5 comments about Mortal Error: The Shot That Killed JFK.

1. It's funny how people try to figure things out sometimes and assume wrongly that a "plot," like in a work of fiction, is in operation and there'll be a conclusion. They never assume that things just "dork-up."
   
   The Kennedy Assassination had two major "dork-ups" with a possiblity of a third. Given the magnitude of the event this is hardly surprising. Oswald was supposed to have died early on and the last shot, as this book outlines, may have been fired mistakenly by a Secret Service agent. The third dork-up may have been that the last shot fired by an honest-to-gosh assassin may not have been fatal and then we might have seen a triangulated shot from elsewhere (and that would have been very obvious on the Zapruder film). Better proof of a conspiracy would have existed.
   
   One can imagine the panic in Dealy Plaza among the hit team when this shot came out of nowhere. Thoughts of a frame-up might have run through their heads and their response may not have been rational. Ditto for the backers. Sad that we'll probably never know the inside story.
   
   This is a great book and might well be one of the real standouts in the analysis of the entire event. If nothing else, the author squares up a few problems with the Warren Commission evidence. A must read.



2. Secret Service agent George W. Hickey, jr. did not and could not have accidentally shot JFK from the follow-up car--among other reasons, the Bronson film and the numerous eyewitnesses debunk this notion. That said, this book is very worthwhile for balistically proving that LHO did not fire the fatal shot. I spoke to and corresponded with the late Howard Donahue, the true author of this book (Bonar Menninger was merely the writer, so to speak). Interesting are the passing comments by many of the agents I also spoke to who debunk his theory of Hickey shooting JFK: Sam Kinney, Jerry Behn, Floyd Boring, James Rowley, Richard Johnsen, and Win Lawson.
   Vince Palamara-JFK/ Secret Service expert (History Channel, author of two books, in over 30 other author's books, etc.)
   Pittsburgh, PA
   BEST JFK ASSASSINATION BOOK: ULTIMATE SACRIFICE
   BEST JFK SECRET SERVICE BOOK: SURVIVOR'S GUILT BY YOURS TRULY :)



3. The theory put forth in the book "Mortal Error" -- a kooky-as-all-get-out hunk of nonsense that has Secret Service Agent George W. Hickey Jr. accidentally firing the fatal gunshot into President John F. Kennedy's head in the midst of an assassination attempt being carried out by Lee Harvey Oswald in Dallas' Dealey Plaza on November 22, 1963 -- is a thoroughly preposterous and untenable theory, and there are several reasons why.
   
   To begin with, the very idea that Agent Hickey would have actually had the extreme misfortune of being able to "find" JFK's head just perfectly via his one "accidental shot" that was discharged from his AR-15 rifle (and miss everything else and everybody else, miraculously, in between himself and JFK) is just way too far-fetched a notion for anyone to seriously consider as fact.
   
   Giving credence to such a crazy theory would mean literally ignoring so many common-sense things (and ignoring so much evidence and witnesses), it's pathetic. Such as: You'd have to believe that Hickey just kept his mouth shut about the "accident" with his AR-15 rifle. And you'd have to believe that David Powers, a friend and personal aide of JFK's, who was sitting in the very same car as Agent Hickey, had somehow not even noticed this rifle blast going off just inches behind where he was seated (or you'll have to believe that Powers was "in" on the "cover-up" which would have followed, which is nonsense of the first order; Powers would be the very last person I'd suspect of covering up anything with respect to JFK's death).
   
   If Hickey had truly fired that fatal shot, you'd also have to swallow that every one of the many other SS agents in that follow-up car in the motorcade either ALL didn't hear the loud rifle shot from right inside their own vehicle...or that all of these agents lied later on when none of them corroborated such a shot from Hickey's weapon. Logical? Hardly.
   
   Plus: No witness that I am aware of claimed to have heard a shot being fired from around the area of "Queen Mary" (the SS code name for the Secret Service follow-up car), which is yet another annoying fly in this theory's ointment.
   
   And the biggie -- If a Hickey shot killed the President, then a logical and reasonable explanation needs to be put forth to explain away the two large bullet fragments that were conclusively proven to have been fired from Lee Harvey Oswald's very own Carcano rifle that were found in the front-seat area of the Presidential limousine. And this book does not contain such a logical answer to that critical flaw within such a "Hickey Did It" theory.
   
   Oswald fired three shots from the southeast corner window of the 6th Floor of his workplace (the Texas School Book Depository). The evidence supporting this fact is overwhelming. And it's obvious that his second shot (aka the "Single-Bullet Theory" shot) didn't produce the badly-damaged bullet fragments that were discovered on 11/22/63 in the limo's front seat. And, IMO, Oswald's first (missed) shot could not have caused the limo fragments either.
   
   If a missed shot, moving at approx. 2,000fps had struck the limo's windshield and/or chrome strip (which were slightly damaged during the shooting), that bullet would almost certainly have penetrated the glass and/or chrome area of the car. Such a full-velocity shot would not have simply dented the chrome, broken up badly, and then scraped the windshield. The FBI's Robert Frazier (who did extensive work for the Warren Commission after the assassination) testified to this, in fact.
   
   That leaves only the "head shot" to account for the front-seat bullet fragments. Oswald's third and fatal shot struck President Kennedy's head, causing the now-severely-slowed-down bullet fragments coming from JFK's head wound to continue to move forward, where the two fragments each struck one of the ultimately-damaged areas at the front of the car (windshield and chrome).
   
   Another thing that debunks the Hickey theory is the fact that out of the many still photographs and films taken in Dealey Plaza that Friday in '63, not one of them corroborates the theory put forth in this book. There's not a photo in existence that shows Agent Hickey with a rifle in his hands while riding through Dealey Plaza.
   
   Another of "Mortal's" errors is the notion that JFK uttered the words "I'm hit" just after the first shot (from Oswald's gun), which the author claims hit the pavement near the limo and sent some concrete fragments flying into the car, striking JFK.
   
   Now, prior to swallowing the above scenario which has President Kennedy actually speaking before the fatal shot hit him, I'd advise reading the official Warren Commission testimony of the two women who were also riding in that limousine with the President (Jacqueline Kennedy and Nellie Connally). Their testimony leaves no doubt about whether any audible words came out of JFK's mouth throughout the entire shooting timeline:
   
   MR. SPECTER -- "Did President Kennedy say anything at all after the shooting?"
   NELLIE CONNALLY -- "He did not say anything."
   
   JACKIE KENNEDY -- "And my husband never made any sound."
   
   MR. RANKIN -- "Do you recall anyone saying anything else during the time of the shooting?"
   JACKIE KENNEDY -- "No; there weren't any words. There was just Governor Connally's."
   
