Brian LeCloux

Well, historian David R. Wrone makes a pretty good case that the Warren Commission's David Belin showed that Oswald couldn't have even arrived at the scene until 1:22. Tippit was shot---and dead---by 1:10 according to eyewitness T.F. Bowley as Wrone cites his statement published by the Commission. Cicero's Lament Wrone is very meticulous in his research and basically anihilates the case against Oswald shooting Tippit. I doubt those who created this site would want to take on Wrone in a debate about the facts of the shooting. Brian LeCloux

My Top Five would be (not in any order): 1. Post Mortem: JFK Assassination Cover-Up Smashed! Weisberg. I have always felt that in reading this book and digesting its contents one can say authoritatively, that, based on the official evidence only, LHO fired no shots on November 22, 1963. 2. Presumed Guilty by Howard Roffman. I have always been impressed by his concise dissection of the official theory. Part II, the medical/ballistics evidence analysis pulverizes the official assertions. And, Chapter 8, The Alibi, clearly shows, again using only official evidence that LHO cannot have been both the 6th floor shooter and a second floor Coke consumer in the time allowed by the Warren Commision lawyers. And the entire book is available free on line. Cool. 3. Never Again! Weisberg. He recaps all the medical, ballistic, and clothing evidence that supports more than one shooter and demolishes the misinformation put out by The Journal of American Medical Association's treatment of the case. One key thing often overlooked by many: The Warren Commission disproved its own report when they hired Dr. Joseph Dolce to test the Mannlicher Carcano ammunition against the single bullet theory. As Dolce years later pointed out to Chip Selby--for his excellent Reasonable Doubt video-- he proved with experiments that the single bullet theory is not true. He told this to Warren Commission lawyers in an April 1964 meeting and they just ignored him. Never called him to testify. His testing is key. I wonder why he is so often overlooked by critics. No definitive work on this case should ignore his revealing test results, nor the treatment he received by the Commission. Weisberg also has some strong words for Jim Garrison and says that Garrison went in the direction with the investigation. There were some leads he gave Garrison while he was in New Orleans, but they weren't pursued. 4. The Assassination of John F. Kennedy, A Bibliography, 1963-1979, compiled by DeLloyd J. Guth and David R. Wrone. This one is essential because in the preface Wrone severely criticizes the House Select Committee on the Assassinations for ignoring massive evidence of conspiracy. He highlights seven major flaws in their approach. This is another set of data most critics have ignored over the years in their discussions re the HSCA. (also, Wrone wrote a great article, Cicero's Lament, on the occasion of David Belin's death, available on line; what a great destruction of the lies of the Commission and Belin; no wonder guys like Wrone don't get on Nightline or the other major news talk shows in America.) 5. Breach of Trust. McKnight. Others have talked about this very fine volume. McKnight rightly give a lot of credit to Harold Weisberg, the dean of the assassination critics. Others I'd have on my list: * The Zapruder Film by David R. Wrone. I have always been impressed with his scholarship. He never seems to get the mainstream media press he deserves. *Accessories After the Fact. Sylvia Meagher. Very well done early analysis of the documentary base. *The Last Investigation. Fonzi's book is fascinating. *The Strength of the Wolf. Douglas Valentine's scholarship has always been suberb and he has a chapter on The Federal Bureau of Narcotics and the Assassination of JFK. Very, very interesting. He told me he also believes the key to the case is what happened in Mexico City. *Not In Your Lifetime. Anthony Summers. *The Assassinations. James DiEugenio and Lisa Pease, editors. Brian LeCloux

My name is Brian LeCloux. I teach high school Psychology and AP Psychology at a Wisconsin high school. I have an ongoing interest in propaganda, public relations, and the scientific study of human behavior and thinking. I first became interested in the JFK assassination in 1980 when I took a History course from Professor David R. Wrone at UW-Stevens Point. Wrone introduced me to the writings and research of the dean of the assassination critics, Harold Weisberg. While at UW-SP, I watched videotapes of a national symposium on the JFK Assassation held in November, 1976. The speakers were David R. Wrone, Harold Weisberg, James Lesar and the young Howard Roffman. Their scholarly approach impressed me and has guided me since in my understanding of the case. I try to apply this approach to each new revelation, book, video, etc. on the case. In joining this forum I would to contribute to the answering of questions posed about topics, books and other publications since I am widely read. I'd also add my own views---where I have knowledge of the documentary record. I'd also like to be able to ask questions of history book authors such as McKnight, Turner and Mellen since I've read their JFK related works.

