Dr Pittelli vs David Reitzes & friends

The absence of venipuncture wounds precludes the possibility the Ferrie was
killed by a sharp thin object being pushed through the roof of his mouth.

Just for Clarification:
A venipuncture wound is basically a needle puncture directly into a vein to draw blood or give a direct venous injection or place an I.V. line (An injection can also be given "intramuscularly", not directly at the site of a vein). A puncture to the roof of the mouth would not be considered a venipuncture, as no one would try to find a vein on the roof of the mouth. So if this puncture had occured, it would not have been described as a venipuncture.

Captain Dave had told friends he was dying of cancer of the neck. He purchased his grave site in St Bernards Cemetary where he now resides. He signed ever his airplane to an acquaintance telling him he was dying and wouldn't need it. He complained of pain with each step up to his 2cd storey apt. These signs and symptoms are sign and symptoms of a leaking aneurysm. He actually had evidence that he leaked a few weeks earlier which corelates with his complaints before the final fatal rupture. Rupture of berry aneurysms typically occurs in Ferrie's age group. Jeffrey

None of these sound like signs of a leaking anyeurism to me except possibly for weakness. You would expect Headaches, maybe some visual disturbances and
otherwise more specific neurological complaints than you have listed. The person would typically be caught by surprise when the anyeurism bursts and would not be anticipating a fatal rupture prior to the event.

He complained of headaches for approximately two years prior to his death; numerous people were aware of this. He was complaining of headaches to George Lardner the night he died. Both David Blackburst and I have posted about this over the past two or three days. He had several "minor bleeds" before the final rupture; this is documented. David and I have posted about that as well.

Have you read any of my posts or the especially well informed posts of David
Blackburst on this subject? There have been two threads on this in the last few days alone. You're speculating; we are not. Do you want another re-post? Just say the word.

I'm not speculating. I am stating an opinion. I have worked with patients with brain injury for years. I'm commenting on the symptoms that were mentioned. I said headaches and weakness are common symptoms. They are common symptoms of a lot of other things too, or there would be a hell of a lot more people with berry aneurysms The other alleged symptoms in the post are pure speculation on the posters part. They aren't common symptoms of a berry aneurysm bleed. You are speculating if you try to say they are.

Have you read any of my posts or the especially well informed posts of
David Blackburst on this subject?
1. Have you read the autopsy report -- yes or no?
2. Have you read the published accounts of Ferrie's medical history -- yes or

The well informed David Blackburst did not even know what a venipuncture was.
Is he the autopsy expert that proves your point. Nice try.

Yes [I read the report], unless I missed a part where they said that the fact that Ferrie said he thought he had throat cancer is consistent with a ruptured berry aneurysm. Can you direct me to the complete report, since you were quite sure that the person who posted that was a rock of rationality. Nice try.

I'm telling you I have worked for the past 5 years as a psychiatrist and no patient that I have seen or heard about from others in the field who had hypochondriacal complaints such as those that were listed have ever been related to a berry anyeurism. It is pure speculation on your part. Unless you've had a different experience in your work in the field. (ha ha) Stick to your element. You agreed with what I felt was some poor conclusions in a post only because it supports your contention.

So you deny that Ferrie's medical history is consistent with his official cause of death?

I'm sorry; I guess I'm asking the wrong questions. Mr. Pittelli, what evidence do you offer to support the allegation that Ferrie was either murdered or committed suicide?

And, while I have your attention, do you still deny -- as per our discussion a couple months ago -- that the CIA ran a Domestic Contacts program which often obtained business-related intelligence from American businessmen?
Physician, heal thyself.

P.S. Pardon me for not hunting our previous exchanges down on Deja News, Dr. Pittelli, but was it not your repeated assertion a couple of months ago that a berry aneurysm COULD NOT have been responsible for Ferrie's death?

I say that the symptoms in question probably had nothing to do with a berry aneurysm whether or not that is how he died. Not every experience Ferrie ever had has to tie in or not tie in with a berry anyeurism just because you want to prove that as the cause of death. You are trying to bolster the idea that Ferrie died of an anyeurism with some questionable theories on the subject. A patient come into my office and says "I think I have throat cancer", I'm not thinking berry anyeurism as a likelihood. Even if I find out he died of a ruptured berry anyeurism shortly after that, I'm not thinking "Oh, that complaint must have been part of the berry anyerism." What am I saying that isn't clear to you?

I'm not offering any evidence. If someone claims that the pope is polish because he flipped a coin and it landed on heads, I can criticize his conclusion regardless of whether the pope is polish. I am criticizing your "evidence" if I don't think it is consistent. If you want to keep using such bad evidence go ahead. I'm no genius, so if it stinks like shit to me, it will to others with more knowledge. If someone tries, for example, to "prove" the autopsy showed no puncture in the roof of the mouth because it said "no venipuncture" than they don't understand what the autopsy is saying. That doesn't mean that there was a puncture in the roof of his mouth, it just doesn't have anything to do with it. Stick to real evidence. Otherwise you sound like a quack.

