Part 3 of Deposition of James. J. Humes
MR.
GUNN: We're back on the record following the first recess.
BY
MR. GUNN:
Q.
Dr. Humes, when did you first see the body of President Kennedy?
A.
I didn't look at my watch, if I even had a watch on, but I would guess it was
6:45 or 7 o'clock, something like that, approximately.
Q.
Was the body in the casket when you first saw it?
A.
Yes, it was in a casket.
Q.
Could you describe the casket in just very general terms?
A.
Yes. It was a wooden casket with long handles on both sides like you usually see
for the use of pallbearers and so forth. one of the handles was broken. I forget
which side it was on. But it was a handsome—the standard of those things. It
was a good-looking casket.
Q.
Where did you first see the casket?
A.
As the people—I think they were sailors that were—it was a Navy ambulance, a
Navy ambulance crew who had picked up the body at the airport, and they brought
it into the morgue and promptly left.
Q.
Do you remember what color the ambulance was?
A.
No—oh, gray. I saw it on television later. And all our ambulances were gray in
those days.
Q.
Were you with the casket from the time it was unloaded from the gray ambulance
until you opened the lid of the casket?
A.
I didn't go out on the loading dock. I was there from the time it came through
the door of the morgue until the President left the next morning.
Q.
How many rooms or hallways are there between the loading dock and the morgue
where you first saw—
A.
Just a very brief hallway. I guess maybe 15, 20 feet, something like that. No
rooms.
Q.
And was the casket opened in the morgue?
A.
Yes.
Q.
Who else was in the room when the casket was opened?
A.
Oh, I can't tell you that. Dr. Boswell and I removed the body from the casket,
and I—I don't know who. There were some enlisted helpers, technicians from our
department there, and I don't know who else was there. I can't tell you. I was
too intent on what I was doing and too, to tell you the truth, a little bit
shook by the whole IS procedure, initially at least. It was disturbing to have a
deceased President there in your arms, you know. It's not an unemotional
experience. But 1 was not worrying about who was around or whatever. It was the
least of my worries.
Q.
Who else in addition to Dr. Boswell, if anyone, helped you remove the body from
the casket?
A.
I don't recall that anyone did, but I don't gainsay the possibility that one of
the enlisted men may have helped. But nobody else.
Q.
How was the President's body wrapped?
A.
It was wrapped in white sheets and the head was—head wound, massive head
wound, was covered with gauze sponges and gauze dressing.
Q.
Was there any plastic or rubber sheeting at all near the President's head?
A.
No. Well, I'm not sure what finally tied down the gauze bandage over the skull
wound. it might have been plastic or something, but, you know, I don't know.
Adhesive tape or God knows what. It was easily removed. It wasn't tight at all.
Q.
Was there any plastic sheeting or rubber sheeting of any kind that you saw in
the casket—
A.
No.
Q.
—with the exception of possibly with the head?
A.
No.
Q.
From the time that you first saw the body of President Kennedy, were you in the
same room with the body until it left Bethesda?
A.
One hundred percent of the time.
Q.
Other than the trip down the hallway, did the body ever leave the morgue room?
A.
No.
Q.
Were you involved with the process of unwrapping the body?
A.
Yes. Yes.
Q.
During that, did any skull fragments fall out from the wrapping?
A.
Not that I recall.
Q.
Did any bullets or bullet fragments fall out from the wrapping?
A.
No.
Q.
Could you describe how the President's head looked at the very first time that
you saw it after it had been unwrapped?
A.
Well, the most obvious thing was a large defect in the right parietal area. The
measurements are in the autopsy protocol, and the hair was matted in that area
and bloody and so forth. And there was a suggestion like a contusion in the
right frontal area over the right eyebrow. The skin was a little bit discolored
in that area, but it wasn't very remarkable. The most striking thing was this
large defect. His face was, for all intents and purposes, normal. Normal as
anybody can be in death, I guess. It was not significantly injured in any way.
Q.
Were any portions of the brain extruding from any wounds in the head?
A.
Well, the wound was so big that—I don't know what you mean by extruding. It
wasn't really- -it was just a gaping hole and the brain was right there. It
wasn't really being extruded, no.
Q.
So you could see it, but it was not as if it were coming out—
A.
No.
Q.
—sort of just seeing inside a hole—
A.
It was a big hole, yeah.
Q.
Did you notice any surgical incisions anywhere on the body of President Kennedy
when you first saw him?
A.
Yeah, there was a gaping defect that was obviously a tracheotomy incision in the
anterior neck, and there were a couple of small—you never heard much about
this, either. A couple of small incised wounds on the chest, and I forget—I
wrote down, wherever I wrote it down, that it looked to me like somebody was
going to think of putting in a chest tube. But they never did, because all they
did was go through the skin. They obviously—I imagine they decided the
President was deceased before they were going to pursue it. But somebody
started, apparently, to insert chest tubes, which would not be an unreasonable
thing to do. They were, you know, maybe two centimeters long, something like
that, and between the ribs, low in the anterior chest. I'm
sure I described them in the protocol someplace.
