top of page
  • Matt Crumpton

Ep 27: Conclusions...So Far


Episode 27 – Conclusions


At the beginning of this podcast, we set out to answer some of the most important questions about the assassination of President John F Kennedy. The idea is that if we zoom in to each issue and review the arguments and evidence presented by both Warren Report defenders and critics, we’ll be in the best position to figure out what most likely happened for each question. And, the hope is that the puzzle pieces of this mystery will come together, at least enough for us to figure out which pieces to pick up next.


In this Season 1 Conclusion Episode, we’ll go over the list of tough positions that Warren Report defenders and critics alike are signing up to defend. Then, I’ll share my conclusions for the 15 most important questions that we set out to answer in Episode 2. Finally, we’ll talk about the plans for the future of the podcast.


Insert Theme Song


I want to take some time to point out that neither the Warren Report defender side nor the Critic side has a perfect argument. No matter where you land, there are some implausible things that have to be true for you to be right. This case is by no means open and shut. It is hotly disputed for a reason. The facts are messy.


Warren Report Critics - have to believe all or most of these things to have a theory of the case consistent with the facts. You have to believe that…


o Oswald took the out of the ordinary step of getting a ride with Frazier on Thursday night - for some reason other than because he needed to get his rifle, which was supposedly stored in the Paine garage.


o You’d believe that Linnie Mae Randle and Buell Wesley Frazier lied about Oswald having a long paper bag and him saying it had curtain rods in it or they were both materially mistaken.


o You’d say that the long paper bag found on the 6th floor, along with three shells, and the Carcano rifle matching the paperwork tied to the Hiddel rifle order must have either been fired by someone other than Oswald and left behind or - it must have been planted.


o You’d also have to believe that the rifle order had to be fabricated and the rifle itself was never received by Oswald. This would mean that Marina Oswald was lying about Lee owning the rifle and that the rifle order itself was placed to frame Oswald. It would also mean that either the FBI handwriting expert who said Oswald’s writing was on the order coupon was lying or wrong; that the evidence was manufactured by professional forgers; OR that Oswald did place the order in his handwriting, but that he didn’t actually receive the rifle.


o You’d believe that Oswald’s fingerprints on the paper sack would have to be either planted by law enforcement, or legitimately obtained when he was touching the paper for reasons related to his job - and then used to frame him.


o You’d have to take the controversial position that Lt. Day planted the palm print evidence and sent it in belatedly on an index card.


o You’d say that the bullet from the first shot that came from the grassy knoll and hit Kennedy’s throat must have been lost in Kennedy’s body and not found, or intentionally obscured at the autopsy because it’s not accounted for.


o You’d have to believe that someone could shoot the president in the daytime while simply hiding behind a fence and only be seen clearly by Ed Hoffman, and be noticed tangentially by Lee Bowers.


o You’d probably say that the person posing as a secret service agent is the most likely grassy knoll assassin. The Dark Complected Man with the walkie talkie giving hand signals is probably involved too. And Stephen Louie Witt may not be telling the truth about not knowing this man. The Secret Service assassin would then also have had to escape, along with the person he was with according to Hoffman and Bowers.


o If you think Oswald is not guilty of killing anyone as he says, you’d have to say that Officer Tippit was murdered by someone who resembled Oswald, but with a Ruddy complexion. This person was likely the same person impersonating Oswald in other instances. Oswald would have to get a ride from his rooming house to the Texas Theater to be there consistent with Butch Burroughs timeline.


o You’d argue that Oswald’s revolver, which he says he bought in Fort Worth, not through the mail, must have been swapped out by the Dallas police or FBI with the revolver that had the same serial number associated with the Hiddell Revolver order.


o You’d also have to believe the extremely hard to swallow position that the autopsy and its corresponding photographs and x-rays were materially altered – or that there were two separate sets of phots and x-rays that were created. And that Doctors Humes, Boswell, and Finck were all knowingly complicit in the cover-up.


o Finally, you’d believe that Jack Ruby is not crazy and take him at his word, even though there is evidence from his psychiatrist that he was mentally insane.


On the Warren Report Defender side, it’s no walk in the park either. You’re signing up for these positions, based on the record:


o You’d say that it’s not a problem that the only witness putting Oswald in the window with a gun didn’t identify him in a line up on the day of the assassination and that no one saw Oswald coming down from the sixth floor.


o It’s also not an issue that the key witness who claims to see Oswald with the package which allegedly had the gun, Buell Wesley Frazier, says the paper sack in evidence is longer and different from the one he saw. Also, it’s not a problem that no witnesses in the building saw Oswald carrying a paper sack or a gun.


o You’d believe that Oswald left work at Jaggers Chiles Stovall on March 12, 1963 at 10:30am to mail the rifle order coupon and payment – even though his timecards show that he was working all morning. You also must believe that there was an error that caused Oswald’s money order to never be deposited since there is no bank endorsement on the money order, BUT, somehow, the deposit document says it was deposited a month before Oswald sent the payment.


o You have to believe dozens of witnesses are wrong or lying. As a small sampling, for example, all of these people have to be wrong or lying: 43 people who said there was a right rear wound in the back of Kennedy’s head, Arnold Rowland, Carolyn Arnold, Richard Randolph Carr, Carolyn Walther, Victoria Adams, Sandra Styles, Vicky Garner, Amos Euins, Deputy Sheriff Roger Craig, Marvin Robinson, Roy Cooper, Helen Forrest, James Pennington, Ed Hoffman, Gordon Arnold, Lee Bowers, Officer Joe Smith, Deputy Constable Seymour Weitzman, FBI agents Vincent Drain, Bardwell Odum, Francis O’Neill, and James Sibert, Dennis David, Paul Connor, Joe O’Donnell, Tom Robinson, Darrel Tomlinson, and O.P. Wright.


o When the majority of Dealey Plaza witnesses say the pattern of the shots was boom, boom-boom, you have to believe that there are at least 1.7 seconds between the two booms in close succession at the end.


o You’d have to accept the official autopsy records over all medical records from Parkland Hospital, which means that the 8 parkland doctors who said they saw destroyed cerebellar tissue were wrong, even though one of them was the chief of neurosurgery. You also would ignore what photographer John Stringer said about the brain he photographed having severe damage to the cerebellum.


o You have to choose which head entry wound you believe is more likely, the lower Warren Report position, or the higher Clark Panel/HSCA position.


o You have to not be suspicious about Kennedy’s personal doctor George Burkley contacting the HSCA to testify about his knowledge of a conspiracy and then changing his mind.


