Don Jeffries

I never knew him, but always respected his efforts in the pursuit of truth and justice. Rest in peace.

B.A., I have done extensive research on the death of JFK, Jr. Look for news about this coming up later this year.

Looks great, John. I hope this means the forum will be here for a while....

Tommy, Yes, Paul Groody made that claim. You would think they'd fingerprint Oswald at the station, but that way certainly sounds deliciously dramatic.

This was primarily a predictable declaration that the film record couldn't have been corrupted.

The important points regarding Oswald's "print" on the Carcano is the fact the FBI didn't report finding it originally, and when taken in conjunction with the nitrate tests, which proved conclusively that Oswald hadn't fired a rifle on the day of the assassination, it is extremely questionable that the print discovered by Lt. Day got there legitimately.

Good points, Peter. I wish more focus would be placed on the Secret Service; no matter who the conspirators were, the assassination would not have been possible if even a few of them had been doing their job. John, I think we can state with certainty that we do know who didn't kill President Kennedy- Lee Harvey Oswald. The logical suspects are many; Emory Roberts, William Greer, Bill Kellerman, J. Edgar Hoover, McGeorge Bundy, etc. We know that Hoover orchestrated the cover up of the crime, so it's reasonable to believe he at least had foreknowledge of the conspiracy. Roberts, Greer and Kellerman are naturally suspect because of their actions (or inaction) in Dealey Plaza. Bundy's very early declaration to JFK's cabinet members that it had already been established there was no conspiracy makes him suspicious, especially taken with the fact he authored NSAM 273, which totally contradicted JFK's recent policy directives in Vietnam as outlined in NSAM 263, before the assassination. Why would he have expected JFK to sign that? Of course, I think many of us believe there were powerful figures above these potential ground-level conspirators, but exposing them would naturally lead to uncovering the actual identities of those who planned the conspiracy. But it's all a moot point, and we do have cause to be pessimistic, because the crime has never been honestly investigated, and unless we get a new crop of politicians, is highly unlikely to ever be.

Thank you so much, Josh!

I would like to have more information about Dallas Police Sgt. Patrick Dean. I believe he is deceased, but could find nothing online about the particulars. Does anyone know the date- an obituary or news story about it would be very helpful. Also, does he have surviving children (or a wife)? I apologize for not being able to track this down myself, but I know that this community is filled with great researchers who can point the way to this kind of data. Thanks.

These are real interviews. Mark Dice does them regularly, with random Californians on the street. This is the most incredible one I've seen. Great job our schools are doing. Here's the link to the video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z-bao9fg6Yc&feature=youtu.be

DVP, Day didn't find the rifle. Legally speaking, the rifle found was a Mauser, because that's what the original identifying officers, Boone and Weitzman, swore to in signed affidavits. But then again, the Carcano wasn't the only piece of "evidence" that was without a viable chain of possession. How, for instance, would CE399, the "magic" bullet, have been entered into the record? No one wanted it, and it passed through multiple hands who didn't mark their initials on it, before it traveled back to Washington in Richard Johnsen's pocket. These are all old arguments. You believe what you believe, for whatever reason. I would hope (and you certainly would), if you ever have to face trial, that the evidence presented against you would be held to a higher standard than the tainted junk we are supposed to accept as "evidence" against Oswald.

The alleged murder weapon in the assassination exemplifies all the problems in this case. First, it is undeniable that, legally speaking, the rifle found was a Mauser. Both officers Weitzman and Boone swore to this in affidavits. Even if you buy the fact they both were identically mistaken, the Carcano couldn't have been entered into the record of an honest courtroom, because no viable chain of possession for it existed. Second, everything about the Carcano, and Oswald's possible connection to it, is extremely dubious. Since Oswald is associated with this weapon exclusively by his alleged alias, A.J. Hidell, the alias has to be able to withstand scrutiny. It doesn't. The phony Selective Service Card alone, supposedly found on Oswald, with his photo, but Hidell's name, should arouse anyone's suspicions. Real Selective Service cards never had photographs on them. Thus, anyone attempting to use it as an alias would have been instantly discovered. It was good for incriminating someone, however. As for the problems with the P.O. Box, the order form in the magazine, size of the Carcano, etc., I suggest anyone who is interested read the conclusive work done on this by Sylvia Meagher, as well as other early critics. Everything about Oswald's ties to this weapon are not only highly questionable, but give new meaning to the term "reasonable doubt." I will have more to say about this and other related issues in my upcoming book, which is scheduled for a Fall 2014 publication date.

