Paul Jeffery

On the subject of mysterious deaths, I would like to re-iterate my plea for information regarding the death of Clint Peoples (see earlier post). Although the majority of posts on this thread are from a while ago, I would like to add my opinion that I believe the vast majority of these deaths were suspicious and are connected. As time goes on people do die, but the wealth of evidence is overwhelming. It troubles me that as late as Nov 2004 in a Radio 5 Simon Mayo interview (UK-live), people can laughingly dismiss the idea of witnesses being removed. Everyone-look at the evidence, the facts are there-no need to speculate.

Just a small point regarding this thread: there was a programme on the History Channel a couple of years ago which documented the LBJ tapes. This includes recordings and commentary. I'm sure it would be useful to this discussion. The one conversation I remember is LBJ to Jacqui Kennedy, not long after the assassination. I found it very disturbing given my view on LBJ's role in the case. "You must come and visit some time...." I think it also worth noting that LBJ and Hoover were close allies in Washington. They used to walk their dogs together in the morning! Both certainly were no fans of the Kennedys. I found the posts on Nixon interesting. His whereabouts on 21-23/11/63 are significant. Was he at the infamous Murchison 'plotters ball', as suggested by Madeline Brown(LBJ mistress). Hoover was allegedly there too, a man who virtually never left the capital due to a fear of flying.

There is already a wide variety of theories being put forward. This is no surprise! OK, I am no expert but will pitch my views as follows: The conspiracy was hatched as far back as 62. The origins of the plot stem from Lyndon Johnson and his 'superlawyer' Ed Clark. When I have said in previous posts LBJ was behind it, I don't actually think he knew any more than the bare essentials. I think Clark set the whole thing up. Whenever LBJ got into trouble in the past (the Coke Stevenson rigged election, the Estes scandal) Clark was there with his mechanism of lawyers, bent judges, hitmen to sort things out. The motive: Johnson was to be dropped as Vice-President in 64, he would be exposed in the Bobby Baker scandal and the Estes debacle. In Texas things were already catching up with him and there was a good chance he would end up in jail. Add to this the death of Henry Marshall. Also oil plays a key factor as LBJ was a broker in Washington for Texas Oil. The 'Oil Men' H.L.Hunt, Clint Murchison needed their case heard in Washington and LBJ was the man they could count on. JFK was set to go against their interests (I don't understand the complexities of the oil business), so there were outside factors for Clark to act on. In short, LBJ stood to go from Master of the Senate to prisoner in the space of 4 years. And if he did so, his Texas power base went with it. This means Clark, Oil, anyone who had benifited from LBJ. I believe Texas was chosen as a location for this very reason. The cover-up would be easier to control. At first LBJ wanted a Texan investigation he knew would be controlled by Clark, but he was forced to change his mind. I believe elements of the CIA, anti-Castro Cubans and Maifa were brought in. Partly to compromise them in the aftermath, partly because their skills would be needed-nothing was left to chance. I'm not sure where Oswald fits in, except that he was set up very well. I think he was CIA and an FBI informant. Quite where he was earmarked as a patsy is hard to say, as all these organisations overlap. Again he could have been picked to compromise these authorities and therefore aid the cover-up. I'm also unsure how he came to leave the TSBD alive. One thing I am sure of however is that he was meant to be killed before he was arrested. Perhaps Tippit was supposed to do that. Jack Ruby is also hard to place as he too had links to many groups that overlap. I believe that Clark would have known of him and that he was easy to manipulate. Ruby was said to be relieved when he heard in jail that Oswald was dead-I'm sure he was put up to it. I still think Mac Wallace was a gunman, or was at least on the 6th floor-perhaps as a spotter. Madeline Brown certainly thought so. I don't believe the fingerprint was planted as this was too dangerous. He may not have been a clinical hitman but he was Clark's boy, ever since the murder of Kinsner only netted him a suspended jail term! What it did bring was a life sentance under Clark. The Estes document is easy to discredit, but at least it is documented and in the public record. It stands slightly above mere speculation. I think Ruby summed it up best during his court appearances. In one of the most tantilising pieces of film(and one rarely seen), he says 'If Adlai Stevenson was vice-president this would never have happened (sic)'. When pressed into who was behind the killing he says 'The Man in office'. Ruby also fingers Johnson in letters he wrote from jail, saying the man is like a Nazi and urges his recipient to read 'A Texan Looks at Lyndon'. This book covers a lot of the LBJ scandals, but could not find a publisher outside Texas.