Q.
Were there any cutdowns on any of the—
A.
I think there was in one of the ankles. There was a cutdown wound. I forget
whether it was the right or left ankle now, to tell you the truth. If I had to
guess, I'd say it was right, but I'm not sure.
Q.
Did you see any other surgical incisions or incisions that you thought might
have been surgically performed?
A.
No.
Q.
Anything in the head area at all?
A.
No.
Q.
Did you see any sutures?
A.
No—well, there might have been of the cutdown on the ankle. There may have
been some black silk sutures there. I'm not absolutely certain, but I think
there might have been.
Q.
Anywhere else that you remember a suture?
A.
No.
Q.
I'd like to show you the document that's been marked Exhibit 1, which is the
first page of the diagram, and the second page is the drawing of the skull.
A.
Yes.
Q.
I'd like to ask you some questions about this. First, was this document, Exhibit
1, in your possession at any point during which you were writing the autopsy
protocol?
A.
Probably. Probably was. Over the weekend, yeah.
Q.
I'd like to draw your attention to a few items on the first page of this
document. Right next to the marking for brain, there's no entry of weight there.
Do you see that on the document?
A.
Yes, I see that it's blank, yeah.
Q.
Why is there no weight for the brain there?
A.
I don't know. I don't really—can't really recall why.
Q.
Was the fresh brain weighed?
A.
I don't recall. I don't recall. It's as simple as that.
Q.
Would it be standard practice for a gunshot wound in the head to have the brain
weighed?
A.
Yeah, we weigh it with gunshot wound or no. Normally we weigh the brain when we
remove it. I can't recall why—I don't know, one, whether it was weighed or
not, or, two, why it doesn't show here. I have no explanation for that.
Q.
The same would be true also for the thymus. Do you see that?
A.
Yes, well, the thymus in an adult, you can't find—99 percent of the time it's
not there. It involutes after the age of about 12, and so this—for 99 percent
of adult autopsies, you'd never find the thymus.
Q.
Okay. For the thyroid over on the right column.
A.
Yeah.
Q.
There's no weight there. Do you know—
A.
It probably wasn't removed. I don't know. Let me go back for one minute. I was
told find out what killed the man. My focus was on his wounds. I didn't approach
this like it was a medical death due to some disease or whatever. I was focusing
primarily and almost exclusively on the wounds. So I don't know. I don't know if
I weighed the thyroid or not.
Q.
Did you consider the autopsy to be a medical-legal autopsy?
A.
Yes. Oh, sure.
Q.
And there was a gunshot wound to the neck, wasn't there?
A.
Well, you'd better clarify that. There was a big gaping tracheotomy wound in the
anterior neck. I learned later that there had been a gunshot wound in that
location, but I didn't know it. That was 99 percent of my problem. There was a
bullet wound in the back above the scapula, like I mentioned earlier, and there
was a wound of entrance in the back of the skull and a wound of exit in the
skull. Those were the wounds.
Q.
Could you look at the diagram on the right side?
A.
Yeah.
Q.
Please, do you see in the head there is a circle with an arrow pointing up and
to the left?
A.
Yes.
Q.
Do you know what the arrow pointing up and to the left signifies?
A.
I have no idea.
Q.
On the face sheet right next to the head, it appears as if the words
"ragged slanting" are there. Do you see those words?
A.
Yeah.
Q.
Does that look correct to you, those words?
A.
No, I don't think it was very ragged at all. It was oval, oblong, and I don't
recall particularly ragged. Maybe the edges were a little bit serrated, but I
don't think I would have used the term “ragged.”
Q.
Do you know what slanting means in that context?
A.
Well, I guess because it was oblong, it might have been interpreted as slanting;
whereas, if it had entered at 90 degrees to the surface, it wouldn't have been
quite as slanting. Do you know what I mean?
Q.
Yes.
A.
It would indicate to me that the wound- the missile did not hit at a 90-degree
angle with the surface.
Q.
So it would be an oblong wound?
A.
Exactly.
Q.
That's the sense of what you—
A.
Right. That's how I would interpret slanting. I think these are J's comments. I
didn't—I don't think I've written anything on this piece of paper.
Q.
Okay. Do you see on the diagram—it's actually true both for the left and the
right diagram—that there are two lines dividing what roughly is at the neck?
A.
Yeah. I assume that those are standard lines—they're on the form before anything else is put on it, yes.
Q.
And what do those two lines signify?
A.
