Bill Charleston

I still think that the Federal Government altering evidence and if need be to lie to whatever extent necessary to hide the truth is the first smoking gun you need to really grasp to finally understand what actually happened and why; that this was just a simple coup by the Vice President, Lyndon Johnson. No one else in the world could have manipulated the system like was done in this case except the President of the United States, and he couldn't have done it without the active participation by J. Edgar Hoover. The YOUTUBE video I posted earlier states beyond any doubt that the medical evidence was altered. Probably the closest witness on the right side of the car says he sees a bullet hit JFK in the temple (probably fired from behind the witness) 1. Sixteen Parkland Doctors according to David Mantik say they do NOT recognize the autopsy photos as what they saw of the President's head 2. David Mantik shows that by looking at multiple photos, the 3D effect is lost just in the back of JFK's head, everywhere else it looks normal. He then says that means photographic forgery. Any reasonable person looking at this knows beyond ANY DOUBT that the Federal Government altered evidence. Either we have witness after witness lying (or just plain incompetent) or we have a corrupt government caught red handed lying in what may be the biggest murder mystery in history. The ONLY CONCLUSION possible in my humble opinion is that someone important is involved and he (they) had enough power to alter even the simplest evidence when necessary. If you look at the shot at Z=313 which hit JFK in the head, you see him driven back and to the left, which any person knows intuitively a shot from the right front. That's exactly what the witness said he saw in the youtube video, a bullet hit JFK in the temple, but almost a half century later, people are still wondering what it means. History is going to laugh at this era, a society that is confused by the simplest of facts. 1. JFK was shot in the head from the front right side of the limo at Z=313. The back of his head was blown out. 2. The autopsy photos show the back of his head intact. The Zapruder film shows the side of his head blown away, something that no witness apparently described, they described the back of his head. The Zapruder film at Z314 shows movement forward, and then back movement one frame later. Simple physics says that didn't happen, just another mistake that shows 1960's technology wasn't all that good compared to what we see now. In a recent thread here on the Zapruder film, no one talked about the most obvious evidence of forgery, the back of JFK's head was blown out in reality but the autopsy photos and the Zapruder film were altered to show evidence of a shot from the rear to JFK's head, something that didn't happen. Since any reasonable person knows beyond any doubt that the Federal Government altered critical evidence in this case, the first question is WHY, what was the motive? With the additional clues that LBJ sealed the evidence until the next century, that the Zapruder film was locked up until 1975 from public scrutiny, that we see see example after example of witness after witness saying X but the evidence held by the government shows Y, then there is no doubt anymore, or at least there shouldn't be. Barr McClellan shows motive, the Henry Marshall murder which according to Billy Sol Estes was ordered personally by Lyndon Johnson. Add in the financial corruption tied to the Bobby Baker scandal and the story is pretty clear. Johnson was in trouble and the assassination was his ticket to stay out of jail. Vincent Bugliosi argues that there are over 5 million pages held at the National Archieves, much of it in fine print, the public just doesn't understand..... No, you can read all 5 million pages of documents held by the federal governmet and you still won't know what actually happened. You can't possible understand what happened in the JFK murder until you understand how really simple this murder really was.

