Jump to content
The Education Forum

James DiEugenio

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by James DiEugenio

  1. When you read this, you really have to wonder about the Dallas Police. It really appears to me that if the JFK case is any kind of example, then they deliberately did not follow correct procedure for the purpose of being able to make it up later. And they then relied on having sympathetic judges and public defender type attorneys.
  2. Thanks Larry. The idea of chain of custody is something that will be in Oliver's film. Day: Flip flop Sims: flip flop Day: GD does not mean George Doughty. It mean Vince Drain. And was CE 543 dented after by the DPD as a way of getting back at the FBI for taking the evidence?
  3. I don't think that is her Karl. Compare the picture above posted by Anthony from her column. Plus in that obit, it says she lived in Oregon and the San Francisco area. Not the Crescent CIty.
  4. As we know, Oswald never had a lawyer. According to the DPD there was no stenographic record of his questioning. He never got a grand jury hearing, or a preliminary hearing. But yet on the day after he was murdered in the middle of about 50 Dallas cops live on TV, he was named by the NY Times as JFK's assassin. Not alleged assassin, but assassin. The Warren Commission was made up of lawyers. But yet every tenet of judicial process was eliminated from their proceedings. No objections were allowed, and no documents were examined, since there was no counsel for Oswald. There was no judge to oversee things since LBJ had neutered Warren as had Dulles, when he objected violently to Warren Olney as Warren's choice for chief counsel. So the kind of circus sideshow Johnny Cairns is going to describe was allowed to run rampant. I don't think anyone has done a better job on the shells, which have been relatively ignored, than Johnny does here. Can you imagine what Mark Lane could have done to Sims and Day on this? And my God, the print evidence! LOL! 😂 https://www.kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-articles/a-presumption-of-innocence-lee-harvey-oswald-part-3
  5. In the list of people who have helped us understand Oswald to a much more comprehensive degree, I should have added Greg Parker. Here is my review of his book which is worth having and has a lot of originality about it. https://www.kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-reviews/lee-harvey-oswald-s-cold-war
  6. The reason I brought those points up about Oswald with Alecia Long is simple. Many years ago, when Phil Melanson appeared before the ARRB, he said that he hoped that once the Board's mission was complete, their work would make his book Spy Saga look like a Cliff Notes version of Oswald. IMO, I think that has happened. In light of the declassified work of Betsy Wolf, plus the work of Newman, Armstrong, Simpich, Titovets and others, we have learned a lot about Oswald. For any author on this case to deal with Oswald, and Oswald in New Orleans, but to leave all of that work out, that is simply not being honest with the reader. Because it is that work which provides the important backdrop to recent advances by people like Morley, and especially Paul Bleau's milestone article on the Fair Play for Cuba Committee. Which if you have not read, you really should. Malcolm Blunt supplied a lot of the ammo for this first class essay https://www.kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-articles/exposing-the-fpcc-part-1 If you are not going to level with the reader about Oswald, then why are you even writing about the subject in the first place?
  7. Let us never forget, Max Holland was the man behind one of the very worst JFK documentaries of recent years. https://www.kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-reviews/the-lost-bullet-max-holland-gets-lost-in-space Considering the works of Gus Russo for PBS in 1993, Peter Jennings in 2003 and Tom Brokaw at the fiftieth, that is saying something. In fact Holland's piece of rubbish should be stamped on his forehead in order to ostracize him from human contact. That is how bad it was. So this is why no one should take that review of Alecia Long at face value. I will be reviewing her book, and Long is not going to like it.
  8. I started reading this book last night. What a joke. She deals with Oswald in the military in five lines. And does not bring up the fact that he learned Russian. But that's good compared to this. She deals with his journey to the USSR and stay there in one sentence. Paul Hoch said it was a very good book. LOL, ROTF. Well maybe it will get dramatically better?
  9. Speaking of Joe Green, Nelson actually encountered Joe later. He told him something like, I know you had to do that. Meaning that somehow I had assigned Joe's article and made him write a negative review of Nelson's "Mastermind" book. I never tell our writers what to write. If I did that, they would not work for us. Everything I do on somebody else's work comes after the fact. For example Seamus Coogan, who was one of the best writers we had-his article on the CIA and UFO's is a classic--wanted to do something on John Hankey. So he did. But I thought it was too long. So I cut about 20 per cent out. Seamus had no objection. But the idea that i make assignments and then tell the writer how to write the piece is nonsense. And, I have to add, if I had written the "Mastermind" review it would have been even worse.
