CommanderHumes. Scientifically, sir, it is impossible for it to have been fired from other than behind. Or to have exited from other than behind.
Mr.McCloy. This is so obvious that I rather hesitate to ask it. There is no question in your mind that it was a lethal bullet?
CommanderHumes. The President, sir, could not possibly have survived the effect of that injury no matter what would have been done for him.
TheChairman. Mr. Specter.
Mr.Specter. What conclusions did you reach then as to the trajectory or point of origin of the bullet, Dr. Humes, based on 388?
CommanderHumes. We reached the conclusion that this missile was fired toward the President from a point above and behind him, sir.
Mr.Specter. Now, on one detail on your report, Dr. Humes, on page 4, on the third line down, you note that there is a lacerated wound measuring 15 by 6 mm. which on the smaller size is, of course, less than 6.5 mm.?
CommanderHumes. Yes, sir.
Mr.Specter. What would be the explanation for that variation?
CommanderHumes. This is in the scalp, sir, and I believe that this is explainable on the elastic recoil of the tissues of the skin, sir. It is not infrequentin missile wounds of this type that the measured wound is slightly smaller than the caliber of the missile that traversed it.
Mr.Specter. Would you proceed, now then to the other major wound of entry which you have already noted and described?
CommanderHumes. Yes, sir.
Mr.Specter. Its point of origin, where it hit the President.
CommanderHumes. I—our previously submitted report, which is Commission No. 387, identified a wound in the low posterior neck of the President.
The size of this wound was 4 by 7 mm., with the long axis being in accordance with the long axis of the body, 44 mm. wide, in other words, 7 mm. long.
We attempted to locate such wounds in soft tissue by making reference to bony structures which do not move and are, therefore, good reference points for this type of investigation.
We then ascertained, we chose the two bony points of reference—we chose to locate this wound, where the mastoid process, which is just behind the ear, the top of the mastoid process, and the acromion which is the tip of the shoulder joint. We ascertained physical measurement at the time of autopsy that this wound was 14 cm. from the tip of the mastoid process and 14 cm. from the acromion was its centralpoint—
Mr.Specter. That is the right acromion?
CommanderHumes. The tip of the right acromion, yes, sir, and that is why we have depicted it in figure 385 in this location.
This wound appeared physically quite similar to the wound which we have described before in 388 "A," with the exception that its long axis was shorter than the long axis of the wound described above. When the tissues beneath this wound were inspected, there was a defect corresponding with the skin defect in the fascia overlying the musculature of the low neck and upper back.
I mentioned previously that X-rays were made of the entire body of the late President. Of course, and here I must say that as I describe something to you, I might have done it before or after in the description but for the sake of understanding, we examined carefully the bony structures in this vicinity as well as the X-rays, to see if there was any evidence of fracture or of deposition of metallic fragments in the depths of this wound, and we saw no such evidence, that is no fracture of the bones of the shoulder girdle, or of the vertical column, and no metallic fragments were detectable by X-ray examination.
Attempts to probe in the vicinity of this wound were unsuccessful without fear of making a false passage.
Mr.Specter. What do you mean by that, Doctor?
CommanderHumes. Well, the defect in the fascia was quite similar, which is the first firm tissue over the muscle beneath the skin, was quite similar to this. We were unable, however, to take probes and have them satisfactorily fall through any definite path at this point.
Now, to explain the situation in the President's neck, I think it will be necessary for me to refer back to Exhibit 385, I believe the number is correct.
Mr.Specter. Yes; please do, that is 385.
CommanderHumes. Now, as the President's body was viewed from anteriorly in the autopsy room, and saying nothing for the moment about the missile, there was a recent surgical defect in the low anterior neck, which measured some 7 or 8 cm. in length or let's say a recent wound was present in this area.
This wound was through the skin, through the subcutaneous tissues and into the larynx. Or rather into the trachea of the President.
Mr.Specter. To digresschronologically——
CommanderHumes. Yes.
Mr.Specter. Did you have occasion to discuss that wound on the front side of the President with Dr. Malcolm Perry of Parkland Hospital in Dallas?
CommanderHumes. Yes, sir; I did. I had the impression from seeing the wound that it represented a surgical tracheotomy wound, a wound frequently made by surgeons when people are in respiratory distress to give them a free airway.
To ascertain that point, I called on the telephone Dr. Malcolm Perry and discussed with him the situation of the President's neck when he first examinedthe President, and asked him had he in fact done a tracheotomy which was somewhat redundant because I was somewhat certain he had.
He said, yes; he had done a tracheotomy and that as the point to perform his tracheotomy he used a wound which he had interpreted as a missile wound in the low neck, as the point through which to make the tracheotomy incision.
Mr.Specter. When did you have that conversation with him, Dr. Humes?
CommanderHumes. I had that conversation early on Saturday morning, sir.
Mr.Specter. On Saturday morning, November 23d?
CommanderHumes. That is correct, sir.
Mr.Specter. And have you had occasion since to examine the report of Parkland Hospital which I made available to you?
CommanderHumes. Yes, sir; I have.
Mr.Specter. May it please the Commission, I would like to note this as Commission Exhibit No. 392, and subject to later technical proof, to have it admitted into evidence at this time for the purpose of having the doctor comment about it.
TheChairman. It may be so marked.
(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 392, for identification.)
Mr.Specter. What did your examination of the Parkland Hospital records disclose with respect to this wound on the front side of the President's body?
CommanderHumes. The examination of this record from Parkland Hospital revealed that Doctor Perry had observed this wound as had other physicians in attendance upon the President, and actually before a tracheotomy was performed surgically, an endotracheal tube was placed through the President's mouth and down his larynx and into his trachea which is the first step in giving satisfactory airway to a person injured in such fashion and unconscious.
The President was unconscious and it is most difficult to pass such a tube when the person is unconscious.