   
   There is also the official statement that was made by (and signed by) SS Agent George Hickey on 11/22/63, which says this:
   
   "At the end of the last report {gunshot} I reached to the bottom of the car and picked up the AR-15 rifle, cocked and loaded it, and turned to the rear. At this point the cars were passing under the overpass and as a result we had left the scene of the shooting. I kept the AR-15 rifle ready as we proceeded at a high rate of speed to the hospital."
   
   So, Hickey says in that original signed report/statement that he didn't even TOUCH his AR-15 rifle until AFTER the last gunshot had already been fired in Dealey Plaza.
   
   Agent Hickey's complete "Original Report" can be found here:
   
   http://jfkassassination.net/russ/m_j_russ/Sa-hicke.htm
   
   In order to believe that the contents of this book are accurate, the reader must necessarily believe that the above-referenced Report signed by George Hickey Jr. of the United States Secret Service is nothing but a pack of lies.
   
   ----------------
   
   "Mortal Error" is just one more volume in the ever-expanding and bulging library of JFK assassination books. And it's also one more book, among many others, that can be filed in the category reserved for "Groundless And Baseless Theories Re. The Kennedy Assassination". In short, "Mortal Error" is nothing but a "Monumental Error" itself.



4. This was an enjoyable read because it stays away from the conspiracy theories and concentrates on the physical evidence
   
   The guy behind the book was one of the expert shooters that recreated the famous 3 shots (the physical evidence suggests 3 shots were not fired from the repository). He later became a gun smith. The book is full of compelling information using mainly the physical evidence.
   
   The explanation of the head shot in particular is illuminating. The behaviour of the bullet that hit Kennedy in the head gives us lots of information which most books and movies never mention: It had to be a shot from the back as it's the front right side of his head that blows outwards. Surprisingly I've never seen a computer animation of the head shot (wonder why?)... and that's the hardest one to explain.
   
   The explanation of the Conelly shot (the so called magic bullet) is very good. However the diagram that goes with it confuses rather than illuminates. A better diagram would make this easier to understand:
   
   Recent computer animations correctly locate all the parties in 3 dimesnions and show the path of the bullet clearly: There was no magic bullet... it's just that Connelly's seat was lower and further in (a very unusual and perhaps uncomfortable placement). This is one of the few books that correctly describes this. A good photo of the car shows you the same thing (such a photo is not in the book). Most people can visualise this very poorly even if they are told about it... so it continues to be a popular source of arguments.
   
   There are many places in the book where better diagrams or photo's would have helped make the information easier to understand.
   
   If you want a book that can be cited to resolve many arguments then this qualifies.
   
   What is a bit disappointing is that the physical evidence from the Conelly bullet appears not have been fully tracked down.
   
   This book was withdrawn from sale after Hickey (the secret service agent accused of shooting JFK accidently with his AR-15) sued and won an out of court settlement.
   
   After the case the author was eventually presented with photographic evidence that changed his mind about Hickey... but many of the ballistic questions he raised remain unanswered.
   
   This is the kind of book that will make you think back to it time and time again over the years.
   
   :-)
   PS. A book by a coroner should get to the heart of much of the physical evidence... but so far I haven't seen such a definitive book (or video). Let me know if you find one!



5. Upon finishing this book, I realized that I no longer had to be afraid that a President that I held in such high regard was murdered by a group, but by a single man and a mortal error. I am truly grateful for this book.

2 comments about Remarkable Stories of the Lincoln Assassination.

1. Few events in American history have sparked as much controversy as presidential assassinations. As a papermaker, the industry I work in has been blessed by the dizzying array of books and magazine articles written on the killings of John F. Kennedy and Abraham Lincoln, two events that stunned their generations and created firestorms of opinions and agendas. The CIA. The Mafia. The U.S. government. Cuba. The Illuminati. The Confederate States of America. The U.S. Secretary of War. The Pope. All have been blamed in some fashion for one (or both) of these events.
   
   While some of the public has been fascinated by theories and speculations, Gettysburg Licensed Battlefield Guide Michael Kanazawich has focused his energies and studies on finding and communicating some of the more obscure vignettes and remarkable true stories from the assassination of the 16th President. You won't find long accounts of Edwin Stanton's alleged betrayal of his commander-in-chief, or of Jeff Davis's secret plot to take care of his rival and counterpart. Instead, this new book offers a diverse collection of short accounts and stories that are perfect for light reading.
   
   Published by Colecraft Industries, a botique publisher based in Ortanna, PA not far from the Gettysburg Battlefield, Remarkable Stories of the Lincoln Assassination continues Colecraft's recent successful series of books with snippets of interesting information arranged in chronological order covering historical events (Gettysburg, Antietam, and now the Booth / Lincoln story).
   
   The author has assembled an interesting array of stories, which are well written and understandable. Some of well known to the general public, but some would only be known to the hard-core Lincoln historian and enthusiast. Kanazawich in short bursts gives a rather complete general overview of the sequence of events from the early stages of the conspiracy through the actual attacks on Lincoln and others down through the capture of the plotters, the trial and the executions. He then offers some useful anecdotes that deal with the aftermath of the tragedy, one that plunged the country in widespread mourning.
   
   Here are example of the snippets and stories that capture the emotions of the unfolding events:
   
   "An inhumane remark was made to [conspirator] Mary Surratt as she was being prepared for her execution. As her arms were being bound she remarked, 'It hurts.' 'Well,' was the consoling reply, 'It won't hurt long.'"
   
   "In 1876 ghouls did plan on stealing Lincoln's remains. Their reason for stealing Lincoln's corpse, however, had nothing to do with the needs of medical schools [in that day, corpses were quite valuable for scientific research and medical training]. A counterfeiter by the name of 'Big Jim' Kneally wanted to steal Lincoln's body and use it to negotiate a trade for his master engraver, who was in prison at the time. To ensure success, Kneally added 'the boss body snatcher of Chicago,' Lewis Swegles, to his team of grave robbers. They chose Election Day to steal Lincoln's remains. With everyone in town awaiting election results, there was a good chance the cemetery would be empty."
   
   To see what happened to Kneally and his morbid assortment of body snatchers, you have to pick up a copy of the new book... it's well worth a read and is a good deal at $9.95.