  10. But if you recall Pitzer's nephew, there were three key points that Allan confirmed: 1. Pitzer was right handed. 2. His right hand was not deformed. 3. No film of the autopsy ever showed up. And how they searched.
  11. You got that right. I mean not to show the Rivera show when the Z film was first shown on national TV, and Dick Gregory was there!
  12. The new Showtime documentary on Dick Gregory is adequate about his showbiz and civil rights career. But I was kind of shocked when it did not include his presence on the first national screening of the Zapruder film on ABC in 1975. It also did not include his co writing credit on Code Name Zorro, later retitled Murder in Memphis on the King case. Or his presence at more than one COPA Conference in Washington DC. Dick Gregory, in my opinion, stands with Mort Sahl as one of the very few first line entertainers who risked it all for their political beliefs about what happened to America. That was my (rather unsurprising) problem with the Showtime documentary. https://www.kennedysandking.com/reviews/the-one-and-only-dick-gregory
  13. No he ended up doubting it. And in opposition to Marvin. Its a shame his site is down. He did some good work on some important issues.
  14. If I recall correctly, if you add in the original five part series, with all the ones that came after, I think there were 12 of them total. (Although Wikipedia says there were nine, they skip over some of them.) When you end up featuring someone like Barr McClellan as your main talking head, and he says, "I know Lyndon Johnson did it," and then you read his book--I mean Yech. He has Oswald on the sixth floor! And then it turns out that the alleged sine qua non of the book and that particular segment, the Wallace fingerprint, is not a match, I mean give us all a break. And the thing is, Turner had the funds to do a double check on this issue. The second print expert--neither were accredited at the time--withdrew his affirmation from Jay Harrison, since the quality of the exemplars they were analyzing was questionable. So questionable that Garrett, who supervised accreditation, would not work with them. He demanded a better basis for analysis, and proved them wrong. Nigel Turner turned the JFK case into the equivalent of a National Enquirer installment series. And every once in awhile NE gets something right. But its like a broken clock being right twice a day. Do you know what Milicent Cranor told me about Tom Wilson? "Jim, Tom Wilson could not find steel in PIttsburgh." John Costella said about the same to me. Allan Eaglesham did the best work on Pitzer. He concluded he was not murdered. And in all likliehood he did not film the autopsy. No comment on Judy Baker. And my God that Morningstar, BIlly Sol Estes stuff about altering the body in Texas. When I found out that Estes started that story, i just started giggling. The more I regurgitate this stuff, the bigger headache I get. Not to mention that in the first series, his so called Steve Rivele hit team also ended up being a custard pie. This guy wasted a really wonderful opportunity to do some valuable work on the JFK case. Especially on the 40th anniversary. What does he do? He gives us McClellan, Baker and Liggett. Recall, this is well after the ARRB had closed down. But that is the kind of sensationalism Turner was interested in. The true facts of what happened to JFK were secondary to him.
  15. Let me add, this is one of the reasons i have so much disdain for Nigel Turner. That guy put out so much bad information on this case, that he might have turned the Kennedy assassination into a a mine field of live bombs. And this was after the ARRB came out. I mean, really, Barr McClellan, the Brown and Harrison "Wallace fingerprint", Tom Wilson, the Pitzer case, Baker, Liggett. I mean where did it all end? With a lawsuit of course. There was so much good stuff he could have put on and this is what he came up with? For the most part it was cheap sensationalism. I did not think much of the Men Who Killed Kennedy original five part series, but it was better overall than what came after.
  16. Dave: I don't think that is Morrow, its Nelson. What is incredible about Nelson is that in his first book on LBJ, he just accepted the fingerprint and also the thing about Johnson ducking before the shots went off. Did not cross check them at all. Years later, Joan did. Unfortunately, this was after the Nigel Turner episode on TV with Barr McClellan, and Walt Brown talking about how he would take the print into court. Both of these pieces of evidence would be blown out of court. The print with Joan's expert, Mr. Garrett, and Groden showed in his book Absolute Proof that LBJ did not react before the shots went off. But this is how intent Nelson was and is in incriminating LBJ. No cross checking, no quality control at all. I thought Faustian Bargains was a pretty good book.
