(Testimony of Dr. Robert Mcclelland Nelson)
Mr. Specter.
other doctors whom you talked this over with, with respect to the nature of the wound, source of the wounds, and that sort of thing?
Dr. Mcclelland.
Immediately we had essentially no facts. We knew nothing of the number of bullets that had supposedly been fired. We knew nothing of the site from which the bullet had been fired, essentially none of the circumstances in the first few minutes, say, 20 or 30 minutes after the President was brought in, so that our initial impressions were based upon extremely incomplete information.
Mr. Specter.
What were your initial impressions?
Dr. Mcclelland.
The initial impression that we had was that perhaps the wound in the neck, the anterior part of the neck, was an entrance wound and that it had perhaps taken a trajectory off the anterior vertebral body and again into the skull itself, exiting out the back, to produce the massive injury in the head. However, this required some straining of the imagination to imagine that this would happen, and it was much easier to explain the apparent trajectory by means of two bullets, which we later found out apparently had been fired, than by just one then, on which basis we were originally taking to explain it.
Mr. Specter.
Through the use of the pronoun "we" in your last answer, to whom do you mean by "we"?
Dr. Mcclelland.
Essentially all of the doctors that have previously been mentioned here.
Mr. Specter.
Did you observe the condition of the back of the President's head ?
Dr. Mcclelland.
Well, partially; not, of course, as I say, we did not lift his head up since it was so greatly damaged. We attempted to avoid moving him any more than it was absolutely necessary, but I could see, of course, all the extent of the wound.
Mr. Specter.
You saw a large opening which you have already described?
Dr. Mcclelland.
I saw the large opening which I have described.
Mr. Specter.
Did you observe any other wound on the back of the head?
Dr. Mcclelland.
No.
Mr. Specter.
Did you observe a small gunshot wound below the large opening on the back of the head ?
Dr. Mcclelland.
No.
Mr. Specter.
Based on the experience that you have described for us with gunshot wounds and your general medical experience, would you characterize the description of the wound that Dr. Perry gave you as being a wound of entrance or a wound of exit, or was the description which you got from Dr. Perry and Dr. Baxter and Dr. Carrico who were there before, equally consistent with whether or not it was a wound of entrance or a wound of exit, or how would you characterize it in your words?
Dr. Mcclelland.
I would say it would be equally consistent with either type wound, either an entrance or an exit type wound. It would be quite difficult to say--impossible.
Mr. Specter.
Dr. McClelland, I show you now a statement or a report which has been furnished to the Commission by Parkland Hospital and has been identified in a previous Commission hearing as Commission Exhibit No. 392, and I direct your attention specifically to a page, "Third Report", which was made by you, and I would ask you first of all if this is your signature which appears at the bottom of Page 2, and next, whether in fact you did make this report and submit it to the authorities at Parkland Hospital ?
Dr. Mcclelland.
Yes.
Mr. Specter.
And are all the facts set forth true and correct to the best of your knowledge, information and belief?
Dr. Mcclelland.
To the best of my knowledge, yes.
Mr. Specter.
Dr. McClelland, did you and I sit down together for just a few minutes before I started to take your deposition today?
Dr. Mcclelland.
Yes, sir.
Mr. Specter.
And I discussed this matter with you?
Dr. Mcclelland.
Yes.
|