2. The assassination of Abraham Lincoln was a traumatizing event to his legions of supporters, a bitter triumph for his many detractors, opened up the southern states to a repressive 'Reconstruction Era' that would have an adverse impact which would last for generations, and became a part of the transformation of an American president into an American legend. While it is commonly known that it was John Wilkes Booth who shot Abraham Lincoln at Ford's Theater while watching a production of 'Our American Cousin', there are a great many minor stories associated with this tragic event that are obscure and relatively unknown to the general public. Michael Kanazawich (a Licensed Battlefield Guide at the Gettysburg National Military Park) has compiled several of these ancillary stories together in his 102-page compendium of "Remarkable Stories Of The Lincoln Assassination". Readers will learn of a gypsy who forecast a terrible end to the life of John Wilkes Booth; of an individual who claimed to by John Wilkes Booth and was mummified and put on display at carnivals; a young boy's eye-witness account of the hanging of Lincoln conspirators. Readers will learn about the conspirators Mary Surratt, Edman Spangler, Dr. Mudd, George and John Atzerod; and Lewis Payne. Accounts of the trial, the day of execution, and the aftermath of the assassination are also presented. Enhanced with anecdotes and endnotes, "Remarkable Stories Of The Lincoln Assassination" is a seminal work that would be appropriate for personal, historical society, and academic library American History reference collections in general, and Lincoln Studies supplemental reading lists in particular.

No comments about COUNTDOWN TO VALKYRIE: THE JULY PLOT TO ASSASSINATE HITLER.

No comments about Encyclopedia of Assassinations (Facts on File Library of World History).

3 comments about Conspiracy: The Plot to Destroy the Kennedys.

1. A sample of Smith's errors:
   
   *He names Robert McNamara's successor as Secretary of Defense as `Clark Gifford' (twice) - (this is not a misprint as the name is placed in the index).McNamara's successor was, of course, Clark CLIFFORD.
   
   *Kathleen Kennedy did not marry in Chelsea, Massachusetts, as Smith claims, but in Chelsea Registery Office in LONDON.
   
   *Smith claims Ethel Kennedy's sister-in-law, Pat Skakel, choked to death at a celebration for RFK's California victory in June 1968 - in fact she died on May 19, 1967.
   
   *Smith states that Sirhan bought his De Soto car a few days before the assassination - incorrect! Sirhan was in possession of the vehicle when he worked at a Corona ranch in 1966.
   
   *Smith implies that the $400 found on Sirhan when he was arrested was `suspicious'. But he fails to inform his readers that Sirhan came into quite a lot of money through an insurance settlement for an injury he received whilst training as a jockey.
   
   Hopefully, Smith will now see his accusations of incompetence against the LAPD and Government investigators in a different light now that his own mistakes have been exposed.
   His publisher presents Smith as one of the world's `leading experts on the JFK and RFK assassinations' - heady claims considering the above errors and the fact that Smith said (In `The Men Who Killed Marilyn') that RFK won the 1968 Democratic nomination for the presidency! Heaven save us from books written by authors with only a `smattering' of knowledge about the assassinations!
   It is quite evident that Citadel Press no longer employs `fact-checkers', otherwise this book would never have seen the light of day.



2. I thought that the sections on RFK and JFK would be a good read for the novice reader. There is little new evidence, but Smith covers the main issues in a readable way, without the difficulty of proving each assertion (as they have been proven by previous authors).
   
   However, the chapters covering Ted Kennedy/Chappaquiddick were disjointed at best. Smith offers no theory of what happened to Mary Jo, and it is difficult to understand the movements of all the players.
   
   The section on Tippit's murder was interesting, but it is difficult to understand that "they" would send someone unreliable to drive Oswald to the airport, but at the same time have a gunman ready to kill Tippit if he didnt follow the script. Why not find a reliable driver instead?
   
   Those two portions of the book make me suspect of the Marilyn Monroe information. I am not as familiar with the circumstances of her death, and Smith's telling is not convincing.
   
   My conclusion is that there is too much speculation.



3. President Kennedy murdered. Ted Kennedy in serious plane crash that killed others an almost killed him. Robert Kennedy murdered. Ted Kennedy's presidential ambitions destroyed when a dead woman is found in his car. President Kennedy and Attorney General Robert Kennedy almost destroyed when carefully planned events make it look like they were involved. Coincidence? Uh, no. Kennedy curse? Uh, no. Ruthless CIA who hate the Kennedy's peace-mongering ways? Yeah. Peace doesn't make Brown and Root rich. So the peace loving Kennedy men have been systematically slaughtered. And at least two women have been murdered in attempts to frame them.
   
   This book describes how the CIA has hunted and destroyed the Kennedy men for years, how they took over the US gov't in the bloody 1963 coup and we never got it back.
   
   One of the few books to show patterns and context and draw the obvious logical conclusions.
   
   Oh, and look at the review history of some people who slam this book, and an agenda becomes obvious. This book is highly recommended to anyone who is partial to the truth.

5 comments about Cally's War (Posleen War Series #4).

1. you may think you need to read book 5 of the Posleen series to see how the horrible alien invaders are defeated and humans rise from the ashes. But you won't find out in this book. The posleen are defeated, dead, gone, defunct, destroyed and absent. Which makes this book about a sex mad assasin fairly pointless. You don't learn anything about plots being developed in previous books. Just some ho-hum sex and nail polish. One posleen is killed during the novel, plenty of humans (by humans). Why? Dunno, who cares? Not me, I'll give mine to the local library so as few people as possible need to waste money on this explotation rip off book.



2. I've been reading science fiction and fantasy for over 50 years now and although I have read and very much liked most of what Ringo has written, this book contained so much violence that it turned me off the book. Once I start a book I very rarely stop reading and drop the book; this was one of the few I dropped. Had the plot been more interesting and the characters been better developed perhaps I would have stayed the course but, they weren't and I didn't.



3. I really enjoyed the Posleen Series and was looking forward to reading more. I assumed this book was an epilouge of sorts. I was wrong.
   
   It was a dreary story of Cally; 50 or so years in the future. The usual charcters were accounted for but it seemed all so stupid. This book has the feel of some dreadful romance novel. Emabrassing sex scenes, horny protagonist, Fabio look alike, well, there were no Fabio clones, however, I have no idea who the target market for this book is!!!
   
   I love Ringo's military fiction; it's the top of the genre. I hope he leaves the romance genre to the Barbara Cartlands of the world.



4. very poor book. Whatever the author had to say, was said in the first two books!!



5. Cally reminds me a great deal of Honor Harrington made famous by David Weber in a prominent series she is a Mary Sue; albeit a very likeable Mary Sue.
   
   Cally just didn't do it for me although I did like the setting of the story. We get to see what the earth was like after the invasion which can be summed up in two words "dramatically underpopulated"
   
   As a conscience much of the earth seems to be reduced to a frontier style of existence with 21st century technology. The most promising part of the story is the interaction between the human characters and those alien forces who are just as tired of being pawns in someone else's game. I think this plot vain has great potential and would like to see more of it.

1 comments about Manhunt: The 12-Day Chase to Catch Lincoln's Kill.