The person who performed that procedure, that is instilled the endotracheal tube noted that there was a wound of the trachea below the larynx, which corresponded in essence with the wound of the skin which they had observed from the exterior.
Mr.Specter. How is that wound described, while you are mentioning the wound?
CommanderHumes. Yes, sir.
Mr.Specter. I think you will find that on the first page of the summary sheet, Dr. Humes.
CommanderHumes. Yes, sir. Thank you.
This report was written by doctor—or of the activities of Dr. James Carrico, Doctor Carrico in inserting the endotracheal tube noted a ragged wound of trachea immediately below the larynx.
The report, as I recall it, and I have not studied it in minute detail, would indicate to me that Doctor Perry realizing from Doctor Carrico's observation that there was a wound of the trachea would quite logically use the wound which he had observed as a point to enter the trachea since the trachea was almost damaged, that would be a logical place in which to put his incision.
In speaking of that wound in the neck, Doctor Perry told me that before he enlarged it to make the tracheotomy wound it was a "few millimeters in diameter."
Of course by the time we saw it, as my associates and as you have heard, it was considerably larger and no longer at all obvious as a missile wound.
The report states, and Doctor Perry told me in telephone conversation that there was bubbling of air and blood in the vicinity of this wound when he made the tracheotomy. This caused him to believe that perhaps there had been a violation of one of the—one or other of the pleural cavities by a missile. He, therefore, asked one of his associates, and the record is to me somewhat confused as to which of his associates, he asked one of his associates to put in a chest tube. This is a maneuver which is, was quite logical under the circumstances, and which would, if a tube that were placed through all layers of the wall of the chest, and the chest cavity had been violated one could remove air that had gotten in there and greatly assist respiration.
So when we examined the President in addition to the large wound whichwe found in conversation with Doctor Perry was the tracheotomy wound, there were two smaller wounds on the upper anterior chest.
Mr.Dulles. These are apparently exit wounds?
CommanderHumes. Sir, these were knife wounds, these were incised wounds on either side of the chest, and I will give them in somewhat greater detail.
These wounds were bilateral, they were situated on the anterior chest wall in the nipple line, and each were 2 cm. long in the transverse axis. The one on the right was situated 11 cm. above the nipple—the one on the left was situated 11 cm. on the nipple, and the one on the right was 8 cm. above the nipple. Their intention was to incise through the President's chest to place tubes into his chest.
We examined those wounds very carefully, and found that they, however, did not enter the chest cavity. They only went through the skin.
I presume that as they were performing that procedure it was obvious that the President had died, and they didn't pursue this.
To complete the examination of the area of the neck and the chest, I will do that together, we made the customary incision which we use in a routine postmortem examination which is a Y-shaped incision from the shoulders over the lower portion of the breastbone and over to the opposite shoulder and reflected the skin and tissues from the anterior portion of the chest.
We examined in the region of this incised surgical wound which was the tracheotomy wound and we saw that there was some bruising of the muscles of the neck in the depths of this wound as well as laceration or defect in the trachea.
At this point, of course, I am unable to say how much of the defect in the trachea was made by the knife of the surgeon, and how much of the defect was made by the missile wound. That would have to be ascertained from the surgeon who actually did the tracheotomy.
There was, however, some ecchymosis or contusion, of the muscles of the right anterior neck inferiorly, without, however, any disruption of the muscles or any significant tearing of the muscles.
The muscles in this area of the body run roughly, as you see as he depicted them here. We have removed some of them for a point I will make in a moment, but it is our opinion that the missile traversed the neck and slid between these muscles and other vital structures with a course in the neck such as the carotid artery, the jugular vein and other structures because there was no massive hemorrhage or other massive injury in this portion of the neck.
In attempting to relate findings within the President's body to this wound which we had observed low in his neck, we then opened his chest cavity, and we very carefully examined the lining of his chest cavity and both of his lungs. We found that there was, in fact, no defect in the pleural lining of the President's chest.
It was completely intact.
However, over the apex of the right pleural cavity, and the pleura now has two layers. It has a parietal or a layer which lines the chest cavity and it has a visceral layer which is intimately in association with the lung.
As depicted in figure 385, in the apex of the right pleural cavity there was a bruise or contusion or ecchmymosis of the parietal pleura as well as a bruise of the upper portion, the most apical portion of the right lung.
It, therefore, was our opinion that the missile while not penetrating physically the pleural cavity, as it passed that point bruised either the missile itself, or the force of its passage through the tissues, bruised both the parietal and the visceral pleura.
The area of discoloration on the apical portion of the right upper lung measured five centimeters in greatest diameter, and was wedge shaped in configuration, with its base toward the top of the chest and its apex down towards the substance of the lung.
Once again Kodachrome photographs were made of this area in the interior of the President's chest.
Mr.Specter. Would you mark the point on Exhibit 385, the one on the rear of the President as point "C" and the one on the front of the President as point "D" so we can discuss those, Dr. Humes?
Now, what conclusion did you reach, if any, as to whether point "C" was the point of entry or exit?
CommanderHumes. We reached the conclusion that point "C" was a point of entry.
Mr.Specter. What characteristics of that wound led you to that conclusion?
CommanderHumes. The characteristics here were basically similar to the characteristics above, lacking one very valuable clue or piece of evidence rather than clue, because it is more truly a piece of evidence in the skull. The skull as I mentioned before had the bone with the characteristic defect made as a missile traverses bone.
This missile, to the best of our ability to ascertain, struck no bone protuberances, no bony prominences, no bones as it traversed the President's body. But it was a sharply delineated wound. It was quite regular in its outline. It measured, as I mentioned, 7 by 4 mm. Its margins were similar in all respects when viewed with the naked eye to the wound in the skull, which we feel incontrovertibly was a wound of entrance.
The defect in the fascia which is that layer of connective tissue over the muscle just beneath the wound corresponded virtually exactly to the defect in the skin.