o You have to ignore all evidence of a lower rear back wound, including clothing, photographs, witness statements, autopsy facing sheets, and the Sibert O’Neill report. You’d also disregard the video of press secretary Malcolm Kilduff pointing to his temple and saying it was QUOTE “a simple matter of a bullet straight through the head”. You’d put aside that at least seven Parkland doctors said that Kennedy’s throat wound was an entrance wound.


o You would have to ignore the comparisons of the bullets from the shooting tests and the almost pristine nature of CE 399 and write the anomaly off to different bullet velocities in the shooting tests based on how far away the gun was shot in the tests vs how far Oswald shot from with CE 399.


o You would believe that Oswald was as good of a shooter as some of the best shooters in the world, even though testimony from his military peers and his last shooting test show otherwise and there is no evidence of him practicing at all before the assassination.


o You would have to assume that everyone’s watches were materially off when it comes to the timeline of the Tippit murder. And assume that Acquilla Clemmons and Frank Wright were lying or mistaken about what they saw. And Warren Reynolds being shot in the head is a coincidence and his perception that it was tied to the assassination was wrong.


o You would have to disregard any parts of the story that imply that there was an intentional Oswald lookalike, including: the man running out of the back of the Schoolbook depository building getting into the Nash Rambler in Dealey Plaza, the Ralph Yates FBI report, the Dobbs House FBI report, the Texas Theater rear exit, the shooting range stories from Dr. Homer Wood and his son Sterling Wood, and mechanic TF White seeing someone in a parked car who looked identical to Oswald after we know that Oswald was already in custody. And you’d have to think it is a mere coincidence that license plate is then traced to a military contractor who is close friends with Tippit.


o You would believe that Ruby was just setting up a wire transfer at the place next to the police station at the time when Oswald was being moved because he wanted to help his employee, who was getting paid the next day anyway.


o You would have to ignore what Jack Ruby said about his own motive and the legal defense he made about his motive under the logic that Ruby is crazy and should not be believed.


Conclusions


In the interest of not being repetitive, I’m going to be as brief as possible in summarizing my conclusions for each of these issues. That means that important information may be left out. If you hear anything that doesn’t make sense, I encourage you to go back to the episode where we discussed it at length for more context or visit the sources and transcripts at solvingjfkpodcast.com.


1. Was Oswald in place on the 6th floor when the shots were fired? (Ep 3 and 4)


No, I don’t think so.


The official story here relies heavily on Howard Brennan’s identification of Oswald in the window, the fact of Oswald’s fingerprints on some of the boxes in the sniper’s nest, and most importantly, the fact that the Manlicher Carcano that was found on the 6th floor was tied to a PO Box associated with Oswald’s alias – AJ Hiddell.


But, critics point out that Brennan did not identify Oswald on the night of the assassination, and no one saw Oswald walking up to the 6th floor immediately before, or walking down from the 6th floor immediately after the shots were fired. Oswald looked calm and collected when Officer Baker and building supervisor Roy Truly encountered Oswald on the second floor.


To me, It does not look like Oswald was in place on the 6th floor when the shots were fired. I rely on statements from Victoria Adams and Sandra Styles that they came down the same set of stairs that Oswald would have had to use (and they did not see him or hear anything on the stairs). They left to go downstairs before the president’s car drove under the railroad overpass, which should theoretically put them on the stairs when Oswald should have been descending them. Also, their boss, Dorothy Garner, said that Officer Baker came upstairs after Adams and Styles had gone downstairs. Since Oswald was on the second floor already when he encountered Baker and Truly, and there was only one set of stairs, this means that Oswald could not have been on the 6th floor.


On top of that, Carolyn Arnold says she saw Oswald on the 2nd floor at 12:25. Arnold Rowland says he saw a light skinned man with dark hair with a rifle in the window at 12:15, and that the man was accompanied by an older bald man with dark skin. Carolyn Walther also claimed to see two men in high up windows.


The open question here is, if Rowland and Walther saw two men, one of whom was a practically bald dark skinned man, who were these men and how did they get out of the building?


2. Did Oswald bring the gun in the building in a paper sack under the guise of curtain rods? (Ep 5)


I’m not sure about Oswald bringing the gun, but I don’t believe these mysterious curtain rods ever existed.


Buell Wesley Frazier gave Oswald a ride to work on the morning of the assassination. This is not disputed. But, Frazier’s story about what Oswald had in his hands that morning is intensely debated. Oswald - for what its worth - said it was a regular paper bag with his lunch.


Warren Report defenders believe Oswald did bring the gun in to the Texas Schoolbook Depository Building in a long paper sack, which Frazier’s sister, Linnie Mae Randle, also says she saw Oswald holding as he got in Frazier’s car.


Critics point to the length of the disassembled rifle and how it would have been impossible for Oswald to carry it the way Frazier claimed he did – cupped with his hand and under his armpit due to its length. Also, the package that was found was much longer than what Frazier described and was a different type of package.


For me, I put this issue as inconclusive. The whole thing really comes down to - do you believe Frazier and his sister. I have no knowledge of why they would lie, unless someone put them up to it – which we have no evidence for. But, a few things cause me to question Frazier’s story about the curtain rods: Edward Shields said he saw Frazier in the parking lot alone – which undermines Frazier’s story about walking in together with Oswald. There’s also the mysterious midnight polygraph that has no police records, but which Frazier supposedly passed. And Frazier recently brought up a new story about seeing a man with a fancy hat and a gun in the parking lot for the first time when his book recently came out – something that no one else associated with the case has ever mentioned.


The open question is if Oswald didn’t bring in the Carcano, then who did? How did the one that was found get on to the sixth floor?


3. Do Oswald’s fingerprints on the boxes in the sniper’s nest and on the paper sack prove that he fired the shots? (Ep 5)


Not really.


Oswald’s left palm print and right index finger prints were found on the top box of the stacked boxes in the sniper’s nest. Oswald also had a right palmprint on another nearby box. The obvious Warren Report critic answer is that Oswald worked on the 6th floor and would have come into contact with those boxes as part of his job. Whether he actually did or not, we don’t know.


A 38 inch long paper sack - about a foot longer than Frazier and his sister said - was also found in the sniper’s nest on the 6th floor. That sack had Oswald’s right palm print and left index finger print. It was made from materials taken from the Depository according to the Warren Report.


The official story here is that this paper bag is the same bag that Frazier and Randle saw, the gun fits in it, and it has Oswald’s fingerprints on it. That seems to implicate Oswald and confirm Frazier’s story about the paper sack.


