JFK Assassination Documents to be released this year

[FISHY1118]

How Kooky was Vincent Bugliosi ?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2wPIng0hGxQ&ab_channel=JREClips

TRUE CRIME PODCAST, Episode 53 --- Vincent Bugliosi Was A Creep

https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/true-crime-ep-53-vincent-bugliosi-was-a-creep/id1495280879?i=1000536832053

Some people here still consider him some sort of credible expert.

The guy was a nut case.

https://atwaatwar.files.wordpress.co...ry-16-3-mb.pdf

OMG this guy was full on whack job. This is the guy @David Von Pein holds up to say wrote the most comprehensive examination of the JFKA and Warren Report ever done? Something like that?



When he is guilty of :

abusing the power of his office
falsification of evidence
perjury in his sworn depositions
complicity in the obstruction of justice
slander of innocent people

What does it say about the man's credibility ?

[FISHY1118]

Nellie Connally Destroys the Single-Bullet Theory
When Nellie Connally, wife of Governor John Connally, testified before the Warren Commission (WC), she destroyed the single-bullet theory (SBT). She explained that she heard a disturbing noise, turned, and saw JFK clutching at his throat, before she even heard the shot that hit her husband. She had time to notice that JFK was grabbing his throat and time to process the expression on JFK’s face. Then, after turning and seeing these things, she heard a second shot and could see that it hit her husband. She was certain her husband was not hit by the same shot that hit JFK.

Her testimony powerfully confirms how and when JFK reacts to his first bullet wound in the Zapruder film. The HSCA’s Photographic Evidence Panel (PEP) noted the clear indications that JFK begins to react to a “severe external stimulus” at Z200. His waving motion freezes; he begins to turn his head rapidly to the left; and Jackie Kennedy starts to turn her head rapidly to the right to look at JFK. The PEP also noted other evidence of this shot and correctly concluded that it was fired at or before Z190 (probably at right around Z186).

The PEP finding dovetails perfectly with Nellie Connally’s testimony, and also with John Connally’s testimony. The governor was certain he was not hit before Z234, and the Zapruder film confirms this. Now let us read Mrs. Connally’s testimony.

Nellie Connally to the WC:

Mrs. CONNALLY. Then I don’t know how soon, it seems to me it was very soon, that I heard a noise, and not being an expert rifleman, I was not aware that it was a rifle. It was just a frightening noise, and it came from the right. I turned over my right shoulder and looked back, and saw the President as he had both hands at his neck.

Mr. SPECTER. And you are indicating with your own hands, two hands crossing over gripping your own neck?

Mrs. CONNALLY. Yes, and it seemed to me there was--he made no utterance, no cry. I saw no blood, no anything. It was just sort of nothing, the expression on his face, and he just sort of slumped down.

Then very soon there was the second shot that hit John. As the first shot was hit, and I turned to look at the same time, I recall John saying, “Oh, no, no, no.” Then there was a second shot, and it hit John, and as he recoiled to the right, just crumpled like a wounded animal to the right, he said, “My God, they are going to kill us all.” (4 H 147)

Fourteen years later, Nellie Connally gave an almost identical account to the HSCA:

Mrs. CONNALLY. I heard--you know how we were seated in the car, the President and Mrs. Kennedy, John was in front of the President and I was seated in front of Mrs. Kennedy--I heard a noise that I didn't think of as a gunshot. I just heard a disturbing noise and turned to my right from where I thought the noise had come and looked in the back and saw the President clutch his neck with both hands.

He said nothing. He just sort of slumped down in the seat. John had turned to his right also when we heard that first noise and shouted, "no, no, no," and in the process of turning back around so that he could look back and see the President--I don't think he could see him when he turned to his right--the second shot was fired and hit him. He was in the process of turning, so it hit him through this shoulder, came out right about here. His hand was either right in front of him or on his knee as he turned to look so that the bullet went through him, crushed his wrist and lodged in his leg. And then he just recoiled and just sort of slumped in his seat. I thought he was dead. (1 HSCA 41-42)

The HSCA’s Forensic Pathology Panel (FPP) claimed that John Connally was hit by the same bullet that struck JFK at around Z190 but could not explain why he did not drop his hat if a bullet had just torn through his wrist. The Zapruder film shows Connally still holding his hat in Z230, some 40 frames, or 2.2 seconds, after JFK was hit. As Dr. Cyril Wecht noted in his dissent to the FPP’s report:

Wecht exhibit 6 shows JBC firmly clutching his hat. This is . . . after he is alleged to have been shot through the chest, right wrist, and into his left thigh. Indeed, the FPP states that they were surprised that although lie lead suffered the injury to his wrist, lie did not drop his hat. The panel should not only be surprised, but incredulous. If they were not so slavishly dedicated to defending the Warren Commission report (WCR), and the previous opinions submitted by two of the panel members, Dr. James Weston and Dr. Werner Spitz, they would have interpreted this picture correctly and accepted it for what it obviously and clearly demonstrates. . . . (7 HSCA 199)

[FISHY1118]

Specter confessed to Epstein. But apparently Epstein did not want to reveal it until after Specter was dead. It does not get any worse than this.

But then, Epstein reveals a couple of quotes which I never recalled from Specter. First, he asks Specter: When the Secret Service did a reconstruction on December 7, 1963, why did they not arrive at the magic bullet concept? Specter replies like this:

They had no idea at the time that unless one bullet had hit Kennedy and Connally, there had to be a second assassin. (p. 69)

In other words, Specter just confessed that the SBT was a matter of necessity not evidence. But then, Specter tops that one. Epstein asks him how he convinced the Commission about this concept. This is Specter’s reply:

I showed them the Zapruder film, frame by frame, and explained that they could either accept the single bullet theory or begin looking for a second assassin. (p. 70)

I don’t recall either of these being in Inquest. To me they are more or less confessions to the very worst thoughts the critics had about how the Commission decided on their conclusions. Why Epstein waited until now to reveal all this is rather puzzling.

[Patrick Differ]

Fiver - Google. Jim Garrison January 31 1969 appeal for xrays and photos. I found it under Hood College.Edu

[FISHY1118]

The video corroborates his testimony. Much of the main evidence against Oswald was never positively identified by the person who found it. This includes the four Tippit shells, the three shells found on the sixth floor, the "stretcher bullet" CE 399, the "tannish-grey" jacket and the C 2766 rifle.

Without these positive identifications, the prosecution's case is weakened because it cannot prove that the items currently in evidence are the same items the witnesses found.

And the fact that all of these same items were also originally described as something else, not only makes positive identification by the finder imperative, it leaves open the possibility that there was evidence tampering by authorities and that the items in evidence may have been substituted for the items originally found.

How do we explain five main pieces of evidence, found in different locations and at different times, and all originally described as something else, not positively identified by the people who found them ?

A coincidence ? Five coincidences ?

No. IMO this is prima facie evidence of tampering by police.

If this case had gone to trial and I were the defense attorney, I'd make a motion to have this "evidence" dismissed, or at the very least, make the jury aware that the "evidence" could not be identified by the person who allegedly found it.