o Who cares who pulled the trigger? The real smoking gun lies in the evidence that was altered. Consider the YOUTUBE Video which shows: A witness says he saw a bullet hit JFK in the temple. A White House Photographer says he saw pictures that showed a small bullet wound to the front side of the head (temple) and a massive wound to the back of JFK's head. BUT later these same pictures were altered to remove the massive wound in the back of the head and the small entrance wound to the front of the head. Several of the Parkland doctors describe the massive wound to the back of JKF's head. Then Doctor David Mantik describes the photos of the back of JKF's head that have OBVIOUSLY been altered. The best 1960's technology can not mask the forgery that took place. Then Dr. Mantik observes these photos have always been in the control of the government so whoever ordered the alterations had to be in the government. That observation rules out most of the suspects, so who had the power that could contol the investigations and alter evidence? There's only two people who come to mind and that's Hoover in the FBI and LBJ as President. Some of this video is from the History Channel's 2003 shows that were pulled from the air just like the subject video of THE GUILTY MEN. It really makes it too easy to reach a conclusion that only LBJ and Hoover could have pulled this off when you looks at some of this information. NEVER FORGET that LBJ sealed most of the evidence, the autopsy photos were the property of the Kennedy Family, the Zapruder film was not seen by the general public until 1975 and was only seen then because of the Garrison investigation...... And on and on. The details bother you but always remember the arrogance of LBJ to kill JFK in front of hundreds of people and then to neuter every dissenting witness. It shows you that they were confident they could pull it off and they did. Neither one of them were hung as they should have been but it's very dangerous having a government that can lie when it needs to and have a press that couldn't figure out something as simple as a third world coup.

You didn't address what doesn't make sense to me, the involvement of Wallace, a bungler who tried to kill Marshall four or five ways. Whose idea was that and why? As already noted, a man who looked a lot like Wallace was seen leaving the TSBD. What if some ignorant cop trying to do his job had stopped this suspicious character? And then what if a couple of photographers, who were running around all over the place, took some good shots of Wallace being detained, like those three famous tramps, to go along with the gallery of lookalikes already on display from Dealey Plaza. Why take such a chance? Wallace invited disaster in what was otherwise an obviously well planned plot. Unless he was an instrument of blackmail (but still one inviting disaster), what in the world did he have to offer the conspirators, other than a willingness to kill, no matter how long and by ever how many means it might take? Seems to me that any conspirators in their right minds would have told Wallace, "Don't call us, we'll call you." One thing about LBJ, he didn't get where he was by being a fool. Why would he want Mac Wallace anywhere near Dallas that day? With CIA and FBI and whoever else on board, he clearly did not need him. Billy Sol Estes said that when Henry Marshall wouldn't take a bribe and wouldn't back off, Lyndon Johnson said "Get Rid of Him." Since this was 1961 (memory) and Johnson was Vice President, imagine sending this clown (Mac Wallace) to kill a federal agriculture agent. Of course, the killing was a mess, but the bottom line is it was ruled a suicide, Henry Marshall supposedly took a bolt action rifle and shot himself FIVE TIMES! Johnson through Ed Clark OWNED the legal system in Texas according to Barr McClellan. Murders, bribes, threats control...... Imagine, the FBI took ALL the evidence away from the Dallas Police, Johnson took the body and limo away from Dallas, the caskets were switched between Dallas and Washington, the autopsy photos don't match the descriptions of what the Doctors at Parkland said they saw. Now, would Lyndon Johnson care at all about using Wallace in the assassination? He knew since Hoover as head of the FBI controlled the evidence, that he could change anything he had to. And he did. That's why we're talking about this murder almost a half century later. A corrupt government controlled by a liberal democrat, Lyndon Johnson, generated any evidence they needed to pass this by Warren Commissioin with future President Gerald Ford feeding Hoover whatever he needed to know. It wasn't foolish for LBJ to use Wallace in the assassination. The man could be trusted to do anything, including killing JFK. There are many who believe Wallace even killed LBJ's own sister to keep her quiet. It wasn't a foolish act by Johnson to use Wallace, it was arrogance to kill a President in front of hundreds of witnesses and realize that the witnesses could be neurtralized. And they were. Wallace left a fingerprint but it wasn't found until 1998. LBJ had sealed all the evidence, remember?