But, Critics point to a few inconsistencies with the paper sack. First, Oswald didn’t access paper or tape from Troy West – the man responsible for dispensing paper and tape at the Depository – during work hours. And he was never seen with the bag or the materials for it by anyone. There were no creases inside the paper bag. And No markings from grease or cosmoline that the rifle was coated in when it was shipped. It also doesn’t seem to make sense that Oswald didn’t get any other prints on the bag aside from a palm print and left index finger print – if he constructed the bag and carried it the way Frazier says he did. Most importantly, Frazier insisted during his Warren Commission testimony that the length of the paper sack in evidence was much longer than the one he saw Oswald with (but he also says he didn’t look that closely).


These issues are inconclusive to me. Oswald’s prints on the boxes can’t be relied on because he would have had a legitimate reason to have prints on those boxes given his job. But, based on what we know Oswald said – which is that he didn’t know anything about curtain rods and he brought his lunch that day - the record seems to indicate that either Frazier is wrong about the length of the package and Oswald did have the disassembled rifle in the long sack in evidence today – OR Frazier wasn’t telling the truth and Oswald did have his lunch. There is no evidence of any curtain rods transported on November 22 ever existing. Oswald already had curtain rods at his rooming house.


And remember, the Ralph Yates Oswald lookalike hitchhiker story demonstrates likely foreknowledge by an unknown Oswald imposter of a curtain rods cover story. That is, unless Yates made the story up. I don’t think that is the case because FBI reports tell us that Yates told his co-worker Dempsey Jones about the interaction before the assassination (which Jones verified to the FBI) and then Yates passed 4 lie detector tests, the last one personally ordered by J Edgar Hoover - ultimately leading to Yates involuntary detention in a mental institution.


4. Did Oswald order the Manlicher Carcano rifle in evidence? (Ep 7)


I’m not sure, but there is a good possibility that evidence was manufactured to make it look like Oswald did.


Oswald admitted that he owned the PO Box where the Carcano rifle was sent, though he denied ordering the rifle, and he didn’t say anything about whose name the PO Box was under. FBI handwriting experts said that Oswald’s handwriting matched the order coupon. And the serial number of the rifle that was found on the 6thfloor matched the one in the paperwork that the Warren Report says Oswald ordered.


For Warren Report defenders, this is one of the strongest pieces of evidence that conclusively convicts Oswald. But, critics point to a discrepancies in the record to undermine the evidence of Oswald ordering the rifle.


First, the February 1963 magazine ad, which is the one Oswald would have used based on the coupon, showed a 36 inch rifle for sale. But, the rifle that was found on the 6th floor is a 40 inch rifle. It’s strange that the company shipped a rifle that is a different size from what was ordered.


Next, the payment for the rifle was sent on March 12th from Dallas and arrived in Chicago, the next day, on March 13th, and was then supposedly opened, processed, and deposited all on the same day. This seems very unlikely – especially the idea that the payment could arrive by the next day in 1963. Presumably, if it did arrive next day, it would have been too late in the day for Kleins to process the payment internally and deposit it with the bank.


Finally, the bank slip from Klien’s deposit of the payment is dated on February 15 – but the order was sent on March 12th. So, that date cannot be correct.


When we consider that Oswald’s mail was being monitored – as demonstrated by the FBI’s knowledge of Oswald’s statements in his outgoing mail – the possibility that someone else ordered and received the rifle for Oswald must be considered. The problem with that is the FBI handwriting expert testimony that Oswald’s handwriting is on the order coupon.


But despite the purported handwriting match, I’ve recently come across more evidence that potentially shows that Oswald didn’t order the rifle. The Hidell money order was postmarked at 10:30 am on March 12th, which means that Oswald would have presumably walked to the nearby downtown post office to send it. But, Oswald’s timecards at his job at that time at Jaggers-Chiles-Stovall, show that he worked and did not leave the building from 8am until 12:15 that day. (WC Exhibit 1855, Vol 23, page 605). The envelope the money order was in was stamped as being sent from Zone 12, which was several miles west of the downtown post office. (John Armstrong, Harvey & Lee, page 450). That does not line up with Oswald sending it at 10:30am on March 12. Also, there are no bank endorsement stamps on the back of the money order, which suggests that it was never actually deposited by Kleins. (CE 788).


The possibilities are that Oswald either ordered the Carcano as the Warren Report says, and there are lots of bizarre anomalies as noted above OR the FBI clumsily fabricated at paper trail. The reason I can’t conclude that Oswald did not order the Carcano is that we still have the handwriting match. Although, if the FBI would fabricate evidence, is it so hard to believe that they would fabricate a handwriting match or be good enough at forgery that they could fool their in-house handwriting expert? Maybe.


5. Was Oswald’s palm print found on the barrel of the Carcano? (Ep 8)


I’m not certain.


According to Lt. Day of the Dallas Police department, fingerprint evidence was found near the metal housing near the trigger and a lifted palmprint from the underside of the barrel. The prints near the metal housing were of no value according to the FBI fingerprint expert, Sebastian Latona. Latona didn’t notice any lifted print or any other prints. Then, six days after Latona first received the rifle, he received a lifted palm print on an index card with a note from Lt. Day that said it was from the underside gun barrel of the rifle in evidence. This late arriving lifted palmprint matched Lee Harvey Oswald’s right palm print. This is the only fingerprint evidence that exists to tie Oswald to the rifle itself.


Warren Report defenders point to an FBI memo on September 11, 1964, that says that lab examiners were able to link the lifted print to the underside of the gun barrel based on inconsistencies in the metal, even though FBI expert Latona did not initially see any evidence of prints being lifted there.


But Critics counter by pointing out the absurdity that such an important piece of evidence would be sent days later on an index card. Also, Lt. Day wrapped the trigger guard in cellophane because he knew there was evidence there. Why would he not wrap the underbarrel in cellophane to protect it? Even if he did lift the print, you would think he would want to preserve the evidence.


The FBI Agent, who picked up the rifle from Lt. Day, Vincent Drain, claims that Day did not mention anything about the lifted print on the underside of the barrel. But, Lt. Day insists that he did tell Drain.


This question is inconclusive for me. I’m not ready to just throw out every thing that every FBI expert says. But, you do have to admit that a late arriving lifted palm print from an area of the rifle not wrapped in cellophane that is disputed by the FBI agent who picked it up isn’t exactly the most persuasive evidence against Oswald.


6. Do the paraffin tests incriminate Oswald? (Ep 8)


The quick answer is that it doesn’t matter a ton because the Warren Report itself says that the Paraffin tests given to Oswald were completely unreliable.


Oswald tested positive for nitrates on both hands and negative for nitrates on his cheek, which would be close to the weapon at the time of shooting if the shooter was carefully aiming. There are competing experts on the issue of whether carcano ammo would be expected to release nitrates such that they should have been on Oswald’s face. Warren Report defenders say that the nitrates on his hands shows Oswald recently fired a weapon.


