The Harper Fragment
-----
Introduction
When young Billy Harper found the Harper fragment on the grass in Dealey Plaza on the day after the assassination, he to it to Methodist Hospital, where his uncle, Dr. Jack C. Harper worked. At Methodist Hospital, the FBI was notified and the fragment was examined by multiple doctors, and photographed and X-rayed before FBI agents came to collect it.
When young Billy Harper found the Harper fragment on the grass in Dealey Plaza on the day after the assassination, he to it to Methodist Hospital, where his uncle, Dr. Jack C. Harper worked. At Methodist Hospital, the FBI was notified and the fragment was examined by multiple doctors, and photographed and X-rayed before FBI agents came to collect it.
Image from https://www.history-matters.com/essays/jfkmed/ADemonstrableImpossibility/ADemonstrableImpossibility.htm
from https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol7/html/HSCA_Vol7_0067b.htm
from https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol7/html/HSCA_Vol7_0067a.htm
What the Methodist Hospital doctors had to say about the fragment they handled and studied is very interesting.
-----
Methodist Hospital Doctors
HSCA's Andy Purdy interviewed two Methodist Hospital doctors who saw the Harper Fragment when it was at the hospital before it was turned over to the FBI.
Dr. Jack Harper, the uncle of Billy Harper, who found the skull fragment named after him, told Purdy that "the consensus of the doctors who viewed the skull fragment was that it was part of the occipital region."
So, "occipital" per the consensus of multiple doctors who had no personal connection to a biased "investigation."
Good to know.
Purdy also interviewed Dr. A.B. Cairns, who, in 1963, had been Chief Pathologist at Methodist Hospital where Billy Harper had taken the Harper Fragment after he found it. Cairns had also examined the Harper Fragment, and told Purdy that "the skull fragment had no indication of being an entry or exit wound. However, he said he believed the skull fragment came from an area close to the entry wound by virtue of the way the 'tables' were broken."
"The way the 'tables' were broken" refers, I believe, to the layers of the skull bone and the associated beveling. So, the Harper Fragment probably came from "an area close to the entry wound."
Also good to know.
HSCA's Andy Purdy interviewed two Methodist Hospital doctors who saw the Harper Fragment when it was at the hospital before it was turned over to the FBI.
Dr. Jack Harper, the uncle of Billy Harper, who found the skull fragment named after him, told Purdy that "the consensus of the doctors who viewed the skull fragment was that it was part of the occipital region."
So, "occipital" per the consensus of multiple doctors who had no personal connection to a biased "investigation."
Good to know.
Purdy also interviewed Dr. A.B. Cairns, who, in 1963, had been Chief Pathologist at Methodist Hospital where Billy Harper had taken the Harper Fragment after he found it. Cairns had also examined the Harper Fragment, and told Purdy that "the skull fragment had no indication of being an entry or exit wound. However, he said he believed the skull fragment came from an area close to the entry wound by virtue of the way the 'tables' were broken."
"The way the 'tables' were broken" refers, I believe, to the layers of the skull bone and the associated beveling. So, the Harper Fragment probably came from "an area close to the entry wound."
Also good to know.
Then there's Purdy's interview with Dr. A.B. Carins, started on the page above and continued below. Cairns said that the HF came "from the lower occipital area, specifically." He described suture and inner markings where blood vessels run around the base of the skull for that evaluation.
He also described a small area on the HF "showing grayish discoloration suggesting metal had stained the bone." He believed that the skull fragment came from an area close to the entry wound because of the way the "tables" were broken."
He also described a small area on the HF "showing grayish discoloration suggesting metal had stained the bone." He believed that the skull fragment came from an area close to the entry wound because of the way the "tables" were broken."
from https://aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/arrb/master_med_set/md19/html/Image01.htm
Dr. David Mantik, in his skull reconstruction, places the metal smear right at the EOP entrance described by the autopsy pathologists.
Dr. Mantik asserts that the grayish smear is on an outside surface of the fragment, making it an entry site. But it's on the outside surface of the inner layer of the "skull bone sandwich."
And that has some interesting implications.
