Michael Baden's DeceptionsHow far would Michael Baden go to deceive

rhe public on the matter of the lGnnedy assas-sination? As you can see from the samples I'vetaken fiom his book, Unnatural Death: Confes-siors of a Medical Erarniner (Rartdom House,1989), Baden - formerly Head of the HouseSelect Committee on Assassinations MedicalPaael - went far beyond making the usual mis-Ieading statements. He must have had gleatfaith in Allen Dulles's comment "But nobodyreads. Don't believe people read in tlis county.There will be a few professors that will readthe record...the public will read very litde." Ibtlpse involved in what the CIA calls "percep-tion management," reality seems to be just arough draft.

lf people like Baden feel ftee to lie aboutwhat is on public record, imagine the reliabil-ity of "information" they provide that can't beverified.

The Harper Fragmeni"The founh [ftagrnmt]... was found a few

days after tlte autopsy by a premed student...He took it home to his fathe4 a docor, whoknew what it was and had ir phorographed. Ata parqr, the photographer couldn't resist talk-ing about it, and the srory tot back to rhe FBLAgents swooped down on the premed student,who was saving the fiagrnent as a souvenir."lP 171

(1) According to FBI documents found bryDr Josiah Thompson, the Harpers behavedquite responsibly. Billy Harper took the ftag-ment to his uncle, Dr. Jack Harper who quicklytook it to Methodist Hospital where it was ex-amined by the chief pathologist, A.B. Caims,and photographed. On the foltowing Monday,1UZ5/64,Dr.Harper tumed the fiagrnent overto the FBL [7 HSCA 24] The FBI lerrieved pho-ros of rhe bone from Mrs. Harper 7 /10/64. 17HSCA 1221

(2) In Dallas, the bone was identified asoccipital ftack ofhead) but, as noted by authorDavid Lifton, photos of the bone (the bone it-selfis missing) were said by the HSCA to showparietal bone (fiont of head) . As first noted byThompson, a blown-out ftagrnent from the backofthe head suggests a shot ftom rhe fronr.

Why would Baden want to discredit theHarpers? Have the archived photos ofthis ftag-ment ever been authenticated by anyone whoactually saw the bone fragment itselP

Kennedy's Head Wound"Perhaps the most egregious error was the

four-inch miscalculation. The head is only five

By Milicent Cranor

inches long fiom crown to neck, but Humeswas confi.rsed by a little piece of brain tissuethat had adhered to the scalp. He placed thehead wound four inches lower than it actuallywas, near the neck instead of the cowlick."lp16l

(1) Baden neglects to mention tlat Humestold him, "the wound on the SKULL preciselycoincided with" the piece oftissue adhering tothe scalp. [7 HSCA 25U

(2) Baden implies the autopsists never liftedup the scalp to examine the bone beneatl, anabsurdity comparable to not lemoving a victim'sclothing during an autopsy.

(3) Baden implies that only one pathologistwas involved, instead ofthree: Humes, Boswelland Finck.

(4) Baden implies that a calculation (moreopportunity for error) instead of a sinple di-rect measurement resulted in this monumen-tal discrepancy.

(5) Baden neglects to mention how the lo-cation was based on an easy-to-see fixed refer-ence point, the extemal occipital protuberance.

(5) Baden implies tlnt Humes did not knowthe top ofthe head from the bottom.

Four inches is quite a chunk of real estateon tlle human head. Property disputes havebeen based on less. No matter how urexnen-enced ttle autopsists were, it is hard to beiievethey could make such a mistake. It is easier tobelieve the wound was revised because. onhindsight, it seemed inconsistenr with a shotfrom the sixth floor of dre Deposirory build-mg.

When the Army "duplicated,, the assassi-nation by shooting at reconstructed skulls, tllebullet entered where Humes said it did, but irdid not exit where it was supposed to accord-ing to the FINAL autopsy report, the rop rightside of the head. The bullet came out of thedght eye, where it was supposed to - appar-ently according to a different aubpsy report.

There may have been an earlier plan to solvethe problem of the trajectory by revising theEXIT wound. Dl Alfred Olivier who supervisedthe Army experirnents testified before the war-ren Commission that "according to the autopsythe bullet emerged duough the superorbitalprocess." [5 WCH 89] He was referdng to thebony ridge beneath one's brow.