But, Critics counter that Oswald was also seen reading a newspaper, which would have put nitrates on his hands. And that the paraffin casts show nitrates on Oswald’s palm and fingers, not on the back of his hands, where you would expect it to fall if he was holding the rifle. Also, regarding whether we should expect to find nitrates on Oswald’s cheek, it looks like the person who administered the test thought they would be there – otherwise why bother with doing the paraffin process on a place where you didn’t expect results.


I rate this as inconclusive and agree with the Warren Report that the paraffin tests are unreliable.


7. Could Oswald have fired the shots that he is accused of firing under the same circumstances? (Ep 20)


An expert could have made the shots, but probably not Oswald.


The sniper’s nest was on the 6th floor. It would be easy for anyone to make one shot because it was not very far away. However, the fact that the vehicle was moving and a bolt action rifle was used, combined with the Zapruder film serving as a timer for how long the shots lasted, it would have been very difficult, but not impossible to make the shots Oswald is accused of. The Warren Report and CBS both used some of the best shooters in the world for their tests with minimal success. But, assuming that the second two shots in close succession are not faster than 1.7 seconds, it is possible that an expert could have made the shots.


But, the weight of the evidence is that Oswald could not likely have made the shots. I base this partially on his extremely poor score on his last marine shooting test in 1959, the fact that his other shooting test was better but not great, and also on the testimony of his peers in the marines who say that Oswald was not a good shooter. Most of all, there is no evidence in the record that Oswald had any practice with the rifle in advance of the assassination. With a bolt action rifle that has a defective scope, he would need all the practice he could get.


8. What are the indisputable facts from Dealey Plaza Witnesses?


Let’s talk about what we know happened within Dealey Plaza based on episodes 9-12. These things are not disputed:


- At minimum of three shots were fired overall.


- At least one, and as many as three shots were fired from the Schoolbook Depository Building. Multiple witnesses saw a man in a high window in the Schoolbook Depository Building with a gun.


- Most of the witnesses recall the second and third shots being bunched close together. When we zoom in to witness testimony, we see that 44 people are on the record saying that the last two shots came in quick succession.


These facts are agreed upon by Warren Report defenders and critics. Now, let’s look at the disputed issues.


9. What are the disputed questions from Dealey Plaza Witnesses?


There are just a few key questions that are disputed in Dealey Plaza, but the answers to these questions get at the heart of the case for whether there was a second shooter.


- Did anyone see shots fired from the grassy knoll?


Yes, at least 6 witnesses say that they saw a shot come from the grassy knoll.


There is a lot of different testimony about what direction the shots came from. Many of the witnesses were identifying where the shots came from based on what they heard, which is not very reliable since there’s an echo in Dealey Plaza.


There are four railroad employees who stood on the railroad overpass. SM Holland, Richard Dodd, James Simmons, and Austin Miller all saw a puff of smoke come from behind the fence on top of the grassy knoll. This puff of smoke was likely the smoke and fire that resulted from the shot being fired itself – not a puff of smoke that lingered in the air for a long time. But, these four men all saw it and then ran to where it was immediately to see if they could find the shooter. Their actions corroborate their testimony and persuade me that they truly believed shots had been fired from behind the fence on the grassy knoll.


We also have statements from Lee Bowers, who was working in the railroad tower and had a birds eye view of the parking lot and the back of the fence, which was about 150 yards away. He said he saw two men near the fence and he also saw a flash of light or smoke or something at the time of the shooting.


Finally, there is controversial witness Ed Hoffman, the deaf mute man who claims to have seen the men who shot from the front from the highway, about 200 yards away. He said that he saw two men: one heavier man in a dark suit and dark hat and another man who was tall, thin, and dressed like a railroad worker. Hoffman says the man in the dark suit was standing behind the fence and then reached down for something, then lifted it up - and he saw a puff of smoke. Then, Hoffman says he saw this man turn with a long gun and toss the gun to the railroad worker, who twisted it to disassemble it, and then put it in a brown tool bag and ran down the railroad tracks.


The FBI documents don’t support Hoffman’s story. They show that he spoke to police and FBI, but the records show that Hoffman said he told the FBI he was mistaken. Hoffman claims the FBI misrepresented what he told them. Hoffman’s story is potentially supported by statements from Officer Tom Tilson and from JC Price, both of whom said they saw a man running down the train tracks behind the fence immediately after the shots were fired.


Also, Officer Joe Smith, who was the first one at the top of the grassy knoll after the shots, said that he smelled gunpowder right away.


- Was there someone impersonating Secret Service near the grassy knoll?


Yes, that’s what the evidence indicates.


Officer Joe Smith and Deputy Constable Seymour Weitzman both told the Warren Commission that they saw a man near the stockade fence who displayed secret service credentials. Gordon Arnold, whether he is credible or not, also echoed this story. The problem is that all Secret Service agents remained with the motorcade according to the Warren Report. This means that the person who showed the Secret Service ID was impersonating Secret Service OR it means that Smith, Weitzman, and Arnold were all mistaken. I can buy Arnold not telling the truth or being wrong, although I think it is possible that he is telling the truth. But, I don’t see how Smith or Weitzman could both be wrong about such a specific claim. They have no reason to lie and their stories remained consistent.


This is a disturbing conclusion to reach. Because, it means that whoever was impersonating Secret Service could have been involved with firing a shot from the grassy knoll, or would have been in a position to see who did it. Why else would there be someone with a fake Secret Service credential in the exact place where critics suspect the second shooter fired from?


- Did anyone see the grassy knoll shooter?


The closest we have to anyone seeing the shooter is the combined story of Lee Bowers and Ed Hoffman. Bowers isn’t specific enough and Hoffman is highly disputed as being not credible.


- Is there anything suspicious about the Umbrella Man or the Dark Complected Man who sat near him on the curb?


The Zapruder film shows a man flapping an umbrella right at the moment when the shots are fired at Kennedy. A lot of people believe the umbrella was used as a signal from a spotter for whether the president had been hit or not. This mystery man flapping the umbrella came to be known as the Umbrella Man in JFK Assassination lore. But, during the HSCA hearings, Steven Louie Witt, came forward and said that he was the Umbrella Man and that the purpose of him flapping the Umbrella was to protest the appeasement policies of Kennedy’s father, Joseph Kennedy, during World War 2.


Aside from Witt’s testimony about him being the umbrella man (and the fact that Witt brought what he claimed was the same umbrella with him to the hearing), we have no proof that Witt was actually Umbrella Man. The video and photo evidence is too grainy to tell.


