Post by Michael Capasse on Nov 8, 2018 8:40:40 GMT -5
Mr. Specter.
We will use the Commission Exhibit No. 387 and I will ask you first of all, for the record, to identify what this document is, Dr. Humes.
(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 387 for identification.)
HSCA
Mr. CORNWELL. And you finally began to write the autopsy report at what time?
Dr. HUMES. It was decided that three people couldn't write the report simultaneously, so I assumed the responsibility for writing the report, which I began about 11 o'clock in the evening of Saturday, November 23, having wrestled with it for 4 or 5, 6 hours in the afternoon, and worked on it until 3 or 4 o'clock in the morning of Sunday, the 24th.
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?
Commander HUMES. 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 any notes which you made at any time which are not included in this group of notes?
Commander HUMES - Yes, sir; there are.
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?
Commander HUMES. That is correct. sir.
Note Humes says 'had the draft notes which we had prepared in the autopsy room'. He now maintains he copied these 'word for word' and then destroyed the bloodstained originals. This implies he burned notes made in part at least by Boswell & Finck, and that we should now be left only non-bloodstained copies of the original autopsy notes. On the first point, Humes will later (1999) contradict himself, and the second is contradicted by simply looking at the 'face sheet' which is itself markedly bloodstained.
A single page containing 25 words of notes of his conversation with Dr. Perry, 15 pages of a rough draft of the autopsy report, two charts not in Humes handwriting, and two certifications both updated November 24, 1963 the first certification by and countersigned by the commanding officer of the Naval medical school it states
"That all working papers associated with the autopsy have remained in my personal custody at all times" and were turned over to his superior with the handwritten draft.The second certified that he had burned "certain preliminary draft notes"related to the autopsy.
Mr. Specter.
And what do the next two sheets represent?
Commander HUMES. 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?
Commander HUMES. 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.
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.
On the seventh page the last 10 lines came six changes in the description of the head these include the alteration of the president's lower entrance wound as described from puncture in the draft to lacerated in the final copy
In the description of location the words "tangential to the scalp" were deleted
"In the underlying bone is a corresponding puncture wound" in the original of the word puncture was deleted
Such substantive changes from the second draft and final cannot be regarded as editing.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here's Boswell in 1999 (ARRB):
Q Did you ever see the notes that Dr. Humes took during the course of the autopsy?
A No. I'm trying to think what notes he might have taken. I don't see his handwriting on that.
Q You mean Exhibit 1? [the 'face sheet']
A Right. I don't think I saw any of his notes.
Q Was it ever the custom or practice to have somebody take minutes or notes of proceedings of an autopsy?
A Always.
Q Was there somebody who did that?
A Well, basically I was taking the notes, for the most part.
Q And by those notes, you're referring to Exhibit 1? [the 'face sheet']
In 1969, Finck testified under oath that he hinself made no notes, and that Boswell made the notes on the 'face sheet'. He then corrects this to say that he did take measurements and may have written them down, or read them out for the others to write down, but that he had no notes when he left the autopsy room. He says Humes & Boswell made notes at the autopsy
[Discussion off the record.]
BY MR. GUNN:
Q: Dr. Finck, have you had an opportunity to read the affidavit of Leonard D. Saslaw, Ph.D.?
A: Yes, I did.
SUMMARY
There are changes from the draft that we have and the final..so the question becomes...
How can we be assured the changes that are made are consistent with whatever Humes burned?
other changes we can see
The rough draft stated the projectiles fired from a point behind and somewhat (illegible word) above a horizontal line to the vertical junction of the body at the moment of impact. As altered the last part reads point defined and somewhat above the level of the deceased [that's quite a change]
On the seventh page the last 10 lines contain six changes in the description of the head these include
The alteration of the president's lower entrance wound as described from puncture in the draft to lacerated in the final copy
In the description of location the words "tangential to the scalp" were deleted
"In the underlying bone is a corresponding puncture wound" is in the original; the word puncture was deleted from the final
On the eighth handwritten page the word "puncture" relating to this same head wound was again deleted
[This is what the WCR describes as the entrance wound of the fatal bullet]
and we are left with
A single page containing 25 words of notes of his conversation with Dr. Perry,
15 pages of a rough draft of the autopsy report,
Two charts not in Humes handwriting, and two certifications both updated November 24, 1963
The first certification by and countersigned by the commanding officer of the Naval medical school it states:
"That all working papers associated with the autopsy have remained in my personal custody at all times" and were turned over to his superior with the handwritten draft.
The second states:
He had burned "certain preliminary draft notes"related to the autopsy
Such substantive changes from the second draft to the final cannot be regarded as simple editing or grammatical corrections
[what da' hell did he burn and why?]
We will use the Commission Exhibit No. 387 and I will ask you first of all, for the record, to identify what this document is, Dr. Humes.
(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 387 for identification.)
Commander HUMES. This document is a copy of the gross autopsy report which was prepared by myself, Dr. Boswell, and Dr. Finck, and completed within approximately 48 hours after the assassination of the President.
HSCA
Mr. CORNWELL. And you finally began to write the autopsy report at what time?
Dr. HUMES. It was decided that three people couldn't write the report simultaneously, so I assumed the responsibility for writing the report, which I began about 11 o'clock in the evening of Saturday, November 23, having wrestled with it for 4 or 5, 6 hours in the afternoon, and worked on it until 3 or 4 o'clock in the morning of Sunday, the 24th.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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?
Commander HUMES. 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 any notes which you made at any time which are not included in this group of notes?
Commander HUMES - Yes, sir; there are.
Mr. SPECTER - And what do those consist of?