1. James Swanson's "Manhunt:The 12-Day Chase to Catch Lincoln's Killer" is a captivating book. It's so spellbinding that it seemed like the shortest 400 page book I'd ever read. I'll read more books by James Swanson.

5 comments about In the Eye of History: Disclosures in the JFK Assassination Medical Evidence.

1. Highly recommended book! Read this and then spend some time on the "History Matters" website to get an idea of the enormity of the JFK assassination cover-up.
   
   We're not only talking about subversion of the medical evidence but also the backgrounds of Oswald & Ruby, Dealey eyewitness testimony, the failures of not only the Warren Commission but the HSCA and the ARRB ... and the list goes on ... for nearly a HALF CENTURY now.
   
   Which is too-often overlooked by folks who want to direct the discussion towards the Mob, supposed JFK Cuban plots, Secret Service agents firing from the front seat, and whatnot.
   
   Oliver Stone wondered who had the power to orchestrate such a massive cover-up ... who had to most to gain by it?
   
   Makes sense.



2. As a firm believer in Lee Harvey Oswald's sole guilt in the assassination of President John F. Kennedy in November 1963, I cannot deny that I'm puzzled and concerned by the number of witnesses (mostly Parkland Hospital witnesses) who have gone on record to say they saw a gaping hole in the back of President Kennedy's head that day back in '63.
   
   But I'm also curious as to HOW so many people at Parkland Hospital in Dallas were of this singular opinion when JFK was in a prone (supine) position, flat on his back, the entire time he was in the emergency room? It seems to me as though Kennedy would have been literally lying on the wound that so many people said was in the very back part of his head. Very strange.
   
   "In The Eye Of History" paints a picture of a seemingly-undeniable multi-shooter conspiracy with respect to John Kennedy's death. But in order to believe the accounts written in this volume, the reader must ALSO disbelieve and completely disregard an enormous amount of the official, documented evidence in the JFK murder case (and at the same time assume that a large number of people, within various organizations, told numerous lies with respect to the facts surrounding Kennedy's death and also faked evidence to support a Lone-Assassin conclusion).
   
   I ask -- Is that type of conspiratorial belief any MORE logical than the LNers who disbelieve the witnesses who support a large wound in the back of JFK's head?
   
   If JFK had a massive hole in the back of his head at Parkland and at Bethesda Medical Center on the night he was autopsied, then we must totally trash the official autopsy report (signed by all three primary doctors who performed that post-mortem exam on the President). In such a conspiracy-favoring scenario, all three of those doctors MUST be scheming, low-life liars, who didn't hesitate to sign off on the most important document any of them would ever sign, even though they had to know the report was nothing but a pack of lies.
   
   If that large hole was at the back of JFK's head, we've also got to swallow the notion that a large amount of the ballistics evidence in the case is dead wrong and was deliberately falsified by an unknown number of people who served the "cover-up" very well. Or, short of believing that theory, we'd have to believe that a "magical" thing occurred just after JFK was shot from the front, and that all of those frontal-shot bullets (however many there might have been that struck President Kennedy) just vanished on their own without the aid of any conspirators' handiwork.
   
   In order to believe in a JFK conspiracy, we'd probably also have to believe that every member of the Warren Commission panel was up to no good, with all of these guys rigging the Warren Report to paint Lee Oswald as a sole assassin (and the lone killer of Dallas city policeman J.D. Tippit as well).
   
   And in such a "conspiracy mindset", it would also almost assuredly mean that many, many members of the House Select Committee On Assassinations in the late 1970s were also no-good, lying SOBs too -- because that committee came to the same basic conclusion that the Warren boys did in 1964, when it came down to the question of: "How Many Bullets Struck The Victims; And Who Fired Those Shots?" .... With the answers being: only 2 shots hit any of the victims in the President's limousine; both of those bullets came from behind the vehicle; and Lee Harvey Oswald fired those shots from the Texas School Book Depository Building.
   
   Does "In The Eye Of History", or any conspiracy volume, really trump the hard, physical evidence in the JFK case? Because if it truly does, then a whole bunch of OTHER STUFF sure worked out in perfect apple-pie order for these unidentified conspirators who mapped out that amazing multi-shooter plot to kill the President.
   
   Did the "real assassins" really get THAT LUCKY with respect to all of the physical evidence (i.e., guns, bullets, shells, and fingerprints), which ALL adds up to ONLY Lee Harvey Oswald's guilt in the murders of Jack Kennedy and J.D. Tippit?
   
   Is it even remotely possible that a group of plotters could have pre-arranged such a perfect "It Was Only Oswald" plot (save for those "BOH" wound witnesses), while at the same time utilizing multiple gunmen hidden throughout Dealey Plaza?
   
   The number of people who needed to be "in" on such a massive after-the-shooting cover-up operation must have been staggering. .... From the Dallas Police, to the FBI, to the Secret Service, to the Dallas doctors who attended both JFK and wounded Texas Governor John Connally (doctors who must have hidden some of the bullets from view, surely!), to the scumbags at Bethesda doing the botched autopsy and then faking the official autopsy report (a report which states, unequivocally, that Kennedy was shot twice from behind....no mention of any frontal shots at all striking the President). .....
   
   "It is our opinion that the deceased died as a result of two perforating gunshot wounds inflicted by high-velocity projectiles fired by a person or persons unknown. The projectiles were fired from a point behind and somewhat above the level of the deceased." -- From Page 6 of John F. Kennedy's Official "Pathological Examination (Autopsy) Report"
   
   People who wish to believe that President Kennedy received the fatal blow to his head as a result of a gunshot from the Grassy Knoll in Dealey Plaza should ask themselves a thought-provoking question regarding the above paragraph I just provided from the 1963 autopsy report.
   
   That question being ----
   
   Is it reasonable to believe that all three of those autopsy physicians would have possessed a desire to attach their signatures to an incredibly-important document like the official autopsy report of the President of the United States, all the while knowing full well that the conclusions they reached within that document they had just signed were complete, outright lies? Is that truly a "logical" thing to believe with respect to Drs. Humes, Finck, and Boswell?
   
   What a perfect all-inclusive "Let's Frame Oswald" plot it must have been (per many conspiracists) -- to have been able to wangle signatures out of ALL THREE of those autopsy doctors....even though the doctors KNOW what they're signing isn't true at all; and they know without question that that "Report" they've signed-off on would probably be more at home on a roller in their bathrooms!
   
   And then (as if signing and fully endorsing an obviously-inaccurate autopsy report isn't bad enough) -- All of these doctors then must have been forced to follow up their initial falsification of the autopsy report by lying about the true nature of JFK's wounds whenever they spoke of the matter to anyone .... for years and years on end, including during their sworn testimony in front of the WC, the HSCA, and the ARRB. An amazing and comprehensive decades-long cover-up that is still continuing to this day evidently.
   