I could accept Witt’s story, but for one major issue. It fails to explain the actions of the Dark Complected Man seen sitting next to Witt on the curb after the assassination. The identity of this man has never been uncovered. And, like Witt, this man appeared to be signaling at the time of the shots. You can see him raising a closed fist at the time Kennedy passes him in the Zapruder film. Witt says that he didn’t know the man and that the man was mumbling “they done shot them folks.”


But, I don’t understand how these two men were sitting on the curb in Dealey Plaza - like they were kids waiting for to be picked up from soccer practice - when everyone else was reacting by ducking or running behind the fence. Oh, and the Dark Complected Man appears to have a walkie talkie which he puts up to his face and then tucks into the back of his pants and walks away.


The identity of this Man needs to be uncovered so that we can rule out anything nefarious. Until it is, both the Umbrella Man and Dark Complected Man remain persons of interest in this case.


10. Is It Possible That CE 399, the bullet in the national archives today, is the Single Bullet that hit both Kennedy and Connally? (Ep 13-15)


No. It is not possible due to chain of custody issues, the condition of the bullet, and timing issues.


First, let’s talk about the chain of custody. According to the Warren Report, this bullet, CE 399, was found by Darrell Tomlinson on a stretcher outside the elevators on the ground floor of Parkland hospital, Tomlinson gave it to the head of hospital security, O.P. Wright, who gave it to Secret Service agent Richard Johnsen, who gave it to Secret Service Chief James Rowley, who gave it to FBI agent Elmer Todd, who gave it to Robert Frazier at the FBI crime lab. So, 6 people had possession of this bullet at one time. But, when we zoom in to the evidence, only 2 of them – FBI agents Todd and Frazier - confirmed that CE 399 was the same bullet that they once had in their possession. Tomlinson, Wright, Johnsen, and Rowley could not identify it and said CE 399 did not look like the bullet they handled.


There is a dispute about whether Tomlinson and Wright actually did positively identify the bullet. This is because CE 2011, which is an FBI summary document about the chain of custody of CE 399, does say that Tomlinson and Wright identified the bullet. But, Wright and Tomlinson told author Josiah Thompson that they did not recognize CE 399 as the one they possessed. This led Thompson’s colleague, Dr. Gary Aguilar, to contact Bardwell Odum, the agent who the FBI says showed Wright and Tomlinson the bullet. But, Odum said he never possessed CE 399 and never met with Tomlinson and Wright at Parkland Hospital. He also said there would be documentation of the meeting if it happened. There is no documentation of Odum’s purported meetings that are represented in CE 2011. So, it appears that CE 2011 may be a fraudulent document based on the lack of underlying FBI reports to support it.


The next issue with CE 399 is it’s condition. People say it is a pristine bullet. It is in very good condition for a bullet that went through what the Warren Report says it did. But, the bottom of it is slightly dented. Also, there is a small piece taken out of the nose of the bullet (which it turns out was removed by the FBI lab and was not how the bullet came).


HSCA exhibit F-294 is an image that shows 4 bullets side by side: two basically pristine bullets that were shot into bails of cotton, 1 bullet that is dented in the middle which hit a goat rib, and 1 bullet that is completely smashed that hit a human cadaver wrist. When compared to CE 399, it is indisputable that the bullets that most closely resemble it are the two that were shot into bails of cotton. The counter argument to believing your eyes is that the test bullets were fired from closer and thus had higher velocity. That may be true. But, it by no means proves that a bullet could go through one man’s body, and then hit another man’s rib, shatter a wrist bone, come out the forearm, and embed into a leg – and be in as good of a condition as CE 399.


Governor Connally had pieces of the bullet that went through his wrist removed from his wrist. Given that CE 399 is supposed to be the bullet that left those fragments in his wrist, we would think that the fragments would match up to the bullet. But there are no places on the bullet that are missing material large enough that the fragments could fit. The puzzle pieces simply don’t line up.


Also, Dr. Robert Shaw said that the bullet was still in Connally’s thigh prior to the surgery being done on his thigh. Medical records show that the thigh surgery was from 4:00 to 4:20pm. But, the bullet was found on the stretcher around 1pm.


I conclude that CE 399 could not possibly be the bullet that went through Kennedy and Connally as the Warren Report alleges.


11. Regardless of whether CE 399 is the bullet - Is the Single Bullet Theory Possible? (Ep 13-15)


No, the evidence does not support the single bullet theory.


Kennedy had a throat wound, which was obscured by the tracheotomy that was performed over it. And he had an upper back or back of the neck wound whose location is disputed. The possibility of the single bullet theory depends largely on the details of these wounds.


Most of the Parkland Doctors initial impressions were that the throat wound was an entry wound including Dr. Perry (the surgeon who performed the tracheotomy over the throat wound) and doctors Akin, Baxter, Carrico, Clark, Crenshaw, Jones, McClelland and Peters. The testimony of these doctors is the best evidence we have about how the wound initially looked because there is no other documentation of it and the autopsy doctors didn’t dissect the wound. So, the weight of the only medical evidence we have about the throat wound points to it being an entrance wound. However, if it was an entrance wound, there is no exit wound for it – which is problematic if you are a Warren Report critic.


The other relevant wound on Kennedy is his back of the neck or upper back wound. The location of this wound is crucial because if it was too low to have exited from Kennedy’s throat on the same trajectory as when it hit Kennedy’s body coming down from the 6th floor, then the Single Bullet Theory cannot be true.


The report written by FBI agents Sibert and O’Neill, which documented what the autopsy doctors in Bethesda said and did, says that the back wound was of a short depth with no point of exit. The counter argument is that rigor mortis would have set in. So, it would have been hard to get a probe through the muscles if the bullet went through. But, Sibert and O’Neill were just writing down what the doctors said, which was “no point of exit”. There is no mention of rigor mortis and one would think that the 3 doctors would be aware of the concept.


There are other reasons to believe that this rear wound was lower and more to the right – such that it wouldn’t line up with the throat wound as an exit:


The Sibert and O’Neill Report says that the wound was “below the shoulders and two inches to the right of the middle line of the spinal column.” Five Secret Service agents are on record saying that this wound was between the shoulder and the neck or in the soft part of the shoulder. The autopsy facing sheet itself shows the wound being in the upper back and to the right. The death certificate itself written by Kennedy’s personal physician Dr. Burkley puts the wound at the third thoracic vertebra – which is materially lower than where the Warren Report claims it is. The holes in Kennedy’s clothing also are consistent with this lower and more to the right position.