And for these reasons we felt that this was a wound of entrance.
Mr.Specter. Did you search the body to determine if there was any bullet inside the body?
CommanderHumes. Before the arrival of Colonel Finck we had made X-rays of the head, neck and torso of the President, and the upper portions of his major extremities, or both his upper and lower extremities. At Colonel Finck's suggestion, we then completed the X-ray examination by X-raying the President's body in toto, and those X-rays are available.
Mr.Specter. What did those X-rays disclose with respect to the possible presence of a missile in the President's body?
CommanderHumes. They showed no evidence of a missile in the President's body at any point. And these were examined by ourselves and by the radiologist, who assisted us in this endeavor.
Mr.Specter. What conclusion, if any, did you reach as to whether point "D" on 385 was the point of entrance or exit?
CommanderHumes. We concluded that this missile depicted in 385 "C" which entered the President's body traversed the President's body and made its exit through the wound observed by the physicians at Parkland Hospital and later extended as a tracheotomy wound.
Mr.Specter. Does the description "ragged wound" which is found in the Parkland report shed any light in and of itself as to whether point "D" is an exit or entry wound?
CommanderHumes. I believe, sir, that that statement goes on, ragged wound in the trachea. I don't believe that refers to the skin. And you might say that it is a ragged wound is more likely to be a wound of exit.
However, the trachea has little cartilaginous rings which have a tendency, which would be disrupted by this, and most wounds of the trachea unless very cleverly incised would perhaps appear slightly ragged.
Mr.Specter. Now, what was the angle, if any, that you observed on the path of the bullet, as you outlined it?
CommanderHumes. The angle which we observed in measuring, in comparing the point of entrance, our point of entrance labeled "C" on 385 and "D" point of exit is one that the point of exit is below the point of entrance compared with the vertical.
Mr.Specter. Have you had an opportunity to examine the clothing which has been identified for you as being that worn by the President on the day of the assassination?
CommanderHumes. Yes; yesterday, just shortly before the Commission hearing today was begun, Mr. Chief Justice, we had opportunity for the first time to examine the clothing worn by the late President.
In private conversation among ourselves before this opportunity, we predicted we would find defects in the clothing corresponding with the defects which were found, of course, on the body of the late President.
Mr.Specter. Mr. Chief Justice, may it please the Commission, I would like to have identified for the record three articles on which I have placed CommissionExhibits Nos. 393 being the coat worn by the President, 394 being the shirt, and 395 being the President's tie, and at this time move for their admission into evidence.
TheChairman. It may be admitted.
(The articles of clothing referred to were marked Commission Exhibits Nos. 393, 394 and 395 for identification, and received in evidence.)
Mr.Specter. Taking 393 at the start, Doctor Humes, will you describe for the record what hole, if any, is observable in the back of that garment which would be at or about the spot you have described as being the point of entry on the President's back or lower neck.
CommanderHumes. Yes, sir. This exhibit is a grey suit coat stated to have been worn by the President on the day of his death. Situated to the right of the midline high in the back portion of the coat is a defect, one margin of which is semicircular.
Situated above it just below the collar is an additional defect. It is our opinion that the lower of these defects corresponds essentially with the point of entrance of the missile at Point C on Exhibit 385.
Mr.Specter. Would it be accurate to state that the hole which you have identified as being the point of entry is approximately 6 inches below the top of the collar, and 2 inches to the right of the middle seam of the coat?
CommanderHumes. That is approximately correct, sir. This defect, I might say, continues on through the material.
Attached to this garment is the memorandum which states that one half of the area around the hole which was presented had been removed by experts, I believe, at the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and also that a control area was taken from under the collar, so it is my interpretation that this defect at the top of this garment is the control area taken by the Bureau, and that the reason the lower defect is not more circle or oval in outline is because a portion of that defect has been removed apparently for physical examinations.
Mr.Specter. Now, does the one which you have described as the entry of the bullet go all the way through?
CommanderHumes. Yes, sir; it goes through both layers.
Mr.Specter. How about the upper one of the collar you have described, does that go all the way through?
CommanderHumes. Yes, sir; it goes all the way through. It is not—wait a minute, excuse me—it is not so clearly a puncture wound as the one below.
Mr.Specter. Does the upper one go all the way through in the same course?
CommanderHumes. No.
Mr.Specter. Through the inner side as it went through the outer side?
CommanderHumes. No, in an irregular fashion.
Mr.Specter. Will you take Commission Exhibit 394 and describe what that is, first of all, please?
CommanderHumes. This is the shirt, blood-stained shirt, purportedly worn by the President on the day of his assassination. When viewed from behind at a point which corresponds essentially with the point of defect on the jacket, one sees an irregularly oval defect.
When viewed anteriorly, with the top button buttoned, two additional defects are seen. Of course, with the shirt buttoned, the fly front of the shirt causes two layers of cloth to be present in this location, and that there is a defect in the inner layer of cloth and a corresponding defect in the outer layer of the cloth.
Mr.Specter. Is there any observable indication from the fibers on the front side of the shirt to indicate in which direction a missile might have passed through those two tears?
CommanderHumes. From an examination of these defects at this point, it would appear that the missile traversed these two layers from within to the exterior.
Mr.Specter. Would it be accurate to state that the hole in the back of the shirt is approximately 6 inches below the top of the collar and 2 inches to the right of the middle seam of the shirt?
CommanderHumes. That is approximately correct, sir.
Mr.Specter. Now, how, if at all, do the holes in the shirt and coat conformto the wound of entrance which you described as point "C" on Commission Exhibit 385?
CommanderHumes. We believe that they conform quite well. When viewing—first of all, the wounds or the defects in 393 and 394 coincide virtually exactly with one another.
They give the appearance when viewed separately and not as part of the clothing of a clothed person as being perhaps, somewhat lower on the Exhibits 393 and 394 than we have depicted them in Exhibit No. 385. We believe there are two reasons for this.
