Jump to content


Spartacus

RFK assassination witness tells CNN: There was a second shooter


32 replies to this topic

#1 Michael Hogan

Michael Hogan

    Super Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3,468 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 29 April 2012 - 05:10 PM

This is an incredible story.


Los Angeles (CNN) -- As a federal court prepares to rule on a challenge to Sirhan Sirhan's conviction in the Robert F. Kennedy assassination, a long overlooked witness to the murder is telling her story: She heard two guns firing during the 1968 shooting and authorities altered her account of the crime.


Nina Rhodes-Hughes wants the world to know that, despite what history says, Sirhan was not the only gunman firing shots when Senator Kennedy was murdered a few feet away from her at a Los Angeles hotel.


"What has to come out is that there was another shooter to my right," Rhodes-Hughes said in an exclusive interview with CNN. "The truth has got to be told. No more cover-ups."


Her voice at times becoming emotional, Rhodes-Hughes described for CNN various details of the assassination, her long frustration with the official reporting of her account and her reasons for speaking out: "I think to assist me in healing -- although you're never 100% healed from that. But more important to bring justice."


"For me it's hopeful and sad that it's only coming out now instead of before -- but at least now instead of never," Rhodes-Hughes told CNN by phone from her home near Vancouver, Canada....


Full article: http://www.cnn.com/2...rfk-second-gun/



#2 Greg Burnham

Greg Burnham

    Super Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,192 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:San Diego, CA

Posted 29 April 2012 - 09:34 PM

In cases where the Medical Examiner refuses to name the accused as the murderer due to the determined cause of death being impossible from the position of the defendant, the outcome of the trial would normally be quite different. In this case, Thomas Noguchi determined that all shots were fired from behind Kennedy including the kill shot, which entered behind his right ear at a distance of no more than 1.5 to 3 inches away. In other words, fired at point blank range. Yet, at no time was Sirhan 1) that close to Kennedy; 2) behind Kennedy; 3) nor was RFK's back ever turned toward Sirhan. In an interview with me, Noguchi said: "Sirhan did not kill Kennedy if the facts as we know them are accurate."[paraphrased]

Is there any other case in history where the defendant was still convicted of the crime given the testimony of the Medical Examiner?

#3 Len Colby

Len Colby

    Super Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 8,224 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Brazil

Posted 30 April 2012 - 02:26 AM

In cases where the Medical Examiner refuses to name the accused as the murderer due to the determined cause of death being impossible from the position of the defendant, the outcome of the trial would normally be quite different. In this case, Thomas Noguchi determined that all shots were fired from behind Kennedy including the kill shot, which entered behind his right ear at a distance of no more than 1.5 to 3 inches away. In other words, fired at point blank range. Yet, at no time was Sirhan 1) that close to Kennedy; 2) behind Kennedy; 3) nor was RFK's back ever turned toward Sirhan. In an interview with me, Noguchi said: "Sirhan did not kill Kennedy if the facts as we know them are accurate."[paraphrased]

Is there any other case in history where the defendant was still convicted of the crime given the testimony of the Medical Examiner?


Noguchi never said this at trial, he was a prosecution witness. IIRC he did say this till years later. Outside of TV shows like Quincy and Crossing Jordan coroners rarely say who was guilty of a nurder.

#4 Greg Burnham

Greg Burnham

    Super Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,192 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:San Diego, CA

Posted 30 April 2012 - 03:43 AM

Even from Wiki:

[Speaking of Noguchi]

His autopsy of Kennedy is significant for its conclusion that the fatal shot was fired into the back of Kennedy's head, behind the right ear, from an upward angle, and from a distance of no more than one-and-a-half to three inches away. This has given rise to conspiracy theories regarding the assassination, as no witnesses reported seeing the convicted assassin, Sirhan Sirhan, in a position to fire such a shot. Noguchi himself points out, in his memoir Coroner, that he has never officially ruled that Sirhan fired the fatal shot.