I don't know. I don't know who dreamed this up, to tell you the truth. They
don't signify anything to me. In case you don't know where the head and the
torso join, I guess it would help to show you. But, really, it's not very
helpful. Those lines are not helpful.
Q.
Okay. Down in the bottom left-hand corner, do you see the handwriting?
A.
Yeah. Verified, George Burkley. That was interesting that he verified it. I
don't know why he did that, who asked him to, or whether he volunteered and he
did. I have no idea.
Q.
You don't recollect having seen Dr. Burkley sign this-
A.
No I do not.
Q.
—at all?
A.
I do not. I guess there's the cutdown, now that you tell me about it. It was, I
guess, drawn. It was on the left.
Q.
Could you turn to the second page, please?
A.
Sure.
Q.
I'd like you to help see if you can explain to me what some of these things
mean, and I understand that you did not do this drawing yourself. First, there
is a line right in the middle of the skull that says “10” with an arrow
going in either direction. Do you have any idea what that means?
A.
I would think it's the width of the defect that's portrayed—as you look at it,
it's on your left—the right side of the skull. I know, but this is the same 10
as in there, and he puts arrows back and forth that it was 10 centimeters wide.
Q.
Okay. And do you see right below that—
A.
Now, let me tell you. That couldn't be too precise because it was not a nice,
clean whatever. It might have been 10 centimeters at on point and 12 at another,
or God knows what, you know.
Q.
Okay.
A.
I was relying, through all of this, on my photographs and my X-rays. I wasn't
really worried about these notes that J was making. It didn't—I didn't tell
him not to make them, and I didn't tell him to make them. I didn't tell him
anything. I'm not displeased that he made them. That's fine. But I was relying
upon the photographs and the X- rays to tell the story. I wish I had had a video
camera. Now, of course, I wish a lot of things. But—
Q.
Were you anticipating at the time you were performing the autopsy that you would
have the photographs and X-rays available for your inspection at the time you
were writing the autopsy report?
A.
No, I never expected to have them when I was writing the autopsy—he wanted the
autopsy report in, what, 36 to 48 hours. No, I didn't anticipate I'd have them
at that time.
Q.
When did he—he being Dr. Burkley, I assume—when you said he wanted them in
36 to 48 hours?
A.
Autopsy report.
Q.
Yes.
A.
Before he left the morgue. Before he left the morgue that night, he said he
would like to have the report, if we could, by 6:00 p.m. on Sunday night.
Q.
And that was Dr. Burkley?
A.
That was Dr. Burkley.
Q.
Right below the middle of the skull, there is the number 17 with, again, arrows
pointing, at least on the paper, up and down. Do you see that?
A.
Yeah. I would presume that this is the antero-posterior maximum measurement of
this defect. Okay?
Q.
Okay.
A.
So it was 17 centimeters, fore and aft, if you will, and 10 wide. I got some
slightly different measurement, I think, in my written report, but ball park,
you know.
Q.
Right below the 17 and the arrow, there's the word, it looks as if it's
"missing." Do you see that?
A.
That much bone is missing. That was a big defect, you see.
Q.
Now, when this 10 by 17 centimeters of IS bone is missing, does that mean that
it was present nowhere in the autopsy room during the autopsy?
A.
Not until later when part of it was brought to me, which I described, I believe,
in the written report.
Q.
So would it—
A.
The pieces that were brought to me, it was either two or three, I think three:
one pretty sizable one and two smaller ones. Again, I'm talking off the top of
my head. When they were repositioned to where they should have been, there was
still a defect. We didn't have sufficient bone to totally close the defect.
Q.
So then from the first time that you saw the President's head without the pieces
of skull fragment that came in later, the approximate measurements of the
missing scalp would be roughly 10 centimeters to 17 centimeters?
A.
By 17, right.
Q.
In the autopsy protocol, you referred to the amount as being 10 centimeters by
13 centimeters, and let me show you the protocol.
A.
I'm not going to debate it. I mean, it would depend on how you were measuring
it, because it wasn't a—like this room is 25 by 35. It's got walls and
extreme—this was irregular, so you could make any kind of measurement you
want, smaller than that—you couldn't make it any bigger than we made it, but
you could make it smaller if you measured it more anteriorally or more
posteriorally, whatever.
Q.
Sure.
[Pause.]
BY
MR. GUNN:
Q.
Let me first show you page 3 of the autopsy protocol.
A.
Right.
Q.
The first paragraph. In that paragraph it refers to 13 centimeters as being the
greatest diameter. The question for you would be whether any pieces of the skull
fragments were put back into place in order to reach the measurement of 13
centimeters.
A.
I can't—I have no explanation for that. I don't know whether J's note is right
or my measurement is right. I don't know.
Q.
In this—
A.
Certainly I'm talking about—when I say the wounds, I'm talking about the
wounds before anything was done to them, in other words, primarily before
anything happened.
Q.
