Mary Pinchot Meyer Case said to be solved...

[Nathaniel Heidenheimer]

This book is really starting to move. It is now around 2,000 in kindle sales, 1,000 in hardcover after being out for one day with zero media and zero adds. That is momentum. The material on Ben Bradlee could really shake trees, IMO.

[Kathleen Collins]

The National Enquirer is where Janney belongs. From my article "Beware the Douglas, Janney. Simkin SIlver Bullets"

As I said, Peter Janney entered the picture after Damore died. His father had worked for the CIA, and he had been friends with Michael Meyer, a son of Mary and her husband, Cord Meyer. He has in recent years put together Damore's research and is now marketing s script called Lost Light based on Meyer's life and death. From what I have read about it, it should be a real doozy, right up there with Robert Slatzer's Marilyn and Me.

I can't contain it. I would think you people would know better. The late Robert Slatzer was a disinformationalist. I bet someone paid him to say the things he says. And the book was actually written by somebody else, as Slatzer couldn't write. The book practically indicts Robert Kennedy as a suspect in the murder. And there was no red "diary" that he told Marilyn to toss away. If Bobby knew she had such a thing, he would take it himself and destroy it. He wouldn't rely on her. He wasn't stupid.

Slatzer was a fan of M. Monroe. He met her while she was making "Niagara." They had a few pictures taken of them against the Falls. It was nothing more than that. He really spread his anti-Kennedy sentiment far and wide. In later years he embellished and made up things. Like he was on the set of "Something's Got to Give" during her birthday party and took a photo of her that is actually from a costume test. One of Fox's still photographers took the picture. His biggest scam was that he married MM down in Mexico but had no record of it. The man who married them burned the certificate and poor Slatzer couldn't prove a marriage. But he said Kid Chisell was their witness. When Kid Chisell was on his death bed a reporter asked him if he witnessed a marriage between Slatzer and Monroe. He said, "I was only trying to help a friend."

The studio had her down as being on set that day and working. John Gilmore wrote a book about Marilyn and called Slatzer an out and out xxxx. Slatzer was on the Niagara location set everyday. After awhile Monroe just ignored him.

Someone killed her either by accident or on purpose. But not Bobby Kennedy. He was trying to help her and keep her away from the President. I doubt she felt love for him. His brother was the big draw.

Kathy C

[Nathaniel Heidenheimer]

I have just recently passed up the RFK-Marylyn M. Part of the book It was only two paragraphs and was almost entirely based on one book. It was very poorly done IMO because it was only based on one source, and did not address any of the critics of this view. It was really terrible, given just how suggestive it was that RFK was involved in the murder-- while never actually saying he was-- but while being so fast and flimsy in sourcing.

That said, there are other parts of the book that are very good.

Edited April 6, 2012 by Nathaniel Heidenheimer

[Nathaniel Heidenheimer]

Lets compare three areas of extreme controversy within Mary's Mosaic. 1) the alleged meeting with Leary 2) the breakdown of Phillip Graham at the Jan 1963 Publishers Convention and 3) the night of her death summary btw. RFK and Marilyn Monroe

In the first two the author clearly acknowledges the controversy and, to his credit, attempts to present different points of view and illuminate their sources. Now it could be that this overview of the different views is loaded with a straw dog presentation of "the critics" of Janney's view. I will need to reread the sections and compare them more closely to other accounts to answer that question.

However, what really stands out #3. The allegations about RFK and Marilyn are so flimsy, short and based on only one source. Given that they very strongly suggest a direct role of RFK in her death, it is kind of like a drive by shooting of RFK.

More and more I have wondered about the incredible lack of interest in the RFK assassination. This is especially true given the incredible number of people interested in the JFK assassination. The combined effect of both assassinations has been to turn the Democrats into The Other Republicans. Given this common result of both assassinations in tandem, how does one explain the tens of thousands who are interested in JFK and spend so much time there, yet have no time at all in the RFK hit.

