Evan Marshall

Only a fool would call a grown man, "Boy". I spent 20 yrs in the Detroit Police Dept where my assignments included-Tactical Unit, CSI, Homicide, and the Special Response Team. After my retirement I worked for Israel Military Industries and the National Nuclear Security Administration's Office of Secure Transportation, training the federal agents who transport nuclear weapons.

Joseph Smith said it best, "People can leave this Church, but just can't leave it alone."

It's too bad that such bigotry exists here-I just finished "Nexus" and find it more enlightening that a printed tirade by an Ex Mormon.

there is no need to get permission from anybody to pursue a carrer or office. There is no connection between the Church and the JBS. It amazes me that people woild be so foolish as to take an outsidders "view" of the Church instead of simply exploring the doctrines of the Church from the Church and deciding if they have any relevance in their life.

If I was thinking about buyong a Chrysler what kind of recommendation do you think I would get from a Buick dealer?

I come here to learn more about the JFK murder not the "Conspiaracies" laucnhed by some imagined secret team in my Church. If this the sort bigotry that is allowed to flourish here the crime will never be solved. Grow up and move on.

Boy, you can learn more here about JFK assassination, by reading the

1990 manuscript/book CROSSTRAILS written by a resigned Mormon.

there is no need to get permission from anybody to pursue a carrer or office. There is no connection between the Church and the JBS. It amazes me that people woild be so foolish as to take an outsidders "view" of the Church instead of simply exploring the doctrines of the Church from the Church and deciding if they have any relevance in their life.

If I was thinking about buyong a Chrysler what kind of recommendation do you think I would get from a Buick dealer?

I come here to learn more about the JFK murder not the "Conspiaracies" laucnhed by some imagined secret team in my Church. If this the sort bigotry that is allowed to flourish here the crime will never be solved. Grow up and move on.

Two of the likable nice republican persons now trying

to become U.S. President are JON HUNTSMAN and MITT

ROMNEY

It is my greatest hope they are not considered by voters

and all others on that fateful day.

From the 1990 manuscript/book CROSSTRAILS

MORMON MANIFESTO

All Mormons must consult their ecclesiastical superiors

to obtain permission before accepting any appointment

that might interfere with their religious duties!

-------------------------------------------------------

Long since embedded in the political,social and

economic fabric of the United States & world.

The question......Future liberty

Arise! Alert to sacrifice

Boycott the 'beastly mark' Mormon mastery

To track all persons thoughts and deeds

Boycott this 'all powerful' apostate Masonry

with assassin grip 'on all U.S. politics'

Boycott their 'common cause' new century

Buy not...Sell not...use not

Boycott it's 'dialectic indignities;

Destroy the 'brute comrades' zeal

Boycott their 'new order' equality

For "U.N. world' work ethic, slavery

Boycott the chaos-creator's 'pale tyranny'

Who's lackeys in 'lethal power' now rule

Boycott 'the plan' of few to subvert majorities

With 'legislated limits' on all rights of liberty!

Harry,

I agree. And I don't want another ex-governor of The Independent Republic of Texas for our President, either...

--Odd Tommy

As an active Mormon the above is a bunch of crap. Go to LDS.org and read what we really believe. I have known the Romney family for yrs and remain unimpressed. Huntsman is a fraud.

The Church will stand or fall on its actual beliefs. I was at BYU on 11/22/63 and quickly realized something was amiss. Yr later as a Homicde Sgt with the Detroit Police Dept I realized it was not really investigated. I knew it was a conspirarcy when Jack Ruby corrected the DA on Oswald's affiliation.

I suggest we focus on the JFK assassination. I refuse to critisize others belief and I fully expect the same courtsy.

no exact length-Detroit had to be the last big city in the US to get a SWAT Team and I was asked to be the training Sgt because of weapons training I had done outside the dept and being regularly publishd in the law enforcement press. Once the Team was spun up I went back to Homicide. Had to take an early retirement due to my cooperation wih the FBI.

I spent 20yrs with Detroit PD including two seperate tours in Homicide-having read all 26 volumes several times and a whole lot of other materials I can assure everybody the Dallas Investigation was a joke.

I've never read any dependable material that showed the relevance of drugs with Dallas. I had homicides involving drug dealers in Detroit where I talked to more people than Dallas Homicide did.

They never secured the crime scenes and never interviewed the whole DC crowd before they left town. They were either intimidated or bribed by the Feds and frankly I don't think Dallas Homicide AT THAT TIME could have found an elephant in a bath tub. Current Dallas Homicide has some really sharp folks.

Every witness to a crime has at least a few specks of gold on them and if they are approached correctly, that spek can lead to the mother load

Thanks Greg,

Just thought the sound of an air gun might be a reason some only heard 3 shots.

jim

Hi Jim,

Do you mean that you were wondering if the reason ONLY 3 shots were heard by some is that the remaining

shots were unheard as a result of the relatively inaudible air gun sound? I think that's what you are asking.

IMO, the amount of mass that a projectile would need to possess in order to inflict the kind of damage that

JFK suffered exceeds the upper limit of 1963 "air power" technology. IOW: the mass of the bullets required

to do the job was too high for "air" alone to power. Again, that is my opinion only. Although I have a fairly

good working knowledge of the subject, I'm no expert by any means.

Greg/Jim

you are looking at over 1000 FPS for a .22 but some home(overgassed) gas powered can reach double that figure. But with such a small (throat wound type )projectile penetration would be a problem.Unless just delivering to blood supply levels in the Derma .

