JFK Assassination Documents to be released this year

[Aethelwulf]

Just thought you might find it interesting given the recent discussion regarding fake photos .

I'd be interested to hear if George agrees with your cry baby 'fake' approach. If so, he can show how the head photo has been manipulated or the actual scene has been faked. Sure it won't take him too long to cast his trawl net into the depths of the web to turn some subjective nonsense.

[GBinOz]

Just to comment on post #989.

I don't know who Ed Kaufman is, and neither does Google (in relation to JFK). Google suggested Ed Hoffman Jnr, but I haven't heard of him either. I don't know who Beverly Oliver is either. Google says she was a witness on the south side Elm St. Perhaps the post where I used these "proven liars" could be referenced.

Contrary to what was claimed, Wecht said that the President was hit in the back and in the head from shots from the rear. He said the head shot from the rear was a fraction of a second after the head shot from the grassy knoll. He said that Connolly was hit by a bullet about one to one and a half seconds after Kennedy's back shot, not long enough to be from the same rifle, and that this is what necessitated the magic bullet theory. Watch the video, and watch any of Wecht's videos "to this day" to see that he advocates the grassy knoll second shooter theory. Then assess who is lying.

Regarding Point 4 (of three) - I post information for the interest of those that keep an open mind, not to be marked like a school assignment, and I have stated on several occasions that I will no longer engage in discussion with some posters. But wait....I just have....oh no.

But for the benefit of the one who places such importance on being in the majority that he actually started a poll with a mousetrap question:

[GBinOz]

Hi George, just thought you be interested in a book the was recently reccommended to me.? I wonder if youve heard of this gentlman ''John Liggett'' and the role he played in the JFK Assassination. My friend believes its a game changer . ''The Presidents Mortician'' you can find it on Amazon. Just thought you might find it interesting given the recent discussion regarding fake photos .

Hi Fishy,

I found a comment, or precis of John Liggett here:
https://www.quora.com/What-part-did-...-assassination

I've heard variations of this theory before. I think that, at my age my book buying days are over.

It appears that Sir HS thinks we post purely to bombard him with questions to answer, and that we are in detention for not answering his every speculation and conjecture.

Cheers, George

[Herlock Sholmes]

Just to comment on post #989.

I don't know who Ed Kaufman is, and neither does Google (in relation to JFK). Google suggested Ed Hoffman Jnr, but I haven't heard of him either. I don't know who Beverly Oliver is either. Google says she was a witness on the south side Elm St. Perhaps the post where I used these "proven liars" could be referenced.

No problem George. ‘Kaufman’ was a mis-type by myself (which you knew of course) You must have forgotten them. Prius I have to say that I’m somewhat amazed at someone who has read about the case who hasn’t heard of Beverly Oliver.



Both Hoffman and Oliver are on this image, originally posted by you, to make your case. O’Connor is also a cracker. He’s the guy that even goes further that other conspiracy theorists to say that there was virtually nothing left of the President’s brain. Lucky they faked the photos and x-rays I guess.

Contrary to what was claimed, Wecht said that the President was hit in the back and in the head from shots from the rear. He said the head shot from the rear was a fraction of a second after the head shot from the grassy knoll. He said that Connolly was hit by a bullet about one to one and a half seconds after Kennedy's back shot, not long enough to be from the same rifle, and that this is what necessitated the magic bullet theory. Watch the video, and watch any of Wecht's videos "to this day" to see that he advocates the grassy knoll second shooter theory. Then assess who is lying.

I have. It’s clearly the obsessive self-publicist Wecht.

Regarding Point 4 (of three) - I post information for the interest of those that keep an open mind, not to be marked like a school assignment, and I have stated on several occasions that I will no longer engage in discussion with some posters. But wait....I just have....oh no.

No you don’t George. You don’t properly debate. You whine. I’ve responded to question after question of yours and Fishy’s but do you ever respond to mine? Of course you don’t. You dismiss a long detailed post where I quote multiple genuine pieces of evidence but you avoided the need for a meaningful response by using the “Bugliosi Get-Out” clause. Any mention of Bugliosi justifies derision from you and Fishy because you only listed to, or read evidence from dyed-in-the-wool conspiracy theorists. The exact same kind of derision that you and your pal burst into floods of tears, screaming ‘vitriol’ about if I do it.