Even among JFK researchers who seem so keenly aware of media distortion and Mockingbird Droppings re JFK seem completely uncritical when doing drive by allegations about RFK. Don't get me wrong. I am not objecting to Janney's right to make these allegations re RFK. What I am objecting to is overwhelming chasm between the seriousness of the charges and the amount of evidence and perspective offered in evaluating these charges.

The RFK assassination is so often shorn of its political context when it is mentioned at all. I recommend the book In His Own Right by Palermo. This book is tied with JFK and the Unspeakable for the most important cure for the US' current woes. It shows more clearly than any other just how huge a difference there was between RFK's multi-faceted California campaign WHICH INCLUDED CLEAR CLASS ISSUES AND THREATENED TO BRING IN WHAT THE UPPER CLASS WITHIN THE PARTY DEEMED "THE GREAT UNWASHED"--and , on the other hand, Gene McCarthy's upper middle class college campaign. Such purity is Lagley's scrubbing bubbles, a temporary finger in the damn until Dow resumed napalming Vietnamese kids. Of course the left is diverted from this connection, with the most flagrant lies about RFK.

I am beginning to wonder if there is not even deliberate disinformation about RFK even among those who are Pro-conspiracy re JFK. That is just how important the RFK assassination is seeming to me right now, and until I find an answer about why it is so ignored all I can do is ponder strange discrepancies such as between 1and 2 v 3.

"for a bore is a straight line

that finds a wealth in division"

The strategy of disinformation used by the CIA in media about the assassinations is not one huge lie but onion-skin style lying, with shared truths diminishing until there are a million sub-groups screaming at each other. Intenet and cable replacing the older three network scenario is good for that approach. http://www.amazon.com/His-Own-Right-Joseph-Palermo/dp/0231120699

Edited April 6, 2012 by Nathaniel Heidenheimer

[Kathleen Collins]

Lets compare three areas of extreme controversy within Mary's Mosaic. 1) the alleged meeting with Leary 2) the breakdown of Phillip Graham at the Jan 1963 Publishers Convention and 3) the night of her death summary btw. RFK and Marilyn Monroe

In the first two the author clearly acknowledges the controversy and, to his credit, attempts to present different points of view and illuminate their sources. Now it could be that this overview of the different views is loaded with a straw dog presentation of "the critics" of Janney's view. I will need to reread the sections and compare them more closely to other accounts to answer that question.

However, what really stands out #3. The allegations about RFK and Marilyn are so flimsy, short and based on only one source. Given that they very strongly suggest a direct role of RFK in her death, it is kind of like a drive by shooting of RFK.

More and more I have wondered about the incredible lack of interest in the RFK assassination. This is especially true given the incredible number of people interested in the JFK assassination. The combined effect of both assassinations has been to turn the Democrats into The Other Republicans. Given this common result of both assassinations in tandem, how does one explain how so many who are interested in JFK and spend so much time there, have no time at all in the RFK hit.

Even among JFK researchers who seem so keenly aware of media distortion and Mockingbird Droppings re JFK seem completely uncritical when doing drive by allegations about RFK. Don't get me wrong. I am not objecting to Janney's right to make these allegations re RFK. What I am objecting to is overwhelming chasm between the seriousness of the charges and the amount of evidence and perspective offered in evaluating these charges.

The RFK assassination is so often shorn of its political context when it is mentioned at all. I recommend the book In His Own Right by Palermo. This book is tied with JFK and the Unspeakable for the most important cure for the US' current woes. It shows more clearly than any other just how huge a difference there was between RFK's multi-faceted California campaign WHICH INCLUDED CLEAR CLASS ISSUES AND THREATENED TO BRING IN WHAT THE UPPER CLASS WITHIN THE PARTY DEEMED "THE GREAT UNWASHED"--and , on the other hand, Gene McCarthy's upper middle class college campaign. Such purity is Lagley's scrubbing bubbles, a temporary finger in the damn until Dow resumed napalming Vietnamese kids. Of course the left is diverted from this connection, with the most flagrant lies about RFK.