Ian

there's a much simpler answer-Mitch Werbell invented the Sionic supresser and Jack Cannnon the Glaser Safety Slug which would look vwey similar to the many projectiles seen on the XRays. They along withn George Nonte make an interesting combination. All 3 had connections to intelligence. A friend who retired from CIA told me the old China hands were pretty extreme.

CSI Dallas -

Intentional or Negligent?

Was it intentional or negligence ...

5) That the rifle found on the Sixth Floor of the TSBD was misidentified as a "Mauser" by three officers in their official reports?

BK

------------------------------------------------------

5) DiEugenio says his research has led to discussion of a third rifle, more appropriately identified as a first rifle, found before the Mauser.

JG

OK, you got me hooked. Tell me more about this THIRD [first?] rifle discovery...or direct me to more information, please.

-----------------------------------------------------------

Hi Mark,

I apologize for not having the specific Black Op Radio archived program from 2009 on which I heard Jim DiEugenio say this. But I have written to the email address on his CTKA site and gotten a response on another matter, so I recommend dropping him a line.

Good Luck,

JG

I don't know when Dallas went to the CSI concept but my dept, Detroit PD, went to it in 1971 and I was in the 1st class for CSI. Prior to that in Detroit, Central Photo would do the pictures, Latent Prints would handle print evidence and the Crime Lab would handle the blood and other body fluids. We went to a CSI approach because there was a tendency to miss stuff. My partner and I handled a number of mutliple homcides and homicide was much happier the way they were handled by one unit.

Dallas Pd certainly deserves alot of criticism for their work on this case, but perhaps a portion of the problem was a number of different people from different units responsible for various components of the scene. We often spent 24hrs or more processing a scene with the thoroughness required and we never had a dead President.

We don't have to wait until 2013 for a Bugliosi vs. Horne slugfest.

Doug & Vince - Chapter 10 (Excerpt)

......The tone of Mr. Bugliosi's attack on my work is unbalanced—it is pejorative and sarcastic, in the extreme. In attempting (unsuccessfully, I believe) to rebut my work, he displayed all of the worst instincts of a prosecuting attorney accustomed to making one-sided attacks against the opposition in an attempt to get a guilty verdict at trial—using a combination of ridicule, distortion, omission, and misrepresentation in an attempt to discredit my hypothesis. There is nothing scholarly or restrained about his attack on my work, in contrast to the tone of my research memo, which attempted to interpret all of the relevant evidence in a balanced fashion. Bugliosi was in his most ferocious attack dog mode when he set out to discredit my hypothesis. But upon close examination, his strategy just doesn't hold up.

Doug Horne is an able writer and this short paragraph could easily refer to much of Bugliosi's writings on conspiracy and the murder of President Kennedy.

During two tours in Detroit Homicide I reached the conclusion that people who jump to conclusions usually end up landing on their posterior. I don't have time at the present to read Doug's work so I haven't bought it but I will. I would suggest that people read it several times before getting overly excited about what's there. Remember he's on our side! Do I hae my ownv opinions about who were behind the JFK homicide? Yup, but as long as some one thinks the Warren Commission was a fraud I'll treat him with kindness without all these paranoid accusations and if some one agrees with the WC I've found its possible to disagree without being disagreeable. Unfortunately, ego often trumps common sense when it turns the subject of what happened to JFK.

I've written three controversial books on ammunition perfromance and tell people they can do one of three things with my effortis:

1.accept it

2. reject it

3. or be like my wife and ignore it.

Civility has become an endangered species

there sadly seems to be little correlation between educational levels and polite and respectful discourse.

Evan Marshall

Sgt, Detroit Homicide, retd

All,

Having decimated Lamson on the Doug Horne thread, Tink has now reappeared to create a massive diversion over the identification of Hawkeye Works. He brings me in because of his pathological obsession with me, even if I have had no more to do with the discovery of Hawkeye Works than to publish "Pig on a Leash" in THE GREAT ZAPRUDER FILM HOAX (2003). The credit goes to Horne and to Lifton.

I do not understand why Bill Kelly wants to get in the middle of this, except that I have called him out for his incompetent review of MURDER. He even admits that he had no background or interest in the medical, ballistic, and photographic evidence, which makes you wonder why he would review a book that is chock full of exactly that. He even seems to think that HOAX was published ten years ago!

Not only is Josiah here to draw attention away from the bizarre solipsism of Craig Lamson but he never wants to engage with the real issues. Horne, after all, published two chapters in MURDER, which appeared in the year 2000. One concerned proof of a second supplemental brain examination with a second brain. The other was a report of Homer McMahon having determined there were six to eight shots from at least three directions.

These would have been worth discussing, but Josiah would rather trade in trivialities than confront the massive evidence that demonstrates the film is a fake. Indeed, that includes the mutually reinforcing deceptions of (1) the blow-out of the "blob" to the right-front; (2) the X-rays with missing mass to the right-front; (3) the caption published in LIFE for frame 313; and (4) Zapruder's depiction on TV of a right-front wound that did not exist.

I published this in "Zapruder JFK Film impeached by Moorman JFK Polaroid", which anyone can google. Given the extraordinary exchanges between us related to the Moorman Polaroid, it would have been unsurprising in the extreme for Tink to have weighed in on this, when it turns out to be the single most powerful proof that the film is a fabrication. But, rather astonishingly, he apparently had better ways to spend his copious free time.