  17. Walt Brown kept this evidence wrapped up for years on end. Joan's expert would not even work with the copies that Jay Harrison had. And her expert had first class credentials. He supervised the certification programs for the IAI. Neither of Jay's experts were certified at the time of their work on the Wallace print. Plus, her expert used better and more current technology. https://www.kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-reviews/mellen-joan-faustian-bargains Phil Nelson went after me for not reading Judy Baker's book. WIthout referring to: which one? She has at least three out there. He then says that somehow because Hunt referred to The Big Event, then Baker must be correct. Nelson does not even know that what eventually got out there was Hunt's second version. I know the guy who Kevin Costner had working on the case. He told me that what Hunt eventually said was not what he told him. And he worked with Hunt for months on end. When I tried to talk to Joan about Nelson's book on The Liberty incident versus hers, she about hung up on me. She was insulted by the question.
  18. Not a problem at all. McClelland is correct about the first point since he was there. In fact he is the source. He is wrong about the other point since he was not there.
  19. Burton Hersh's book was just crud. One of the very few books I could not read because it was both poorly written and just full of cheap sensationalism. I really think someone got to him for that one.
  20. Its not that at all David. Its the enemies they made and the tactics they used in order to politically assassinate the Kennedys many years later. This created an industry. And the MSM got behind it. The mantra was: well if you don't believe these things then somehow you are protecting the Kennedys. When it was clear that no one in any powerful position was doing any such thing. It has all been one sided and it reached its apogee with Hersh and Double Cross which got great exposure. When in fact, they were both hatchet jobs. John did a nice job exposing Hersh in his latest.
  21. Joe Kennedy had to go through six different inquiries when he was assigned to different offices for the government by FDR and Truman in the thirties, forties and fifties. This came to about 800 pages of investigations. It began right after FDR repealed Prohibition. In none of those pages did anyone say anything about Joe Kennedy's illegal bootlegging. 800 pages and zilch. So when did this accusation first occur? In a newspaper report in the fall of 1960. Now anyone who knows anything about politics and the media could see what happened here due to the timing. Because of what was going to be a very close presidential race, someone in Nixon's camp got this BS story into the press on the eve of the election. Based on the W Virginia primary. But in all the inquiries done on W. Virginia, and the two best books researched on it by people who were there, there was no Mob influence in it. Bobby Kennedy just ran a very good race, plus he brought in a lot of money, especially toward the end which helped fund the state wide infomercial which Teddy White said was the best such political program he had ever seen. There were 4 different inquiries into that one. None revealed anything improper. Even Goldwater came up empty. The thing about Kennedy in Canada was also researched in the book Last Call, one of the best books on the subject. That was a different Kennedy. (Burton Hersh's book was so poorly sourced and so sensationalistic, I could not read it.) I am sorry, but I am not going to accept the word of some mobster talking to Peter Maas. I mean come on. Talk about an agenda. These guys despised the Kennedys because of their all out war on the Mob, I mean the tales they will tell. One has them looking through a one way mirror as JFK was cavorting with two hookers in Havana before the revolution. Please. If anyone has seen the pictures of the girls that JFK went out with before his wedding, that is just ridiculous. Last Call put this issue to rest. And the author did it in a rigorous and systematic way. And he worked for the NY Times so its not hagiography. As per Nasaw, at one time during this era, Joe Kennedy was running two studios at once! And he was granted stock options in both. He then went ahead and got into film distribution himself. In one year, he released 51 films, a movie per week. Distribution is where the big money is since you are cut in from the first dollar. Joe Kennedy made so much money in films that this is what he used to buy the Sears tower, at that time, probably the most expensive piece of real estate in Chicago. In my research I always think its important to find the origin of something. When did it first appear, and is there a pattern one can discern? And who are the sources relied upon? After Gore Vidal had his dust up with Bobby Kennedy, that was it. I mean Gore Vidal actually was promoting that piece of crud Double Cross. Which among other pieces of BS said the Mob owned Marilyn Monroe's contract. If you have been reading Don McGovern over at K and K--who knows more about this than anyone--that is more utter horse dung. But this is how badly these mobsters want to somehow insinuate themselves in the Kennedy family. In order to somehow neutralize RFK's holy war against their criminality. And this includes fake gangsters like Gianni Russo, who came up with some real science fiction, used by the now exposed Mark Shaw.
  22. Thanks so much Paul. In the Nasaw biography of Joe, for the first time, there were actually records of his income. I did not see these in the previous biographies. Why would anyone making that kind of money legitimately, risk making much less illegally? But the MSM does not want you to think that.
  23. BTW, Mike Griffith is an underrated and under noticed guy who does a lot of good work on the JFK case. Nice critique of Gus Russo https://miketgriffith.com/files/russo.htm
  • Create New...