385 is a schematic representation, and the photographs would be more accurate as to the precise location, but more particularly the way in which these defects would conform with such a defect on the torso would depend on the girth of the shoulders and configuration of the base of the neck of the individual, and the relative position of the shirt and coat to the tissues of the body at the time of the impact of the missile.
Mr.Specter. As to the muscular status of the President, what was it?
CommanderHumes. The President was extremely well-developed, an extremely well-developed, muscular young man with a very well-developed set of muscles in his thoraco and shoulder girdle.
Mr.Specter. What effect would that have on the positioning of the shirt and coat with respect to the position of the neck in and about the seam?
CommanderHumes. I believe this would have a tendency to push the portions of the coat which show the defects here somewhat higher on the back of the President than on a man of less muscular development.
Mr.Specter. Mr. Chief Justice, may it please the Commission, I would like to mark for identification Exhibit 396, which later proof will show is a picture of President Kennedy shortly before the first bullet struck him, and ask the doctor to take a look at that.
Will you describe, Doctor Humes, the position of President Kennedy's right hand in that picture?
CommanderHumes. Yes. This exhibit, Commission Exhibit No. 396, allegedly taken just prior to the wounding of the late President, shows him with his hand raised, his elbow bent, apparently in saluting the crowd. I believe that thisaction——
Mr.Specter. Which hand was that?
CommanderHumes. This was his right hand, sir. I believe that this action would further accentuate the elevation of the coat and the shirt with respect to the back of the President.
Mr.Specter. Now. Doctor Humes, will you take Commission Exhibit No.395——
Mr.McCloy. Before you go, may I ask a question? In your examination of the shirt, I just want to get it in the record, from your examination of the shirt, there is no defect in the collar of the shirt which coincides with the defect in the back of the President's coat, am I correct?
CommanderHumes. You are correct, sir. There is no such defect.
Mr.Specter. As to Commission Exhibit 395, Dr. Humes, will you identify what that is, please?
CommanderHumes. We had an opportunity to examine this exhibit before the Commission met today, sir. This is Commission Exhibit No. 395, and is the neck tie purportedly worn, purportedly to have been worn, by the late President on the day of his assassination.
Mr.Specter. What defect, if any, is noted on the tie which would correspond with the path of a missile apparently passing through the folds of the shirt which you have already described?
CommanderHumes. This tie is one of those—this tie is still in its knotted state, as we examine it at this time. The portion of the tie around the neck has been severed apparently with scissors or other sharp instrument accounting for the loop about the neck.
The tie is tied in four-in-hand fashion but somewhat askew from the way a person would normally tie a four-in-hand knot.
Situated on the left anterior aspect of this knotted portion of the tie at a point approximately corresponding with the defects noted previously in thetwo layers of the shirt is a superficial tear of the outer layer only of the fabric of this tie which, I believe, could have been caused by a glancing blow to this portion of the tie by a missile.
Mr.Specter. Mr. Chief Justice, I move at this time for the admission into evidence of Exhibits 393 through Exhibit 396, the three articles of clothing and the photograph which we have just used.
TheChairman. They may be admitted.
(Exhibits Nos. 393 through 396 were received in evidence and may be found in the Commission files.)
Mr.McCloy. Commander, did you say left or right?
CommanderHumes. No, sir. In fact, the way this bow is tied now it would appear to be on the left of this tie, but it is kind of twisted out of shape.
Mr.McCloy. Yes. It is twisted. It is not too clear.
CommanderHumes. It is not too clear, it is not clear how that might have been in position with the shirt, sir.
Mr.Specter. Now, Doctor Humes, at one point in your examination of the President, did you make an effort to probe the point of entry with your finger?
CommanderHumes. Yes, sir; I did.
Mr.Specter. And at or about that time when you were trying to ascertain, as you previously testified, whether there was any missile in the body of the President, did someone from the Secret Service call your attention to the fact that a bullet had been found on a stretcher at Parkland Hospital?
CommanderHumes. Yes, sir; they did.
Mr.Specter. And in that posture of your examination, having just learned of the presence of a bullet on a stretcher, did that call to your mind any tentative explanatory theory of the point of entry or exit of the bullet which you have described as entering at Point "C" on Exhibit 385?
CommanderHumes. Yes, sir. We were able to ascertain with absolute certainty that the bullet had passed by the apical portion of the right lung producing the injury which we mentioned.
I did not at that point have the information from Doctor Perry about the wound in the anterior neck, and while that was a possible explanation for the point of exit, we also had to consider the possibility that the missile in some rather inexplicable fashion had been stopped in its path through the President's body and, in fact, then had fallen from the body onto the stretcher.
Mr.Specter. And what theory did you think possible, at that juncture, to explain the passing of the bullet back out the point of entry; or had you been provided with the fact that external heart massage had been performed on the President?
CommanderHumes. Yes, sir; we had, and we considered the possibility that some of the physical maneuvering performed by the doctors might have in some way caused this event to take place.
Mr.Specter. Now, have you since discounted that possibility, Doctor Humes?
CommanderHumes. Yes; in essence we have. When examining the wounds in the base of the President's neck anteriorly, the region of the tracheotomy performed at Parkland Hospital, we noted, and we noted in our record, some contusion and bruising of the muscles of the neck of the President. We noted that at the time of the postmortem examination.
Now, we also made note of the types of wounds which I mentioned to you before in this testimony on the chest which were going to be used by the doctors there to place chest tubes. They also made other wounds, one on the left arm, and a wound on the ankle of the President with the idea of administering intravenous blood and other fluids in hope of replacing the blood which the President had lost from his extensive wounds.
Those wounds showed no evidence of bruising or contusion or physical violence, which made us reach the conclusion that they were performed during the agonal moments of the late president, and when the circulation was, in essence, very seriously embarrassed, if not nonfunctional. So that these wounds, the wound of the chest and the wound of the arm and of the ankle were performed about the same time as the tracheotomy wound because only a very few moments of time elapsed when all this was going on.