Tink prefers softer targets and does everything he can to avoid the real deal. If he really had serious intent to get to the truth of the matter, then a post that I put up two weeks ago would have provided an ideal opportunity for him to have targeted Doug Horne and me in relation to the newest news about film fabrication, which came from his recruiting experts on film restoration to study an optically enhanced, 6k version of the film, which led them to gasp with astonishment over the amateurish qualify of the fakery.

The massive blow-out to the back of JFK's head had been painted over in black and the "blob" and blood spray had been painted in, just as Roderick Ryan had explained to Noel Twyman and as he had reported in BLOODY TREASON (1998). But Tink is never going to address the real issues, because it runs too high a risk that his role as professional obfuscator extraordinaire would be more easily exposed. Consider this post, which I could have written just for him:

James H. Fetzer

Dec 8 2009, 10:36 PM

Post #60

Advanced Member

***

Group: Members

Posts: 310

Joined: 23-August 04

Member No.: 1135

This is a nice example of someone who has been out-of-touch with research on the authenticity of the Zapruder film, which has been proceeding at a rapid clip since the symposium on the film I organized and moderated at the Lancer Conference in 1996. Since the film has been used as the backbone of the cover up from its inception--including the creation of the "blob" of brains bulging forward, the missing right-front cranial mass from the x-rays, the caption for frame 313 in LIFE magazine describing how the direction of the shot was determined by the study of the film, and Abraham Zapruder's appearance on television that evening, using his had to show a blow-out to the right-front that did not occur--it would have been extremely unfortunate had Doug Horne followed the advice of J. Raymond Carroll and suppressed his research on the film. Indeed, one of the great virtues of Vol. IV is its exposure of film fakery.

Let me say that Doug Horne has been extremely generous in acknowledging the previous work by Jack White, David Mantik, David Healy, John Costella, and David Lifton, who are those who have made the most important contributions to establishing that the Z-film has been recreated. After all, anyone who takes for granted that the film is authentic--as have generations of students of the crime in generations past--will be unable to reconstruct what actually happened in Dealey Plaza during the assassination, since some events--such as William Greer bringing the limousine to a halt to make certain JFK would be killed, Motorcycle Patrolman Cheney's motoring forward to advise Chief Curry that he had been shot, and Mary Moorman and Jean Hill's stepping into the street to take Mary's famous Polariod--have been removed, while other events--such as the bulging "blob", the blood spray, and the passengers being thrown forward WHILE THE LIMO WAS ACCELERATING--have been added in. Horne's studies reinforce these discoveries.

I especially like the manner in which Doug Horne encourages other students of JFK to abandon their long-held but provably-false belief in Zapruder film authenticity:

"The biggest problem we face right now in the JFK research community are the legions of "old guard" researchers who refuse to face this fact [that the Z-film has been fabricated] and who stubbornly cling to some piece of "bedrock evidence", which in their mind will lead them out of the wilderness if only they study it long enough and can divine its true meaning. For Thompson, Wrone, Weisberg, Groden, and may others, the Zapruder film has been this piece of bedrock evidence for over four decades. I say to the old guard who have continued to insist that the Zapruder film is an authentic and unaltered film in spite of the mounting evidence of its alteration, "Come on over, and see the light." You will feel better for having done so--in fact, it will liberate you. Once you accept the fact that the Zapruder film is a clever (but imperfect) forgery, you are free suddenly to believe the Dealey Plaza car stop witnesses (which include several Dallas motorcycle policemen and Bill Newman); Marily Sitzman; the Kodak laboratory personnel (who all say the original film was slit the evening of the assassination); Marilyn Willis; Erwin Schwartz; Cartha DeLoach; Dan Rather; and the Parkland doctors and nurses. For if you believe the Zapruder film is authentic, you must, of necessity, believe that all of these people are either liars, or incompetent and unreliable witnesses.

"Following the lead of Noel Twyman, BLOODY TREASON (1997), who consulted Roderick Ryan, an expert on special effects from the cinema capitol of the world, who told him that the "blog" and the blood spray had been painted in, Doug Horne consulted additional experts on special effects and reported that, "When the 6K scans of frames 313 through 323 were viewed, one after the other on two high resolution video screens in the editing bay, Ned Price (who just happens to also be the Head of Restoration at a major Hollywood film studio) said: "Oh, that's horrible, that's just terrible! That's such a bad fake." His colleague, Paul Rutan, opined: "We are not looking at originals; we are looking at artwork." (By this, Rutan meant we were not looking at traveling mattes; we were looking at painted visual effects superimposed on top of the original film frames--by inference, he meant aerial imaging.) The film editor concurred with his two colleagues. To say that this was an electrifying moment would be a gross understatement.

"The considered opinions of our two film restoration professionals, who together have spent over five decades restoring and working with films of the late 1940s, 1950s, and 1960s (when visual effects were done optically--not digitally), in that one moment superseded the statements of all those in the JFK research community who have insisted for two decades now that the Zapruder film could not have been altered, because the technology did not exist to do so. Our two restoration experts know special effects in modern motion picture films far better than Josiah Thompson, or David Wrone, or Gary Mack, or Robert Groden, or me, for that matter; and their subjective opinion [better: professional judgment] trumps Rollie Zavada's as well--a man who has absolutely no experience whatsoever in the post production of visual effects in motion picture films. And while Rollie Zavada, a lifetime Kodak employee receiving retirement pay from his former employer, would certain have an apparent conflict of interest in blowing the whistle on Zapruder film forgery if his former employer was involved in its alteration, our three Hollywood film professionals had no vested interest, one way or the other, in the outcome of their examination of the 6Kscans on August 25th of 2009."