When you say before anything was done to them, that means before any skull
pieces were—
A.
Yeah, before anything was put back—
Q.
—put back in or taken out?
A.
Exactly.
Q.
So it would be your understanding that the centimeters in the numbered paragraph
I would refer to the skull as first seen after being removed from the casket?
A.
That's correct.
Q.
Could you help me with some of the other descriptions on the second page of
Exhibit I? And, again, I understand that these were not written by you. Can you
read the writing over on the right side of the document, the first word of which
appears to be "Falx"?
A.
"Falx"—I don't know whether that's "bone" or what. Looks
like “parasagittal.” I can't— don't know what that is.
Q.
Let me try what I read it and tell me whether that makes sense to you or whether
something else—"Falx bone from sagittal sinus from the coronal suture
back."
A.
It could be. You'd better get J to tell you what this is.
Q.
"Falx loose from sagittal sinus," is that —
A.
That's more likely. Yeah, the falx cerebri, you know, it's one of the membranes,
and it was detached as part of the wound. I think that makes more sense, yes.
Q.
So "falx loose," does that describe what you saw during the autopsy?
A.
Yeah, I suppose so. I'm not going to debate it now. It's kind of incidental to
the whole affair, as far as I'm concerned, but
Q.
So would it be fair to say, then, that the falx was loose from the coronal
suture back-
A.
Right.
Q.
Okay.
A.
Coronal suture is the one that goes across the middle, the top of the head.
Q.
On the diagram, over on the left side of the skull, there is 10 with not an
arrow but a dash on either side of that. Do you have any recollection of what
that would mean?
A.
I think it's the same 10 that's present with the arrows on either side of it,
but your guess is as good as mine, to tell you the truth.
Q.
Up at the top of the skull, there is a 3 cm, I assume 3 centimeters. Do you see
that?
A.
Yes.
Q.
Do you have any knowledge about what that would mean?
A.
I certainly don't.
Q.
And over on more towards the right, right below where it says "globe right
eye," there is a circle with a line or maybe a hook through it. Do you see
that?
A.
Yeah.
Q.
Do you know what that signifies?
A.
No. Well, it says something about fractures through the floor of the—I would
presume of the anterior cranial fossa. There were all kind of fracture lines,
you see, in the skull from this massive wound, and I presume that's one of the
fracture lines. I didn't detail all those for the reasons that I stated in the
protocol. They're going this way and they're going that way, and, you know,
that's the way it goes.
Q.
Okay. If we go down to the bottom of the skull, there are numbers written at the
bottom, a 4, a 3, over a 6. Do you see those?
A.
Yeah.
Q.
Do you know what those signify?
A.
No.
Q.
Were there any injuries or fractures in that portion of the skull?
A.
Well, yeah, I guess. Yes. Because the wound was below there, you see. You're
looking at it from above, and the wound, the entrance wound you wouldn't see on
a view from the top. But there were fractures in the posterior cranial fossa
radiating from the wound.
Q.
Okay. Do you see the very small, what looks like a drawing down at the bottom of
the page that looks something like a half circle perhaps?
A.
Yeah.
Q.
Do you know what that is?
A.
I think it's just a gross depiction of the configuration of the largest fragment
that we got from Dallas. I think that's what that is.
Q.
One last question on the drawing. There are some dotted lines that go roughly
around the right perimeter, extending around to the left. Again, do you have any
idea what those dotted lines signify?
A.
I'd have to guess they may be fractures, but it's an educated guess.
Q.
Okay. At the time that you first saw the body of President Kennedy, saw the
skull, would it be fair to say, based upon your prior testimony, that there was
a skull fragment or fragments missing that would have been in the approximate
measurements of 10 centimeters by 13 centimeters or 10 by 17, approximately?
A.
Yes. That's right.
Q.
Was scalp missing from that same—from those same measurements?
A.
Not as much scalp. There was some scalp missing, but we were able to pretty much
close the scalp, skin, when we finished everything. So I can't tell you how much
was—but it was not that much skin missing, no.
Q.
So mostly skull fragments—
A.
Right.
Q.
—but not the scalp itself?
A.
Right. Right.
Q.
Was there any scalp on any of the fragments that you received later in the
evening—
A.
No.
Q.
—that you referred to?
A.
No.
Q.
So there was no scalp that came to the autopsy room—
A.
No.
Q.
—during the course of the autopsy?
A.
There was none.
Q.
When the embalming process was completed, approximately how much scalp was
missing?
A.
Oh, I don't know. Maybe three or four centimeters, something like that. Not
much. We were able to—you can undermine the skin, you know, and we pretty much
closed it. We didn't have enough bone to completely close that part of the
defect, and we had—one of the people who was around and very helpful was our
chief of surgery, Dr. David Osborne. And we went to—he went to the operating
room and brought back some rubber dam, which is material that is used in surgery
not infrequently to cover a variety of different kinds of defects. And we used a
rubber dam to help us close the skull bone. But I don't think we had to add
anything to the scalp.