By this time, people knew that Kennedy'sface was outwardly intact. (The bone beneaththe right brow was ftactured.) No bullet couldhave exited ftom anlwhere near his eye. Possi-bly this is why a different location for an exitwas decided upon.

Incredibly, Arlen Specter did not ask, Whatautopsy report was that? Nor did he show theleast concem about Olivier's photo of the ex-perimental skull with the right side ofthe facemissing, even though this obviously did notresemble Kennedy's wounds. (It's very inter-esting that, because of over-penetration,Kennedy's A-P x-ray seems to show tlte samearea missing.) Specter changed the subject tothe entralce wound. There may or may not bea connection but, four years late!, Kennedy gota new entrance wound in his head.

Front Seet lhagments"The Kermedyhead bullet was found on the

floor oflGnnedys car in front. It had struck thewindshield smrt and broken in two." [p13]

(1) This contradicts what Baden says onpage 14 of HSCA Volume 1: "This bullet ftag-mented after entering the cranium, one majorpiece of it passing forward and laterally to pro-duce an explosive ftacture of the right side ofthe skull as it emerged from the head "

(2) The Army experiments did not includeplacing something behind the skulls to dupli-cate the windshield strut. The bullets suDDos-edly broke on the skulls themselves.

(3) Baden neglects to mention how, in 1 968,a 6.5mm metal ftagment magically appearedimbedded in the new location of the entrarcewound (in x-rays), or how it supposedly gorthere: when the buller broke upon entering theskull. But then he would have to explain howthe autopsists and radiologists who saw fine,dusdike panicles on unenhanced x-rays couldmiss a big 6.5mm fragmenr in rhe back of thehead.

Something seems to be seriously wrong withthe story of *rese ftagments, but what is it?The nose ponion was a tom copper jacket con-taining lead; the tail, a piece of empry jacker.But Dr. Johlt Lattimer, who often claimed it waseasy to separate the lead core ftom the jacket ofa Carcano bullet, reponed the fragments to bea hunk of lead without a jacket, ald an empryjacket. which was what his own exDerimentsproduced, and what he claimed (with no refer-ence) |}le Army's experiments produced. fResidStaff Phys 1972;18:34; Surg, clnecol Obster1976; 42:2461I found no derailed descriprionof those Army experiment fiagmen rs bu r, judg-mg lrom pnotos, only one seems iacketed.

Should aCarcanobullet fiagment under Lhepresumec clrcumstances into two jacketed frag-ments? Was the small, neat entiance woundconsistent with the sort of violent inreracuon

continued. on page 36

-.

Iltlay-tlrrae, ree? FXQil=

t

conlinued ftom page 25He repeatedly expressed the view that both

the FBI and CIA had concealed imponant ma_terial from the Commission, ard that rhe CIA,/Mafla plots would have had a ,,very direct bear-ing on the areas of conspiracy which we lriedto pursue." He also asked,,Areyou looking inrorhe plors on rhe basis of wherher they werecovered up by the CIA because some ofthe verypeople involved in tiem could have been in_volved in the President,s assassination?,, I saidthat yes that was an area of our investigation,and he replied strongly, ,,Good. Good. you haveto look at it that way.,, I also said that we werelooking into charges that Castro might havereraliared for the plors by killing Kennedy, andhe repJied. Where is any evidence of rhar? Ithink the other approach would be much morelogical." This was apparently in reference toprobing those involved in the plots themselves.

I told him that we would of course makeexrensive matedal available to him in refer_ence to our questioning of him, noting tharwe wanr him ro refresh h js memory as io his

.'* old memos, etc. as well as other documentsf,raethat we will give him in advance. He was very' . ".appreciative ofthis and said he would like to; : know more about rhe CIAlMafia plots and our;11: work on them.' He remarked a couple times rhat he has

norhing ro regret about his work on the Com-mission, and thar he tried his hardest to makeir rhe best investigation possible. He said hestill-believe,s very strongly that he had a goodstaffofthe finest legal minds. He did of co,-ursesay thar the agency cooperation and input (FBIand CIA) was and is the key issue ro hjm.

He also again said that he would like anopportunity to review rhe testimony ofotherWC staffers before he comes down. I asainsLaced, more srrongly rhis time, rhat l rhoriehrthar this would probably nor be in accordaicewith Committee rules. He said he .,would ap_preciate the courresy."

