Jump to content
The Education Forum
Sign in to follow this  
John Simkin

Mel Ayton and John Hunt

Recommended Posts

Mel Ayton has made accusations that I have deleted a posting he made about the RFK assassination. This is of course a lie and I suspect just a way of avoiding a debate with John Hunt.

I have started this new thread where Mel and John can discuss this issue. Mel, post your comments on this thread and John and others will respond to your arguments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mel Ayton has made accusations that I have deleted a posting he made about the RFK assassination. This is of course a lie and I suspect just a way of avoiding a debate with John Hunt.

I have started this new thread where Mel and John can discuss this issue. Mel, post your comments on this thread and John and others will respond to your arguments.

John,

I wrote at http://www.jfklancer.com/hunt/moldeas.htm that:

Quote on

"Ironically, in a book which concluded that Sirhan B. Sirhan acted alone,

Moldea actually offered a shooting scenario that demands two shooters! “

And what was Moldea's fatal mistake? He concluded that one of the victims

(Paul Schrade) was struck in the forehead by a bullet that struck nothing

else first.”

Quote off

Melvyn Ayton claimed that I was wrong—that “several” scenario’s could explain the crime in an innocent fashion. I challenged Melvyn to give us that workable scenario for 8 shots with

the “official damage* starting with Moldea's "Schrade Shot” ( see http://www.jfklancer.com/hunt/moldeas.htm)

Melvyn tried twice, failing convincingly both times. I rebutted what he wrote in detail with graphics. Oddly, Melvyn has never offered a single word in rebuttal. He simply re-posts the same faulty analysis as if it had never been challenged.

Rather than come through with the goods, Melvyn took umbrage with this portion of my essay:

Quote On

HUNT: "In order to sort out his [Moldea's] scenario, we need to be aware of

additional points of damage that Dan Moldea ignored; three bullet holes in

the pantry's ceiling tiles."

Quote off

The key words are "his scenario." What I wrote was accurate; Moldea did

indeed ignore the ceiling tiles as they relate to his non-sinister

scenario. Nowhere in his book does Moldea apply his conclusion that Paul

Schrade was hit by a shot unto itself to the rest of the scenario to see

if it works.

In blind defense of Moldea, Melvyn Ayton insinuated that was not the

case. Wrote Ayton, "Hunt goes on to claim that Moldea did not address the

issue of the ceiling tiles. However Hunt has simply not read pages 86,

137-138, 166, 186, 231 and 259 of Moldea's book."

Firstly, I did not "claim" that Moldea did not address the ceiling tiles,

for clearly he did, although just barely. Ayton's insinuation that I'd not

read the book was based upon his misreading of what I wrote.

Having said that, first Moldea, then Ken Rahn and, now, Ayton, have all cited the pages

listed in Moldea's index: 86, 137, 166, 186, 231 and 259, as proof that

Moldea did address the ceiling tiles.

Of the seven pages cited in defense of Moldea, one (pg.137)does not even reference

the ceiling tiles in any way, shape or form. Moldea, Rahn and Ayton

all parroted Moldea's index, which incorrectly cites page 137 as

referencing the tiles. It does not.

Page 138, on the other hand, does. It

reads: "In short, Wolfer said, under oath, that no bullet holes were

discovered in anything but the ceiling tiles and the victims."

Is telling what Wolfer testified to us under oath “dealing" with the

ceiling tiles?? No.

On page 166, Moldea writes: "Among these were the whereabouts and

condition of the following: "Ceiling tiles with bullet holes to determine

their location in the pantry and the angle of entry and exit of the

bullets."

Is relating that Paul Schrade's lawsuit called for a search for the

missing original ceiling tiles "dealing" with the ceiling tiles?? No.

On page 186 Moldea writes, "Of course, this [1975] photo opportunity

yielded no additional bullets, since the door frames, center divider, and

the ceiling tiles-which, according to numerous witnesses, contained bullet

holes-had been destroyed six years earlier in 1969."

Moldea tells us that the ceiling tiles were destroyed and not in the

pantry in 1975. Is that "dealing" with the ceiling tiles?? No.