I am beginning to wonder if there is not even deliberate disinformation about RFK even among those who are Pro-conspiracy re JFK. That is just how important the RFK assassination is seeming to me right now, and until I find an answer about why it is so ignored all I can do is ponder strange discrepancies such as between 1and 2 v 3.

"for a bore is a straight line

that finds a wealth in division"

The strategy of disinformation used by the CIA in media about the assassinations is not one huge lie but onion-skin style lying, with shared truths diminishing until there are a million sub-groups screaming at each other. Intenet and cable replacing the older three network scenario is good for that approach. http://www.amazon.co...o/dp/0231120699

Excellent post. Here are a few things I know. Marilyn Monroe had been in a psychiatric ward in 1961 and left feeling better and lost some weight. Joe DiMaggio took her to the Atlantic Ocean. She bought a very small house and property. She lived in a cul de sac. There was no security. She was having an affair with the President and conceded to RFK's wish for her to sing Happy Birthday to his brother in Madison Square Garden. RFK and MM were in her dressing room alone. Someone said she was messy looking and the hair had to be done over when RFK exited her room. There was a man standing by and RFK said to him, "I hate dealing with that bitch."

The following day, when it was in the papers and all over the news, that Marilyn only had sequins on and sang Happy Birthday with a lot of sexual appeal, RFK told the President he had to cut off the relationship. It looked bad. So the man who asked her to sing to John Kennedy was also the man whose mind changed about MM.

She couldn't get through to the White House. She started to call the Justice Dept. RFK tried to appease the situation by talking to studio bosses. She had been fired. He was in California to make a movie of the book he wrote called "The Enemy Within." And he also talked to her psychiatrist, "Romey" Ralph Greenson. Allegedly, she was going to squeal to the press. RFK probably wanted Greenson to calm her down somehow. So he was at her house a number of times.

Robert Slatzer was not the first to bring up RFK and MM. Frank Capell wrote a thick pamphlet that came out in 1964. This writer alleged that Marilyn Monroe was surrounded by Jews and Communists; and that she was having an affair with left-thinking RFK. It was a book of insinuations. Like 30 year old Pat Newcomb, Monroe's press agent. They insinuated that she was a lesbian because she wasn't married. When Marilyn died, the Kennedys took Pat Newcomb up to Hyannis for a vacation. Then gave her a job about motion pictures, located down the hall from RFK. Again, insinuations. The book that came out in 1964 was to discredit RFK. Somehow it was surpressed. But I got a copy of it from The Sons of Liberty, whoever they are. Unfortunately, all my movie star books are with my brother in another state.

RFK was at her house the day she died. He was supposed to be in Gilroy, CA at Bate's Ranch. Photos exist. One photo was taken at 9:30 am of RFK with his family going to church. Monroe's death was announced around 5 a.m. He apparently flew in a helicopter back to Gilroy. If anyone could ruin a presidency, he could. Did he have an affair with MM? I don't think so.

Kathy C

[Guest Tom Scully]

Is there some way for forum members to see Damore's manuscript and/or get the name of the supposed CIA contract agent who he says did the professional hit?

I have asked my informant if I can name Mary Pinchot Meyer's killer on the Forum. I am awaiting his reply.

Hello -

My name is Peter Janney and I am the person John is referring to. I have actually been researching the life and death of Mary Pinchot Meyer for over thirty (30) years now. I am in the midst of producing a full length Hollywood drama called "Lost Light" which deals with Mary's relationship with JFK and her death. I also writing a book on the same subject ("Mary's Mosaic") which I am hard at work at.