But for the benefit of the one who places such importance on being in the majority that he actually started a poll with a mousetrap question:

Christ, you’re even bringing up other threads. Perhaps you’d like a bit of info about my school days too?

You are the one recommending that people watch the tv Trial. I agree with you. They should also look at the verdict.

Oswald guilty of being the Lone Assassin……no other result could have been arrived at.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Hi Fishy,

I found a comment, or precis of John Liggett here:
https://www.quora.com/What-part-did-...-assassination

I've heard variations of this theory before. I think that, at my age my book buying days are over.

It appears that Sir HS thinks we post purely to bombard him with questions to answer, and that we are in detention for not answering his every speculation and conjecture.

Cheers, George

The telling problem is that your non-conspiracy book buying days never began.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Hi George, just thought you be interested in a book the was recently reccommended to me.? I wonder if youve heard of this gentlman ''John Liggett'' and the role he played in the JFK Assassination. My friend believes its a game changer . ''The Presidents Mortician'' you can find it on Amazon. Just thought you might find it interesting given the recent discussion regarding fake photos .

So can we now add the list of assassins?



A man called Saul proposed by Hugh McDonald.

Roscoe White.

Jack Ruby.

Three Corsican hitmen.

The Badge Man Rorschach Ink Blot.

Charles Harrelson and Jack Lawrence, fingered by Sam Giancana’s son who claimed that Oswald and Ruby were lovers.

A Cuban called Manuel.

Marita Lorez’s assassination squad - Oswald, CIA agent Frank Sturgis, Orland Bosch, Pedro Diaz Lang and two unnamed Cuban brothers.

David Ferrie.

E. Howard Hunt.

James E. Files.

Loy Factor.

Mac Wallace.

The driver of Kennedy’s car William Greer.

George Hickey, clumsy Secret Service agent in the car behind.

The three tramps (Larry, Curley and Mo)

Desmond Fitzgerald.

Gerry Hemming.

Chauncey Holt.

Charles Nicoletti.

Stevie Wonder.

Charles Rogers.

Johnny Roselli.

JD Tippit.

Bernard Weissman.

Umbrella Man.

Black Dog Man, another Rorschach ink blot man.

Jimmy Fratiano.


And that’s not all of them.

Can anyone spot the one I made up.

……

To be honest, I’m starting to feel left out. Why haven’t I been named? Perhaps my birth certificate is a fake too.

……..


Just one question: Will this madness ever end?

[Herlock Sholmes]

Nice to see George’s character assassination of Ruth Paine. A decent, honest non-looney. “Cold eyes” cites St. George. They didn’t look cold when she cried. George’s analysis is - you don’t particularly like someone so you help frame them for the assassination of the President.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Please see my replies below.

Im a bit rusty on my JFK.

Evidently.


The shots were fired from the book depository by Oswald with no help from Grassy Knoll phantoms.


According to the best medical evidence, the throat shot was fired from the front, this being the unanimous opinion of the doctors who examined the wound and recognised it as an entrance wound.

Similarly, they were of the opinion that the fatal head shot came from the front.

That was also the opinion of Kennedy's personal physician, who signed his death certificate, and whose opinion was mentioned at a press conference following the assassination, as well as of Dr McClelland, who recorded it in writing on the same afternoon.





When the Zapruder film is analysed Kennedys head moves forward very slightly on first impact than backward.



You omitted to mention that the difference in terms of the number of frames between the two movements means that the two movements are unconnected and must have been caused by separate shots - the final 'double' shot reported by many witnesses, including secret service men.

The first of those two shots must have come from behind and the second from the front.

That is why two experts who examined the autopsy brain x-rays saw fragments from two bullets.



A combination of the bullet exploding in his brain and the jet effect makes the head jar backwards. Exactly as scientific experts say that it would.



No scientific experts ever provided historical evidence that a shot from the back can cause a victim to be propelled backwards.

The Warren Commission report was unable to provide a single historical example in support of its theory.



Also, on closer analysis, the arterial spray from Kennedy goes in front of him. Shot from behind without doubt.


You did not mention the fact that a police motorcyclist riding to Kennedy's left and rear was spattered with brain matter and testified that he thought the shot had come from the front, nor that Jacqueline Kennedy retrieved a large piece of the President's skull from behind him.