Q.
Approximately where was the missing scalp as of the time that the embalming
process was completed?
A.
You got me—I don't think there was—I mean, we were able to close it by
undermining and stretching and so forth. I don't recall that we didn't
completely close—I think we completely closed the skin and the scalp.
Q.
Without stretching the scalp, just, you know, basically how much scalp was
actually missing at the time that the body arrived at Bethesda?
A.
You know, I couldn't—it would be a rough guess. Maybe four or five centi—three
or four centimeters, something like that. Probably, because it was all torn, you
see, with serrated— and there were—it wasn't like a punch that was punched
out. It was torn apart, you know. So I have a hard time estimating that.
Q.
Do you have any knowledge as to where the missing skull—or missing scalp was?
A.
No. It wasn't that much, I'm telling you. it was more torn than missing.
Q.
The next question I wanted to ask you would be where, as best you recall, the
lacerations were on just the scalp.
A.
They went in every direction. They were—I think I described them as stellate.
So they went down this way and back, and the whole area was lacerated.
Q.
For the scalp?
A.
Yes.
Q.
In towards the back of the head, so in the occipital—
A.
Not really. Not really. The parietal region primarily. Parietal and to some
extent occipital, but primarily parietal.
Q.
Okay. Just for any scalp lacerations, were there any tears over the occipital
bone?
A.
No. No.
Q.
None whatsoever?
A.
No.
Q.
There were tears, however, over the temporal.
A.
Temporal and parietal.
Q.
And the parietal.
A.
Yes.
Q.
And were there any tears over the coronal area?
A.
Well, now you're talking about a line that goes across like this. Whether or not
any of these tears extended to the coronal suture area, I can't recall
specifically. I wouldn't be surprised, but I wouldn't also swear to it.
Q.
You mentioned that there was a rubber dam in the embalming process. Where was
that located?
A.
Well, it was not in the embalming process. When they got finished embalming, we
had to put—we didn't have to, but we helped them put the scalp back together
and the skull. And the defect that remained in the skull—I can't now measure
it specifically—was three or four or five centimeters, something like that.
And we used a rubber dam to cover that part of the skull defect.
Q.
And where was that located?
A.
Well, I can't—it was part of this large defect, and I can't tell you now
exactly where it was.
Q.
When you say part of this large defect, you mean in the parietal area?
A.
Right.
Q.
Did you notice any wounds that appeared to be incisions—
A.
No.
Q.
—in the scalp at all?
A.
No. None.
Q.
Or any in the skull below?
A.
No.
Q.
After the body was placed on the table, having been brought out of the casket,
what was the general order of procedures that you followed?
A.
Take photographs, first off, and X-rays.
Q.
Did you take photos and X-rays before you did any cleaning of the head?
A.
Yes.
Q.
Did you replace or remove or rearrange any fragments of bones at all before
taking photographs?
A.
No.
Q.
Did you make any incisions at any place before taking the photographs?
A.
Well, depending on which photographs you're talking about. We didn't photograph
the wound in the occiput until the brain was removed, you know. Sure, we had to
make an incision to remove the brain and so forth, but no, generally speaking,
no, we didn't make any incisions at all.
Q.
You previously have seen the photographs that were taken at the autopsy; is that
correct?
A.
Only once—1966.
Q.
Didn't you see some of the photographs during the time that you met with the
HSCA panel?
A.
Well, I guess they had some of them there. That was kind of a confused affair,
and I—did I have the photographs in my hands to look at? No. They had some
blow-ups that they were trying to use to demonstrate to the panel, I guess, and
I found them very difficult to interpret, to be perfectly candid with you. I had
problems with them.
Q.
There is one photograph, or one series of photographs that shows what looks to
be a gaping wound in the head with the scalp reflected.
A.
Yeah.
Q.
Other than that series of photographs, were the remainder of the photographs all
taken at the beginning of the autopsy, do you recall?
A.
Virtually all of them were, yeah.
Q.
Do you remember-
A.
There's only basically two that weren't. one was the inside of the occipital
region, which we interpreted as the wound of entrance, for obvious reasons, and
one that never came—whatever happened to it, I was very disturbed by it. We
took one of the interior of the right side of the thorax because there was a
contusion of the right upper lobe of the lung. So the missile had passed across
the dome of the parietal pleura and contused the right lobe. I wanted to have a
picture of that, and I never saw it. It never—whether it was under-exposed or
over-exposed or what happened to it, I don't know. And it's three years later
when we were looking at it, of course. But we didn't see that photograph. So
that was taken later, and the one of the inside of the skull was taken later.
But all the rest of them were taken at the onset of examination.