I am going to post a much larger reply than I can at the moment in few days or so, but let me say this as an introduction:

Mary Meyer most certainly had a relationship with Tim Leary. I own all of Leo Damore's research on Mary Meyer. Damore was a prodigious researcher, just read his book Senatorial Priveledge and you can see for yourself. Damore even knew what room number Mary stayed in at the Ritz Carlton when she first came to meet Leary in the Spring of 1962. I also have a two hour tape recorded interview with Leary and Damore talking about the Meyer-JFK relationship. There are details on that tape that Leary talks about that he could have never known about if he had not known Mary back in the 1960s. Mary Meyer and JFK did take LSD together at Joe Alsop's house in Georgetown in the early Spring of 1963. I believe this experience was a catalyst for JFK's evolution of his political dispostion toward world peace initiatives. Soon after this experience JFK gave his legendary commencement speech at American University on June 10, 1963. More on that later.

Mary Meyer was not murdered; she was assassinated. I believe I am well on my way to proving this. The assassin's name was William L. Mitchell and he testified at the Crump murder trial as the "jogger" who passed Mary on his way back to Key Bridge. He testified that a black man, allegedly Ray Crump, was following Mary after he passed her. It was a complete frame up, again generated by certain individuals within the CIA.

Leo Damore interviewed "William L.Mitchell" ("Mitchell" told Damore that his name was an alias and that he had several aliases that he used) on March 31, 1993 on the phone for several hours. He allegedley recorrded the call but I could never find the tapes. "Mitchell" confessed to Damore that he had been ordered to take out Mary Meyer. Immediately, after the call, Damore called his attorney. His attorney took five (5) pages of notes on that call and he saved them and has given the notes to me.

Damore told me personally in 1993 that he had interviewed the assassin, but I was too heart broken at the time from a broken engagement to really get into it with him at the time.

I shared my taped interview between Leary and Damore with David Talbot and he credits me for that in his footnote. As much as I respect Jim Eugenio, he is wrong about Leary and Mary Meyer and I believe I have enough evidence to prove that.

Please feel free to post questions and I will try to respond. More later. Thank you.

According to Bill Wolfsthal at Skyhorse Publishing, Peter Janney's book will be "available everywhere (in stores and on line) on April 2."

http://www.amazon.co...t/dp/1616087080

This started some time ago. I think you owe Jim DiEugenio an apology Michael. At the least, Janney seems a gullible fool, and Damore and Luciana Goldberg warrant far more scrutiny. What does Janney now have to offer from Damore's "research" to maintain his issues with his father being in league with a CIA assassin of Mary Meyer?

[Michael Hogan]

This started some time ago. I think you owe Jim DiEugenio an apology Michael. At the least, Janney seems a gullible fool, and Damore and Luciana Goldberg warrant far more scrutiny. What does Janney now have to offer from Damore's "research" to maintain his issues with his father being in league with a CIA assassin of Mary Meyer?

What started long time ago? I've reproduced my three posts on this thread. I provided information that was timely, on topic and of likely interest to members, Jim DiEugenio included.

There are no criticisms of Jim and no personal endorsements by me of Janney's book. I hadn't even had opportunity to read it.

If you want me to apologize to Jim, why not express so on the thread that contains our exchanges? Maybe it's you that has an axe to grind.

It does not escape me that you refer to another EF member as a gullible fool. Other members' posts have been made invisible for less.

I intend to reply to your other post about Dovey Roundtree and Mitchell when I get the time. And my reply will be on the appropriate thread.

And lastly, it's not clear to me exactly what you think I need to apologize for.

According to Bill Wolfsthal at Skyhorse Publishing, Peter Janney's book will be "available everywhere (in stores and on line) on April 2."

http://www.amazon.co...t/dp/1616087080

Doug Horne has posted his detailed review of Mary's Mosaic at the Amazon website.

There is a shorter review by the biographer of Dovey J. Roundtree, Kathleen McCabe.

http://www.amazon.co..._pr_product_top

David Mantik has also added a short review. He calls Mary's Mosaic "Magnificent--and courageous, too!"

(Excerpt omitted)

http://www.amazon.co..._pr_product_top