So, therefore, we reached the conclusion that the damage to these muscles on the anterior neck just below this wound were received at approximately the same time that the wound here on the top of the pleural cavity was, while the President still lived and while his heart and lungs were operating in such a fashion to permit him to have a bruise in the vicinity, because that he did have in these strap muscles in the neck, but he didn't have in the areas of the other incisions that were made at Parkland Hospital. So we feel that, had this missile not made its path in that fashion, the wound made by Doctor Perry in the neck would not have been able to produce, wouldn't have been able to produce, these contusions of the musculature of the neck.
Mr.Dulles. Could I ask a question about the missile, I am a little bit—the bullet, I am a little bit—confused. It was found on the stretcher. Did the President's body remain on the stretcher while it was in the hospital?
CommanderHumes. Of that point I have no knowledge. Theonly——
Mr.Dulles. Why would it—would this operating have anything to do with the bullet being on the stretcher unless the President's body remained on the stretcher after he was taken into the hospital; is that possible?
CommanderHumes. It is quite possible, sir.
Mr.Dulles. Otherwise it seems to me the bullet would have to have been ejected from the body before he was taken or put on the bed in the hospital.
CommanderHumes. Right, sir. I, of course, was not there. I don't know how he was handled in the hospital, in what conveyance. I do know he was on his back during the period of his stay in the hospital; Doctor Perry told me that.
Mr.Dulles. Yes; and wasn't turned over.
CommanderHumes. That is right.
Mr.Dulles. So he might have been on the stretcher the whole time, is that your view?
TheChairman. He said he had no view. He wasn't there, he doesn't know anything about it.
Mr.Dulles. Yes. I wonder if there is other evidence of this.
Mr.Specter. There has been other evidence, Mr. Dulles. If I may say at this point, we shall produce later, subject to sequential proof, evidence that the stretcher on which this bullet was found was the stretcher of Governor Connally. We have a sequence of events on the transmission of that stretcher which ties that down reasonably closely, so that on the night of the autopsy itself, as the information I have been developing indicates, the thought preliminarily was that was from President Kennedy's stretcher, and that is what led to the hypothesis which we have been exploring about, but which has since been rejected. But at any rate the evidence will show that it was from Governor Connally's stretcher that the bullet was found.
Mr.Dulles. So this bullet is still missing?
Mr.Specter. That is the subject of some theories I am about to get into. That is an elusive subject, but Dr. Humes has some views on it, and we might just as well go into those now.
Mr.McCloy. Before he gets into that, may I ask a question?
TheChairman. Surely, go right ahead.
Mr.McCloy. Quite apart from the President's clothing, now directing your attention to the flight of the bullet, quite apart from the evidence given by the President's clothing, you, I believe, indicated that the flight of the bullet was from the back, from above and behind. It took roughly the line which is shown on your Exhibit 385.
CommanderHumes. Yes, sir.
Mr.McCloy. I am not clear what induced you to come to that conclusion if you couldn't find the actual exit wound by reason of the tracheotomy.
CommanderHumes. The report which we have submitted, sir, represents our thinking within the 24–48 hours of the death of the President, all facts taken into account of the situation.
The wound in the anterior portion of the lower neck is physically lower than the point of entrance posteriorly, sir.
Mr.McCloy. That is what I wanted to bring out.
CommanderHumes. Yes, sir.
Mr.McCloy. May I ask this: In spite of the incision made by the tracheotomy, was there any evidence left of the exit aperture?
CommanderHumes. Unfortunately not that we could ascertain, sir.
Mr.McCloy. I see.
Mr.Dulles. There is no evidence in the coat or the shirt of an exit through the coat or shirt.
CommanderHumes. There is no exit through the coat, sir. But these two, in the shirt, of course—excuse me, sir—there is. The entrance by ourcalculations——
Mr.Dulles. The entrance I know.
CommanderHumes. Posteriorly.
Mr.Dulles. What about the exit?
CommanderHumes. The exit wounds are just below.
Mr.Dulles. But there was no coat to exit through.
CommanderHumes. No; anteriorly the coat was quite open.
SenatorCooper. May I ask a question?
CommanderHumes. Yes, sir, Senator.
SenatorCooper. Assuming that we draw a straight line from Point "C" which you have described as a possible point of entry of the missile, to Point "D" where you saw an incision of thetracheotomy——
CommanderHumes. Yes, sir.
SenatorCooper. What would be the relation of the bruise at the apex of the pleural sac to such a line?
CommanderHumes. It would be exactly in line with such a line, sir, exactly.
SenatorCooper. What was the character of the bruise that you saw there?
CommanderHumes. The bruise here, photographs are far superior to my humble verbal description, but if I let my hand in cup shaped fashion represent the apical parietal pleura, it was an area approximately 5 cm. in greatest diameter of purplish blue discoloration of the parietal pleura. Corresponding exactly with it, with the lung sitting below it, was a roughly pyramid-shaped bruise with its base toward the surface of the upper portion of the lung, and the apex down into the lung tissue, and the whole thing measured about 5 cm., which is a little—2 inches in extent, sir.
SenatorCooper. What would be the—can you describe the covering around the apex of the pleural sac, the nature of its protection. My point is to get your opinion as to whether some other factor, some factor other than the missile could have caused this bruise which you saw.
CommanderHumes. A couple of ways we might do this, sir. One with regard to temporal, it was quite fresh. When examined under the microscope, the lung in this area had recent hemorrhaging in it. The red blood cells were well-preserved, as they would be if it happened quite recently before death, as was the red blood cells where they had gotten out into the lung tissue near there.
The discoloration was essentially of the same character as the discoloration in the muscles adjacent thereto, which would roughly again place it temporally in approximately the same time since bruises change color as time goes by, and these appeared quite fresh.