Again, he seemed quite friendly through_out the conversation and seemed to look for_ward to meeting with us. +

continued ftom page 17ttlat would break this kind of bullet? Wouldsuch a collision drive the head very much for,war-d? How much energy would be expended,and would this afi'ect the jet effect? 'r\tren ohvsi_cisr Luis Alvarez fired ac melons with super iasrbullets (3000 ft/sec versus Carcano,s 1g00 ft/sec impact velociry) to ',prove" the jet effecr,did any ofthose bullets break upon striking rheoccipital region ofthe melonsi

Head Movement"Since the head moved backward, they said.

JFK was shot from the fiont...This theory rs norunreasonable; it's just wrong. They left out oftheir calculations the acceleration of the carKennedy was riding in." [p7]

(7) OnIy Kennedy,s head.moves backward.(2) The car doesn't accelerate until later.

Kennedy's Back Wound"The X-rays and phorographs show rhe

wound to be lower on the back and rhe trackslightly upward." [p 14]

True. And in HSCA Volume l, page I96, hesaid. "ln rhe jacker and rhe undirlying shinrhere is a peforation of the fabric that corre_sponds direcdy with the location of rhe perfo_ration of rhe skin of rhe righr upper back...Yer, in 1988, on Nova, Baden said the rrack isu_pward on-ly if Kennedy had been upright, thatKennedy, therefore, was leaning fo;,,/ard whenshot. But the Zapruder film shows KennedvWAS uprighr and already reacrins when rhemagic bullet is supposed [o have-srruck himfor the first time, along with Govemor Connallv

f,onnally's Back Wound'According to Connally,s medical records,

the bullet struck him nose first in the back andleft a vertical scar. I thought the records werewrong.Ifitwas the same magic buller, itwouldhave gone in sideways witi che length, nor rhepoinL, firsr. After leaving Kemedy, ir-would havelost its power and became a tumbling bullet,and tumbling bullets rotate. When thev finallvstrike, tJrey srrike edgewise. I needed to exaryl'-

ined Connally... He removed his shirt. There i!was-a wo inch long sideways entrance scar inhis back. He had not been shor by a secondshooter but by the same flattened bullet thatwent through Kennedy" (emphasis added)lp2ol.

(1) As any physician knows, the size of ascar does not necessarily indicate the originalsize ofa wound.

(2) Connally's thoracic surqeon. Dr. RobenShaw, tesLified Lo rhe Warren iommrssron. onfour different occasions, thaL rhe wound wasonly 1.5 centimeters [4 WCH 104, 6 WCH85,861, and was enlarged to 3cm [4 WCH 88]

(3) The size was indirectly confirmed by rheFBI'S measurements of the hole in Connallvsclothes: Back ofshin:5/8 x4/8 inch. Back ofjacket: 5/8 x 3/8 of an inch [5 WCH 64]

(4) From HSCA Volume 7, p. 326: ,.[T]heragged edges of the wound were surgically curaway, effecrively enlarging it Lo approximarely3cm"

(5) From HSCA Volume 7, p.143: ,,Dr.Baden localized these wounds as follows: lAkthe site-ofgunshor perforarion ofrhe righiupper back there is now a 11l8 inches lone hori_zontal pale, well healed scar Lhat is-up rothree-eighrhs inch wide...,,

Here, Baden has outdone John Lammer-Lattirner published the report of Connally,soperarion which describes the sizeofrhewoundas 3cm, bur this was after enlargement, as ex_prarneo over and over again by Dr Shaw.Lattimer also cropped testimony and a diagramto Bive the false impression ofa sjdeways hit'fMed Times I974; 102:331 Some people srreLchtie trurh, bur Baden has strerchid alie.

What revisions will the future brins? $

PtE3Eis on the Web @

http ://www.webco m.com/ctka

cL Lee Bankin Baden

CTKA Pleose note the *pirat;on date of yow subscription on the label below.P.0. Box 3317Culver City, CA 90231

RqlL!.C. FOST.4GE

Pcrrni:llo. li5,.,..f#3oe*,,

Lasl issue \ryill be: 9m 9?

SEND TO: r\4R. JOHN KELIN .1205 N, TEJONCOLORADO SPRINGS CO 80903

j

I