Q.
Okay. With regard to X-rays, when were they taken in relationship to the
photographs?
A.
I would guess that most of the X-rays were taken prior to any of the
photographs. But, I mean, I just don't have that crystal clear in my mind. But I
think so. I think most of them were taken before.
Q.
Were any skull fragments rearranged or put into place or removed prior to the
time that the first X-rays were taken?
A.
No.
Q.
Were any skull fragments rearranged or moved at any time during any time that
there was an X-ray of the cranium?
A.
No. No.
Q.
So there was no reconstruction whatsoever'
A.
No. There was nothing to reconstruct. No.
Q.
During the course of the autopsy, did you have any X-rays available for your
inspection?
A.
Yes.
Q.
Developed X-rays?
A.
Yes. We had them all.
Q.
Did you use all of the X-rays that you were aware of—
A.
Sure.
Q.
—during the course of the autopsy?
A.
Yes. Weren't particularly helpful, but we used them, yeah.
Q.
Do you have any recollection now about radio-opaque objects being in or
appearing in the X-rays?
A.
Yes, in the skull. There were some little tiny fragments of radio-opaque
material, which we thought to be bullet fragments, traversing from- well, I
don't know. It looked like it was going from posterior to anterior. Very fine,
sort of granular-looking material, went almost as far forward as the frontal
bone, but not quite that far.
Q.
Those are dust-like fragments?
A.
Yes, right.
Q.
Were there any—
A.
A couple of them were—we did retrieve a couple that were maybe a couple
millimeters, as I recall, from that path, you know. But that was about all.
Q.
Do you recall where you retrieved those fragments?
A.
I think from the frontal lobe of the brain.
Q.
Were there any X-rays taken between the time that you—or after the time that
you removed the small fragments?
A.
No.
Q.
So all of the X-rays of the cranium were taken before any—
A.
Exactly.
Q.
—metal fragments were removed?
A.
Exactly, exactly.
Q.
Do you have any recollection now about the shapes of the fragments that were
removed?
A.
They were small and irregular. That's all I can tell you.
Q.
Long and sliver-like or roundish or—any recollection?
A.
Flat, irregular, two or three millimeters.
Q.
When was the first incision made at Bethesda, as best you recall?
A.
Well—
Q.
Let me withdraw that question. My question is not so much what time it was, as
whether it's 8 o'clock or 8:15 or 8:30.
A.
Yes, okay.
Q.
But just let me start out first: Where was the first incision made?
A.
I believe, of course, the top of the skull to remove the skull plate of the
brain. To remove what remained of the calvarium and to approach the removal of
the brain.
Q.
And was that incision simply of the scalp, or did you need to cut—
A.
No, we had to cut some bone as well.
Q.
Where did you make the incision on the scalp?
A.
Where we usually—in the coronal plane, over the coronal suture. Of course,
half of it was already—I mean, you know, it wasn't a neat incision because
part of it was over the large defect that was already present.
Q.
So did you make any incisions in the scalp other than the one that would be
roughly from either right to left or left to right, roughly over the coronal—
A.
No, we didn't make any others.
Q.
So there were none front to back along—
A.
No. There were lacerations of the scalp in several different directions, but,
no, we didn't make any other incision.
Q.
Where did you cut the bone?
A.
I find that—it's hard to recall. Once we got the scalp laid back, some of
those pieces could just be removed, you know, by picking them up, picking them
up because they were just not held together very well, other than by the dura, I
suppose. So other than that, we probably made it like we normally do, in a
circumferential fashion from books, like right above the ear around. But it was
a real problem because it was all falling apart, the skull. And I can't recall
the details of exactly how we managed to maneuver that, because it was a
problem.
Q.
Who was involved in the process of removal of the brain?
A.
I was.
Q.
Did anyone else assist you with that?
A.
Maybe J. I'm not sure now. I mean, it's not a two-man job particularly. You have
to cut across the top of the spinal cord, of the medulla to—you know, you just
make one incision. I mean, it's not a major thing for a lot of people to be
involved with.
Q.
Were there any lacerations in the area of the mid-brain?
A.
Yes.
Q.
What kinds of lacerations?
A.
They were length-wise. There was one length-wise in the mid-brain, and—it's
hard to describe, you know. From my memory now, there were—and there weren't a
lot—there weren't too many very extensive ones, but they were very
extensive—very serious location, is what the problem was. They were right in
the mid-brain. And they were probably due to disruption by the force of the blow
rather than by the particular passage of any missile, I would guess. The
photographs, again, depict these problems.
Q.
I'd like to hand you a drawing that we will number Exhibit No. 71, which is
labeled the brain and the cranial nerves. My
question for you first will be: Is this a reasonably fair description of the
brain and cranial nerves?
A.
Yes, well, it's a lateral view, sagittal view.