This is with regard to time—I don't know whether that is the right parameter in which you wished to study it, Senator.
SenatorCooper. My question really went to this point: Considering the location of the bruise at the apex of the pleuralsac——
CommanderHumes. Yes, sir.
SenatorCooper. And of the tissue or muscles around it, was there any other factor which you could think of that might have caused that bruise other than the passage of a missile?
CommanderHumes. It was so well localized that I truthfully, sir, can't think of any other way.
SenatorCooper. That is all.
Mr.McCloy. May I ask you one question which, perhaps, the answer is quite obvious. If, contrary to the evidence that we have here, that anterior wound was the wound of entry, the shot must have come from below the President to have followed that path.
CommanderHumes. That course, that is correct, sir.
Mr.Specter. Dr. Humes, can you compare the angles of declination on 385, point "C" to "D", with 388 "A" to "B"?
CommanderHumes. You will note, and again I must apologize for the schematic nature of these diagrams drawn to a certain extent from memory and to a certain extent from the written record, it would appear that the angle of declination is somewhat sharper in the head wound, 388, than it is in 385.
The reason for this, we feel, by the pattern of the entrance wound at 388 "A" causes us to feel that the President's head was bent forward, and we feel this accounts for the difference in the angle, plus undoubtedly the wounds were not received absolutely simultaneously, so that the vehicle in which the President was traveling moved during this period of time, which would account for a difference in the line of flight, sir.
Mr.Specter. Aside from the slight differences which are notable by observing those two exhibits, are they roughly comparable to the angle of decline?
CommanderHumes. I believe them to be roughly comparable, sir.
Mr.Specter. Could you state for the record an approximation of the angle of decline?
CommanderHumes. Mathematics is not my forte. Approximately 45 degrees from the horizontal.
Mr.Specter. Would you elaborate somewhat, Doctor Humes, on why the angle would change by virtue of a tilting of the head of the President since the basis of the computation of angle is with respect to the ground?
CommanderHumes. I find the question a little difficult of answering right off, forgive me, sir.
Mr.Specter. I will try to rephrase it. Stated more simply, why would the tilting of the President's head affect the angle of the decline? You stated thatwas——
CommanderHumes. The angle that I am making an observation most about is the angle made that we envisioned having been made by the impingement of the bullet in its flight at the point of entry. This angle we see by the difference of the measurement of the two wounds.
Therefore, this is—we have several angles we are talking about here, unfortunately, this is—the angle of which we speak in this location, "A" to "B", and it is difficult.
I have to retract. Since we feel from their physical configurations, wounds 385 "C" and 388 "A" are entrance wounds, if there wasn't some significant change in the angulation of the President's head with respect to the line of flight from these missiles, the physical measurements of 385 "C" and this 388 "A" should be similar. They aren't, in fact, dissimilar in that there is a greater angulation in 388 "A". Therefore, there has to be either a change in the position of the vehicle in which the President is riding with respect to the horizontal or a change in the situation of the President's head. I believe that the exhibits submitted earlier, thephotograph——
Mr.Specter. I believe the ones were given to you so far—excuse me, you are right, 389.
CommanderHumes. 389, in fact at this point shows the President's head in a slightly inclined forward position, and I am not enough aware of the geography of the ground over which the vehicle was traveling to know how much that would affect it.
Mr.Specter. If you were to be told that there was a distance traversed of approximately 150 feet from the time of Point "C" on 385 to Point "A" on 388, and you would assume the additional factor that there was a slight angle of decline on the street as well, would those factors, assuming them to be true, help in the explanation of the differences in the angles?
CommanderHumes. I think that they would make the figure as depicted in 388 quite understandably different from 385.
Mr.Dulles. Was it possible, in view of the condition of the brain to point with absolute accuracy to the point of exit there? I can see that the point of exit in 385 can be clearly determined. Is it equally possible to determine the point of exit in 388?
CommanderHumes. No, sir; it was not, other than through this large defect becausewhen——
Mr.Dulles. Therefore, that angle might be somewhat different.
CommanderHumes. Might be somewhat different, sir. I think we made reference to that somewhat earlier. The fragments were so difficult to replace in their precise anatomiclocation——
Mr.Dulles. That is what I thought, but I wasn't sure.
CommanderHumes. That is correct.
Mr.McCloy. I would like to ask a question in regard to 385 similar to that I asked as to 388. In your opinion, was the 385 wound lethal?
CommanderHumes. No, sir.
Mr.Dulles. With the wound in 385, would it have affected the President's power of speech?
CommanderHumes. It could have, sir. The wound caused a defect in his trachea which would most usually have caused at least some defect in the proper phonation, sir.
(Discussion off the record.)
TheChairman. On the record.
Mr.Specter. In response to Mr. Dulles' question a moment ago, Doctor Humes, you commented that they did not turn him over at Parkland. Will you state for the record what the source of your information is on that?
CommanderHumes. Yes. This is a result of a personal telephone conversation between myself and Dr. Malcolm Perry early in the morning of Saturday, November 23.
Mr.Specter. At that time did Doctor Perry tell you specifically, Doctor Humes, that the Parkland doctors had not observed the wound in the President's back?
CommanderHumes. He told me that the President was on his back from the time he was brought into the hospital until the time he left it, and that at no time was he turned from his back by the doctors.
Mr.Specter. And at the time of your conversation with Doctor Perry did you tell Doctor Perry anything of your observations or conclusions?
CommanderHumes. No, sir; I did not.
(A short recess was taken.)
TheChairman. Gentlemen, the Commission will be in order. We will continue with the examination.
Mr.Specter. Doctor Humes, as to points of entry on the body of the late President, how many were there in total?
CommanderHumes. Two, sir, as depicted in 385-C and 388-A.
Mr.Specter. And to points of exit, how many were there?