I believe the Wallace fingerprint is probably genuine and that Wallace was there. What I can't understand is why, as it would seem to defy common sense. I suppose that Wallace being used to blackmail LBJ if necessary is a plausible explanation. But why in the world would LBJ have to be blackmailed? Also, how could conspirators using Wallace to potentially blackmail LBJ count on Wallace leaving an identifiable fingerprint? "Mac, we're doing this to blackmail Johnson, so leave something to incriminate yourself." Or, "Mac, be sure not to wear any gloves." It's just one more mind-boggling aspect of the assassination. Ron If Mac Wallace was involved in the killing of Henry Marshall (which many think he was) and the roof was about to come crashing down on the TEXAS MAFIA, then the best way out was to get LBJ in charge. Let's just consider what LBJ would have done IF he was involved in the assassination: First, there has to be a patsy and Oswald, who was obviously involved in intelligence, fit the bill perfectly. Oswald was down on the second floor in the lunchroom..... He'd want to kill the investigations, and it's well documented that he set up the Warren Commission to keep the many other investigations from springing up, such as Congress, Texas...... He'd have Hoover supply whatever "evidence" he needed, and anything too damaging would disappear. Start with the Zapruder Film, buried for years because the public couldn't handle it, the Autopsy photos the property of the Kennedy family to this day, the classified sealed evidence, the idiotic documentaries which even now get confused about the simplest information, and on and on. No one else on Earth could have pulled this off and half a century later have people still wondering about who did it. The US GOVERNMENT will never admit that LBJ killed him but the falsified evidence points directly to Hoover and LBJ. Instead of seeing all the discrepancies as confusing, look at them as confirmation that the GUILTY MEN were at the top and had the power to make lies into facts. Then and only then, it all makes sense.

In his book, in his defense of the SBT, Posner ignores the FPP and cites Dr. Lattimer left and right. Lattimer was as wacky as the wackiest CT. He insisted the autopsy photos proved the back wound was higher on the neck than in the Rydberg drawings. Even worse, when you read the fine print, you see that Lattimer based his impression of the neck wound on the X-RAYS. In other words, he ignored what was obvious--that the wound is on the back--and determined that the bullet entered Kennedy's neck, based on his interpretation of the x-rays. Even though the photos showed it to be on the back. Even though the doctors measured it on the back. That is an EXCELLENT POINT! Since we know that the neck wound, if NOT an exit wound as the SBT/Warren Commission crowd believe, then it must have been an ENTRANCE wound fired from the front. That is of course consistent with what many of the witnesses at Parkland Memorial Hospital saw, a small wound in the neck which they clearly thought was an entrance wound. So, Lattimer was seeing the X-ray bullet trace through the neck. It had to exit and Lattimer saw it. You should ask why no one saw the exit in the back of the neck but with a hole the size of a grapefruit in the back of Kennedy's head, few would ever notice a small wound to the back of the neck. The area around the back of his neck was covered in blood and would probably would have concealed that wound. Thank you for making that clear! OF course the wound to JFK's back was found at the autopsy to be a shallow wound that went down as anyone would expect. Listen to one of the FBI agents who was at the autopsy say, no point of exit. Now you notice FOX NEWS along with many others say, OH, they simply failed to properly trace the bullet path.... No actually they did trace the bullet path correctly, it was shallow and it went no where. Ask me WHY that's true and you'll understand the hardest part of the assassination to understand, the third shot which hit Kennedy in the back. Regards Bill