In complete opposition to J. Raymond Carroll, I assert that, if this had been the only contribution of Doug Horne's research toward a better understanding of the assassination of JFK and its cover up, it would have been worth the price of the volume by itself! I am completely and utterly in awe and admiration for his painstaking efforts and meticulous research on the most controversial aspects of the case, where I believe that it has become impossible to deny that the film is a fabrication and that the cover up cannot be understood --even remotely!--without rejecting the blindfold extended by Josiah Thompson, David Wrone, Gary Mack, Rollie Zavada and their chums and allies, who have held back major advances in research on the basis of their misconceived objections to the alteration of the film. I therefore agree with Bill Kelly in his belief that "the corner has been turned" in relation to the question of Zapruder film alteration. Jack White, David Mantik, David Healy, John Costella, David Lifton and I have known it for some time, but there is no substitute for a presentation that anyone with the capacity for objectivity can comprehend! For that--and for his diligence, his dedication, his intelligence, his self-sacrifice, and his professionalism--I congratulate him!

_____________________________________________

QUOTE (J. Raymond Carroll @ Nov 17 2009, 12:17 PM) *

QUOTE (William Kelly @ Nov 17 2009, 10:30 AM) *

Inside the Assassinations Records Review Board: The U.S. Government’s Final Attempt to Reconcile the Conflicting Medical Evidence in the Assassination of JFK

By Douglas P. Horne

Chief Analyst for Military Records, Assassinations Records Review Board

Table of Contents

Chapter 14: The Zapruder Film Mystery p. 1185

Based on his interview with Dick Russell, my advice to Doug is to leave out this chapter entirely.

By his own admission, it is highly speculative. As such, its inclusion could seriously undermine the credibility of the book.

Instead he could just publish it on the Mary Ferrell site as a speculative article.

After all, its not as though the book will be TOO SHORT if this chapter is omitted.

And its not as though the book will not be CONTROVERSIAL enough if this chapter is omitted.

________________________________________

The number of experts who concur in these professional judgments ("expert opinions") has now grown to seven--or eight, if we count Roderick Ryan, who, by the way, received the Academy Award in 2000 for his contributions to special effects in cinema. If Tink wants to pursue the Lamson line--that we can only know what we ourselves have been able to prove on our own--which would drastically constrain our knowledge of physics, chemistry, and biology, not to mention cinematography!--then we can return to the "Doug Horne" thread and discover the bizarre mind-set of Craig Lamson, where Lamson's posts provide further substantiation of my diagnosis of his mental defect in adopting a solipsistic attitude toward the world: if it is not part of his system of beliefs, it is non-existent or false!

Lamson even denigrates reliance upon observation because, he claims, it entails interpretation! Yet he poses as an expert on photographs and films, which cannot possibly be subjected to analysis without dependence upon observation and interpretation! So by Lamson's standards, we should dismiss his work on photographs and films BECAUSE IT IS DEPENDENT UPON OBSERVATION AND INTERPRETATION! This is a nice example of the absurdity of his position, which reduces the scope of available knowledge to the contents of his own mind! Could anything be more bizarre? Now I confidently predict that Tink will try the Lamson gambit and invite us to disregard the best work by the best people in all these things. That, after all, has been his modus operandi of long standing. If he can't obfuscate the truth one way, he'll try another.

Jim

FETZER AND LIFTON CHANNEL DOUG HORNE: TRULY OR FALSELY?

We first heard of “Hawkeyeworks” at the 1998 Lancer Conference. Since that time, NPIC, Doug Horne’s interviews with Ben Hunter and Homer McMahon and associated details have become a staple of Fetzer’s series of books on the assassination. His Great Zapruder Film Hoax, published in 2003, featured a long article by David Lifton entitled, “Pig on a Leash.” Written in a kind of jaunty prose much more enjoyable to read than the usual assassination fare, this article laid out in detail Lifon’s long history with the film and his equally long attempt to show it was faked-up. Surprisingly, in a piece that runs on for 117 pages of small print, Lifton offers exactly one fact to show the Zapruder film has been altered. This fact, says Lifton, came to his attention through Doug Horne.

Horne had frequent contact with Roland Zavada as Zavada carried out his work for the AARB. According to Lifton, Horne explained to him that Zavada had come upon one significant indication that the Zapruder film was faked-up and never admitted this in his final report. According to Lifton, this signal indication of Zapruder fakery was what he called “the full flush left problem.” Here is how Lifton explained it in the first printing of his article:

"This point is crucial: in the case of the supposed camera original, there is not just “some image” in the sprocket hole area (the image doesn’t just “bleed over” a little bit); rather, the image goes all the way to the left! To the left margin of the film!

That this is so can clearly be seen even on the frames of the Zapruder film published in Volume 18 of the 26 Volumes. But is that possible? Can the Zapruder lens do that? Can it put an image on the film that is full flush left?

In connection with his ARRB work, Zavada purchased some half dozen cameras at garage sales, he took them apart, he put them back together. The man really worked hard on a wide variety of problems and issues.

And then he went to Dallas and took test shots, putting his wife in Dealey Plaza, and exposed all sorts of scenes at a variety of settings.

Then these test pictures – these test shots – went into an appendix in the final report, which was delivered within hours of the ARRB going out of existence. A report that was supposed to 'explain the anomalies.'

What Doug Horne noticed was that in not one instance – not a single one – could Rollie Zavada get the images to go full flush left.

It couldn’t be done, because the camera just isn’t designed that way. " (TGZFH, p. 397)

In the second printing, Lifton explained it this way:

"Turning to Figures 4-1 and 4-2 [of the Zavada Report], the Zapruder frames, the Zapruder frames Rollie had photographed at the National Archives, it was clear that these frames were out full flush left. All the way to the left.