CommanderHumes. Two, sir, as depicted in 385-D and the vicinity of 388-B. I make the latter remark as was developed earlier, in that the size of the large defect in the skull was so great and the fragmentation was so complex that it was impossible to accurately pinpoint the exit of the missile in the head wound.
Mr.Specter. Now as to that last factor, would the X-rays be of material assistance to you in pinpointing the specific locale of the exit?
CommanderHumes. I do not believe so, sir. The only path that the X-rays show in any detail are of the minor fragments which passed from point A to point B.
Mr.Specter. Now that you have finished your major descriptions of the wounds, can you be any more specific in telling us in what way the availability of the x-rays would assist in further specifying the nature of the wounds?
CommanderHumes. I do not believe, sir, that the availability of the X-rays would materially assist the Commission.
Mr.Specter. How about the same question as to the pictures?
CommanderHumes. The pictures would show more accurately and in more detail the character of the wounds as depicted particularly in 385 and 386 and in 388-A. They would also perhaps give the Commissioners a better—better is not the best term, but a more graphic picture of the massive defect in 388.
Mr.Specter. Going back for a moment, DoctorHumes——
TheChairman. Before we get off that, may I ask you this, Commander: If we had the pictures here and you could look them over again and restate your opinion, would it cause you to change any of the testimony you have given here?
CommanderHumes. To the best of my recollection, Mr. Chief Justice, it would not.
TheChairman. Mr. McCloy.
Mr.McCloy. May I ask this question?
TheChairman. Go right ahead.
Mr.McCloy. Do you have any knowledge as to whether or not any photographs were taken in Dallas?
CommanderHumes. I have none, sir, no knowledge.
Mr.McCloy. No knowledge that any were taken?
RepresentativeFord. May I ask what size are the pictures to which you refer?
CommanderHumes. We exposed both black and white and color negatives, Congressman. They were exposed in the morgue during the examination. They were not developed. The kodachrome negatives when developed would be 405. They were in film carriers or cassettes, as were the black and white. Of course they could be magnified.
RepresentativeFord. Have those been examined by personnel at Bethesda?
CommanderHumes. No, sir. We exposed these negatives; we turned them over. Here I must ask the counsel again for advice—to the Secret Service.
Mr.Specter. Yes; it was the Secret Service.
CommanderHumes. They were turned over to the Secret Service in their cassettes unexposed, and I have not seen any of them since. This is the photographs. The X-rays were developed in our X-ray department on the spot that evening, because we had to see those right then as part of our examination, but the photographs were made for the record and for other purposes.
RepresentativeFord. But they had never been actually developed for viewing.
CommanderHumes. I do not know, sir.
Mr.Specter. Doctor Humes, back to the angles for just a moment.
CommanderHumes. Yes, sir.
Mr.Specter. Hypothesize or assume, if you will, that other evidence will show that the wound inflicted on Commission Exhibit 385 at point C occurred while the President was riding in the rear seat of his automobile approximately 100 feet from a point of origin in a six-floor building nearby, and assume further that the wound inflicted in 388 at point A occurred when the President was approximately 250 feet away from the same point.
With those assumptions in mind, there would be somewhat different angles of declination going from C to D on 385 and from A to B on 388.
CommanderHumes. I would expect there would.
Mr.Specter. You have already testified earlier today that you were unable to pinpoint with precision angle A to B on 388 because of the reconstruction of the scalp.
Now my question to you, in that elongated fashion, is from what you know and what you have described, are the angles, as you have expressed them to be in your opinion, consistent with a situation where the two wounds were inflicted at the angles and at the distances just described to you?
CommanderHumes. I believe they are consistent. I would state that the path outlined on 388-A to B is to a certain extent conjectural for the reasons given before.
Mr.Specter. Now, Doctor Humes, I hand you a group of documents which have been marked as Commission Exhibit No. 397 and ask you if you can identify what they are?
CommanderHumes. Yes, sir; these are various notes in long-hand, or copies rather, of various notes in long-hand made by myself, in part, during the performance of the examination of the late President, and in part after the examination when I was preparing to have a typewritten report made.
Mr.Specter. Are there also included there some notes that you made while you talked to Doctor Perry on the telephone?
CommanderHumes. Yes, sir; there are.
Mr.Specter. Are there any notes which you made at any time which are not included in this group of notes?
CommanderHumes. Yes, sir; there are.
Mr.Specter. And what do those consist of?
CommanderHumes. In privacy of my own home, early in the morning of Sunday, November 24th, I made a draft of this report which I later revised, and of which this represents the revision. That draft I personally burned in the fireplace of my recreation room.
Mr.Specter. May the record show that the Exhibit No. 397 is the identical document which has been previously identified as Commission No. 371 for our internal purposes.
Is the first sheet then in that group the notes you made when you talked to Doctor Perry?
CommanderHumes. That is correct, sir.
Mr.Specter. And do the next 15 sheets represent the rough draft which was later copied into the autopsy report which has been heretofore identified with an exhibit number?
CommanderHumes. That is correct, sir.
Mr.Specter. And what do the next two sheets represent?
CommanderHumes. The next two sheets are the notes actually made in the room in which the examination was taking place. I notice now that the handwriting in some instances is not my own, and it is either that of Commander Boswell or Colonel Finck.
Mr.Specter. And was that writing made at the same time that the autopsy report was undertaken; that is, did you review all of the markings on those papers and note them to be present when you completed the autopsy report?
CommanderHumes. Yes, sir. From the time of the completion of this examination until the submission of the written report following its preparation, all of the papers pertinent to this case were in my personal custody.
Mr.Specter. Have you now described all of the documents which were present in that 397, Exhibit No. 397?
CommanderHumes. Yes, sir; with the exception of the certification to the fact that I, in fact, detailed them in my custody, and a certification that I had destroyed certain preliminary draft notes.
