|
Post by rick3 on Sept 9, 2006 19:28:17 GMT -5
Well Michael, IMHO, you might be on the wrong side on this one. I have concluded just the opposite today after reading Chapter 9 of Gunshot Wounds by Vincent JM Di Maio: YES--there was a gunshot to the head which caused 2 or 3 skull fractures. 1. In gunshot wounds of the head caused by .22 caliber bullets, the bullet will exit in only 10% of the cases. page 218 2. In the another 10% the bullet will exit the skull and be found under the skin. 3. Of the bullets that do not exit the skull, the vast majority are retained in the cranial cavity. 4. Thus, internal ricochet is fairly common, occuring in up to 25% of cases. Internal ricochet is more common with lead bullets and bullets of small caliber. Ricochet occurs most often with .22 caliber bullets. page 219 5. "No reasonable man can beleive that the baby in falling, can have its skull fractured in three places by the wall of a house or the rungs of the ladder..." Richard A. Knight (Forum Magazine) in Hysteria by Dutch 6. An experienced County Physician tells the Press "Baby killed by gunshot"...Charles H. Mitchell 7. "A stick cannot poke a hole in solid skull"--Charles H. Mitchell 8. Mitchell later denied he ever said there was a bullet hole, therefore just like Dr. VanIngen he didnt have to testify any further. 9. So was the bullet over looked or lost in a sloppy, reeking autopsy when Charlies brains ran out? We dont know? 10. Some bullet wounds to the skull can result in very little blood loss and it does not need to be found on Mt. Rose road? In the Deathbed Confession (The Curious Mulatto) doctors thought Robert Brewer had been "hit in the back of the head with a bottle" until they found the bullet. 2 or 3 unexplained Skull Fractures + One unexplained 1/2" hole in solid skull + Blood clot/hematoma/fracture acrossed from hole + disc.server.com/discussion.cgi?disc=141545;article=34544;title=The%20Lindbergh%20Kidnapping%20Hoax%20ForumStick poke an excuse not a reason - One overlooked, lost or misplaced bullet - no xrays Little or no blood loss not onto burlap bag--maybe confined to Sleeping Suit that was washed? Dr. Mitchells post autopsy News Conference +++ What other explanation is there? A hospital drainage tube?
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Sept 10, 2006 8:34:35 GMT -5
Rick, here is something I posted just last month: Rick gives a very good example. It depends on the caliber of the bullet and sometimes the distance and angle of the shot as well. I know of a case where a man was shot in the back of the head with a .22. The bullet did not even penetrate the skull but followed the contour of it around the head (under the skin) and exited out of the eye. (Aug 11, 2006, 6:14am) So, as you can see, I am aware of what you've written above. Here's the problem.... I think most people who read what I write see that I struggle with following up on the "loose ends" of a situation. I pursue alternative scenarios and consider them until I (we) can disprove them. Too often I see post hoc, ergo propter hoc arguments without chasing down all of the variables which may alter this conclusion. We see this alot when people use the word 'forensics.' Once this word is invoked its supposed to mean the story is over. Keraga's report is a perfect example of this. Part of what he does is forensics and part of it clearly isn't. Once the forensic part is gathered it should be thoroughly investigated, which in my opinion - wasn't. (So much for throwing the word 'forensics' around as if it means something.....) What am I getting at? Well I think the term non sequitur applies here. It's Latin for "it does not follow" and used to exemplify the point that if you have a beginning and an end then everything in the middle must work. There is a child with at least one condition affecting his bone strength. We simply cannot take the examples of an adult and/or normal skull and apply them here in good faith.
|
|
|
Post by rick3 on Sept 10, 2006 9:43:51 GMT -5
Michael, I totally agree with your analysis of the problem...but we cant eliminate ALL options and make believe its not there. We need to come up with an explanation for the 1/2" hole in Charlie's skull first observed as a bullet hole by Dr. Mitchell. We know what he saw: 1. It is not a stick poke, so we can eliminate that right off the bat. This is so lame an excuse its not worth serious consideration. 2. It could be a gunshot from Hans Mueller's .25 caliber Lilliput or some other low caliber pistol? 3. It could be a drainage tube inserted by physicians at a hospital? Or an equivalent medical procedure to relieve the pressure of the skull fractures? John Hopkins for instance? 4. It cannot just be summarily dismissed as not there? 5. The hole is caused by something--and its important to discover what because it might solve the kidnap and cause of Charlie's death. 6. What is your best guess
|
|
|
Post by sue75 on Sept 10, 2006 11:31:51 GMT -5
Hi Rick,
Several accounts say that the burlap bag was found under some rocks. Might this confirm that the body was left in the Mount Rose grave on the night of the kidnapping? Was the burlap bag put under rocks so that it would not blow away and be found by the police? It WAS windy that night! Or was the burlap bag intentionally put near the side of the road under rocks to increase the chances of someone stumbling upon the body?
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Sept 10, 2006 12:00:10 GMT -5
Rick, I might as well throw in my 2 cents. First I am a bit surprised that you are arguing for the gunshot wound given the one character we know possessed a small caliber firearm. I have to give you credit for that. But where is the bullet? I know the autopsy wasn't a stellar performance, but I doubt they would miss a bullet. Also, how do you figure the bullet trajectory here? Do you feel the child was face down with the head turned to the right? Since no trace of gun powder is evident, would you assume the shooter stood back some distance from the child ? In short how would you envision the shooting scene and why do you think it was necessary to execute a 1 yr old with a gunshot?
|
|
|
Post by rick3 on Sept 10, 2006 15:51:39 GMT -5
Hi Sue and Kevin/ Holy crap...what makes you think I know all this? I just axed a real live MD forensic pathologist for his opinion about the 1/2" hole and the skull fractures as cause of death? He said and I quote...."sticks don't puncture skulls, but bullets cause multiple skull fractures!" This pretty much agrees with Dr. Mitchell so I'm encouraged with their agreement on this.