On page 231, Moldea writes, "From the outset, Wolfer had been adamant that

he never confirmed bullet holes in anything but six people, as well as two

entrances and one exit hole in the ceiling tiles suspended above the

kitchen pantry."

Is quoting Wolfer on where he found bullet holes "dealing" with the

ceiling tiles?? No.

Further down on page 231, Moldea quotes Wolfer's testimony: "WOLFER: I

made reports accounting for all the bullet holes. I found them in the

ceiling tiles, I found them in all [sic] bullet holes in the ceiling."

Moldea tells us that Wolfer referenced the ceiling tiles under oath. Is

that "dealing" with the tiles?? No.

On page 259, Moldea quotes from an interview with SID officer, David

Butler, "During my interview with him, Butler gave me a briefing about

bullet flight paths and the problem with the shots Sirhan fired that went

through the ceiling tiles."

Moldea quotes a reference to the ceiling tiles uttered by a witness

recounting the evidence. Is that "dealing" with the ceiling tiles?? No.

And now we come to the LAST reference to the ceiling tiles cited by

Moldea and his "defenders." That last reference is actually the first in the

book. On page 86 Moldea writes:

Quote on

The flight paths of the bullets are difficult to match with medical

records, particularly in the cases of Evans and Schrade. According to

Wolfer's reconstruction, the Evans bullet penetrated a thick acoustic

ceiling die, ricocheted off the ceiling, exited through a second tile, and

then struck Evans, who was fifteen feet away, with enough force to lodge

in her forehead. This description contradicts the official medical of her

wound, which says, "The bullet entered the scalp of the forehead just

below the hairline, off center to the right and traveled upward to

approximately one inch above the hair line" (emphasis added by Moldea).

Quote off

Here Moldea merely quotes from Wolfer's trajectory accounting and then

tells us that the shot was supposed to hit Evans in the forehead, but that

the upward path in her head "contradicted" Wolfer's assertion. In the only

words by Moldea himself on the subject, he casts doubt on the official

version!!

There you have all the reference to the ceiling tiles in Moldea's book.

Recall Melvyn’s claim that, "Hunt has simply not read pages 86, 137-138,

166, 186, 231 and 259 of Moldea's book."

It is obvious who has not read those pages.

In the near future I will post Melvyn’s two attempts to reconcile the “Official” damage to the RFK shooting. I will also show you and Ayton (for the fourth time) where he went wrong.

John Hunt

* The “Official” LAPD damage:

1. RFK - Shot in the head, no exit.

2.RFK - Shot in the right rear armpit, with the bullet coming to rest in

the flesh beneath the skin at the base of the back of the neck. The bullet

was recovered at autopsy.

3.RFK - Shot in the right rear armpit one inch above shot No. 2. The

bullet exited through right front chest below the clavicle.

4.RFK - Entry and exit of a bullet which passed through the rear right

shoulder of RFK's suit jacket. The entry and exit were both behind the

yolk seam at the top of the shoulder, and penetrated only the outermost

layer of fabric.

5.Paul Schrade - Shot in the forehead above hairline near the apex of

the head. Bullet fragments remained in the head, with a majority exiting

through an exit defect several centimeters behind the entry point.

6.Ira Goldstein - Shot in the left buttock/thigh. The bullet was

recovered during surgery.

7.Ira Goldstein - Entry and exit of a bullet that passed cleanly through

his left pant leg without striking him.

8. Irwin Stroll - Shot in the left shin. The bullet was recovered during

surgery.

9.Elizabeth Evans - Shot in the center of the forehead one inch below

the hairline. Fragments of a bullet recovered during surgery were too

light to comprise a full .22 round. There was no exit point in the scalp.

10. William Weisel - Shot in the left abdomen. The bullet was recovered

near the spine during surgery.

11. Ceiling Tile Hole #1 - A bullet penetrated an acoustic ceiling tile

(A), proceeding into the drop-ceiling interspace.

12. Ceiling Tile Hole #2 - That bullet (No. 11) struck the concrete

ceiling above the tiles, and ricocheted back down into the pantry through

a second ceiling tile (:D.

13. Ceiling Tile Hole #3 - A bullet entered the same tile as No. 11

above (A), but, we are told, did not exit back down into pantry. That

bullet was "lost in the ceiling interspace," and apparently never

recovered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×