Mr.Specter. And these represent all the notes except those you have already described which you destroyed?
CommanderHumes. That is correct, sir.
Mr.Specter. Now, just one point on the notes themselves. Page 14 of your rough draft, Doctor Humes, as to the point of origin, the notes show that there was a revision between your first draft and your final report.
CommanderHumes. Yes, sir.
Mr.Specter. Will you first of all read into the record the final conclusion reflected in your final report.
CommanderHumes. I would rather read it from the final report. The final report reads:
"The projectiles were fired from a point behind and somewhat above the level of the deceased."
Mr.Specter. And what did the first draft of that sentence as shown on page 14 of your rough draft state?
CommanderHumes. It stated as follows:
"The projectiles were fired from a point behind and somewhat above a horizontal line to the vertical position of the body at the moment of impact."
Mr.Specter. Now would you state the reason for making that modification between draft and final report, please?
CommanderHumes. This examination, as I have indicated, was performed by myself with my two associates. The notes which we have just admitted as an exhibit are in my own hand and are my opinion, was my opinion at that time, as to the best way to present the facts which we had gleaned during this period.
Before submitting it to the typist, I went over this with great care with my two associates. One or the other of them raised the point that perhaps this sentence would state more than what was absolutely fact based upon our observations, pointing out that we did not know precisely at that time in what position the body of the President was when the missiles struck, and that therefore we should be somewhat less specific and somewhat more circumspect than the way we stated it. When I considered this suggestion, I agreed that it would be better to change it as noted, and accordingly, I did so.
Mr.Specter. Mr. Chief Justice, I move now for the admission into evidence of Exhibit No. 397.
TheChairman. It may be admitted.
(The documents, previously marked Exhibit No. 397 for identification, were received in evidence.)
Mr.McCloy. May I ask one question about the notes? The notes that you made contemporaneously with your examination, you said you put those down and then you put some in later. How much later were the notes, within the best of your recollection of the final notes made, not the final report, but the final notes that you made in your own handwriting?
CommanderHumes. The examination was concluded approximately at 11 o'clock on the night of November 22. The final changes in the notes prior to the typing of the report were made, and I will have to give you the time because whatever time Mr. Oswald was shot, that is about when I finished. I was working in an office, and someone had a television on and came in and told me that Mr. Oswald had been shot, and that was around noon on Sunday, November 24th.
Mr.Specter. Mr. Chief Justice, I have now marked another photograph as the next exhibit number, Commission Exhibit 398. May I say to the Commission that this is a photograph which, subject to later proof, will show it to be taken immediately after the President was struck by the first bullet.
TheChairman. It may be marked.
(The photograph was marked Commission Exhibit No. 398 for identification.)
May I move for its admission into evidence at this time for this purpose?
TheChairman. It may be admitted.
(The photograph, previously marked Commission Exhibit No. 398 for identification, was received in evidence.)
Looking at Commission Exhibit 398, Doctor Humes, with that as a background, have you had an opportunity to review the medical reports on Governor Connally at Parkland Hospital in Commission Exhibit 392?
CommanderHumes. I have.
Mr.Specter. Have you noted the wounds which he sustained on his right wrist, that is, Governor Connally's right wrist?
CommanderHumes. Yes, sir; I have noted the report of it in these records.
Mr.Specter. What does the report show as to those wounds on the right wrist?
CommanderHumes. The report shows a wound of entrance on the dorsal aspect of the right wrist. Let's get the precise point here. The wound of entry is described as on the dorsal aspect of the right wrist above the junction of the distal fourth of the radius and the shaft. It was approximately two centimeters in length and rather oblique, with the loss of tissue, and some considerable contusions at the margins. There was a wound of exit along the volar surface of the wrist about two centimeters above the flexion crease of the wrist in the midline.
Mr.Specter. Doctor Humes, I show you a bullet which we have marked as Commission Exhibit No. 399, and may I say now that, subject to later proof, this is the missile which has been taken from the stretcher which the evidence now indicates was the stretcher occupied by Governor Connally.
I move for its admission into evidence at this time.
TheChairman. It may be admitted.
(The article, previously marked Commission Exhibit No. 399 for identification, was received in evidence.)
Mr.Specter. We have been asked by the FBI that the missile not be handled by anybody because it is undergoing further ballistic tests, and it now appears, may the record show, in a plastic case in a cotton background.
Now looking at that bullet, Exhibit 399, Doctor Humes, could that bullet have gone through or been any part of the fragment passing through President Kennedy's head in Exhibit No. 388?
CommanderHumes. I do not believe so, sir.
Mr.Specter. And could that missile have made the wound on Governor Connally's right wrist?
CommanderHumes. I think that that is most unlikely. May I expand on those two answers?
Mr.Specter. Yes, please do.
CommanderHumes. The X-rays made of the wound in the head of the late President showed fragmentations of the missile. Some fragments we recovered and turned over, as has been previously noted. Also we have X-rays of the fragment of skull which was in the region of our opinion exit wound showing metallic fragments.
Also going to Exhibit 392, the report from Parkland Hospital, the following sentence referring to the examination of the wound of the wrist is found:
"Small bits of metal were encountered at various levels throughout the wound, and these were, wherever they were identified and could be picked up, picked up and submitted to the pathology department for identification and examination."
The reason I believe it most unlikely that this missile could have inflicted either of these wounds is that this missile is basically intact; its jacket appears to me to be intact, and I do not understand how it could possibly have left fragments in either of these locations.
Mr.Specter. What wounds did Governor Connally sustain in his chest area, based upon the records of Parkland Hospital, which you have examined, Doctor Humes?
CommanderHumes. Governor Connally received in his chest a wound of entrance just—this is again from 392—"just lateral to the right scapula close to the axilla which had passed through the lattisimus dorsi muscle, shattered approximately ten centimeters of a lateral and anterior portion of the right fifth rib, and emerged below the right nipple anterially."