To John Simkin/ everyone

[Cliff Varnell]

Tony Summers wrote one of the best books on the assassination, CONSPIRACY,

and I have never heard that he has disavowed it. He is definitely not agnostic,

rather just careful to avoid undocumented theories or claims. Or do you know

something we don't?

Tink Thompson is another matter still not fully resolved.

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...ost&p=50287

QUOTE:

"I did say to Lisa Pease that I don't think a conspiracy has been proven - for the good reason that there is no definite, uncontested proof of conspiracy. Perhaps there was a plot, and my writings show that I'm very open to that possibility. But there's nothing finite, or indeed anything hard enough to "go to the bank" on. Any open-minded person ought to accept that."

This is hardly a disavowal or change of mind! I agree with Tony that NOTHING HAS BEEN PROVEN.

Jack

Interesting.

It's a proven fact that the bullet holes in JFK's shirt and jacket are 4 inches

below the bottom of the respective collars.

http://www.subversivehistory.com/

Is it not a proven fact that for the official 3-shot scenario requires JFK to have

been shot at the back base of his neck?

Yes, that is a proven fact. The Single Bullet Theory does not work given a wound

below the neck.

Is there any evidence that JFK's shirt and jacket were elevated nearly 3 inches

in tandem at the time of the shooting?

No, the photographic evidence is to the contrary.

http://www.occamsrazorjfk.net/

Anyone who claims that conspiracy in the murder of John F. Kennedy is not

a PROVEN FACT is either unfamiliar with the basic physical facts of the case,

or has been rendered cognitively impaired as a result of egregious intellectual

dishonesty.

Cliff,

You are talking about proof required to win an argument on an internet forum, while I'm talking about evidential proof that can be admitted into a court of law.

BK

The clothing evidence would readily be admitted into a court of law.

Why would you think otherwise?

Absolutly, Except that a real serious Grand Jury would require the bodies of the victims to be exhumed and a proper, forensic autopsy performed that would determine the exact measurements on the body, rather than the shirts or jacket.

BK

A little late for measuring the actual back wound, I dare say.

Since the 3-shot scenario requires JFK to have been shot in the back of the

neck, the holes in the clothes stand as prima facie evidence of 4+ shots.

It does not require an "exact" measurement of the back wound to debunk the

single bullet theory.

After all, the "low" back wound also appears in the only medical evidence

produced according to proper military autopsy protocol: in Burkley's death

certificate (signed off as "verified") and the location of the back wound recorded

in pencil on the autopsy face sheet (also signed off as "verified.")

None of the medical evidence of the well-traveled "high" back wound was

recorded according to autopsy protocol.

I would argue that a Grand Jury only needs to see the holes in the clothes, the

photographic evidence that JFK's jacket dropped in Dealey Plaza, the death

certificate, the autopsy face sheet, the FBI autopsy report, the wound diagrams

sworn to by the FBI SAs attending the autopsy, the sworn testimony of four secret

service agents, and the statements of more than a half-dozen Bethesda medical

witnesses -- and the "probable cause" standard is more than satisfied.

To argue the case for conspiracy on any other grounds is to present a weak case, imo.

Edited July 2, 2008 by Cliff Varnell