Q.
When you say that there were lacerations, if I understood correctly, in the
mid-brain, could you point to where that is on the diagram? Not where the
diagram says that there was a mid-brain, but where the lacerations were.
A.
Well, first of all, they weren't laterally. They were posteriorally. They
weren't laterally. So you don't have the right plane to do it, okay? But they,
as I recall, were—I can't show them because this would have to be sideways,
you see.
Q.
Okay.
A.
I can't do it. I don't know how well I'm going to do it when you give me the
other one from memory, to be quite candid with you about it.
Q.
Would this diagram help you?
A.
Well, it's better, but it's ... well, the problem with this diagram is that
it's, roughly speaking, cut along the coronal suture, because you have the large
ventricles open, and back here in the back of the brain where this was, you
don't have that picture, but basically they were in this vicinity. I'm not going
to mark up this book, but they were in this vicinity here. See, this is supposed
to be the skull, I presume, and you transect the—whether it's the spinal cord
or the brain stem, whatever you want to call it, you do it at the foramen
magnum, which is this space here, and you transect it at that point, and so then
you're left with this. But you don't have this big fourth ventricle. So it's
really hard to—they were in this vicinity here.
Q.
Okay.
A.
Just above where we transected the brain' stem.
Q.
Okay. Back to Exhibit 71, would it be fair to say that it is roughly in the
portion right below the cerebellum?
A.
Yes. The cerebellum was somewhat disrupted, as I recall, as well. But the
photographs of the brain show it to you very clearly.
Q.
Would you mind making a mark on this document? It can just be a point or a
circle, if that's more accurate, and I can make a photocopy of the other
diagram, if you would prefer, of just where you're understanding the laceration
to be in the mid-brain.
A.
It's really hard to do it from—very difficult to do from these kind of
drawings. It's just they don't lend themselves to what you're trying to do, I'm
sorry to tell you.
Q.
Would you be able to do a drawing yourself that would be-
A.
No. I'm the world's worst artist. I tell you, if you'll forgive me for saying
so, we're doing a lot of nitpicking here that I'm having difficulty with, you
know. It doesn't lend itself to what you're trying to have me do.
Q.
I'm just trying to understand where the laceration was or where the disruption
was or-
A.
Well, you're asking me to recall from memory, and I'm having a very difficult
time with that, and I'm referring you to the photographs which we took of this
part of the brain. I can't do that very well. I'm sorry. It's just I'm not that
clever.
Q.
What did you do with the brain when it was removed from the cranium?
A.
Placed it in formalin. The blood vessels were somewhat disrupted. Normally we
would inject the brain with formalin through the basal artery or some place. But
some of these arteries were disrupted, and I can't recall—don't ask me exactly
where the disruptions were. But the brain was damaged, and it didn't lend itself
well to infusing it like we normally do. So we placed it in a very generous
quantity of 10 percent formalin in a, you know, specimen container.
Q.
Was that a sealed container or some other—
A.
It has a lid, but it's not sealed in the way a Dar is sealed. It's like a pail,
really, that you have a lid put on it. For the brain, for that, we use it
routinely for that purpose. I don't think we were able to inject it. I don't
believe that we were.
Q.
But a standard container—
A.
For brains, right.
Q.
For brains.
A.
Sort of like a three-quarter gallon can. I don't know what the volume of it is,
but you can put the brain in and totally immerse it in formalin.
Q.
Were any sections taken at all from the brain?
A.
Not at that time. Some place else I showed you, the report you showed, we did
take certain sections a day or two later, whatever it was, from the
location—we didn't divide the brain like we often do. You know, we often make
a so- called bread loaf-type incision. Some people do it fore and aft. Some
people do it different ways. But we didn't do that with this brain, because the
next thing you know George Burkley wanted it. We might have gone on to do that,
but when he came and said that they wanted the brain, fine, you know. I'm not
going to argue about it.
Q.
After the brain was removed, what was the next thing that you did in the
autopsy?
A.
The next thing we did was look at this wound that was in the back of the skull.
It was obvious from both the point of entrance and inside the skull, and we
examined that very carefully, measured it, took pictures of it.
Q.
Did you identify a hole that you thought to be either an entrance or exit wound
in the back of the cranium?
A.
Definitely. Definitely. Entrance, there wasn't any question in our mind about
it.
Q.
Did the wound appear as something like a puncture in the bone, or was there a
fragment of the bone that was missing and that there was an indentation?
A.
No. It was directly beneath the scalp wound back there, directly beneath it. It
was almost round, but a little bit more ovoid, and the inner margins of it were
shelved. If we put a BB through that glass over there on the side where it went
in, you'd see a little round hole, depending on the size of the missile. On the
other side you'd see shelved out, and that's exactly what we had.
Q.