   And that's precisely one of the biggest reasons to know why such a large-scale JFK conspiracy never could have possibly happened (or have been covered-up so beautifully) in the grandiose fashion that many CTers champion. Because only Houdini could have masterminded such sleight-of-hand magic and such indomitable powers of unrelenting influence and domination over so many different people (within various official and unofficial capacities) in 1963, and for all eternity thereafter.
   
   Back to reality now.......
   
   The documented evidence that exists surrounding the 1963 murder of President John F. Kennedy does NOT indicate "conspiracy". Not even close. Let's have a quick look:
   
   1.) Three bullet shells are discovered in the Book Depository's "Sniper's Nest" by police (shells that positively came from the rifle of Lee Harvey Oswald).
   
   2.) A bullet ("Commission Exhibit 399") is found in Parkland Hospital; and CE399 is a bullet which just happened to also come from the rifle of Lee H. Oswald.
   
   3.) Two large bullet fragments (also from Oswald's rifle "to the exclusion") are found inside the very vehicle which was being occupied by John F. Kennedy when he was killed by rifle fire on the afternoon of 11/22/63.
   
   4.) Lee Harvey Oswald's fingerprints are all over the "Sniper's Nest" area, including his prints on a paper bag THAT HAD NO LEGITIMATE AND LOGICAL REASON FOR BEING THERE IN THE COURSE OF NORMAL DAY-TO-DAY BOOK DEPOSITORY OPERATIONS. (A very important point, IMO.)
   
   5.) Eyewitnesses who place Lee Oswald (or someone who looked remarkably similar to him) in the Sniper's Nest at the exact moment JFK was being assassinated via rifle fire (or just seconds prior to the murder).
   
   6.) Oswald's actions after leaving his workplace on 11/22/63; e.g.:
   
   6a.) Oswald leaves work three minutes after the American President is gunned down right in front of his place of employment (and lies about why he did so, with his excuse of "I figured there would be no more work today" being one that won't make the grade, even via "CT" standards -- because of WHEN he actually left -- 12:33 PM; there is no way, at that time, he could have KNOWN he could just leave without getting permission first from one of his bosses, Bill Shelley or Roy Truly; which is permission he never obtained).
   
   6b.) Oswald rushes into his roominghouse on North Beckley Avenue, grabs a jacket and a revolver, and quickly leaves.
   
   6c.) Oswald shoots and kills police officer J.D. Tippit with a handgun at approximately 1:14 PM on Tenth Street.
   
   6d.) Oswald is seen acting and looking "funny" (suspicious) by shoe-store employee Johnny C. Brewer just minutes after the Tippit slaying.
   
   6e.) Oswald punches in the face and attempts to kill another of Dallas' finest within the Texas Theater.
   
   6f.) Oswald's comments made in the theater: "This is it!" and/or "It's all over now!" ... Now, can some CTer come up with a good and reasonable "He's Innocent Of Killing Anyone" explanation for Oswald having said those two phrases -- or even just one of them -- just as the police approach him in the theater on November 22nd? Good luck trying, because Oswald's "It's all over now!" has "consciousness of guilt" stamped all over it.
   
   7.) Oswald's continual lies to the police and to the American people VIA LIVE TELEVISION after his arrest .... e.g., "I didn't shoot anyone" and "They've taken me in because of the fact I lived in the Soviet Union; I'm just a patsy!", among gobs of other provable falsehoods spouted by LHO.
   
   8.) And let's not forget this not-so-trivial little item --- Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano rifle (proven to have been used to kill JFK without a shred of a doubt) is found on the Depository's sixth floor at 1:22 PM on November 22nd -- the very same rifle that just happened to turn up missing in Ruth Paine's garage that very same day.
   
   And what do conspiracy theorists have in their "Physical Evidence Of A Conspiracy/Multiple Shooters" basket? (Stuff like "guns", "bullets", "shell casings", "clothing fibers", and/or "eyewitnesses who positively identified a specific human being to the exclusion of all other humans as being the killer of both JFK and Officer Tippit"? How much of that kind of stuff is on the CT table to date?)
   
   Answer: None. Not a scrap. And there never has been.
   
   The above batch of "single-assassin evidence" (with all of this evidence spelling out "Oswald is a murdering and lying President-killing, cop-killing piece of filth") means little to hardline CTers, I know. But, in reality, that's of little consequence, and always has been. Because what theorists WANT to believe regarding this evidence is meaningless -- because, like it or not, THAT'S the physical evidence CTers must deal with (and somehow squirm their way out of in order to paint Oswald as an innocent "Patsy" on 11/22/1963 AD).
   
   And the "Hole-In-The-Back-Of-The-Head" witnesses do not come close to trumping all of the above evidence. They can't. No matter how many there are. Because there's too much OTHER STUFF on the "LN/LHO" table that is telling us that those witnesses cannot possibly be correct regarding the precise location of President Kennedy's head wound; and too many OTHER PEOPLE who would all have to be included in the category of "co-conspirators" in order for the back of JFK's head to be missing -- way too many to believe such a plot could have possibly been successful.
   
   But, thankfully, there are people like Dale Myers, Larry Sturdivan, and Vincent Bugliosi around who DO still put some value on the physical evidence in the JFK and J.D. Tippit murder cases, instead of merely screaming "It MUST all have been faked (somehow)", which is nonsense of the first order, of course, when considering the totality and perfect "LN/LHO Cohesiveness" of such a huge basket of would-be "faked" evidence (in both the Kennedy and Tippit cases).
   
   Ignoring (or deeming as "all phony") the above batch of "One Assassin Named Oswald" evidence is about as silly an exercise as believing that some dumbbell plotters tried to frame a lone "patsy" by shooting up Dealey Plaza from every conceivable angle. THAT goofball plan should have everybody laughing out loud (even the CTers). But, remarkably, many conspiracy theorists have latched on to that "Patsy" theory and won't let go of it, despite its obvious implausibilities.
   
   -------
   
   Post-Scripts..............
   
   A highly-recommended anti-conspiracy website that "sets the record straight on the JFK assassination" is a site founded in 2003 by Kenneth A. Rahn, Ph.D., who is part of a small but well-informed group of Lone-Assassin believers. The website is known as "Nonconspiracists United".
   