Just as an explanation- the "I Think I See" topic, started by Bill Byas, had to be closed for a couple of reasons. First, there were a number of posts that went over the line in terms of abusive language, nastiness, etc. Second, there is no reason to have a debate here about what happened on another forum. We have had some great discussions recently, especially the long thread about the autopsy and JFK's wounds.Those are the kinds of topics, with informed posts by knowledgeable people, that make internet forums like this such a valuable resource.

Pat, The fact that Humes, Boswell and Finck identified the photos as being legitimate was hardly surprising. After all, this was their autopsy. And since not a single aspect of their autopsy is free from suspicion, again I ask- why would you believe the photos and x-rays resulting from this "Bowery bum" fiasco are legitimate?

That's great news, Vince. You're really hitting the big time!

Pat, There are many things about this case that make no sense. Certainly, it seems illogical for conspirators to alter films or JFK's body, when plenty of evidence can be seen in the extant film record to demonstrate shots were fired from the front, and the holes in JFK's clothing alone prove the official story is impossible. You might just as well ask why they didn't just plant the Carcano on the 6th floor initially, instead of a German Mauser. It seems to make little sense to do that as well, but the evidence is what it is. Boone and Weitzman did not both identically "mistake" a German weapon for an Italian one, that has "Made in Italy" stamped on it. Why was the bullet planted to implicate Oswald- CE399 -in nearly pristine condition? Wouldn't astute conspirators try to make it look more realistic? But again, it obviously was planted. I remain on the fence about David Lifton's body alteration theory, but it's undeniable that everything about JFK's autopsy violated standard procedures. You are right to argue that there is clear evidence of conspiracy without factoring in any fake autopsy photos or x-rays, or any alteration of the body or the film record. But there is no rational reason to trust in the validity of those photos and x-rays, when everything we know about the autopsy suggests it was a sham and a central part of the cover up, and when it portrays JFK's head in a manner that no one seems to have described. Trusting the medical evidence in this case is extremely naive, imho. Humes, Boswell and Finck weren't just innocent doctors, trying to do their best in a difficult situation. They were quite clearly following orders, and agreeing to an impossible scenario. At times in their testimony, their reluctance reveals itself, but ultimately they presided over one of the most disgraceful autopsies ever performed. You are essentially giving them a historical stamp of approval with your present position.

Thanks for the link, John. Don't know how I missed that. Reading through the posts, though, it seems pretty clear that Moldea was unable to defend himself or explain the way his sudden conclusion contradicted everything else he wrote in the book.

Moldea has been peddling his predictable mantra for a long time. His RFK book is filled with definitive proof that there was a conspiracy, but near the end of the book, Moldea abruptly switches gears, and declares Sirhan acted alone. I questioned him about this on another forum long ago, and he ignored me. He has always been in the "blame the mafia as the first option to the lone nut fairy tale" category.

The bickering continues, but the larger picture is being ignored here. Why would anyone trust in the validity of the photos and x-rays that came out of this autopsy? That's the central question, isn't it? Why is it more outrageous to believe the photos and x-rays aren't legitimate, in light of the improper, irregular nature of everything that went on at Bethesda that night? And when we factor in the expert medical testimony that directly contradicts them, and all the other missing, altered and destroyed evidence in this case, imho it's far more logical to think they're fakes.