Probably the most compelling piece of evidence is the autopsy photo that has leaked that shows this wound. The wound is exactly in the place where it is described to be by everyone I just cited – in Kennedy’s upper back to between his spine and shoulder blade. This is obvious to me, even though Kennedy is on his side in the picture and his head is turned up so that it looks like there is less space between the bottom of his head and his back. But don’t take my word for it. Here’s what Chief Counsel of the Warren Commission, J Lee Rankin said in a closed door Warren Commission meeting on January 27, 1964 QUOTE “we have a picture of where the bullet entered in the back, that the bullet entered below the shoulder blade to the right of the back bone, which is below the place the picture shows the bullet came out in the neckband of the shirt in front.”


The evidence conclusively establishes that the entrance wound in Kennedy’s back is too low and too much to the right to have possibly exited from Kennedy’s throat. And, remember, the trajectory of the wounds must match the trajectory of the shots coming down from the 6th floor. This means that the entrance wound would have to be noticeably higher on Kennedy’s back to come out of his throat. But, here, the wound is noticeably lower in his back than the one in his throat.


Also, while its not something that I base my conclusions on, we also have the left to right zig zagging nature of the single bullet that resulted in it getting the Magic Bullet nickname. It’s possible that Connally and Kennedy could have been in alignment for a split second. But, Connally’s certainty that the bullet that hit Kennedy didn’t hit him somewhat undercuts that argument. As does Connally’s late reaction on the Zapruder film which was noted by commissioners John McCloy and Allen Dulles.


Another counter argument from Warren Report defenders is that Kennedy was leaning forward at the time of the shots, and that forward lean would make it so that the trajectory wouldn’t have to be so pronounced. But, the Zapruder film doesn’t show Kennedy leaning forward that much. There is also an argument that we can’t rely on Kennedy’s clothes as evidence for the wounds because his suit was bunched up. I looked at that claim and it’s true that there was some bunching, but not enough to account for the discrepancy in the wound locations.


Thus, like President Johnson, Senator Russell, and Governor Connally, I do not believe that the Single Bullet Theory is correct.

12. Where did the shot that hit Kennedy’s head come from? (Ep 16)


Probably from the right front, near the grassy knoll. But, there may have been a second head shot from the back shortly after the first shot from the right front.


The Warren Report says that Kennedy was hit at the base of his head and that Kennedy’s head was leaning forward at the time he was shot, such that the shot entered the lower right part of Kennedy’s head and exited the top right side. Attorney General Ramsey Clark created a panel of doctors who reviewed the autopsy materials and moved the location of the entry wound up by about 4 inches to Kennedy’s cowlick area, without changing anything about the exit wound. The HSCA adopted the Clark Panel’s higher position – one that no witnesses, including the autopsy doctors, ever observed.


The official story is challenged by the documented accounts from witnesses at both Parkland Hospital and Bethesda Naval Center. Specifically, as many as 43 people, most of them doctors or nurses, saw a wound in the right rear of the president’s head. This includes very credible testimony from Dr. McClelland who was next to Kennedy’s head and had the best view of the Parkland Doctors.


To further highlight that a lower rear head wound was seen, the cerebellar tissue was observed by 8 Parkland doctors, including Dr. Kemp Clark, the head of neurosurgery. If these doctors saw Cerebellum, the wound had to be low enough in the back of the head for Cerebellum to visible. Autopsy photographer John Stringer also said that the cerebellum was destroyed in the brain photos he took. The testimony of the Parkland doctors and Stringer is opposed to what Dr. Humes and Dr. Boswell said – which is that there was no damage to the Cerebellum at all.


On top of that, we have several witnesses who say that they saw a small entrance wound near the president’s temple. This includes Bethesda orderly Dennis David, Joe O’Donnell (who says he was shown the photo by Robert Knudsen (kahNoodSon)), and notably, the mortician who prepared Kennedy’s body for burial Tom Robinson. This isn’t enough to prove an entry wound in the temple, but it is worth noting given all of the other information that corroborates a shot from the right front.


Then, there is Harper’s Fragment, which is a hotly disputed piece of bone that was found in the infield of Dealey Plaza the day after the assassination. The fragment was shown to the chief pathologist at Methodist hospital in Dallas who determined that it was occipital bone. If so, that would prove that there was a rear head wound because it would have been the rear head bone that was blown out. But this issue is disputed by experts. The HSCA found that the Harper fragment was parietal bone. Today, the bone fragment has gone missing, but we do still have photos of it.


Another consideration when it comes to Kennedy’s head wound is that the autopsy photos of his body don’t show any damage past his ear. Sibert and O’Neill both insisted there was no damage past the president’s ear. Using either the original autopsy location or the Clark Panel location of the entry wound, we would expect to see an exit wound on Kennedy’s face. But, there was no exit wound there.


Looking at the Zapruder film, Kennedy’s body goes violently back and to the left. It’s also true that it looks like there is damage to the right side of Kennedy’s head in the film. What we don’t see, however, is a large explosion of blood and brain going forward or going backwards. The Zapruder film is not as conclusive for me as I hoped it would be. But, it tends to show that Kennedy was hit from the front because his body went clearly back and to the left. Larry Sturdivan’s counterpoint about a last dying spasm causing this movement does not hold up under objective scrutiny because Kennedy did not react in the same way that the goats did when Sturdivan shot them in the head.


I leave open the possibility that Josiah Thompson’s theory of a second head shot hitting Kennedy from the rear 7 tenths of a second after the first shot hit him from the right front - is accurate. HSCA medical panel expert Dr. Michael Baden said that the while the possibility was remote, there could have been a head shot from the front, but only if there was another head shot from the back shortly after. And Baden’s timing for that possibility is precisely consistent with Thompson’s theory. I’m not certain about this by any means, but it is possible and worth considering.


I conclude that the shot that hit President Kennedy’s head likely originated from the right front. The problem with this conclusion is that it is completely against the weight of the autopsy’s photographic and x-ray evidence presented in the Warren Report. This leads to the next question.


13. Is there any evidence of x-ray or photographic forgeries associated with President Kennedy’s autopsy? (Ep 17-18)


It appears that either the photographs and x-rays were altered, or there were two different autopsies, or a combination of both.


I don’t reach this conclusion lightly. So, let’s talk about the evidence I’m relying on.


Autopsy photographer John Stringer told the Assassination Records Review Board under oath that he did not recognize the brain photos in evidence because he never took photos with a view from underneath the brain AND like the 8 Parkland doctors, Stringer said that the cerebellum was damaged and cut in the photos that he remembered taking. But the official autopsy photos show the cerebellum as being intact. Stringer also said that he used different film from what the photos were printed on and that he put ID tags on the photos, which were not present. It is true that Stringer did say that he wasn’t sure about some things. So it is possible that he forgot. But, for providing so much detail, I’m not just throwing out what he said, especially since it is corroborated by other witnesses.