Jayna Davis in her book THE THIRD TERRORIST clearly shows that there were IRAQI false defectors from GULF WAR I involved in the bombing. The name of the book comes from the fact that when McVeigh gets out of the truck shortly before the bomb explodes that another man, one of the eight IRAQI's involved, gets out of the truck on the passenger side. That same man is identified in a pickup truck with a bug shield speeding away from the Federal Building. It gets even better than that. The same man is working at Boston Logan Int'l Airport the morning of 9/11/2001 when the two planes that hit the World Trade Center buildings took off. Jayna Davis in her book talks about a law suite against her that the Iraqi filed against her. Due to that legal action, she was able to find out this man was having anxiety attacks while working in Boston as he had been seeing a psychiatrist about his anxiety attacks. Now, the high level official may have existed as part of a surveillance that went bad, and may have been the first part of an official coverup, but the real cover up occurred when President Clinton said there were NO TERRORISTS involved with McVeigh and Nichols, they acted alone. The cover ups extended all the way to 9/11 when it was too late for any more lies. The 9/11 Commission featured Jamie Gorelick, author of the GORELICK WALL which kept intelligence services and law enforcement from communicating with each other. This action was set in motion before the OKC bombing but after the FIRST WTC attack which happened in 1993 which had ties to Iraq too. Saddam started avenging GULF WAR I with that attack and they didn't stop until the terrorist attacks went over the line with 9/11. Far fetched you say? In 2004 it was revealed that Sandy Berger while gathering material for the 9/11 Commission was stuffing TOP SECRET SPECIAL CATEGORY documents into his socks and underwear. IT was recently revealed that he went back at a later times and stole copies of the same documents that he took earlier. WHY? Because the smoking guns lie there and the Clinton administration must still be worried about discovery. Personally, I think they have little to worry about. The US News Media couldn't figure out Iraqi ties to OKC and other terrorists attacks during the 1990's unless someone in that administration personally briefs them on it. We also had a reserve officer reveal that an operation called ABLE DANGER had identified ATTA, the pilot of the first plane that hit the WTC a year before 9/11. At first the 9/11 Commissioners denied that they ever heard about ABLE DANGER. The bottom line is that significant information did NOT get into the 9/11 report. I feel confident that Jamie Gorelick was involved in suppressing that information as she was involved in the OKC bombing coverup too. The reserve officer who went to the media revealing ABLE DANGER lost his security clearances and was attacked by the Pentagon. Here's where it gets tricky: The Bush Administration has fought the disclosure of terrorist ties to OKC as much as the Clinton administration ever did. WHY? Imagine the US GOVERNMENT telling the world that a President lied about several terrorist attacks in the 1990's. The common link to all of these unexplainable conspiracy theories is that the goverment investigation says one thing, the witnesses say repeatedly that no, we didn't see that. Let's look at another one of those nasty things that happened during the Clinton years, TWA-800 which has the problem of several hundred witnesses seeing a missile hit the airplane and destroy it. The government investigation is a lot simpler. The center fuel tank exploded which was identified right out of the White House by non other than Richard Clark, one of the lead critics in the 9/11 hearings that tried to blame Bush's incompetence as being the root cause of 9/11. It didn't stick, but when you're worried about being hung by the neck until dead if it's discovered that the terrorist attacks in the 1990s were concealed because of Presidential orders, then you'll try anything. Now, why would anyone believe that the US Government would think they could pull off something this big? The education forum has been a source of entertainment for years, listening and watching all the arguments about who killed John F. Kennedy in 1963. IT's very clear now that the U. S. Government has altered evidence repeatedly over the years, from what now is amateurish attempts (1963 technology) to conceal the five shots that were fired. The Government has learned that the press can be bullied into believing most anything and that the masses will follow. Some may argue, but overall, things go on. Few step up to the plate to really cause problems. TWA Witnesses ask WHY they are being called liars when it's clear the U. S. Goverment is lying Ask yourself WHY witnesses would take the time and the money to buy this ad in a major newspaper. They clearly say that major parts of the US Government are lying, they just ask WHY? As you look back at the last half century of US History, many of the problems started when LBJ ordered the killing of JFK. The U. S. Government's credibility was being restored until Clinton, the man who never saw a lie he wouldn't tell, went to the dirty tricks department to keep from having to go to war over Iraqi sponsored terrorist attacks during his administration. It's an easy story to see looking back over history, but few can believe it. Of course, few believe that LBJ killed JFK but as you look at the magnitude of the lies told and the evidence altered, the President of the United States is the only person in the government who is powerful enough to pull this type of lie off. Listen to Jayna Davis describe her book. IT's very simple but no one believes it. At least, not yet. Future historians will look back and wonder how we could have been so controlled that we believed the impossible simply because we were told over and over that it's true. Jayna Davis radio description of OKC Recognize that NONE of these people know WHY the US Government is lying, they just know lies are being told. Jim Quinn, the interviewer, is a not so typical media guy, but he doesn't depart from the stereotype media person, no thinking, just repeat what others say. He doesn't believe the obvious either.