Pat and Andric, you have a lot more faith in the authenticity of the evidence, and especially the medical evidence, than many of us do. What about that inexcusably shoddy autopsy causes you to trust in the validity of the photos and x-rays? The reason why some believe in body alteration, or film alteration, is because the wounds that we see in those photos and x-rays appear to contradict the bulk of the eyewitness testimony (especially at Parkland) and/or the film record. We know that this autopsy of a United States president was woefully incomplete. They not only failed to section the brain, per protocol, they managed to misplace it, to such a degree that is just written off as "lost." How many times has that happened to anyone? We know that Humes burned the first autopsy report and his notes in his home fireplace. How often has that happened? We know that the Secret Service confiscated Stringer's autopsy film, and purposefully ruined Riebe's. Again, how many times does this happen? We know that Sibert and O'Neill signed that mysterious receipt for "a missile removed by Commader James J. Humes" and that Burkley turned a receipt for this "missile" over to the Treasury Department. We know that Perry was pressured into changing his impressions of the entrance wound to the throat, and that Drs. Clark and Shaw also sated publicly that JFK had an entrance wound in his throat. We know from Boswell's original autopsy face sheet that the back wound was precisely where the bullet holes in JFK's clothing show it to be, but instead we are expected to believe this medical professional was just "estimating" where the wound in a United States President was. Funny how his "estimate" just happened to correspond exactly to where the holes in the clothing are, and where Burkley located it on the death certificate. Maybe Burkley was another of the countless "mistaken" witnesses. Believing in the validity of the autopsy photos and x-rays is to dismiss all the evidence that contradicts them. Given the nature of the autopsy and the still ongoing cover up, this is hopelessly naive, imo, to put it kindly.

Exactly, John. This is the crucial point; we can analyze the medical testimony all we want, but the fact is NO ONE described seeing what the autopsy photos show. Thus, we have two choices on what to believe. The first choice would be that the medical people at Parkland were so incompetent they not only misidentified the area where the wound was, they completely imagined a huge gaping wound in the head, since the photos show the head to be intact. The second choice, as many of us believe, is that the photos are simply not legitimate. Nothing about JFK's autopsy was normal. As Harold Weisberg noted, it was not worthy of a Bowery bum. We should be skeptical of everything associated with it, and that certainly includes the x-rays and photographs.

Robert, I have no problems with this, either, and have heard nothing about anyone else experiencing difficulties. I'm not sure why this would affect only you, but that appears to be the case.

Stephen, The important point here is that, no matter what you or I think, Jim Garrison regarded del Valle as one of his most important witnesses, and he wound up dead. Shot and with a hatchet through his head dead. Those kinds of very, very unnatural deaths are all too familiar to those of us who research the JFK assassination and similar cases. Combined with Ferrie's own unnatural death, it defies credulity to believe there was no connection to the Garrison investigation. Someone must have thought Garrison was on the right track, because his witnesses were either dying before they could help him, or being denied extradition in unprecedented, uncooperative actions by Governors like Ronald Reagan and John Connally.

The original critics of the official story relied heavily upon eyewitness testimony. They had little choice here, in that nothing productive was ever investigated by the authorities, and so much other evidence was missing, had obviously been tampered with or destroyed. This has been my argument for years- if the "neo-con" thinking prevails in the research community, we are throwing out many of the clearest indicators of conspiracy. Yes, witness testimony can be notoriously unreliable. However, can we really believe that on November 22, 1963, so many unconnected witnesses happened to be mistaken in the exact same way? And always on points that would have destroyed the lone assassin myth? So, Weitzman and Boone were both "mistaken" and identically swore that the weapon they found on the 6th floor was a German Mauser. Dozens of witnesses, unknown to each other, "mistakenly" noted that the limousine had stopped or nearly stopped at the time of the shooting. The majority of witnesses, including law enforcement, "mistakenly" thought the shots had come from the knoll area, as can be seen in all the immediate post-assassination photos. And all the medical personnel at Parkland "mistakenly" recalled an identical wound that we don't see in the official photos and x-rays of JFK. The holes in JFK's shirt and coat, in conjunction with the location noted by Boswell on his original autopsy face sheet and Burkley on the death certificate, represent about as good a piece of evidence destroying the official version of events as we're ever likely to get. And yet we get "bunched up" theories that fly in the face of all logic and resemble the SBT and "jet effect" nonsense designed to explain the unimpeachable evidence anyone can see. Backtracking and giving ground on any of these issues makes no sense. We should all be more certain that ever that the evidence is overwhelming JFK was felled by a very powerful conspiracy.

Even as a 7 year old, when Oswald was shot, I instantly thought (and shared this with every adult I came in contact with), that Jack Ruby must have been involved somehow, and clearly wanted to silence Oswald. As I've noted on this forum many times before, I don't understand the prevalence of conspiracy to lone nutter transformations. To echo Ron, the only excuse for accepting the official fairy tale is ignorance of the subject matter. Or as Penn Jones said, "The only way to believe the Warren Report is not to read it."