   Here's the site address:
   http://karws.gso.uri.edu/Noncons/
   
   -------
   
   Let me now interject a few words straight from the always-logical mind of former Los Angeles prosecutor Vincent T. Bugliosi:
   
   "I am writing two volumes on the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. My conclusion is that I believe beyond ALL doubt that Lee Harvey Oswald killed Kennedy, and beyond all REASONABLE doubt that he acted alone." --V. Bugliosi
   
   -------
   
   "There was no plot, no conspiracy. JFK wasn't murdered by anti-Castro Cubans, the mob, or rogue CIA agents. There has not been one scintilla of proof tying the assassination to anyone but Oswald. There have been theories, but no evidence. Oswald had the motive, the opportunity, and the skill to kill President Kennedy." -- V. Bugliosi
   
   -------
   
   
   "The evidence will show that Oswald's rifle, to the exclusion of all other weapons, was determined by firearms experts to be the rifle that fired the two bullets that struck down President Kennedy." -- Mr. Bugliosi (via a portion of his Opening Statement to the jury during the 1986 televised Docu-Trial "On Trial: Lee Harvey Oswald")
   
   -------
   
   "Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone in the assassination of President Kennedy. The evidence is absolutely overwhelming that he carried out the tragic shooting all by himself. .... In fact, you could throw 80 percent of the evidence against him out the window and there would still be more than enough left to convince any reasonable person of his sole role in the crime." -- V. Bugliosi



3. I believe this book has great value as a JFK assassination investigation resource. But not for the reasons of others. That the memories of the witnesses, all seemingly well-intentioned, are so diverse, is indicative of the frailty of human memory. As a result, no isolated recollection can be held up as infallible and those quoting the 35-40 years after recollections of these witnesses as "proof" of anything are off the mark. What can be determined from reading these interviews, however, is that something wasn't right about the Bethesda autopsy. So much so that most everyone involved had questions about the eventual conclusions. Particularly enlightening, IMO, are the statements of Frank O'Neill, an FBI agent present at the the autopsy. O'Neill feels quite sure that Oswald acted alone, even though his personal recollections of the wounds substantially differs from the official interpretations, and would make a conclusion of conspiracy inevitable. His reluctance to accept the implications of his own memories is indicative of the mindset of much of the media, IMO. Charles Roberts of Newsweek, for example, witnessed the Secret Service cleaning up the limousine after the shooting, something never mentioned in any of their reports, yet wrote a book assuring the public that all was well and good with the Warren Report, which failed to investigate or mention the clean-up Roberts witnessed. Hide in plain sight.



4. Dr.Kemp Clark,Dr Mcclelland,Dr.Paul Peters,Dr.Charles Carrico,Dr.Macolm Perry,Dr.Gene Akin and Nurse Diana Bowron AL PLACED AND DESCRIBED JFK HEAD WOUND IN THE ''RIGHT OCCIPITAL REGION'' OF THE SKULL.THERE IS NO WAY THIS DOCTORS COULD HAVE BEEN MISTAKEN ABOUT WHAT THEY SAW THAT DAY.UNLESS THEY GOT TOGETHER AND DECIDED TO LIE!!DONT THINK SO!!THEY ALSO SAW THE THROAT WOUND IN THE ANTERIOR OF THE NECK!!JFK GOT SHOT FROM THE RIGHT FRONT!!THE BACK WOUND WAS SEVERAL INCHES BELOW THE COLLAR LINE TO THE RIGHT OF THE 3RD THORACIC VERTEBRA IT NEVER EXITED HIS BODY OR HIS NECK!!TO LEARN MORE I HIGHLY RECOMMEND THIS BOOK!!



5. I had to ask myself, if I disagree with the conclusions of an author, does that make the book a bad book. The answer in this case in no. The book is an important contribution to this subject. Its an engaging read as well. It contains interviews with military personnel on duty at the JFK autopsy. I felt after reading the book again after a few years break that it poses some very interesting questions. Not for me that the body was altered to disguise wounds that meant conspiracy, but how is it possible that a few individuals who were there generally have a recollection that does not support the official Warren Commission conclusion. Well one thing that is apparent when reading the book, is that individual recollections of the same event can differ considerably. But is this sinister ? Personally I think not. But I can understand how one might reach the conclusion that "something was not right" about the autopsy. But what was not right ? In my humble opinion what was not right is that the autopsy was not conducted by the appropriate doctors and was not thorough enough. But this was the President and we should not be surprised by the flawed work given the circumstances. It is however very frustrating that we are left with questions regarding for example the exact location of the back wound and whether or not the bullet traversed the back exiting the throat - because the doctors failed to recognize that the throat wound was more than just a tracheotomy - it was a bullet wound as well.
   
   Most of the attendants in this book were very young at the time of the autopsy. They were interviewed in this book some approx 30 years after the event. Can we rely on their recollections I wonder ? Well I can certainly accept that an event like this would leave a firm impression on an individual, but I cannot be sure I can rely on any individual to recall everything accurately. And their lack of experience should be taken into consideration. So in a nutshell we cannot truly know what is accurate and what is not. But we certainly get an impression.
   
   A central issue of course is that of the head wound, its size and location. Was the exit in the rear of the head as so many doctors seem to state and do the photo's published in this book form the autopsy show what actually happened or are they faked ? Its important to realize that the same wound can be photographed at different times during the examination and appear to be a "different" wound. In this case we have variations in what was visible and what was not according to person and the time at which their observations were made. Some describe intact brain, some missing brain, some highly damaged brain. Make of it what you will. But there is witness testimony and there is witness testimony - they do not all carry the same weight. A case in point is that of Dr Robert Grossman one of the attending neurologist at Parkland in Dallas and the only man or woman present who spent the whole time adjacent to and looking at the head wound. He sates that it is in the side of the head, above the ear in a recent bbc radio interview. Not at the back of the head. No one is in a better position than he. Yes we hear some of the attending personnel at Bethesda describe a larger wound extending further back. Isn't it just possible that the wound did in fact become more avulsed as time passed, as the body was handled ? It seems to me that scalp and bone could easily have become loosened in transit and handling. And as the autopsy progressed the wound would change - depending on when you saw it would influence your picture. I am not taken at all by the argument that the wounds were altered as per David Liftons "Best Evidence" - of which this book in some ways is perhaps an extension - but I am intrigued by the interviews recorded here and it makes for a highly interesting read. A decent and honest if not misguided work and one for the collection.

5 comments about Official and Confidential: The Secret Life of J. Edgar Hoover.

1. Anthony Summers has written a masterpiece; no other way to put it. Well written and researched--the best book on HOOVER, bar none. Get this! Vince Palamara
   Secret Service expert (History Channel, author of 2 books, in over 32 other author's books, etc.)



2. It's incredible how some still think that J. Edgar Hoover was a great American. Maybe these people should read this book to see how he really was. Anthony Summers did a great job investigating the life of number one of the FBI. Although written in a kind of a tabloid style, it still gives us some shocking details of the life of this man.
   
   Thanks to his vast knowledge, Hoover blackmailed his way through American society. Because of his 'compromising documents' he was able to keep the members of Congress and the presidents quiet. The fact that Hoover told the people what they wanted to hear, made a hero out of him. If only they had known what we know now.
   