Then Doug compared those with the test shots Rollie made in Dealey Plaza from Zapruder’s perch with one of his Zapruder-type cameras. One strip showed [his] wife standing in the street, another showed a red truck passing through. Another test shot, his figure 4-26, showed his wife standing in front of their garage in Rochester. In each case, Rollie varied the telephoto setting and, as the zoom increased, the left margin moved somewhat to the left. But, contrary to what Rollie had told me, there was quite a problem.

The test frames did not appear similar to those from the original Zapruder film. It was a simple matter of geometry: Rollie’s clearly did not go consistently full flush left." (TGZFH, p.97)

To this charge of cover-up, Rollie Zavada responded in his usual calm, mild way. As Lifton points out, “Zavada replied with a statement, posted on the Internet. He claimed his test shots proved the case – that his test shots proved full penetration of the intersprocket area...(TGZFH, p. 402).

Lifton and Fetzer must have felt that their proof in this area was wanting. In the second printing of TGZFH, they added photos purporting to show Zavada’s test shots. In the text under the test shots, appears this claim: “Note that in none of the tests (shown here) could he [Zavada] replicate the continuous ‘full flush left’ phenomenon seen on the previous two pages” (TGZFH, p. 400).

So let’s see if what Fetzer and Lifton (channeling Horne) say is correct. Is it true or false that using other cameras of the same make and model Zavada was unable to produce “full flush left penetration?”

First, here is a shot of several frames from the Zapruder film used by Zavada as “Figure 4-2" and commented upon by Lifton/Horne:

Next is the published Fetzer/Lifton’s version of a test shot by Zavada showing a truck in Dealey Plaza:

Next is the actual photo as it appears in Figure 3-12 of Zavada’s Study 3:

Finally, here is another test shot by Zavada using a camera of the same make and model as Zapruder’s. Note that this test shot also shows “full flush left penetration.”

I want to point out that I wasn’t swift enough to get all this straight. It was Rollie Zavada back in 2003 who called my attention to this. With respect to this later test shot he wrote on a Post-It: “Note full intersprocket image penetration.” With respect to the former test shot of the pickup truck in Dealey Plaza,"[/i] he wrote on a Post-It: “Note: Full inter-sprocket image penetration of truck scene taken in Dallas. Doug Horne missed this in my report!”

I want to make two things clear.

(1) Doug Horne had nothing to do with the publication of this claim by Lifton and Fetzer. When Horne’s book arrives, I look forward to seeing whether this earlier bogus claim remains in any way a part of his discussion of the Zapruder film.

(2) What Fetzer and perhaps Lifton did here is simply outrageous. They took one of Rollie Zavada’s test shots. They published it in degraded form and used that form to claim it showed the opposite of what it does show! For all I know, this was done without either Horne’s or Lifton’s knowledge and permission. Similar cases occur in other Fetzer books. In Murder in Dealey Plaza, he circled a clean and undamaged part of the limousine windshield and labeled it, “The apparent through-and-through hole in the windshield.” In The 9/11 Conspiracy, he publishes a photo of World Trade Center 7 with a caption that states, “WTC-7, above right, during the attack on the Twin Towers, appears undamaged except for a modest fire at street level.” The only problem is that the photo was taken in 1997 and the “modest fire at street level” is an orange Calder statue installed on the mezzanine level of the building!

Josiah Thompson

dup

We need to remember that nothing effects cops worse than the death of another officer. I was on the job in Detroit 1969-1989 and the death of a cop placed at Oswalds feet in 1963 should have guaranteed Oswald DRT (Dead Right There) instead of arrested.

I honestly don't understand the point of all this, Tom. Are you trying to say this was a manufactured incident? Well, if it was, it would have to be one of the lamest in history. I mean, four guys in a lifeboat who were so inept they let one of their own be taken hostage by an unarmed crew does not exactly rise to the level of danger or evil that would make this Captain's rescue "miraculous" and the stuff of legend. Some stupid criminals messed with the wrong guys. These guys fought back. The cops arrived, and shot the criminals in the head. It's really everyday stuff.

The only thing that pushed it up a notch or two was media interest, and that's as unpredictable as the wind. A few years ago the big rage here in Southern California was car chases. They'd stop all the local programming whenever some guy in a mini-van decided he didn't want to stop for a speeding ticket, and then follow him for hours via helicopter as he dodged the police. In 1999, I went to Australia. I flicked on the tube. And what did I see? A car chase in Southern California. Evidently, local news teams in California had figured out that if they followed a car chase, they'd get interest around the world, and make money off the feed. So that's what they covered. Unfortunately, some depressed guy ended up shooting himself in the head on live TV, which led to a few moms complaining and threatening to turn off their set if it happened again, and now the coverage is more cautious.

I spent 20 yrs as a Detroit cop and always felt that people who want to committ crimes ought to to be atleast as much at risk as I was. good guys are safe and bad guys are no longer in a position to put good guys at risk-my kind of results.

Do I believe JFK, RFK, MLK, and Malcom X were murdered by conspiracies? you bet. do I believe in UFO's?-nope. spent severals week at the Nevada Test Site which is next door to Area 51-saw alot of "things" in the air at night-convinced they are CFO's-classified flying objects, not UFO's.

not everything is a conspiracy and often is simply what it appears to be-evil people, doing evil things.

they can be seen at www.stoppingpower.net, and I'm not sure of the relevance here except in a very limited way.

