The Disappearing Mastoidectomy scar?

[Greg R Parker]

No doubt about your propensity to believe the FBI when you think it suits your argument... but despite what this FBI report says about the wrist, the actual autopsy report does not mention it in relation to this scar.There is a reason for that. The medial aspect of the mid-distal third of the left arm is NOT the wrist.

No sleight-of-hand can make this description describe a gunshot wound "just above the elbow" as Marine medics described it.

Online Merriam-Webster defines "distal" as: "situated away from the point of attachment or origin or a central point especially of the body compare proximal." [proximal is nearest the point of attachment].

If you divide the arm into thirds, with the "distal" being the third farthest away from the point of attachment (the shoulder) "mid-distal third" of the left arm sure sounds near the wrist to me, but, quite obviously, it is not "just above the elbow," as the medics described the gunshot wound.

Are you seriously going to try to make the case that "mid-distal third of the left arm" refers to "just above the elbow."

As for believing FBI reports or not, it is always a question of motive. Was there a reason to lie? Not in this case. The FBI would surely have preferred your version, instead of indicating it was a wrist wound.

Your problem is in insisting records are never wrong for benign reasons. But here, you are simply adding to the confusion they already caused. The wound just above the elbow was not the wound of entry. It was where the bullet was removed. The one we are talking about is the entrance wound.