For best books about the JFK assassination, I'd rank all of the Weisberg's books ahead of any other books. His knowledge of the documentary evidence is unsurpassed. He really did smash the cover up with his 1975 Post Mortem volume and never got credit in the mainstream media for the awesome work he did forcing the truth out in dozens of FOIA cases. I was never turned off by his passion. It seemed acceptable given the issue involved: the cover up of the killing of the president and the failure by the Congress, the Courts, the mainstream media, the critical liberal intellectual community and the general public to properly respond to the negation of democracy. Next, I'd go with Presumed Guilty by Howard Roffman. Especially since the young man was only 21. I saw a video tape of presentations he gave in 1976 at UW Stevens Point (along with Wrone, Lesar and Weisberg). Unbelievable. Using only Warren Commision evidence Roffman clearly and logically destroyed the frame up of Oswald. His only book on the case seems to have the best presenation for LHO's alibi. The chapter on how he could not possibly have been a sixth floor shooter and within approximately one minute been on the second floor drinking a coke could have been key to his acquital had there been a trial. We need no speculation or theorizing here: official evidence supports the contention that he cannot have gotten down the stairs in time. The reconstructions and witness statements make this unsupportable. He would have arrived after patrolman Baker. Witnesses on the stairwell would have seen him run past them. It did not happen; officially. Game over. Next would be David R. Wrone's new book about the Zapruder film and related issues. I've always enjoyed Wrone's take on the facts and issues in this case. I like how he just thrashes Posner and Seymour Hersh about their sloppy scholarship and unsourced claims. Wrone's work is overlooked as it should not be. He's a trained historian with a superior understanding of government, politics and history. He seems to know the documentary evidentiary base almost as well as Weisberg did. He and Weisberg highlight the information provided by Dr. Joseph Dolce. Dolce just blew apart the single bullet theory. Interviewed by the Warren Commission he just told them flat out, the theory is wrong, after having proved it with experiments. So, of course, they couldn't include him in the Report. And if you're a critic and you're writing a book length treatment of this case, how can you not include Dolce? Well, I don't know, but many writers don't include the Dolce study conducted for the Warren Commission disproving their own theory. The Chip Selby doc, Reasonable Doubt, has a great interview with him. Critics should be throwing this guy's material in the face of guys like Posner and McAdams. The 1980 bibliography Wrone compiled with DeLloyd J. Guth is superb. In the introduction Wrone just anihilates Blakey and the HSCA for their failure to properly investigate the JFK case. He cites seven key facts/areas supporting conspiracy - not including LHO as a shooter - that the HSCA badly handled. Next, would be The Assassinations compilation by Pease and DiEugenio. These two authors are rare in the field of assassination research. They seem to not only write well but also have an excellent command of the documents. Further, they seem to avoid ridiculous speculations found in many other popular treatments. Next, for me, would by Accessories After the Fact. Meagher did a great job revealing the evidenc of conspiracy and the flaws in the case against LHO without engaging in factless speculation. Nearing the end of my list I'd add Not in Your Lifetime by Summers. I like how he seems to engage a mass of material and write about in a consise manner. I'd conclude my list with The Last Investigation by Fonzi. I enjoyed reading this insider's account of the promising, but politically crushed, HSCA. An excellent history of the HSCA has yet to be written. Not a long list because most of the books on this case are marred by speculation, lack of foundation, procrustean bed theorizing, false connections, poor scholarship, etc.