by Walt Brown
PREFACE
In the spring of this year, a few "medical evidence" questions came up in a discussion among researchers, and I filed them away mentally until I could
I told him, from a thought I put in the book Treachery in Dallas,
that it was my experience that autopsies usually featured microphones suspended
above the table in order for the pathologist(s) to record their observations verbally,
for use later in compiling the official record. He indicated that a microphone was
also standard procedure there, except
that night.
> I also reviewed the theory of the skull cavity wound (reproduced in Treachery
) and he told me that the proposed theory, of the photo showing both the entrance
and the exit in the back of the head,
was exactly the way he saw it, but had
>hesitated to speak out from past fears.
"I read him Roy Kellerman's testimony
concerning an entrance
wound in the hairline in front of
the right ear and he agreed with
such placement."
I read him Roy Kellerman's testimony concerning an entrance wound in the hairline
in front of the right ear and he agreed with such placement. In discussing the differences
in what is shown in the x-rays and the photographs, he indicated that the x-rays were far more accurate than the "stare of death" photo. He also, almost casually,
added that when the film was placed under the skull for the A-P x-ray, a bullet fragment
fell out of JFK's neck or lower head.
Needless to say, between trying to take decent notes and keep up with some of these
revelations, I was trying to catch a breath. In trying to take a step back, I asked
him to just generally take me through what happened, so I could get a sense of the
flow, the tension, the key moments in the event. He told me that the two FBI agents,
Sibert and O'Neill, were "in control" in the sense of crowd control and the "audience."
He also indicated that Dr. Ebersole, the radiologist cited above, was frequently
telling the pathologists what to do,
>which prompted a comment from me that such would only be the case if there was more
metal to deal with than the official version suggests. Custer told me, in so many
words, "You said that, I didn't." He added, however, that someone in uniform was
saying things
like, "You don't want to explore that
>area," or "You don't want to do that," and "You don't want to get into that," clearly
orders, not suggestions.
I went back to the difficulty I had with Humes's inability to name more than three
people present. Humes was an administrator, Custer told me, and he had never worked
on an autopsy with that crew before; so in a very real sense, he didn't really
know who they were. I suggested he should have. Custer readily agreed. He also indicated
that Humes spent a lot of time on the telephone, and it was his impression that he
was speaking to people in Dallas. I told him that it is a semi-consensus within
the research community that the phone showed in the left lateral autopsy photo, on the tiled
wall, was an in-house phone only. Custer was not certain about the phone, but felt
sure, based on what he heard, that conversations were going out
of the hospital.
Jerrol Custer and I talked about putting his whole story on the record, and he seemed
willing. He made some comments on that day months ago that I am not sure he would
want publicized yet, so they will remain temporarily hidden until I can receive his
permission to use them. He was gracious enough to read the uncorrected manuscript of
Treachery in Dallas,
and sent in a "blurb:" "Brown has the key that will
unlock a mystery that the world has been trying to solve for 32 years..." I am very
thankful to him for his time, for his kind words, and for the additional leads he
gave me to follow up, and I hope he keeps his courage up and remains willing to go
public with the whole story.
Used by permission. Electronic or other reproduction is prohibited. All rights reserved.