You are saying that I deny that that [CIA Domestic Contacts program] happened? That I denied the CIA used domestic contacts to obtain business related intelligence from American businessmen? That I said "The CIA Never used domestic contacts to obtain business related intelligence from American Businessmen". That is a bit of stretch, don't you think Dave?

I said that obtaining business related intelligence for the CIA and getting any kind of payment or gratuity (eg. plane tickets) for it is "working" for the CIA which Clay Shaw lied about. Keep trying Dave.

Ed. Ledoux wrote:Venipuncture...roof of mouth...?
Maybe they didn't want him to snore while murdering him?

see Snoreplasty

Ed

I don't recall ever asserting anything about "throat cancer" with regard to
Ferrie's death. Please cite your source.

The original poster said it, and you said something like great post, it's good
to see some common sense. Don't make me get that post. It started this thread
unlike stuff you're trying to say I said 6 months ago.

Don't make me track down your quotation, Mr. Pittelli. You asked me to produce documentation that the CIA utilized American businessmen to receive routine business intelligence. I replied that it was public domain information and I was not going to do your homework in that area for you. You then declared I was evading the issue.

Please, if you're going to talk about something you allege I posted months ago, track it down. I offer your own posts as evidence. You said he was working as a "business contact" or some other silly double speak. I say that that is working for the CIA. Thanks. Anyone else reading this, I refer you to Dave's own often referenced work on the subject.

If you were questioned by a police officer about a given topic or topics, would that make you a employee of the police department? Or would it simply make you an informant?

Is this like a buffer argument? Then if it's proven that he did get plane tickets (which I believe you conceded at one point here) you'll just say that that still isn't working for the CIA. If the police department came up to me because I was, say, knowledgeable about a drug ring (and I wasn't just trying to save my ass by wearing a wire, but actually just trying to help the police) then yes I would say I worked for the police dept at one time. Would you say Bill Clinton didn't have sex with Monica? And do you really believe Clay Shaw or anyone else would do all these favors for the CIA and get NOTHING in return? Do you really believe that? Not whether it was proven, just what do you believe?

BTW, which theory do you think Ferrie's autopsy report supports -- DiEugenio's "two kinds of Thyroid medicine forced down his throat with a tube" theory or Vernon's "something pushed through the roof of his mouth into his brain" theory? Or are you working on one of your own?

I know what a venipuncture is. I was illustrating that autopsist Welsh did
examine the body for puncture wounds or other signs of external violence, and found none. He did not specifically address the issue of whether or not he found a puncture wound to the roof of the mouth. But since he examined the mouth closely enough to find two "areas of dryness" an inch or so away, it would have been difficult to miss such a puncture wound. No, I am not [an expert], but I understand the English language. Cause of death: Natural. Berry aneurysm. Hypertensive cardiovascular disease. Pulmonary edema. No marks of violence on the body.

"They" didn't [think that throat cancer was consistent with a ruptured berry aneurysm]. Ferrie had told friends that he thought he might have cancer of the NECK or encephalitis, and that he felt like he was dying (which he ultimately did do). Ferrie's self-misdiagnosis aside, both conditions are often attended by pressure in the head. Ferrie was wrong. He had had a non-fatal aneurysm, and he was on his way to a fatal one. Severe headaches, inability to keep food down, and a feeling that he was dying are hardly inconsistent with the condition that killed him.

After my post, are you still trying to say that Ferrie died of a berry aneurysm? If you have the medical report that says this, I'd like to see it. I won't say it's impossible, but I've never heard of anyone dying of a berry aneurysm. A ruptured berry aneurysm would be another story. Do you understand the difference? A berry aneurysm is a tiny little outpouching of a weakened vessel. Many people have these and they generally aren't even noticed or with only some fairly small neurological signs depending on where the aneurysm is located. However, when the aneurysm bursts, it can cause all kinds of problems including death, depending on where it is located, etc. That makes a difference in your post because you said that a berry aneurysm cannot be produced externally and used that as a reason for why this was a naturally caused death. Many drugs can cause increases in blood pressure that could cause a berry aneurysm to burst. Thyroid medication would be one of these.

Death by Proloid ingestion would come many hours after ingestion, it is easily detectable cause of death

No. The cause of death would have to do with what the Proloid did to the
person. For example, it could cause a fatal heart arrhytmia. That would be a cause of death then. It might also cause severe hypertension which leads to a ruptured berry aneurysm. I agree that that would generally take several hours to kick in (so to speak), although you can't say that with certainty. it would depend a lot on the person, how quickly the blood pressure responds (that would vary quite a bit) and how weak the vessel wall was at the time. I could easily point out another possible consistent with your post, where the individual takes the overdose by himself and after several hours (or a day) thinks nothing happened to him and he is okay. This same person might then sit calmly (people are usually quite calm after a failed overdose) just hours before his death and might notice nothing as hypertension by itself is hardly perceptible to most people. I could invent a number of other scenarios as well, but all of them are speculation. I don't know what happened to Ferrie and I don't know if he was killed, killed himself or died of natural causes. I don't know if a berry aneurysm even had a thing to do with it or if the autopsy was bogus. I do think the timing of his death seems rather suspicious or at least strangely coincidental and I assume you do too.