Bill-while there is no statute of limitations on murder, God apparently has put his own statute of limitaions on defendents and witnesses. We all ought to be able to agree that we would like to know the truth whatever is turns out to be. I certainly have my own views of what happened, but I could we wrong-I have been before and unless I die in the next 10 seconds, I will be again.

Our egos are our biggest foe not the anti-conspiracy folks. if well intentioned folks of any ilk could put their pet theory on hold and start from a point of agreement, EVEN only if it's JFK died in Dallas and we kept our sarcasm and ridicule inside our heads instead of on the tips our tongues AND focus on finding the truth we could move slowly towards an understanding of what really happened. If it's LHO on the 6th floor or David Phillips, Mitch Werbell, George Nonte and some old China hands on the grasy knoll, or Colonel Mustard in the drawing room with a candle stick-we could move IF we could establish an "Ego Free Zone" but I'm more skeptical about that happening than I am about who really killed Malcolm X.

I've written three books and know what it's like to be the deflator of people's pet theories that they gained fame AND/OR money with. People are puzzled why I don't respond angrily when attacked in print. It's really very simple. My need to be loved, respected, admired or even tolerated ends with my youngest grandchild.

Duncan,

I'm not sure which mistakes you're referring to, since you weren't specific.

As for JFK's head moving back and to the left, it undeniably does. However, there is general agreement that it moves forward first, as you said. It is pretty reasonable to speculate then, as many of us have over the years, that he was hit by almost simultaneous head shots from the rear and then the front. My point about the backwards movement is that there is no question about it, and it clearly contradicts the notion that Lee Harvey Oswald fired all the shots from behind.

I was just trying to come up with a list of items that are either unquestionable (i.e., the impossibility of the single bullet theory) or solid indications of conspiracy that have seemingly been abandoned by many researchers for no apparent reason.

Don,

I wasn't specific because you make so many assumptions of things which you say are undeniable facts. For example, you say that Josiah tells us that the Zapruder film does not show the umbrella man pumping the umbrella up and down, well he's 100% correct, it doesn't show any pumping movement, it shows a twirling of the umbrella from left to right, and nothing more. If you have footage which shows the pumping movement, I'd love to see it. As for researchers abandoning their positions, I don't see anything wrong or sinister about that at all, it's called evolution of their opinions based on their research and consideration of other research sources over the years.

Duncan

could we atleast agree we have not been given the truth? Or do we spend decades argung how many lone gunman can dance on a grassy knoll?

what bothers me is that there are too many in love with pet theories and cannot disagree without being extremely disagreeable. I found during two tours in Detroit Homicide that I was often wrong and had to back up and view the murder in question from a different angle. We often sat down as a squad and ran it from different perspectives until we reached a consensus and then divided up the things that needed to done and did them. Did we always solve them? no, but atleast we examined and explored alternative theories.

until people can muzzle their ego's, we'll rarely make genuine progress-and that's the tragedy

I joined Detroit PD in 1969 and we had similar boards that contained a list of stolen cars and we could attach flyers on wanted folks. Additionally, many would attach a spring clip to hold mug shots of wanted people.

I've always been of the opinion that Tippit was murdered to encourage the cops to kill his killer as nothing angered cops more than to see one of their own slain and a dead Oswald in the Theater was have made everything "tidier".

Additionally, I've never been convinced by Oswalds involvement in this event.

Fish and Wildlife has my vote. Second is Bureau of Land Management.  Look, I don't see any involvement of the Jesuits. I worked with some on Iran-Contra [Christic Institute] and they were trying to expose the crimes involved in the Assassination [and Iran-Contra - Secret Government, in general]. That is not to say that within the same 'organization' there can be people, for a variety of reasons, who are at opposite poles on an issue, person, or political viewbut this all seems like a non-starter.

Unlike Oswald, the Boy Scouts of America know how to shoot

Thanks Christopher and Evan. I'm no expert, but since his documented sidearm was called a K-38, it seems this was the lighter Model 15.

What I'm really interested in is establishing the likelihood of Tippit not only owning two weapons, but in having both while on duty.

It seems to me there are two weapons discussed in the records - one taken from Tippit at the hospital by Davenport, and a second handled - along with a wallet - by a very forgetful Owens at the scene of the murder and taken by him to either the Property Room at HQ or the Property Room at the Oak Cliff Substation.

If Tippit wasn't in possession of two weapons, then the possibility exists that the gun handled by Owens was in fact the murder weapon he was so keen to deny was the murder weapon under oath (hell, it couldn't have been the murder weapon - after all, his wife assured him it wasn't!)

I carried a 2nd gun daily for 20 yrs and still carry two today. Also carried an N Frames in both uniform and plain clothes until I went to SWAT and was issued a 9MM pistol.

The biggest problem in this whole event seems to be that the securing of crime scenes and processing them correctly was an unknown art in Dallas. If both shootings had been processed and investigated like Homicides we would know alot more today. I did two tours with Detroit Homicide and have rounded up more witnesses in the murder of a drug dealer than Dallas PD did in both.

Tippit's murder puzzles me as cop killings in Detroit were always worked thoroughly and tons of "evidence" was always collected.

The problem is that it wasn't done right at either the TBD or at Tippit's murder scene and once you've lost control of the scene you're screwed.

evan marshall

www.stoppingpower.net

Evan,

Your experience in developing crime scene evidence is appreciated.

But don't you think after botching things two, three, four times, it's apparent that the DPD, DA, et al, intentionall botched things up?

Also, would you consider going over the evidence available today, if a grand jury would review it?