Shot from the front without a doubt.


Oswalds actions after the assassination have obvious guilt written all over them. He couldnt have acted more like a guilty man if hed tried. A description had been put out, Tippit stopped him. He was seen acting suspiciously then entering the cinema without paying.



The Dallas Police could not explain where Oswald's description came from, which suggests that it was prepared in advance, which means someone prepared his ‘obvious guilt’ in advance.

Tippit did NOT stop him.

Professor Michael Kurtz pointed out that if Tippit thought the man who was about to shoot him was Oswald, whose description had been given to him, and thought he was about to make the arrest of his career, there is just one problem: at no time did Tippit even look as though he was thinking of drawing his revolver.

It is obvious that Tippit did not think his assassin was Oswald.

The man seen behaving suspiciously was not Oswald and, moreover, the oft-repeated story about his running into the cinema was not even in the statement made by the witness to his allegedly suspicious behaviour.

Similarly, the cashier did not claim that she saw Oswald entering the theatre without paying.

Oswald was already placed in the cinema by several witnesses, who were never called to testify at his trial because the conspirators could not risk that happening.

No witness has ever been produced who saw Oswald enter the viewing area at a time after the alleged Oswald is alleged to have run into the cinema.



When he was arrested the gun he was carrying was scientifically identified as the gun that killed Tippit to the exclusion of every other gun in the world.


That is disputed and the words 'to the exclusion of every other gun in the world' are as credible as Anderson's 'merely stating a definitely ascertained fact'.

In particular, two types of ammunition were removed from Tippit's body and the chain of custody of the bullets, which would have been required in order to prove anything about them, was absent.

As another member has already pointed out, Oswald's pistol was not fit for purpose.

I would also point out that the overwhelming majority of the eyewitnesses to the Tippit shooting described a suspect who, in terms of his appearance, could not have been Oswald.

As you say, you are a bit rusty.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

The SBT has been proven beyond all reasonable doubt

I suppose that makes it a definitely ascertained fact.

The SBT is proven beyond all reasonable doubt ONLY after the entrance wound in Kennedy's back has been raised by about five inches and the downwards angle of entry of that shot substantially reduced - as shown by the Commission's illustrations and photographs - from the 45-60 degrees established during the autopsy.

THEN everything lines up.

I don't think you have any answer to that.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Then they had to find, persuade and then facilitate a man to eliminate Oswald (ensuring that it was timed perfectly with the police allowing him access to the basement at exactly the right time.)

You have used almost exactly the same words as those used by Jack Ruby to explain how he was able to murder Oswald:

... and who else could have timed it so perfectly by seconds?
If it were timed that way, then someone in the Police Department is guilty of giving the information as to when Lee Harvey Oswald was coming down.

(Warren Commission Hearings, Volume V, page 206)

[Herlock Sholmes]

Please see my replies below.

I have. Nonsense as ever.

Im a bit rusty on my JFK.

Evidently.

You certainly haven’t changed. Still a know-all.


The shots were fired from the book depository by Oswald with no help from Grassy Knoll phantoms.


According to the best medical evidence, the throat shot was fired from the front, this being the unanimous opinion of the doctors who examined the wound and recognised it as an entrance wound.

Similarly, they were of the opinion that the fatal head shot came from the front.

That was also the opinion of Kennedy's personal physician, who signed his death certificate, and whose opinion was mentioned at a press conference following the assassination, as well as of Dr McClelland, who recorded it in writing on the same afternoon.

You really should try reading. The best people to analyse the wound were the people whose task it was to analyse the wounds. Humes, Boswell and Finck and not a bunch of largely young and inexperienced Doctors whose job it was to try and save Kennedy in the mere 22 minutes that they had his body in front of him.

McClelland, at 4.45 on the day of the assassination wrote in his report that the shots had come from the front. Then he miraculously changed his mind even drawing his famous diagram published in Josiah Thompson’s book. He then admitted that he could have been wrong and that his drawing was ‘misleading,’ now he appears to have changed his mind back again. If that’s your idea of a reliable witness over the 3 autopsy Doctors then whoopie for you. You also have to dismiss the 9 pathologists at the HSCA who unanimously concluded that the shots undoubtedly came from the rear (including star conspiracy theorist Cyril Wecht who 100% agrees that the 2 shots came from behind)


When the Zapruder film is analysed Kennedys head moves forward very slightly on first impact than backward.