And the whole circumference of the entry wound was visible without any
reconstruction of the skull?
A.
Oh, yeah, sure.
Q.
In which bone was the entrance wound?
A.
Occipital bone.
Q.
After you examined the occipital bone, what did you next do in the autopsy?
A.
Well, we looked with care at the margins of the defect in the skull, and we
found a similar situation where the bone fragments that were placed—that
remained in place, halfway in place, were shelved on that outer table of the
skull. And when we got the fragments from Dallas, they were similarly—we
almost could complete the circle of what appeared to be the actual exit wound
because it was shelved on the outer table, and we almost could put it all
together, that wound. Not the defect, but the wound.
Q.
So unlike the wound in the occipital bone, the wound towards the front, there
was a nick or a half-circle or some such thing showing what you understood to be
the exit, and you were able then to complete that wound when the fragments came?
A.
When the fragments came, almost, because they're all flying around, you know.
These fragments are—it's like, you know, working with clouds, because they
were—you had to put them together with great care to make that out.
Q.
Approximately how much time did you spend examining the cranium after the brain
was removed?
A.
Oh, you know, that's really hard to estimate. I would guess maybe 30, 45
minutes, something like that.
Q.
Was there any other examination that you made of the cranium at that time?
A.
Well, we looked with care at the whole interior surface of the skull to see if
there were 5, any other-defects or what have you. There were no others. Of
course, the one that was hard to evaluate, of course, was the exit, because it
was all disrupted.
Q.
Were there any fragments or breaks in the left hemisphere of the cranium,
looking from the inside?
A.
I can't recall how far over some of these fractures—whether they crossed the
midline or not. I really can't recall.
Q.
When you finished—or did you return to examine the cranium at any subsequent
point during the autopsy?
A.
No.
Q.
What did you do next?
A.
Well, we looked at this wound in the upper part of his neck, and we made a
customary Y-shaped incision to do the rest of the autopsy and removed the breast
plate, which was standard operating procedure, and examined the' inside of the
thorax. And that's when we saw the contusion of the dome of the upper lobe of
the right lung, and we wondered, 5. where's the bullet? You know. Should have
called Dallas right then and there. It would have saved me a lot of worry and
grief for several hours, because X-rays hadn't found it for us. Like it could
have been in his thigh or it could have been in his buttock. It could have been
any damn place. We don't know where it went. It was obvious after we talked to
the doctors the next morning where it went. It went out. That's why we couldn't
find it. And we weren't going to spend the rest of the night there, you know.
Meantime,
George Burkley is telling me, you know, the family wants to get out of here
sometime tonight. Then we proceeded with the dissection of the lungs,—heart,
and abdominal contents and so forth.
Q.
Do you recall approximately where in the procedures that Dr. Finck arrived?
A.
Oh, pretty early. As soon as I saw the nature of the thing, before-we did
anything, I called Dr. Smith back and said, you know, send us this chap. I
didn't know him. I had never laid eyes on him before. And so I would say around
the time we were taking X-rays, photographs, or both.
Q.
Was he—Dr. Finck—there at the time the cranium was being examined?
A.
Oh, sure. He was there through the whole examination, basically. If he missed
anything, it was when we were taking the preliminary photograph and stuff.
Q.
Approximately how far through the examination did you first locate the wound on
the posterior thorax?
A.
Oh, right away. It was obvious. It was no secret. It was right there. But we
directed our attention first to the wound that we were certain was the fatal
wound, of course, the head wound.
Q.
Were you aware of the posterior thorax wound at the time you lifted the body
out, or was that—did you turn the body over?
A.
We weren't aware of anything when we lifted the body out, but we understand in
Dallas they never did turn him over.
Q.
So when did you first turn the body over to see that wound?
A.
Oh, I can't—probably right away. As soon as we got him on the table, we
probably—part of the external examination right away before we did anything.
Q.
During the time that you were performing the autopsy, did you ever identify what
you took to be the margin of a wound in the area of the trach incision?
A.
No.
Q.
Approximately when during the autopsy did the fragments arrive, the skull
fragments?
A.
Oh, quite late. I couldn't tell you exactly what time, you know.
Q.
Was that after the Y incision had been performed?
A.
Oh, yeah. It was quite late. I couldn't say. Maybe it was 10, 11 o'clock, 12
o'clock. I don't know what time it was.
Q.
I believe you said earlier today that it was your recollection that there were
three fragments that arrived.
A.
I think so. The one quite sizable, and the other two a little smaller,
considerably smaller. I think. I mean, I'd have to go back. You know, you're
asking me something—you realize how long ago this was.
Q.
We appreciate that these are more than 30 years ago, so we understand that.
A.
My wife tells me I can't remember what happened last week sometimes. Or this
morning, as far as that goes.
MR.
GUNN: Let's go off the record for a moment.
[Recess.]