Thanks for your imput.

Bill Kelly

I don't know about the initial work, but I agree that subsquent "investigations" had an agenda.

Have to appreciate the enormity of what happened on 11-22-63.

During the Republician Convention in Detroit I was involved in keeping traffic moving along the back of Cobo Hall. Many of my young coppers were excited to see the various Canitdates. I reminded them we were there to keep an eye on those is close proximity to the cantidates not the cantidates.

Not having been there (Dalls) I have no idea how overwhelmed people where by what happened.

I'd be happy to look at the evidence but I'm not sure there is anything super significant that we can prove a chain of custody on.

I may be outside of the US soon for a longish period-trying to find a job inside the US but there isn't alot of market for my sort of work.

Thanks Christopher and Evan. I'm no expert, but since his documented sidearm was called a K-38, it seems this was the lighter Model 15.

What I'm really interested in is establishing the likelihood of Tippit not only owning two weapons, but in having both while on duty.

It seems to me there are two weapons discussed in the records - one taken from Tippit at the hospital by Davenport, and a second handled - along with a wallet - by a very forgetful Owens at the scene of the murder and taken by him to either the Property Room at HQ or the Property Room at the Oak Cliff Substation.

If Tippit wasn't in possession of two weapons, then the possibility exists that the gun handled by Owens was in fact the murder weapon he was so keen to deny was the murder weapon under oath (hell, it couldn't have been the murder weapon - after all, his wife assured him it wasn't!)

I carried a 2nd gun daily for 20 yrs and still carry two today. Also carried an N Frames in both uniform and plain clothes until I went to SWAT and was issued a 9MM pistol.

The biggest problem in this whole event seems to be that the securing of crime scenes and processing them correctly was an unknown art in Dallas. If both shootings had been processed and investigated like Homicides we would know alot more today. I did two tours with Detroit Homicide and have rounded up more witnesses in the murder of a drug dealer than Dallas PD did in both.

Tippit's murder puzzles me as cop killings in Detroit were always worked thoroughly and tons of "evidence" was always collected.

The problem is that it wasn't done right at either the TBD or at Tippit's murder scene and once you've lost control of the scene you're screwed.

evan marshall

www.stoppingpower.net

I concur with Guns and Ammo re the S & W Model 27.

S & W made it in 3 1/2, 5, 6, and 8 3/8 inch models.

There was no Model 27 produced in 2 1/2 that I have ever seen, and I keep a pretty close eye on matters relating to the S & W Model 27.

The following is directed at some of the other questions and comments.

Police officers presently keep their guns 2 - 4 years, at which point they are given new ones and the used ones are refurbished and sold to dealers.

They are handled with agreements or programs that PDs have with Glock, SigArms, Heckler and Koch, etc.

I suspect that there were no such programs 45 years ago, so that an officer with a functional 11 year old handgun, particularly a revolver (which is a fairly mechanically simple weapon), would not be issued a new one.

I also anticipate that PDs, at that time, simply bought weapons when they needed them and that they didn't essentially rent them from Smith & Wesson, Colt, etc.

Some PDs and other law enforcement units permit their officers to use their own weapons, subject to certain guidelines (e.g. prohibition of calibers in excess of 40 W & W).

This is the exception and not the rule, but I have talked with officers who carry their own weapons, because they don't like Glocks, which are the prevailing "program" issue guns for law enforcement officers today.

I would like to see a picture of Tippit's gun.

It may not even be a Model 27.

I also find it odd that he had the grip safety added.

It is a peculiar feature for a revolver, but S & W made a model which had the grip safety.

However, it was a 38 Special revolver and not a 357 Magunum.

I will update this post with the model number.

Almost no revolvers of the 1960s era had safeties, because the 10 - 12 lb. trigger made an accidental discharge highly unlikely.

Now, S & W makes its revolvers with internal safety locks, which many wheelgun shooters find rather silly.

when I was a rookie Detroit Cop in 1969 I was issued a Colt Official Police .38 revolver that had been in dept inventory for years. I eventually saved enough money to buy a personal Magnum which I could legally carry

The Tyler T Grip adaptor was not a safety device-it fit between the grip panels on the front of the frame to fit the end user better.

We had a number of negligent discharges annually but I never saw or heard of a genuine accidental discharge

what a bunch of nonsense. I was born in Salt Lake City and been a Mormon all my life-I know a number of retired CIA folks and only one of them is LDS.

I also served a Mission for the Church and our focus was on sharing our message. people don't agree-fine but the Church did not gain from JFK's assassination and remains poliitcally neutral.

Why not focus on fields of investigation that have some merit?

I'm continually appalled by the anger and ridicule that exists among those that feel we don't know Who killed JFK nor who lead the cover up.

We're too busy arguing over how many lone gunman can dance on the head of a pin instead of bringing something edible to the table.

Do I have a theory? You bet! As a retired Homicide cop I think the whole thing smells. Can I prove my pet theory? No, but I bet if more people checked their egos at the door we might make some genuine progress. While I'm poltically far to the right of almost everyone here, I'm convinced we stopped being a free nation on 11/22/63.

No, I don't believe in UFOs even though I spent several weeks at the Nevada Nuclear Weapons Test Site (next door to Area 51) and saw alot of curious things in the night air. I do believe in CFO's-Classified Flying Objects.

Anyway, maybe we could crank it down three notches and focus on the goal.