The film suggests that Dick Cheney is behind the plot as it allows him to become president and to order the invasion of Syria (the lone gunman has links with Syria). Lyndon Johnson was supposed to order the invasion of Cuba as Oswald had close links with Castro. LBJ of course chickened out and decided to go with the "lone nut" solution. Since there can be little doubt now that LBJ ordered the assassination and there is no doubt LBJ and FBI director J. Edgar Hoover ran the coverup that's still a hot topic today, it's not surprising the movie tries to parallel history with fiction. It's obvious why LBJ didn't invade Cuba since he was involved with the murder planning up front. I've seen numerous references in the press recently to the movie

"I reached over & pulled him to me & tried to get us both down in the car" "Then came a third shot"---"I did not see the third shot hit--but I felt something falling all over me. My sensation was of spent buckshot. My eyes saw bloody matter in tiny bits all over the car." Handwritten notes of Nellie Connally, written 10 days after the assassination. Both John and Nellie Connally got this part clearly wrong. John in several interviews says essentially the same thing.

indicate he knew that Robert Kennedy had no objections. Katzenbach later testified RFK had no objections. Warren deserves some credit in that just before he died he wrote about the Warren Commission and took full responsibility for withholding the photos from Specter and the doctors. Actually the Warren Commisson was controlled by Hoover supplying the "evidence" and Johnson supplying the power when needed to ensure the coverup worked. There was absolutely no way that the Conspirators, Johnson and Hoover were going to allow autopsy information to be supplied to the Warren Commission. That part was fundamental to the coverup. This is just another indicator who the conspirators were. It was Lyndon Johnson and Hoover all along. Why else would the government insist on something that isn't true, that one bullet passed through JFK after hitting him him in the back and exiting his throat, a situation that IF true, would mean the bullet would have to been traveling UP when it left Kennedy. As anyone knows, the Warren Commission then said the bullet went DOWN when it passed through Connelly hitting him in the back, exiting his chest, breaking his right wrist, and then depositing A BULLET FRAGMENT in his left leg. OF course, there is NOT enough mass missing from the magic bullet to deposit the material found in John Connelly's wrist and the fragment in his leg. I'll give you another clue, but something I haven't researched, I just saw a reference to the bullet fragments found in the car do NOT have any blood or human tissue on the bullet fragments found in the car. The quote: -- There were no traces of blood or human tissue on the bullet fragments that were found in the limousine when Donahue examined them at the National Archives, yet the Warren Commission said these fragments came from the bullet that plowed through the President's head. This quote is from a rediculous paper that was trying to show another of the Secret Service fired the shot papers. Is it true there were no Human blood or tissue on the bullet fragments? This should be true for CE840, the three bullet fragments found under Nellie Connally's seat. I doubt if it's true (but it is possible for the Connally shooting scenario) for the bullet fragments found toward the front of the car (CE 567, 569).