You omitted to mention that the difference in terms of the number of frames between the two movements means that the two movements are unconnected and must have been caused by separate shots - the final 'double' shot reported by many witnesses, including secret service men.

And you make the mistake of listening to conspiracy theorists. There are no missing frames. All are accounted for.

The first of those two shots must have come from behind and the second from the front.

That is why two experts who examined the autopsy brain x-rays saw fragments from two bullets.

This is a meaningless statement.


A combination of the bullet exploding in his brain and the jet effect makes the head jar backwards. Exactly as scientific experts say that it would.



No scientific experts ever provided historical evidence that a shot from the back can cause a victim to be propelled backwards.

Numerous have. And experiments have replicated it.

The Warren Commission report was unable to provide a single historical example in support of its theory.

Nonsense.


Also, on closer analysis, the arterial spray from Kennedy goes in front of him. Shot from behind without doubt.


You did not mention the fact that a police motorcyclist riding to Kennedy's left and rear was spattered with brain matter and testified that he thought the shot had come from the front, nor that Jacqueline Kennedy retrieved a large piece of the President's skull from behind him.

Doesn't change the fact that spray went forward too.

Shot from the front without a doubt.

Rubbish.

Oswalds actions after the assassination have obvious guilt written all over them. He couldnt have acted more like a guilty man if hed tried. A description had been put out, Tippit stopped him. He was seen acting suspiciously then entering the cinema without paying.


The Dallas Police could not explain where Oswald's description came from, which suggests that it was prepared in advance, which means someone prepared his ‘obvious guilt’ in advance.

Howard Brennan…..try reading.

Tippit did NOT stop him.

Where you there?

Professor Michael Kurtz pointed out that if Tippit thought the man who was about to shoot him was Oswald, whose description had been given to him, and thought he was about to make the arrest of his career, there is just one problem: at no time did Tippit even look as though he was thinking of drawing his revolver.

Did someone see this on cctv? How the hell can anyone who wasn’t there say what Tippit looked like at that moment? You’re worse than Fishy.

It is obvious that Tippit did not think his assassin was Oswald.

Meaningless drivel.

The man seen behaving suspiciously was not Oswald and, moreover, the oft-repeated story about his running into the cinema was not even in the statement made by the witness to his allegedly suspicious behaviour.

Your just making things up. Johnnie Brewer saw him and testified as such.

Similarly, the cashier did not claim that she saw Oswald entering the theatre without paying.

Invention.

Oswald was already placed in the cinema by several witnesses, who were never called to testify at his trial because the conspirators could not risk that happening.

Invention.

No witness has ever been produced who saw Oswald enter the viewing area at a time after the alleged Oswald is alleged to have run into the cinema.

Johnnie Brewer….end of.

When he was arrested the gun he was carrying was scientifically identified as the gun that killed Tippit to the exclusion of every other gun in the world.


That is disputed and the words to the exclusion of every other gun in the world are as credible as Anderson's merely stating a definitely ascertained fact.

Meaningless waffle.

In particular, two types of ammunition were removed from Tippit's body and the chain of custody of the bullets, which would have been required in order to prove anything about them, was absent.

Untrue. A different make of bullet means nothing. The bullets were fired from the revolver that Oswald had on him when arrested.

As another member has already pointed out, Oswald's pistol was not fit for purpose.

Invention.

I would also point out that the overwhelming majority of the eyewitnesses to the Tippit shooting described a suspect who, in terms of his appearance, could not have been Oswald.

Invention.

As you say, you are a bit rusty.

As I say, typical of your standard of posting. Your time away hasn’t been spent well. By the way, will you start whining about other posters now or will you wait awhile?


…..

And I get criticised?

You pile straight back in after a lengthy suspension or ban when I recall you accusing someone of being a racist among other things and annoying just about everyone including Admin and here you are again….arrogant as ever.

[Herlock Sholmes]

I suppose that makes it a definitely ascertained fact.