Robert Knudsen told his family, who told the ARRB because Knudsen was not alive at the time, that he was the only photographer at the autopsy. We know this isn’t true because Stringer was the official autopsy photographer. Knudsen told his family that in one of the photos hair had been drawn in to cover a missing portion of the top back of the president’s head.


Saundra Spencer was a Navy Warrant Officer who processed the film from the autopsy. She told the ARRB that the photos in the record are not the ones that she remembered processing. She also brought a copy of the paper that was used at that time and it did not match the photo paper used for the autopsy photos in the record.


Finally, Dr. David Mantik is the radiologist/physicist who says that the x-ray and photos of the back of Kennedy’s head are both forged. He used an optical densitometer to determine that the light coming from the back of Kennedy’s skull on the x-ray is too bright to be legitimate. He also used a stereoviewer on the photographs and determined that there was a patch added in on the photo that shows the rear of the president’s head.


So, it looks like the photos in the archives are not the same as what the official photographer remembers or what the person who processed the photos remembers. And then we have another photographer who says he took photos where no other photographer was present. This makes it possible that there were two sets of autopsies performed: one where Knudsen took photos and one where Stringer took photos. And I have yet to hear a technical refutation of Dr. Mantik. This evidence is even more compelling given the 43 witnesses who saw a right rear head wound which is not reflected in the autopsy documents.


For all of those reasons, I find that there is evidence of photographic and x-ray forgery. I don’t know the details of what happened. But, simply listening to the people who were involved is enough to show that something strange is going on with the autopsy photographs and the x-rays.


14. Did Oswald kill officer Tippit? (Ep 21-24)


Probably not, but the scenario where Oswald didn’t shoot Tippit is a bit fantastical.


There are four key facts that suggest that Oswald did kill Officer Tippit:


First, Oswald had a revolver on him when he was arrested. This revolver is supposedly in the national archives today and has the same serial number as the gun that the paperwork shows was ordered by AJ Hiddell. But, there is no paperwork or witnesses to establish that Oswald actually picked up the revolver when it was ordered. Still, for Oswald to be innocent, the police or FBI would have had to switch the revolver Oswald had for the one that has the serial number on the paperwork. That’s a big claim to make without evidentiary support.


Second, there are 9 eyewitnesses who identified Oswald as the man they saw running with the gun. Most of these identifications were the product of a police line up where Oswald had a black eye, was dressed differently than other people in the line up, and where Oswald gave his name and place of employment. Still, the fact of 9 witnesses all identifying Oswald is a bad fact for him that cannot be ignored.


Third, the markings on the shells found at the scene were consistent with being fired from the revolver Oswald was found with according to the Warren Report. Remember, how the shooter emptied the shells from his gun. Here is that evidence in the record. The question is, who was the shooter?


Fourth, a light gray zip up jacket was found in a parking lot between the Tippit shooting and the Texas Theater. Lee’s wife Marina said that Lee owned this jacket. But, there was also a dry cleaning tag on the jacket and Marina said Lee never dry cleaned anything.


I count eight facts that support Oswald’s innocence in the Tippit murder:


First, based on the time the Warren Report says Oswald left his rooming house, it would not be possible for him to have been at the Tippit murder scene based on witness testimony. Based on what cab driver William Scoggins said and Oswald’s landlady, Earlene Roberts said, Oswald left the rooming house close to 1:05. It would take between ten to fifteen minutes to walk from Oswald’s rooming house to 10th and Patton.


When Tippit was shot, Margie Higgins who lived close to the murder scene looked at the clock on top of her TV and it said 1:06pm. Helen Markham said the shooting was at 1:06 or 1:07, because she was on the way to catch her 1:12 bus a block north. TF Bowley encountered Tippit’s wounded body on the ground and looked at his watch and the time was 1:10. And, Butch Burroughs says Oswald entered the Texas Theater between 1:00 and 1:07 and that he sold Oswald popcorn at 1:15.


Putting all of this together, it is impossible that Oswald could have shot Tippit, unless everyone’s clocks are off and we completely disregard all evidence of time. The evidence puts the shooting between 1:06 and 1:10. It’s not possible that Oswald could have traveled from his rooming house to the Tippit murder scene in 5 minutes – especially if he was already at the Texas Theater as Butch Burroughs says.


Second, the shooters actions are not consistent with someone who was on the run from law enforcement. Eyewitnesses, like Helen Markham, say that Tippit stopped his car, and then the shooter stopped walking, approached the car, and put his arms inside the open window on the passenger side. This is the behavior of someone who knows the officer or, at a minimum, has no worries about being arrested. And it makes no sense, unless Oswald was just completely crazy, which is what Warren Report defenders attribute this behavior to.


Third, while the shells found at the crime scene were consistent with being fired from the revolver, the bullets from the gun could not be traced back to the same gun.


Fourth, Warren Reynolds did not initially identify Oswald and was then shot in the head, after which time, he did change his position and said that he could identify Oswald. Reynolds himself believed that the shooting was meant to send him a message. He said that the reason he changed his testimony was because he wanted to live. This points to potential witness tampering and begs the question why that would be necessary.


Fifth, Oswald is wearing a brown shirt when he is arrested. But, none of the 9 witnesses from the crime scene said he was wearing a brown shirt. They all say he had a white t shirt under the jacket. An important caveat is that Johnny Brewer and Julia Postal do say that the man who entered the theater without buying a ticket was wearing a brown shirt.


The sixth fact potentially supporting Oswald’s innocence is the unbelievability of Johnny Brewer’s story that he found out about the Tippit shooting on the radio and was on the lookout for the suspect. Given that the shooting was about 7 blocks away from Brewerss store, and that there was a delay between when it happened and when police dispatch was notified, it’s hard to believe Brewer was telling the truth. Even if the delay was short, Brewer didn’t have a police scanner – so how could he possibly know in time? But, maybe Brewer was just exaggerating and this issue is a red herring. That is possible.


Seven, the fingerprints on Tippit’s passenger window ledge where the shooter was seen to put his hands by Helen Markham did not match Oswald’s fingerprints. Jack Tatum, who came forward years later, somewhat undermines this argument because he says Oswald kept his hands in his jacket the whole time. But, Tatum would have been farther away and driving the opposite direction when it happened. So, it’s possible that he didn’t see the entire interaction or was wrong.