Actually you can disprove the Single Bullet Theory very easily if you just show when John Connally was actually wounded. It should be apparent to anyone with an IQ greater than 75 that the SBT is impossible with the wound to JFK's back so far below his neck. The reason that the Warren Commission was tricked into that conclusion is that the autopsy photos were "the property of the Kennedy family." I think I remember Specter saying "and out of deference to the Kennedy family, the autopsy photos were not shown." Of course, the Warren Commission used a drawing made from memory several months after the autopsy (show me another case in history where the autopsy photos and other evidence is controlled by the victim's family). You can also understand that the SBT is wrong if you carefully look at Connally's wounds. The single bullet theory is not consistent with all those wounds. I met with Dr. Wecht last year and told him you have been arguing for years about what did NOT happen, you've never shown what actually did happen. And of course, the majority of Americans do not believe the Warren Commission's conclusion of a single shooter, but virtually no one understands what did happen. By the way, you may remember that Dr. Wecht was the lone dissenting member of the 1978 House Subcommittee on Assassinations. His basis was that the down angle of the bullet through Connelly was approximately 25 degrees, something that is impossible with the supposed entry wound to JFK below his neck. So, if you don't believe the SBT, when was Connally shot? When you answer that question correctly, you'll also know who ordered the killing.

Hi Dawn; Of course Dale Meyers says he was once a believer in conspiracy, but now he is Warren Commission convert (my words, not his). I wanted to meet with him and discuss a plan, he wanted no part of it. It took several emails to him before he even acknowledged my existence. I am quite sure his appearance in ABC's "BEYOND CONSPIRACY" and later in the Discovery Channel's "Beyond the Magic Bullet" will one day be classics, and not in the way he thinks they will be. Imagine if you hear Peter Jennings telling us again and again, if you don't believe the Warren Commission, you really need help :-) I watched every minute of both shows, it's necessary to understand the enemy to defeat them. Bill

If any of you have large files you'd like to share such as 3d figures you've done in your animations, you can use http://www.uploading.com/ to share files up to 150 MB in size. I was in contact with Dale Meyers last year concerning inaccuracies in his animation but we never went past the point of just discussing some observations I had. He of course is a lone gunman "theorist." It was discussed earlier in this thread that there are better programs for 4D animations than Sketchup, and they are expensive. I'd be curious what program may be better to use. Of course what I'm looking for is the best bang for the buck to where a 3d presentation of the whole trip down Elm Street could be shown. Thanks for any help Bill

Good summary on her book. I got her book on the hope that she left just a few unique observations of the day, which of course she did but none were very relevant. Nellie died without a clue about who the killer was and the motive for "that horrible day" in Dallas. She was the last surviving occupant of the limo. I think as far as notes and insight, the diary that is locked away that reveals who the real power behind the killing was is in Jacky's diary, although I'm not holding my breath on that one either. I think John Connelly did know who ordered the killing but as I read here recently on another post, Connelly said he would never say in public what he thought happened as he loved his country too much. There's a lot of insight in that statement if you understand John Connelly's history of corruption in Texas with his mentor. Connelly got his start in politics with the trash of our society, but like Harry S Truman, he distanced himself from it later.

"There are basicly two camps. OK, I'm clearly in one..but either both camps should be as happy or as unhappy with the Museum for it to be able to say it is being 'neutral' and objective about historical fact. I don't deny it may have some educational value for the average person who knowns next to nothing, but.... " Of course the overwhelming evidence points to LBJ as the man who ordered the assassination, and of course Hoover and LBJ had to be the ones who "pulled" off the coverup. I noticed very clearly on one display in the 6th Floor Museum that talked of the possible killers that LBJ was noticably absent. The two most obvious men to want JFK dead, and they aren't even mentioned in the museum. Who else could have pulled off one of the poorest coverups in history? Today, it SHOULD be transparent that it was LBJ.

I do not believe that our country would have been damaged politically had the truth of government involvement in the murder of President Kennedy been reported. The reverse is the case. Democracy is weakened by the press maintaining official lies; please see "9/11 and 11/22," my op ed piece on my website http://www.joanmellen.net/NYC_2006article.html which compares the lies of two Presidential commissions, the Warren Commission and the 9/11 Commission. Joan; I was fascinated by your comparison of the JFK assassination to the 9/11 Commission. You are close to gettting it, but you are still somewhat off target. Keep looking and the truth will jump out at you. There is one more large similarity that you are missing. Bill

Once that failed, now you are trying to say that there is no proof that the wrist is in the wrong place. The official version has Connally's right wrist out over the center of his body because they knew it needed to be there to make things line up. So when someone like yourself claims that I have not evaluated the film correctly despite your numerous errors in interpreting the images - Having read zillions of comments on this thread, since Connelly's wrist isn't in the right place (postulated, maybe backed up by photographic evidence), would someone CLEARLY state what DID happen in the shooting.