The SBT is proven beyond all reasonable doubt ONLY after the entrance wound in Kennedy's back has been raised by about five inches and the downwards angle of entry of that shot substantially reduced - as shown by the Commission's illustrations and photographs - from the 45-60 degrees established during the autopsy.

THEN everything lines up.

I don't think you have any answer to that.

Just to pre-warn you. I have absolutely no intention of wasting my time responding to every one of you random and clueless posts.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Just to pre-warn you. I have absolutely no intention of wasting my time responding to every one of you random and clueless posts.

As I wrote:

I don't think you have any answer to that.

Evidently, you have no answer.

[Herlock Sholmes]

I’m now going to log out happily having spent too much time already dealing with fantasy. I don’t have to go anywhere tonight so I can have an uninterrupted read of The Man From The Train where I’m certain that the author won’t be suggesting that the murders were committed by a quartet of Tanzanian lion tamers on the orders of Theodore Roosevelt and Mark Twain. I’ll leave you to talk to Fishy….you’ll get on like a house on fire.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Please see my replies below.

When the Zapruder film is analysed Kennedys head moves forward very slightly on first impact than backward. (HS)



You omitted to mention that the difference in terms of the number of frames between the two movements means that the two movements are unconnected and must have been caused by separate shots - the final 'double' shot reported by many witnesses, including secret service men. (PI1)

And you make the mistake of listening to conspiracy theorists. There are no missing frames. All are accounted for.



Wrong.

I was not referring to allegedly missing frames.

I was referring to the the time difference or 'the difference in terms of the number of frames between the two movements', which is too great for the two movements to have been caused by the same shot.




A combination of the bullet exploding in his brain and the jet effect makes the head jar backwards. Exactly as scientific experts say that it would. (HS)



No scientific experts ever provided historical evidence that a shot from the back can cause a victim to be propelled backwards. (PI1)

Numerous have. And experiments have replicated it.


Please cite any historical evidence of that.

The experiments to which you refer were not valid.





The Warren Commission report was unable to provide a single historical example in support of its theory.

Nonsense.



If what I have written is nonsense, please provide an example from the Warren Commission Report. (PI1)





Also, on closer analysis, the arterial spray from Kennedy goes in front of him. Shot from behind without doubt. (HS)


You did not mention the fact that a police motorcyclist riding to Kennedy's left and rear was spattered with brain matter and testified that he thought the shot had come from the front, nor that Jacqueline Kennedy retrieved a large piece of the President's skull from behind him.

Doesn't change the fact that spray went forward too.



How do you explain the fact that blood and brain matter was sent backwards and to the left unless at least one shot came from the front?




Shot from the front without a doubt.

Rubbish.


If it is rubbish, then please explain how blood and brain matter was sent backwards and leftwards unless at least one shot came from the front?(PI1)




Oswalds actions after the assassination have obvious guilt written all over them. He couldnt have acted more like a guilty man if hed tried. A description had been put out, Tippit stopped him. He was seen acting suspiciously then entering the cinema without paying.


The Dallas Police could not explain where Oswald's description came from, which suggests that it was prepared in advance, which means someone prepared his ‘obvious guilt’ in advance.

Howard Brennan…..try reading.


Howard Brennan was a completely unbelievable witness, who could not even identify Oswald.




Tippit did NOT stop him.

Where you there?

According to eyewitnesses, Tippit simply got out of his car and walked round the front of the car towards the man. (PI1)


Professor Michael Kurtz pointed out that if Tippit thought the man who was about to shoot him was Oswald, whose description had been given to him, and thought he was about to make the arrest of his career, there is just one problem: at no time did Tippit even look as though he was thinking of drawing his revolver.

Did someone see this on cctv? How the hell can anyone who wasn’t there say what Tippit looked like at that moment? You’re worse than Fishy.


There were witnesses and no-one saw Tippit even look as though he was about to draw his gun. (PI1)




It is obvious that Tippit did not think his assassin was Oswald.

Meaningless drivel.


It is not meaningless nor drivel.

It is a logical deduction from the fact that according to the evidence, Tippit did not draw his revolver nor even make a movement suggesting he was about to draw his revolver.





The man seen behaving suspiciously was not Oswald and, moreover, the oft-repeated story about his running into the cinema was not even in the statement made by the witness to his allegedly suspicious behaviour.

Your just making things up. Johnnie Brewer saw him and testified as such.