The eighth thing that aids Oswald defense is witness testimony that the shooter had a ruddy skin complexion. This was said by Ted Callaway, Domingo Benevides, Helen Markham, and Julia Postal. Oswald did not have a red skin complexion. When this fact is combined with the statements of Butch Burroughs and Bernard Haire that someone who looked just like Oswald was taken out of the back of the Texas Theater by police (when we know Oswald was taken out the front), it starts to look like there is another guy who looks like Oswald but has a more ruddy skin tone. We also have the insane story about the Oswald lookalike sitting in a car near the Texas Theater whose license plate came back as belonging to a military contractor who was Tippit’s close friend – Carl Mather. Mather insisting on immunity to merely speak to the HSCA about the incident makes it even more salacious.


On top of these eight points in Oswald’s defense, we have Earlene Roberts testimony under oath about a honking police car that happened to stop in front of the house and honk during the two or three minutes when Oswald was at the rooming house. We also have the saga of the competing Oswald wallets with both Oswald and Hidell IDs inside. The source of the wallet at the national archives is in dispute. FBI agent Bob Barrett says Captain Westbrook found the wallet at the Tippit crime scene. Sargeant Gerald Hill and Detective Paul Bentley both say that Oswald had the wallet on him while he was in the police car after being arrested at the Texas Theater.


Finally, we have the bizarre actions of Officer Tippit immediately before he was killed that make it clear that he was frantically looking for someone in particular. Maybe it was Oswald, but if it was, then he would have had to already personally know Oswald, or at least what he looked like, given how vague the description was of the man who was fleeing – an average looking thin white guy in his 20s.


I’m not sure what happened in the murder of J.D. Tippit. But I can’t write off the times given by all of the witnesses. I agree that there would be a range and that everyone’s watches were not synchronized in 1963. Even with that range, the timing evidence exonerates Oswald. This issue leans towards Oswald not being the shooter. But, for that to be true, it requires an Oswald lookalike, faked revolver order documents, and a switcharoo of Oswald’s revolver for the one used in the crime, which was ordered to the Hidell P.O. Box.


15. Why did Ruby kill Oswald? (26)


The quick answer is to make sure that Oswald could not defend himself or share anything he that he may have known.


We have Jack Ruby sightings all over the place on November 22, including in Dealey Plaza, at Parkland Hospital, and even at the Texas Theater. But, it’s the Ruby sightings once Oswald is in police custody that are the most interesting. Ruby tried to enter the area where Oswald was being held on the third floor of the police department early in the evening. Then, later in the evening, Ruby chimed in on Oswald’s affiliation with Fair Play for Cuba at a press conference. Why was Ruby at the police station during all of these times? We know that Ruby liked to be in the mix of what was going on and was generally a curious person. We also know that he was very friendly with Dallas Police. So, Ruby being there when the accused assassin of the president is held there, doesn’t necessarily prove anything.


Ruby’s alibi as to why the murder was not premeditated is that he had just sent a money transfer minutes before at the nearby Western Union and if he cared about killing Oswald, he would not have missed his chance by sending the money transfer. But, there are two facts that suggest that Ruby decided in advance to kill Oswald.


First, the Karen Carlin wire transfer shows that Ruby planned with Carlin in advance that he would send her a wire transfer. Given that the record shows that Carlin was not in need of the money since she was about to receive her regular paycheck the following day - and that Ruby is the one who had the idea to send her the funds via Western Union - it appears that Ruby was trying to use this as a proactive alibi against premeditation. Remember, Western Union was only 350 feet from the police department.


Second, there were 3 live tv technicians, all of whom claimed that they saw Ruby on multiple occasions between 8am and 11am on the day he shot Oswald near the police building. Ruby was supposed to be at home at this time. The Warren Report ignored the testimony of these 3 tv techs. To me, their shared recollection is one more reason to show Ruby’s actions were premeditated.


The best argument against Ruby planning out the murder of Oswald is that Ruby left his dog in his car. But, then again, Ruby could have done that in a cold and calculated way to make it appear that he was acting randomly, just like how he arranged the Western Union transfer.


When we look at Ruby’s actions and statements after he killed Oswald, it becomes obvious that his motive was to silence Oswald. In support of this conclusion, we have Detective Don Archer who was with Ruby when he learned that Oswald died. Ruby’s reaction wasn’t concern about being subject to the death penalty. It was relief.


The notes from Ruby’s psychiatrist, who did say that Ruby was insane, said that the Kennedy assassination was QUOTE “an act of overthrowing the government”. Ruby also told his psychiatrist that QUOTE “I was framed to kill Oswald.”


You can take or leave what deputy sheriff Al Maddox says about Ruby passing him a note that says he was part of a larger conspiracy and the purpose of killing Oswald was to silence him. We don’t have the note and Maddox’s statement was years later.


But, the video of Ruby plainly saying in front of his lawyers and the press that the world will never know what really happened because powerful people are silencing him is the showstopper. In my view, it’s a straight up confession to conspiracy.


The only way you can believe that Ruby’s murder of Oswald was not premeditated to silence him is if you are thoroughly convinced of the idea that Ruby was crazy and you hang your hat on what his psychiatrist said. But, if you listen to the audio of Ruby’s own words, he certainly doesn’t sound crazy to me.


NEXT STEPS IN THE PODCAST


So, there you have it. About half of my conclusions were inconclusive and left the door open, but the other half are solidly in the Warren Report Critic camp. These findings are that Oswald was not in place on the 6th floor, someone impersonated a Secret Service agent on the grassy knoll shortly after the shots were fired, CE 399 is not the single bullet, the single bullet theory is not possible, Kennedy’s head shot came from the right front, and that Jack Ruby’s motive for killing Oswald was to silence him.


I have enough evidence compiled to confidently say that the Warren Report got it wrong. But we have a long way to go before we solve anything. The implication of these conclusions are that we need to find more information about the secret service imposter, the ruddy complected man who looked like Oswald, the driver of the green Rambler, and the Dark Complected Man who sat near Umbrella Man.


Another massive question that we haven’t looked at yet is “Who was Lee Harvey Oswald, really?” I mean, why would he go to the Texas Theater for a matinee movie after the president was killed? If he was really innocent, wouldn’t he have stuck around to be questioned and then go home to his family? While I don’t think Oswald fired the shots that killed Kennedy, I can’t say that Oswald is innocent given all of his strange behavior.


Actually, we’ve got a lot more work to do when it comes to Oswald.


Next Season on Solving JFK: We’ll look zoom in to the life and times of Lee Harvey Oswald. What was his life like growing up? What about his time in the marines? Why did he defect to the USSR at the height of the cold war? Who was Oswald hanging out with in New Orleans and Dallas? What about the General Walker Shooting and the back yard photo allegedly showing Oswald with the rifle and the revolver? What more can we learn about Ruth Paine and George De Mohrenschildt? Is there any evidence to support Oswald being an intelligence asset? And is there any support for the idea of an Oswald lookalike?




194 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All
bottom of page