#5 Dawn Meredith

Dawn Meredith

    Super Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,496 posts
  • Location:Austin, Tx.
  • Interests:political justice, conspiracy/truth, music, law, Bible prophecy

Posted 30 April 2012 - 03:29 PM

Yes this is an amazing story especially for MSM. My dear departed friend Phil Melanson, who found this woman, is smiling in the afterworld. So what "Colby" that the DA called the coroner, he still testified accurately as to where the kill shots came from. It was the defense who shut him up. I have never heard, in twenty seven years of practicing law, of a defense team stipulating that their client was the killer. That is NOT a trial. They should have been disbarred.
Yea for CNN. I hope that this judge can comprehend the concept of a Manchurian candidate. I know that Dr. Pepper will certainly educate him. Otherwise there is no justice for Sirhan under what is commonly known as the party rule, called vicarious liability in CA according to this article.

Dawn

#6 Len Colby

Len Colby

    Super Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 8,224 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Brazil

Posted 30 April 2012 - 04:02 PM

Even from Wiki:

[Speaking of Noguchi]

His autopsy of Kennedy is significant for its conclusion that the fatal shot was fired into the back of Kennedy's head, behind the right ear, from an upward angle, and from a distance of no more than one-and-a-half to three inches away. This has given rise to conspiracy theories regarding the assassination, as no witnesses reported seeing the convicted assassin, Sirhan Sirhan, in a position to fire such a shot. Noguchi himself points out, in his memoir Coroner, that he has never officially ruled that Sirhan fired the fatal shot.



Oh gee, if it’s in Wikipedia it must be true! No where however did it say Noguchi said this at trial. According to the cited source:


One more issue remained, one that neither Noguchi, the LAPD, nor the witnesses at the crime scene could explain — and one that continues to haunt theorists and historians of the assassination to this day. The shot that both Noguchi and the Los Angeles conclude killed Kennedy — the one that entered the back of his neck, fragmented upon impact and lodged in his brain stem — was fired so close that it left thick powder burns on the skin. Coroner Noguchi estimates (and the LAPD concurs) that the shot was fired at a range no more distant than one-and-a-half inches. Yet, according to all witnesses, Sirhan Sirhan shot in front of Kennedy and, as far as anyone knew, the senator never had the chance to turn his back towards his hunter.


Even though Noguchi remained tight-lipped and diplomatic at the time, in his biography that he penned a decade later — entitled Coroner — he wrote, "Until more is precisely known...the existence of a second gunman remains a possibility. Thus, I have never said that Sirhan Sirhan killed Robert Kennedy."


http://www.trutv.com.../kennedy/5.html

But you over look the obvious, if he part of the plot, whether he actually fired the fatal shot or not is not relevant regarding his guilt.

#7 Len Colby

Len Colby

    Super Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 8,224 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Brazil

Posted 30 April 2012 - 04:04 PM

Yes this is an amazing story especially for MSM. My dear departed friend Phil Melanson, who found this woman, is smiling in the afterworld. So what "Colby" that the DA called the coroner, he still testified accurately as to where the kill shots came from. It was the defense who shut him up. I have never heard, in twenty seven years of practicing law, of a defense team stipulating that their client was the killer. That is NOT a trial. They should have been disbarred.
Yea for CNN. I hope that this judge can comprehend the concept of a Manchurian candidate. I know that Dr. Pepper will certainly educate him. Otherwise there is no justice for Sirhan under what is commonly known as the party rule, called vicarious liability in CA according to this article.

Dawn


" I hope that this judge can comprehend the concept of a Manchurian candidate"

I'd be surprised if he was NOT familiar with the concept, whether he buys such an substatiated sci-fi theory is another story.

#8 Greg Burnham

Greg Burnham

    Super Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,192 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:San Diego, CA

Posted 30 April 2012 - 04:18 PM

Substatiated?