Given Ferrie's medical history and his own statements to numerous witnesses in the two years or so preceding his death -- including two undated notes found among his possessions that indicated anticipation of dying in the not-to-distant future (one a political rant, one a bitter message to a would-be lover) -- I do indeed find the timing to have been coincidental, and nothing more. Only if one believes Jim Garrison's statement that an arrest of Ferrie was imminent -- a statement belatedly refuted in 1994 by Assistant DA James Alcock in an interview with Patricia Lambert -- does the timing seem suspicious. In reality, as the DA's records affirm, their office had absolutely nothing on Ferrie and had all but closed the case on him -- until he died. Then Garrison was free to call him "one of history's most important individuals" and attribute his death to a suicide (and later to murder), while never bothering to order the exhumation that would have proved Ferrie's autopsy report to be accurate.

Sure. I'd like to comment on a few things first, like Dave Reitzes silly twisting of my statement that David Ferrie could not have died of a berry aneurysm. He knows full well that I was explaining the difference to him (of which he did not have the slightest idea) between a berry aneurysm and a ruptured berry aneurysm. People don't generally die from unruptured berry aneurysms. They are just little outpouches of a blood vessel (generally in the brain in the circle of willis blood vessel area) caused by a weakened wall. They occasionally but not always have some leakage which can cause some neurological signs (headaches, visual disturbance, weakness). However, if this little pouch ruptures, it is often fatal or at least very serious. I explained this to Dave, but now he acts as if this was something he understood and deliberately misrepresents what I said. The symptoms Ferrie expressed depression, somatic delusions, weakness, easy fatigue, preoccupation with his own death, headaches) are very consistent with what The DSM IV (the main text for psychiatric diagnoses) would describe as a Major Depressive Episode, Severe with Psychotic Features. Which is also consistent with him writing a couple of suicide notes. I do not think the symptoms described can be adequately explained as caused by a leak from a berry aneurysm. Does that mean he could not also have died of a ruptured berry aneurysm? No, it does not. If that is how he died, I would say that the symptoms leading up to it were probably not related to his death in my opinion, with the possible exception of the headaches. (incidentally, I also pointed out that an overdose of thyroid medication could lead to a rupture of a berry aneurysm by severly increasing blood pressure. I am not saying that that is what happened, as Dave would like you to believe, I'm saying it is a possibility). I'm trying to give my opinion on this subject. Am I biased towards the conspiracy side of the issue? Probably. This is, afterall, alt.conspiracy.jfk.

Mr. Blackburst, would you care to elaborate on why you disagree, or just leave it at disagreement? Do you disagree because you want to prove the berry aneurysm rupture? Or do you disagree based on some particular study of the effects of a berry aneurysm leaks? Or are you just plain disagreeable? Or you just don't like me? Or you really like Dave?

Mr. Pittelli,
You are correct: My recollection of your statement [about Shaw] was inaccurate. I apologize, and I have already re-posted the relevant portions of our exchange. It is not my intention to misrepresent anyone's views. I too am biased on "the conspiracy side of the issue" -- the issue being the assassination of John F. Kennedy. I've just never seen any evidence that David Ferrie or Clay Shaw -- or any other Garrison suspect -- had anything to do with that tragic event.

I don't have a particular theory I'm working on. I just want to sort out the facts of it. I think Ferrie was severely depressed for whatever reason prior to his death. That keeps the possibility of suicide open. I certainly think it is possible that he died from a ruptured berry aneurysm, but the timing of it seems a little suspicious which makes it a little suspect as a spontaneous cause of death. I have no way of assessing the accuracy or intergrity of the autopsy other than hearsay. As I mentioned, proloid or other thyroid medications could induce a berry aneurysm rupture so I find it interesting that Garrison pointed to this as the possible medication. That leaves a suicide open. I find it unlikely that anyone would waste time stuffing proloid down someone's throat as a murder technique considering the delayed effect of such a medication giving time for the person to get help and the fact that this medication in overdose would often not even be fatal (and they wouldn't have known about a berry aneurysm). I find the "sharp object through the soft palate" theory interesting. I don't know how this one originated and I'd have to review my anatomy, but I think that such a technique could puncture a vessel in the brain, mimicking a ruptured berry aneurysm, especially if a thin pointed object was used that didn't leave much collateral damage, as it might go unnoticed in an autopsy (and removes the pathologist as a conspirator). So I'd leave that open as a possibility. But I'm certainly no pathologist, so that would be the person to ask about that if you want to pursue it further. If I had to pick, my hunch is suicide.

Thanks for the apology. Let's end this thread for now! I'm sick of it.

These guys are masters of the subtle, off-hand lie that then rises like the living dead.