Kevin...youve got me all wrong. I am willing to let all the chips fall where they may in this case. It doesn't really matter to me who killed Charlie Jr. as long as it holds water and makes sense. If Hans Mueller or BRH shot Charlie then so be it. Christ, this important hole in the skull was almost buried for 75 years--ostensibly just so as not to confuse the jury? I doubt very much the shot occurred on Mt. Rose Hill but more than likely at the half-way house......or Johns Hopkins University Hospital Children's Ward if it turns out to be a drainage hole for an accidental skull fracture? I can go either ways on this issue.
Sue....Yes, my best guess is that the bag acts as a marker for the body. So that Allen or someone else can find it. After all it was bought and paid for at least once, maybe twice, maybe three times? You don't DUMP a body out this close to home unless you want it to be found. Who is crazy enough to actually do this? The mob? There may even be some code in the last ransom note leading to the body location? B ody B ag or B urlap B ag or B aby B ag? But, NO, Xharlie has not been lying there, nor the bag, since 1 March 32....more like 1 MAY 32!
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Sept 10, 2006 19:18:54 GMT -5
I agree with Kevin. They did search through the brain and didn't find anything. Considering all the variables I (personally) can't accept the "bullet" theory at this point. It's interesting - I admit - but it just doesn't fit in with all of the facts and circumstances we do have.
|
|
|
Post by leah for rick on Sept 11, 2006 6:45:49 GMT -5
i know this doesnt add either way to the bullet arguement but there are other options besides the bullet or the wall. if elisabeth purposely dropped the baby out of the window by his feet and he landed directly on his head i would think an extensive injury of this nature would occur ido think the cause of death may tell us somehting about the crime but im perplexed as to why anyone would shoot a baby
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Sept 11, 2006 7:01:48 GMT -5
Leah,
Do you think Elisabeth was involved? I don't know what this means but checking the phone logs the days after the crime it was Elisabeth who continually called down to Highfields to speak with her Mother....at least once a day and sometimes multiple times a day. I always wondered what that was all about.
Of course it could be unrelated - I wish there had been a nosey operator writing this stuff down somewhere.
|
|
|
Post by rick3 on Sept 11, 2006 11:12:15 GMT -5
Leah/ there are a many possible scenarios, more than we can even imagine how Xharlie managed to acquire multiple skull fractures:
1. Fall down the stairs? 2. Fall out the window? 3. Backed over by a car 4. Gunshot? 5. Crushed with a chisel handle 6. Fall offen a ladder 7. crushed with a rock 8. hit with a pillow and fall into a sharp coffee table 9. Practical joke gone wrong?
BUT there are a limited number of ways a baby's head can acquire a perfectly round 1/2 " hole that an experienced County Physician can mistake for a gunshot wound???
1. Actually a real .25 gunshot wound and attending skull fractures
2. Some medical procedure to relieve internal skull pressures
3. Witch doctors hole to let out evil spirits
Why would anybody shoot Xharlie in the head? Well, if in fact it is Xharlie and the blue-threaded t-shirt wasn't all a red herring then the answer is simple....TO KILL HIM! Why would anybody drop a child's body out of a car along a road in a burlap bag to be found anyways? Skull is crushed, so with or without any gunshot this is evil, sadistic and brutal at its surface.
The only thing I can say about the Elizabeth theory of the crime is that the Noel Behn book is well researched. If either Elizabeth or Dwight Jr. ( Norris book) is involved in Charlie's disappearance then CAL/JFC are clearly co-conspirators in the coverup hoax.
It might prove informative to count up all the shooters in the LKC:
1. Joyce Milton claims BRH bragged about shooting a child?
2. CAL threatened to shoot any cop who disobeyed his orders?
3. Condon claims CJohn had a gun at Woodlawn?
4. Condon claims CAL was packing a rod in the car?
Postscript for Kevin: as you read around approximately 1/2 of the authors/investigators are not convinced by CAL and Gow that the body on Mt. Rose road is in fact Charlie Jr. Maybe a real skull gunshot hole, unaccounted by any evidence, would tip towards a substitute? just a thought? Mitchell and VanIngen are quite clearly NOT convinced.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Sept 12, 2006 19:26:31 GMT -5
Well don't forget that Condon was supposed to have a gun here too.
|
|
|
Post by rick3 on Sept 14, 2006 7:33:09 GMT -5
Michael....can you unscramble the code in Parkers letter to Hoffman on page 176 of Master Detective: - CJ has a big gun in a holster or Condon?
- gun traced to man dead five years?
- gun given to man Parker has in mind? Who dat?
- For my 2cts, the gravity of this situation with all the guns is fascinating? CAL/JFC/CJ,,,,smacks of the mob or Mafia with everyone packing a heater?
II. Is it possible that Parker grabs Wendel only because he knows way too much about the crime, rather than because he was the kidnapper? One news article implied collusion between them to avert BRHs execution? III> Dr. Mitchell's press conference and testimony is at best disquieting. Mitchell knows you should find a bullet in a gunshot but he goes full ahead with news conference anyways. Apparently, his ability to make this judgment call was assumed to not leave "loose ends" as you say. By the next day its blown off as a stick poke by Schwartzkopf. This doenst add up either? Oddly, Mitchell and his mixed statements are omitted by Gardner? This is typical of evidence in the LKC: first the bullet disappears, then the hole, then even the County Physician? Going, going, gone/
|
|