#9 John Dolva

John Dolva

    Super Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 10,444 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Location:Australia
  • Interests:remembering the two towers of 13,000 children that fall down, dying of starvation, preventable diseases, lack of clean water and basic health needs every 1 1/2 hours 24/7/365...
    9/11? Bah...
    ...Viva Che'...
    living in a nice world

Posted 30 April 2012 - 04:22 PM

:) an goes with a wowel. U? Is there a hint of dislike of N?

edit add don't worry I dont get it either.

Edited by John Dolva, 30 April 2012 - 04:24 PM.


#10 John Simkin

John Simkin

    Super Member

  • admin
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 16,093 posts

Posted 30 April 2012 - 04:36 PM

This story has also been picked up by the Daily Mail, the world's most popular news site on the web:

http://www.dailymail...o=feeds-newsxml

#11 Greg Burnham

Greg Burnham

    Super Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,192 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:San Diego, CA

Posted 30 April 2012 - 05:22 PM

Colby is lost again. I am not concerned so much with attempting to exonerate Sirhan as I am concerned with indicting those who perpetrated a fraud on the American people, who perpetuate the cover-up, and are guilty of obstruction of justice.

#12 Dawn Meredith

Dawn Meredith

    Super Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,496 posts
  • Location:Austin, Tx.
  • Interests:political justice, conspiracy/truth, music, law, Bible prophecy

Posted 30 April 2012 - 07:21 PM

Colby is lost again. I am not concerned so much with attempting to exonerate Sirhan as I am concerned with indicting those who perpetrated a fraud on the American people, who perpetuate the cover-up, and are guilty of obstruction of justice.


Sirhan did not kill RFK. I believe he should be exonerated. "Colby" is lost on purpose. Noguchi DID testify that the shot that killed the Senator was behind the right ear as close as an inch away.

John that is great news it will now get far more publicity. I have written to Brad Johnson but cannot find a contact for the co-author Michael Martinez (I may also be mis-remembering his name)..

Dawn.

#13 Greg Burnham

Greg Burnham

    Super Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,192 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:San Diego, CA

Posted 30 April 2012 - 10:19 PM

I agree, Dawn, he should be exonerated. However, on a Deep Political level, unfortunately, debating Sirhan's guilt or innocence only serves the perpetrator's agenda. It is a distraction from the larger picture. I would liken it to the reality that we all must face when we realize that the death of JFK or RFK, although tragic on a personal level, must take a back seat to the larger picture. The larger picture includes the fact that JFK, for example, was not killed for "personal" reasons. Their intent was not to murder "JFK" as a "person". Their intent was to murder the Executive Branch of our government. That was paramount to the agenda of the entity. He was never the target, the office of the POTUS was.

#14 Kathleen Collins

Kathleen Collins

    Super Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,818 posts

Posted 01 May 2012 - 02:08 AM

Is there any other case in history where the defendant was still convicted of the crime given the testimony of the Medical Examiner?


What about Sam Sheppard or Dr. McDonald?

Kathy C

#15 Kathleen Collins

Kathleen Collins

    Super Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,818 posts

Posted 01 May 2012 - 02:16 AM

I agree, Dawn, he should be exonerated. However, on a Deep Political level, unfortunately, debating Sirhan's guilt or innocence only serves the perpetrator's agenda. It is a distraction from the larger picture. I would liken it to the reality that we all must face when we realize that the death of JFK or RFK, although tragic on a personal level, must take a back seat to the larger picture. The larger picture includes the fact that JFK, for example, was not killed for "personal" reasons. Their intent was not to murder "JFK" as a "person". Their intent was to murder the Executive Branch of our government. That was paramount to the agenda of the entity. He was never the target, the office of the POTUS was.


I don't agree that they were not killing him as a person, but the Executive Branch of our government. HL Hunt, a John Bircher, Clint Murchison Jr, and others hated Kennedy. His joint chief of staff hated him. And those in the government did as well. The Secret Service must have hated him. Why would these factions make a film of it? Why kill him in public with his wife next to him? Why did it have to be so violent? That makes me feel that the Kennedy Assassination was a sort of thrill kill.

Kathy C



Reply to this topic



  


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users