Obviously not enough

Photographer Who Snapped

Infamous Oswald Photo

Said 'No Blood At Crime Scene'

By Greg Szymanski

Arctic Beacon.com

10-19-6

Bob Jackson, former photographer for the Dallas Tiimes Herald who

captured on film Ruby shooting Oswald, reveals for the first time on

American radio he didn't see a speck of blood on the body or at the

crime scene.

For those JFK assassination researchers and truth seekers, a startling

revelation was made on American radio Thursday, as Bob Jackson,

former Dallas Times Herald photographer, made public for the first

time that there was "not a speck of blood anywhere" on the body or at

the crime scene when Jack Ruby supposedly shot and killed Lee

Harvey Oswald.

Jackson was on assignment for the Dallas paper on the morning of

Nov. 24, 1963, when Oswald was being transferred from his holding

cell and snapped the picture "seen around the world," a Pulitzer Prize

winning photo of Oswald grimacing with Jack Ruby fully visible with

pistol in hand, shooting Oswald.

After 43 years, Jackson told listeners of Greg Szymanski's radio show,

The Investigative Journal, he witnessed no blood on Oswald after the

shooting, as well as "not a speck of blood" at the crime scene leading all

the way to when Oswald was put in the ambulance.

"I sure did think it was strange not to see any blood whatsoever," said

Jackson, whose award-winning photo was later published first on the

Times Herald front page and then in the Saturday Evening Post.

"I stayed on the scene well after Oswald was taken away in the

ambulance and I never did see any blood, not one drop."

Jackson's startling revelation adds fuel to the fire of researchers who

claimed Oswald was never shot by Ruby, but later killed by CIA

operatives in the ambulance after Oswald was sedated against his will.

Jackson's testimony, never before released in the American media,

backs up other researchers who claim Oswald and Ruby faked the

shooting as a part of an undercover operation designed to eventually

eliminate Oswald's knowledge of the real JKF assassination team as

well as his part played as the government's patsy.

"Oswald probably was told to fake the shooting and then was double

crossed by Cia operatives who killed him in the ambulance in order to

eliminate any loose ends in the Kennedy assassination," said one

researcher who claims Oswald was used as a patsy.

On the Investigative Journal, Jackson was joined by researcher Brian

David Andersen, a long time JFK truth advocate, who said Jackson's

testimony gives further credibility to the discrepancy to the type and

angle of the wound reported in Oswald's autopsy and the angle of the

gunshot would captured in Jackson's photo taken as Ruby supposedly

fired the pistol into Oswald's chest.

"The bullet should have went straight through Oswald if you look at

Bob's photo, but later the attending physician said the angle of the

bullet was at an upward angle" said Andersen after he questioned

Jackson on the radio show, indicating the possibility that Oswald was

actually shot after he was placed in the ambulance. "The absence of

blood also indicated this to be a real possibility."

Regarding the Kennedy autopsy, Andersen was also privy to inside

information, showing the final doctor's report used by the Warren

Commission was rigged.

"When growing up in Irving, Texas (suburb of Dallas) my neighbor

was Dr. Charles Baxter M.D., the Parkland Hospital coordinating

surgeon on John Kennedy," said Andersen. "On November 23 1974,

while I was photographing a hand surgery being conducted by the

doctor, Baxter explicated and thoroughly detailed all of the events that

occurred related to him regarding the treatment of Kennedy that was

purposely excluded from the Warren Commission Report. The truth

is so more outlandish than any kind of fiction."

In the radio interview, Jackson added that he was also present in the

presidential motorcade ? seven cars behind the lead vehicle - the day

Kennedy was shot, hearing three distinct shots coming from the

direction of the book depository.

"I looked up after the shots and saw a rifle being pulled in from the

window but I couldn't make out who it was," said Jackson . "I also

remember seeing two police officers run right into the book depository

and remember thinking who ever fired the shots never had a chance of

getting out of the building without being caught or killed."

Regarding the Oswald photo seen by tens of millions of people,

Andersen set the scene as it took place in 1963.

"In the basement of the Dallas Police Department on November 24,

1963 were two photographers. Jack Beers pointed a twin-lens reflex

camera while working for the Dallas Morning News and took a

photograph of Jack Ruby shooting Lee Harvey Oswald

"One sixteenth of second after Jack Beer pressed the button on his

camera, Bob Jackson with a 35mm camera and working for the Dallas

Times Herald, pressed the button on his camera.

"Beers immediately returned to the darkroom and processed his

photograph that was instantly sent out on the wire services around the

world. Everyone who witnessed Beer's photograph for the next two

hours stated he would win the Pulitzer Prize.

"HoweverBut...Also...and Hold On!

"The City Desk of the Dallas Times Herald ordered Bob Jackson to

remain in the basement of the Dallas Police Department for over an

hour and half therefore his film was not processed until two hours after

Oswald had been shot.

"After Jackson's picture was printed in the darkroom, Felix McNight,

managing editor of the Times Herald shouted and stomped his feet as

he tried to describe the fantastic photograph to the photo editor of Life

Magazine but to no availthe magazine was under a tight publishing

deadline and the Life editors believed they had the best photo therefore

Beer's photo was published in the most popular American publication

in 1963.

"Bob Jackson's photo was published on the front page of the Times

Herald and in the Saturday Evening Post. Bob Jackson's photo won

the Pulitzer Prize and numerous other awards and his photograph is an

icon of American history. Jack Beer's photo became an almost

forgotten footnote in American History by 1/16 of a second."

spent 20 yrs with Detroit PD including two tours with Homicide and saw alot of people shot who did not show blood on their clothing. Once fought and handcuffed a guy who had been shot six times-he was taken into the precinct and collapsed on the floor-dead.