   Hoover was corrupt and received a lot of nice presents from his rich friends. The fact that Hoover hated homosexuals was all the more strange, because it was a well kept secret that his 'friend' Clyde Tolson was more than just a friend. The incompetence of the FBI was never questioned, because Hoover was able to lie his way through his career.
   
   Well written and interesting new facts.



3. This book is an expose' of J.Edgar Hoover and his actions as Director of the F.B.I.
   Mr. Summers covers Hoover's entire career and his rise to fame thanks in part to his personal PR man. He was definitely an oppurtunist and exaggerated his stories frequently. Thoughts expressed by his nieces were candid and of interest in that aspect.
   Hoover had far too much power and that becomes more obvious through the relationships he had with the Presidents he was supposed to serve. FDR made the regrettable decision to enhance Hoover's powers.
   That fateful decision adversely affected a lot of people including Charlie Chaplin and John F.Kennedy to name a few.
   Hoover was the most powerful figure during most of his tenure. He used that power to gather as much blackmail material as possible and he frequently used it. Often-times blackmail was used for his job security or, as in the case of the 1960 Democratic ticket, to force political decisions. His longevity was due in large part to fear. He wasn't trusted by most of the Presidents during his directorship.
   Anthony Summers wrote about other abuses by Hoover which includes the free vacations he took with Clyde Tolson,the backing by Organised Crime figures of his horse racing bets,the staggering amount of taxpayer money spent on Hoover's luxuries.
   There were a lot of pages dedicated to Hoover's relationship to many mafia figures. The Mob's blackmailing of Hoover was covered in detail also.
   This book is easy reading and covers J.Edgar Hoover from birth to death. There are some startling details of his abuse of power. A very good book overall!



4. A book like this succeeds or fails on its ability to organize endless and sometimes contradictory streams of information into a format that can be digested and appreciated by the reader.
   
   The Secret Life of J. Edgar Hoover succeeds admirably, leaving this reader horrified and shocked by the revelations about Hoover, who may have been the most powerful man in America.
   
   His closeted homosexuality and transvestism are certainly the most salacious revelations, but those charges aren't damning in and of themselves. What strikes the reader is his hypocrisy-- at the same time that he wages a war against sexual deviance, he is himself engaging in the very practices he is denouncing.
   
   As juicy as that bit of gossip may be, the revelations that really boil one's blood are far more serious. Hoover's complete and utter subversion of the justice system reads like a scornful account of a third world country's despotic king. Keeping files on public figures for the express purpose of blackmailing them is only one dirty deed.
   
   Hoover also mismanages the CIA's most basic missions, by both failing to correctly interpret a clear warning about Pearl Harbor, and by lowering the bar for acceptable spy techniques. Human rights go out the window, and even those who would argue that the ends justify the means would be hard pressed to identify what Hoover's ends are.
   
   The saddest thing about the book is that a noble person in Hoover's position could have had such an opportunity to create a respected and honorable force for good in this world. Instead, the CIA has become hated and feared-- not only by foreign enemies, but also by American citizens.
   
   Overall, the writing errs slightly on the side of long-windedness, but I didn't mind. There were enough details provided to back up the accusations beyond a reasonable doubt, and the eye-opening charges are enough to make us all a little less comfortable about whether such things could happen here in America.



5. Being a great fan of biographies, I thought this was going to be not just interesting but,hopefully, entertaining.
   Sadly I was disappointed on both counts. Yes, it's OK as a superficial guide to the subject, but it has all the faults of mediocre journalism - attention grabbing headlines, but little content. It is little more that a collection of chronological episodes in the life of Hoover, rather like a series of news cuttings arranged in date order. It never gets below skin level and you are left with a murky story of the FBI whose chief officer one one J. Edgar Hoover - and a pretty nasty one at that.
   I would say more if I could, but I'm afraid that's all I learnt from this mediocre book.

5 comments about Six Seconds in Dallas: A Micro-Study of the Kennedy Assassination.

1. This book belongs with a short list of excellent books published in the 1960's. These include Weisberg's "Whitewash" series, Lane's "Rush to Judgement", Sylvia Meagher's "Accessories After the Fact", James Hepburn's "Farewell America", and Leo Sauvage's "The Oswald Affair". This book broke new ground in that it was the first commercially published book to describe the actual assassination plot, and not merely take pot shots at the wretched Warren Commision Report.
   It has since been superceded, however, by the brilliant research group headed by Professor James Fetzer, who has edited three books concerning the JFK assassination: "Assassination Science", "Murder in Dealey Plaza", and his latest, "The Great Zapruder Film Hoax". These books should be ordered from Amazon before the government pulls them from circulation.



2. Pity it's out of print. It is a must-have for any serious researcher. Its theories are more than probable, much more than Fetzer's nutty theories of Zapruder film alteration.



3. With dozens upon dozens of far-fetched theories about the JFK assassination, this book above all others is the most sane, the most rational, and the most logical. Using eye- and ear-witness testimony, drawings made from stills of the Zapruder film (which may have been tampered with but is NOT a fabrication, puh-LEEZE, Mr. Fetzer!), and expert analysis, Josiah Thompson's SIX SECONDS IN DALLAS remains the best study of the assassination--and the best proof of a conspiracy--to have emerged from the 60s, or any other decade for that matter.
   
   Don't look for Cuban-exile/CIA/FBI/KGB/Vinnie-Goombatza-crime-family conspiracy theories here. This book is not interested in the whodunnit aspect of the case. It is solely interested in those moments--those six seconds--between the first and last shots that murdered President John F. Kennedy. And in his analysis of them, Josiah Thompson proves beyond a reasonable doubt that a second shooter, and probably a third, took part in the assassination.
   
   Sometimes, after reading some of the more disappointing books about the JFK assassination (and there are TONS of them), I shake my head and really wonder if anything beyond the Warren Commisssion's conclusions had really occurred. Then I pick up SIX SECONDS IN DALLAS and turn to any page. And there is no longer any doubt that a conspiracy murdered our president. It's a shame that this book is out of print. I hope that some of the publishers who have made a fortune out of the glut of conspiracy books--like Thunder's Mouth Press or Carroll & Graf--will pick up the rights to this great book and publish it for a new generation of JFK assassination researchers. That new generation will need it!