Dr. Mantik asserts that the grayish smear is on an outside surface of the fragment, making it an entry site. But it's on the outside surface of the inner layer of the "skull bone sandwich."
And that has some interesting implications.
-----
David Mantik's Footnote 10
Dr. David Mantik's skull reconstruction with the Harper Fragment places it as "occipital," based on characteristics of the fragment seen in the pictures of it, thus matching the Methodist Hospital "consensus" that it was "occipital."
In Mantik's book JFK Head Wounds, Mantik includes this footnote to note that the metallic smear on the Harper Fragment is on the outside, indicating that this point of the Harper fragment is for an entry wound. And son of a gun if his placement, with the help of the F8 "mystery" autopsy photograph, which both he and neurologist Dr. Michael Chesser describe as showing an "occipital" hole based on landmarks (nipple, eyelashes, abdominal fat) visible in the NARA version of the photo but not in the cropped the publicly available one, places the Harper fragment with its metallic smear right where the autopsy doctors placed the EOP entrance.
Moreover, there are indications that the skull had already been fractured before the bullet struck the site of the EOP smear.
Mantik's Footnote #10 in his book John F. Kennedy's Head Wounds is especially interesting. Here it is (with my underlining):
Dr. David Mantik's skull reconstruction with the Harper Fragment places it as "occipital," based on characteristics of the fragment seen in the pictures of it, thus matching the Methodist Hospital "consensus" that it was "occipital."
In Mantik's book JFK Head Wounds, Mantik includes this footnote to note that the metallic smear on the Harper Fragment is on the outside, indicating that this point of the Harper fragment is for an entry wound. And son of a gun if his placement, with the help of the F8 "mystery" autopsy photograph, which both he and neurologist Dr. Michael Chesser describe as showing an "occipital" hole based on landmarks (nipple, eyelashes, abdominal fat) visible in the NARA version of the photo but not in the cropped the publicly available one, places the Harper fragment with its metallic smear right where the autopsy doctors placed the EOP entrance.
Moreover, there are indications that the skull had already been fractured before the bullet struck the site of the EOP smear.
Mantik's Footnote #10 in his book John F. Kennedy's Head Wounds is especially interesting. Here it is (with my underlining):
10. John Hunt (e-mail of September 24, 2014) observes that the smear is on the outside of the inner table of the skull, which may be true. Picture the skull bone as a sandwich; the two slices of bread represent the two skull layers—the inner and outer tables of bone. Inside the sandwich is the cancellous (soft) bone. Even though the smear is on the inner table (i.e., inside the sandwich), it nonetheless faced outward—and there was no cancellous bone or outer table overlying it. That is because those portions had already broken off before the bullet arrived. The inner table (i.e., the surface facing the cancellous bone—or, if you prefer, the surface facing the meat in the sandwich) was therefore directly exposed to the incoming bullet (that deposited the smear). In that case, the fracture must have occurred before the bullet struck the site of the smear. Exactly when this fracture occurred (with respect to the arrival of the bullet) can be debated, but it is known that fractures can propagate faster than bullets can travel (Terminal Ballistics: A Text and Atlas of Gunshot Wounds (2005), Malcolm J. Dodd, p. 104). It would seem therefore that a single EOP shot could have caused both the fracture and the smear, without requiring a second EOP shot. The alternate scenario would be two EOP shots: one that chipped off the outer table (but did not deposit the smear), and a second shot that left the smear. However, it seems unlikely that two EOP shots would arrive at precisely the same site within seconds of one another.
So "the fracture must have occurred before the bullet struck the site of the smear."
Well, son of a gun if that doesn't match my first shot scenario! The fracture occurred with the first (Oswald) head shot, then the AR-15 bullet arrived after the skull had already been fractured, passing the already fractured "meat" side surface of the bread "sandwich" on the layer of bread closest to the brain, to deposit its metallic smear.
Well, son of a gun if that doesn't match my first shot scenario! The fracture occurred with the first (Oswald) head shot, then the AR-15 bullet arrived after the skull had already been fractured, passing the already fractured "meat" side surface of the bread "sandwich" on the layer of bread closest to the brain, to deposit its metallic smear.