Commander HUMES - 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.
Is the first sheet then in that group the notes you made when you talked to Doctor Perry?
Commander HUMES. That is correct. sir.
Note Humes says 'had the draft notes which we had prepared in the autopsy room'. He now maintains he copied these 'word for word' and then destroyed the bloodstained originals. This implies he burned notes made in part at least by Boswell & Finck, and that we should now be left only non-bloodstained copies of the original autopsy notes. On the first point, Humes will later (1999) contradict himself, and the second is contradicted by simply looking at the 'face sheet' which is itself markedly bloodstained.
A single page containing 25 words of notes of his conversation with Dr. Perry, 15 pages of a rough draft of the autopsy report, two charts not in Humes handwriting, and two certifications both updated November 24, 1963 the first certification by and countersigned by the commanding officer of the Naval medical school it states
"That all working papers associated with the autopsy have remained in my personal custody at all times" and were turned over to his superior with the handwritten draft.The second certified that he had burned "certain preliminary draft notes"related to the autopsy.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Specter.
And what do the next two sheets represent?
Commander HUMES. 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?
Commander HUMES. 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.
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.
Commander HUMES. Yes, sir.
Yes, sir. That's it; no explanation or follow up..none..
Some Revisions
The rough draft stated the projectiles fired from a point behind and somewhat (illegible word) above a horizontal line vertical junction of the body at the moment of impact.
As altered the last part reads point defined and somewhat above the level of the deceased
On the seventh page the last 10 lines came six changes in the description of the head these include the alteration of the president's lower entrance wound as described from puncture in the draft to lacerated in the final copy
In the description of location the words "tangential to the scalp" were deleted
"In the underlying bone is a corresponding puncture wound" in the original of the word puncture was deleted
Such substantive changes from the second draft and final cannot be regarded as editing.
There is the avoided left temple as described in Dr. McClelland's original handwritten report at the time of the assassination confirmed by and in his appearance before the commission and about which the commission avoided asking him any questions whatsoever.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here's Boswell in 1999 (ARRB):
Q Did you ever see the notes that Dr. Humes took during the course of the autopsy?
A No. I'm trying to think what notes he might have taken. I don't see his handwriting on that.
Q You mean Exhibit 1? [the 'face sheet']
A Right. I don't think I saw any of his notes.
Q Was it ever the custom or practice to have somebody take minutes or notes of proceedings of an autopsy?
A Always.
Q Was there somebody who did that?
A Well, basically I was taking the notes, for the most part.
Q And by those notes, you're referring to Exhibit 1? [the 'face sheet']
A Right.
In 1969, Finck testified under oath that he hinself made no notes, and that Boswell made the notes on the 'face sheet'. He then corrects this to say that he did take measurements and may have written them down, or read them out for the others to write down, but that he had no notes when he left the autopsy room. He says Humes & Boswell made notes at the autopsy
Q: Dr. Finck, I would like to show you another document that has been marked as [Exhibit # omitted] this deposition, and it is on its face an affidavit of Leonard D. Saslaw, Ph.D. And I wish that you would take a minute to read this affidavit. [Handing document to witness]
MR. GUNN: We can go off the record.
[Discussion off the record.]
BY MR. GUNN:
Q: Dr. Finck, have you had an opportunity to read the affidavit of Leonard D. Saslaw, Ph.D.?
A: Yes, I did.
Q: Let me quote from two paragraphs of the affidavit and then I will ask you if that helps refresh your recollection to any events.
Paragraph X states:
"I clearly heard Dr. Finck, who was speaking sufficiently loudly for his words easily to be overheard, complain that he had been unable to locate the handwritten notes that he had taken during the autopsy on President Kennedy. Dr.Finck elaborated to his companions with considerable irritation that immediately after washing up following the autopsy, he looked for his notes and could not find them anywhere. He further recounted that others who were present at the autopsy also had helped him search for his notes to no avail.............Dr. Finck concluded his story by angrily stating that he had to reconstruct his notes from memory shortly after the autopsy."
The question, Dr. Finck, is do these two paragraphs help refresh your recollection first on the question of whether you took notes during the autopsy?
A: I don't know."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY
There are changes from the draft that we have and the final..so the question becomes...
How can we be assured the changes that are made are consistent with whatever Humes burned?
other changes we can see
The rough draft stated the projectiles fired from a point behind and somewhat (illegible word) above a horizontal line to the vertical junction of the body at the moment of impact. As altered the last part reads point defined and somewhat above the level of the deceased [that's quite a change]
On the seventh page the last 10 lines contain six changes in the description of the head these include
The alteration of the president's lower entrance wound as described from puncture in the draft to lacerated in the final copy
In the description of location the words "tangential to the scalp" were deleted
"In the underlying bone is a corresponding puncture wound" is in the original; the word puncture was deleted from the final
On the eighth handwritten page the word "puncture" relating to this same head wound was again deleted
[This is what the WCR describes as the entrance wound of the fatal bullet]
and we are left with
A single page containing 25 words of notes of his conversation with Dr. Perry,
15 pages of a rough draft of the autopsy report,
Two charts not in Humes handwriting, and two certifications both updated November 24, 1963
The first certification by and countersigned by the commanding officer of the Naval medical school it states:
"That all working papers associated with the autopsy have remained in my personal custody at all times" and were turned over to his superior with the handwritten draft.
The second states:
He had burned "certain preliminary draft notes"related to the autopsy
Such substantive changes from the second draft to the final cannot be regarded as simple editing or grammatical corrections
[what da' hell did he burn and why?]
and out of all things, this was so important to get right for the death of the President.