I am not making things up.

You suggest I do some reading.

I suggest you read Brewer's statement.

He did not say that the suspect ran into the cinema.




Similarly, the cashier did not claim that she saw Oswald entering the theatre without paying.

Invention.



Again, I suggest you read her statement.

She said nothing about anyone not paying.




Oswald was already placed in the cinema by several witnesses, who were never called to testify at his trial because the conspirators could not risk that happening.

Invention.



It is not invention.


Butch Burroughs, the theater manager, said that Oswald entered the theater several minutes before Tippit was shot, and that Oswald bought popcorn from him at about the time that Tippit was shot.

Jack Davis confirmed that Oswald was in the theater at about that time and that he repeatedly changed his seat, each time sitting next to a different person.






No witness has ever been produced who saw Oswald enter the viewing area at a time after the alleged Oswald is alleged to have run into the cinema.

Johnnie Brewer….end of.


That is not true.


I suggest you read his statement.




When he was arrested the gun he was carrying was scientifically identified as the gun that killed Tippit to the exclusion of every other gun in the world.


That is disputed and the words to the exclusion of every other gun in the world are as credible as Anderson's merely stating a definitely ascertained fact.

Meaningless waffle.

Are you denying that it is disputed? (PI1)




In particular, two types of ammunition were removed from Tippit's body and the chain of custody of the bullets, which would have been required in order to prove anything about them, was absent.

Untrue. A different make of bullet means nothing. The bullets were fired from the revolver that Oswald had on him when arrested.

You have made no comment about the chain of custody of the bullets.





As another member has already pointed out, Oswald's pistol was not fit for purpose.

Invention.

Are you saying that someone made up the fact that it had a faulty firing pin?





I would also point out that the overwhelming majority of the eyewitnesses to the Tippit shooting described a suspect who, in terms of his appearance, could not have been Oswald.

Invention.


(1) Helen Markham said the murderer was short and stocky and had bushy hair. Oswald did not fit that description at all.

(2) Jack Tatum said Tippit's killer wore a light zippered jacket. Oswald was not wearing a jacket and the discarded one allegedly worn by him was brown.

(3) Domingo Benavides said the assassin had curly hair, which needed cutting, and a ruddy complexion. Oswald had neither curly hair nor a ruddy complexion and anyone looking at photos of him taken at that time can see that he did not need a haircut.

(4) Virginia Davis said that the murderer 'didn't look like he was over 20' and 'had on a light-brown-tan jacket'. Oswald was 24, but because of his receding hair looked older and certainly looked 'over 20'. Oswald was not wearing a jacket and did not own a light-brown jacket.

(5) William Scoggins testified that the assassin was wearing a darkish-brown jacket. Oswald was not wearing a jacket and did not own a brown jacket.

(6) Ted Callaway testified that the killer was wearing a light-brown tan jacket. Oswald was not wearing a jacket and did not own a brown jacket. Calloway made a prejudiced statement about the way Oswald was dressed when he identified him: 'He had the same trousers and shirt, but he didn't have his jacket on. He had ditched his jacket.' A more reasonable explanation is that he was someone else or even that he had taken it off at the police station.

(7) Sam Guinyard testified that the murderer wore a light grey jacket. Oswald was not wearing a jacket and the discarded one allegedly worn by him was brown.

(8) Warren Reynolds Dallas Police Patrolman Roy W. Walker radioed in a description of the shooter: 'He’s a white male, about 30 ... 5 ft 8 ins; black wavy hair, slender, wearing a white jacket, white shirt and dark slacks.' Walker revealed in an interview on April 2, 1983 that the person who gave him the description at the Tippit shooting scene was Warren Reynolds. Oswald was 24, 5 ft 11 ins, did not have wavy hair, and did not wear or even own a white jacket.

(9) William Smith testified that the assassin had dark hair whereas when he saw Oswald on television, he appeared to have much lighter coloured hair. He testified that Oswald wore 'a sport coat of some kind' but when shown 'a grey, zippered jacket' agreed that that was what the assassin had worn. Oswald was not wearing a sport coat nor a jacket and the one that had been discarded was not grey, but brown.

(10) B.M. Patterson described the murderer as 'white' and 'aged about 30' and that was all.



Is that your idea of invention?