Does anyone have any information regarding the death of Clint Peoples? He was the Texas Ranger who for years tracked the death of Henry Marshall, eventually persuading Billy Sol Estes to testify that Mac Wallace had killed him. This was as opposed to the official 1962 version of suicide-he shot himself dead 5 times! The verdict was over-turned to murder in the 80's, of course Wallace was long gone by this time. At the same time Estes, through his lawyer, produced the explosive document in which he offered knowledge of other murders-including the most famous one of all! Wallace and Peoples have something in common: they both died in one-car accidents. Peoples died in relatively recent times-after claiming he had documentary proof of Wallace-Johnson involvement in the death of the President. His name must surely come very high on the long list of suspicious deaths. Higher, in my opinion, than Richard Nagell, who also died in the 90's. What alarms me most about these cases is the fact they happened so long after the crime-the cover-up still in action 40 years later?? As mentioned, all I know is that Peoples died in a one-car crash. Does anyone have further info on the circumstances? ie, press cuttings, reports etc.. Was there an autopsy? Did anyone raise suspicions? Does he have family ? Any help greatly appreciated.

Hi Nic, hope you're nowhere near Rita. I've always had a problem with the position of Cuba as a motive and 'pastsy' in the case. This is mainly because Cuba was not invaded. Indeed, US defence policy shifted very quickly towards Vietnam. If the plan was for Castro to be blamed, Cuba invaded, and the Mafia let back in-why did this not happen? I'm certain there were people who wanted this to happen. David Atlee Phillips/CIA for one. But this could have been merely disinformation- from a reputed expert. Also after reading Anthony Summers' 'Kennedy Conspiracy' I'm not so sure JFK was soft on Cuba. There is strong evidence he and RFK were supporting plots for Castro to be killed. Problem is, everyone has a motive. But not many had the means to cover it up....

Thank you all of you who replied to my first post. It's nice to know there is a forum where sensible debate takes place. John-I will look at the links you provided-I am not familiar with Fred Black, that is useful to me and one of the reasons I joined-to find out new information/characters. I have come across the counter-arguments for Wallace and/or LBj's involvement. The debate over the how and why of Wallace's participation emphasise the frustrating nature of the JFK assassination. All the waters are muddied, we are indeed 'through the looking glass'. Every scenario has at least 2 contrasting angles. I have to say I find it far-fetched to believe that Wallace was somehow strategically placed to force Johnson's hand. I accept that he was rather obvious as a conspiracy candidate but if you look at the Henry Marshall killing, we find the same pattern of events: Johnson in trouble, Clark the orchestrator, Wallace the hitman. I see no reason why the same chain of events could not occur on 22/11/63. Suppose hyperthetically that LBJ/Clark were behind the murder. Who would they trust enough to execute(at least in part) the plot? A mercenary? A hired gun? Mafia? CIA agents with government links? Perhaps it was better to play safe and use a man who was under their complete control and influence. Wallace was cleared of the Kinsner murder, but it came at a price-his independence. He was thereafter a pawn of LBJ/Clark sculdugery. Another 'outsider' could have been un-trustworthy, with questionable loyalty. Somehow 'better the devil you know'. OK, he might have been caught, but the plan was that he would escape-and he did. I may be guilty of reading too much into Barr McClellan's 'Blood,Money and Power' book-a much maligned publication. I accept he makes conclusions where he has no factual backup, but I do believe the jist of what he says. Jack Ruby also thought so: on www.jfkmurdersolved.com check the clip where he accuses 'the man in office' of participating. Maybe he too was speculating, but it is hard to argue he must have had a fair idea who was behind the murder. Unless he really did kill Oswald impulsively..... These are only the views of a JFK buff, I do not wish to be drawn into any protracted arguments. There are many other specific issues I intend to raise. Thank you all of you for your replies!

This is my first post on this Forum, so I'd like to start with a few general points about my thoughts on the JFK assassination. 1.I believe that LBJ, Ed Clark and Mac Wallace were key conspirators. 2.That Oswald was never meant to be arrested-most likely he was to be killed or less likely helped to escape. 3.That elements of the CIA and Mafia were involved along with Cubans attached to the CIA. 4.That J.Edgar Hoover was responsible in part for the coverup, knowing full-well what had really happened. My main areas of interest (everyone has their own key areas!): 1.Who shot what and from where in Dealey PLaza. 2.Oswald's movements from after the shooting until his arrest. This is partly fuelled by John Armostrong's '2 Oswalds' research, which I find compelling. 3.The Tippit shooting. 4.The autopsy and the possibility of changes made to the body. Dave Lifton's 'Best Evidence' and Paul O'Connor's testimony. 5.Suspicious deaths of key witnesses or those with knowledge. I would particularly like to know more about the deaths of Clint Peoples and Richard Case Nagel if anyone has any information. My thoughts on JFK web-forums and fellow researchers: There seems to be a large amount of in-fighting and arrogance amongst folk on the message boards-though I have not had chance to view this one yet! I think the sharing of information is important and by bringing like-minded people together it is surely for the greater good of learning and understanding the case. I intend to post more specific comments in the near future, but would welcome any initial comment to set the ball rolling.

I am 26 years old, from Brighouse, West Yorkshire. I am a professional musician and published songwriter. I have a strong interest in the JFK assassination and am looking to discuss issues on the subject with likeminded people.