Mark, I don't see any evidence of Jackie causing JFK's reaction to being hit. It appears that Jackie turns her head away towards the the front of the car/her right arm following in a forward direction, while JFK is rifled backwards. Bill This ""appears"" to be as 2 images in 3 parts. Image 1, then image 1 + 2, then image 2. Image 1 shows no injury. Image 2 shows a star shaped injury, but JFK's head is already back (although blurred). The star shape does not move so can only come from one image, which must be the second image, when his head is already back. ST And since the head "wound" is in the side of his head as seen in the Zapruder film, doesn't this CONFIRM that the Zapruder film was modified? The medical staff at Parkland and at the autopsy both describe the wound to the BACK of JFK's head, not the side. IF you accept this premise as a fact (and there should be little question that this is true), that the major head wound was to the back of his head, doesn't this alone narrow it down to WHO could be behind the coverup and WHY? Bill_C

They also, took with them, all his JFK, assassination files, documentation and such...which has and had absolutely nothing to do with his actions as a coroner....... As far as I know, at present nothing has been returned. Ah, then if they took ALL of his doucmentation on JFK then they have a copy of some of my work which explains what actually happened in Dallas, but there were some holes in that presentation that Dr. Wecht helped me fill. I have since answered his questions but I have not closed the loop. But Dr. Wecht's secretary in his office told me last year that he cooresponded frequently with several other researchers on the jFK assassination, and he may have met some objections to those activities. Bill

I had the pleasure of meeting with Dr. Wecht last year when we covered some details of the book I am working on. HE was EXTREMELY helpful with his comments and helped me piece together some details that previously had escaped me. I have been working on an update for him but I had not sent to him as I have a few more details to straighten out. He is an extremely busy man and I didn't want to waste any of his time with inaccuracies. His son Ben was also there for our meeting and he is also an extremely fine man, just like his father. As I set up the appointment, I had interractions with both the Coroner's office and his private consulting business. Of course Dr. Wecht will always be the main critic of the single bullet/magic bullet/magnificient missle as he sometimes called it, probably the biggest, silliest lie in human history. Dr. Wecht is right about that, of course, he just didn't know what really happened. Bill

In this e-mail Marrs states that the funeral director of the funeral home where Oswald was TOLD Marrs that he (the director) had seen an FBI agent use Oswald's body to plant a print on the rifle. Are people familiar with this claim? In one of the original "Men Who Killed Kennedy", the funeral director says that the FBI came back to the funeral home and asked to be alone with LHO's body. It was his opinion that they could have planted the fingerprint on the rifle at that time (from memory, I'll have to look at the clip to confirm). Bill Charleston

It probably didn't come from behind the stockade fence. Something DID happen down there, I think (almost) all of us agree. With several witnesses seeing "smoke" and other suspicious activity, why don't you think it was from behind the fence? It might not have been shots Why would it not be a shot? Is there any reason to "guess" anything else? By the way I asked this question knowing that the echo hypothesis was bogus, I wanted to understand it's history. It could have been brainstorming by the questioner as he was trying to "convince" Jean Hill that she didn't hear 4-6 shots.

The FBI said that witness testimony on what they heard was not reliable due to echoes. Does anybody have a brief history on WHEN this excuse was first used? Thanks Bill

Pamela: Thanks so much for the dimensions on the Limo! Now I can get out my slide rule and figure out some details (I think I have MATHCAD on this computer so I guess I probably won't need the slide rule). Bill