4. As an American who believes in his heart that President Kennedy was assassinated as the result of a conspiracy, it pains me to see so many half-baked and flat-out irresponsible studies of the assassination. These run the gamut from the ridiculous defenses of the Warren Report (Gerald Posner, in particular) to the most outlandish conspiracy books hawking absolutely ridiculous theories (James Fetzer's books claiming that the Zapruder film is a fake is the latest). Both the Warren Commission's defenders and the way-out conspiracy theorists do the search for the truth a great disservice. Both groups pick and choose whatever evidence suits their needs. Warren Commission apologists suspend the natural laws of forensics and physics and brand every anti-Commission witness as a nut and every conspiracy believer as a paranoid lunatic. The extreme conspiracy theorists see assassins in every photograph, including, they claim, James Milteer (a right wing activist of the day, Charles Harrelson, a professional hitman and the father of Cheers star Woody Harrelson and even Watergate figure Howard Hunt).
   
   Thankfully, in 1967, Josiah Thompson provided a study of the assassination which is, in my opinion, still the best book ever published about the assassination. Six Seconds in Dallas breaks down the evidence and, using a scientific approach to the investigation, shows conclusively that President Kennedy was fired upon by three assassins, not just Lee Harvey Oswald. Warren Commission proponents love to point to the fact that Governor John Connally defended the Warren Commission -- they just ignore the fact that the Governor testified that he was certain he was hit by a separate shot from the one that hit President Kennedy in the back. Using the Zapruder film, however, Thompson pinpoints the exact moment when Connally was shot, showing conclusively that he and the President were struck by separate shots. Using the FBI tests of Lee Harvey Oswald's rifle, he shows conclusively that Oswald could not have possibly shot Kennedy in the back, recycled the rifle and then shot Connally. Therefore there was another shooter.
   
   Thompson also analyzes the much studied Moorman polaroid photograph. This is the photo that allegedly shows an assassin dressed as a Dallas Police officer (Badgeman) firing on JFK. However, using the testimony of a witness, S.M. Holland who saw a puff of smoke come from the grassy knoll, Thompson concludes that the shot to President Kennedy's head was actually fired to the left of where Badgeman stood. Thompson asked Holland to stand where the smoke came from. Sure enough, when the photo is blown up, what looks like the top of a man's head appears at that exact spot -- a shape that does not appear in Thompson's re-creation of the photo.
   
   Those are just two of the investigative threads Thompson follows in Six Seconds in Dallas. No matter what part of the assassination he investigates, however, his conclusions come as the result of exhaustive investigation and scientific analysis. He even debunks some claims made by the more extreme conspiracy theorists, like the claim that a photo shows Oswald standing in the doorway of the Texas School Book Depository at the time of the shooting or that the Nix film shows an assassin firing from the top of a station wagon. Thompson does not make the wild claims of the irresponsible conspiracy books. He does not make a claim that he cannot back up with conclusive evidence. Had every book regarding the assassination been this thorough and responsible, Dan Rather, Peter Jennings, Arlen Specter, Gerald Posner and other defenders of the Warren Commission would have a much tougher time dimissing the conspiracy theorists.
   
   A friend of mine once asked me, "Why are we still talking about Kennedy's assassination? It was a long time ago." This made me livid. If there was other assassin(s) who participated in the murder of John F. Kennedy, they must be identified and brought to justice -- whether it takes 40, 50, 60, even 100 years. The American electoral process is sacred. It's flawed, it's antiquated in many ways, but it expresses the will of the people to choose the person who will lead the country. That a select few who hate the person elected could subvert the will of the people and assassinate the President should be offensive to every American. We, as Americans, have the responsibility to seek the truth and do so responsibly, no matter what skeletons the truth might shake loose. The Warren Commission's defenders continue to stick their heads in the sand. The far-out conspiracy theorists hurt the cause, exploiting, in many cases, the murder of President Kennedy for attention or monetary gain. Josiah Thompson does neither -- he seeks the truth and so should we all.



5. Josiah Thompson studied at Oxford, Copenhagen, and Yale. He was an Assistant Professor of Philosophy at Haverford College. He worked as a member of the 'LIFE' magazine team that investigated the JFK assassination using the photographs and movie films taken at that time. The purpose of this book is to use the available evidence to investigate the unsolved assassination. Critics of the Warren Report said it could not have happened that way (a lone gunman). This 1967 book uses the evidence to answer how it happened. Lawyer Vincent Salandria was the first to list the misrepresentations and contradictions in the Warren Report (p.viii).
   
   Chapter 2 notes the differences among witnesses as to the number, direction, and quality of the shots heard. [Years later a discovered recording would present objective evidence.] If two shots were "bunched" there were two shooters. Chapter 3 explains why the first shot hit JFK in the back (p.35). The Bethesda autopsy said this had a downward trajectory of 45-60 degrees downward (p.41). Chapter 4 explains why the second shot hit Governor Connally (p.67). Chapter 5 tells about the third and fourth shots that hit JFK (p.87). A piece of skull was found 10 to 15 feet to the left of the car's path (p.100). This suggests a shot from the right front of the car (p.101). A neurosurgeon said the head injury was a tangential wound (p.106). Note the difference between the head wound observed at Parkland (p.107). And that at Bethesda (p.111). It is as if two different bodies were observed!
   
   Who was that man with Secret Service credentials (p.125)? The bullet that struck Governor Connally likely came from the roof of the Dallas County Records Building (p.130). Two shots came from the School Book Depository (p.136). Pages 143-145 tell of the problems with the four shells found in the TBSD. There is a problem with CE 399 (p.147). What bullet was found in the hospital (p.156)? CE 399 could not have come from Kennedy or Connally (p.158). Chapter 8 has a reconstruction of the assassination: 4 shots, 3 shooters (p.178). Note the comments on page 190. The Warren Commission went wrong because of uncritical acceptance of the single bullet theory (p.196). [But if they said more than one assassin that would be proof of the conspiracy they said did not exist!] Pages 203-204 analyze the "ramshackle case". Experts said Connally was hit by "two different bullets" (p.206). The Warren Report was "hearsay and contradiction" (p.209). There was "contradictory
   evidence" buried in the Warren Report (p.213). Who was in the doorway (pp.226-227)? Who owned the jacket discarded by Tippit's assailant (p.229)? Did Oswald shoot the President (p.233)? That can't be proved or disproved.
   
   Appendix D has a critique of the Autopsy by Cyril H. Wecht M.D., L.L.B. They did not use an experienced forensic pathologist as they had mistakes of procedure and technique. There was not mention of the adrenal glands, and a failure to adequately inspect the brain. The body was not X-rayed and the films inspected before the autopsy. The entrance wound in the back is substantially lower than the purported exit in the throat. Wecht does not agree with the essential findings of the Warren Report or the autopsy on which it was based (p.283). Another problem is CE 399.
   
   In 1974 George O'Toole's book "The Assassination Tapes" provided the physical evidence to question Oswald's guilt. A Congressional committee concluded in two shooters. More books were published afterwards. The majority of Americans today do not believe the Warren Report.