JFK Exhumation petition

[B. A. Copeland]

I cannot believe it is actually a big deal to have a proper examination of the body of JFK, to develop xrays, forensic evidence that is unquestionable in its authenticity, etc etc etc etc. I think when it comes to the Exhu. of JFK's body in todays world, most people would understand clearly why it should be done. The moment he was killed nothing went "right" or proper. It was not designed to be as such. I don't know how much of a chance we'd have today with an examination of his body being "proper" but it is well worth it. With today's technology we could have some very, very good documentation/ photos, xrays, etc for record keeping and clarification.

[David Andrews]

I believe that it's necessary to make the request, through proper channels, presenting enough reason to exhume, in order to direct continuing attention toward prosecuting the conspiracy. Achievable forensic objectives ought to be determined and presented in the request.

[John Dolva]

A look at the precedent may help in organising it properly.

It turned a bit dramatic in execution but appears to have achieved its objective, : ( no he wasn't poisoned.)

[Micah Mileto]

What is the most legally feasible way an exhumation of JFK could occur?

 

Also, would it ever be possible for an Oswald to legally demand the official rifle be given to them? You can use the government's evidence against them, to claim that Oswald owned the rifle, but use forensic evidence to establish the lack of basis for calling it a murder weapon. Imagine how much that'd sell for.

Edited October 1, 2021 by Micah Mileto

[David Andrews]

Despite what I said 10 years ago (above), I feel like the 1981 Oswald exhumation was thrown to us (in the person of Michael Eddowes) in order to create a negative precedent to be used against a JFK exhumation - a cultural precedent, if not a legal one.  A court remembering this might be influenced to feel, "Well, Oswald was exhumed to no demonstrable effect, so why go as far as a president?"  An attorney arguing against a JFK exhumation might throw that in as a potent aside.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2013/11/exhuming-lee-harvey-oswald-jfks-killers-corpse-was-raised-based-on-a-conspiracy-theory.html

From that article: "Eddowes believed that after Oswald moved to the Soviet Union, the KGB’s Department 13 (its much-feared assassination squad) trained a look-alike to assume his identity. This deadly body double was the man who met Marina Prusakova at a dance in Minsk, married her six weeks later, and returned to the United States in 1962 with his wife and infant daughter in tow. This was the Oswald who went on to work at the Texas School Book Depository, kill the president, and be killed himself."  -- In effect, Eddowes was parroting one of CIA's propaganda lines.

However, there was this intervention attempt by a guy whp always did as told:

"Oswald’s brother Robert battled in court to stop the exhumation, but eventually ran out of emotional and financial resources to continue the fight."

Edited October 1, 2021 by David Andrews

[Micah Mileto]

2 hours ago, David Andrews said:

Despite what I said 10 years ago (above), I feel like the 1981 Oswald exhumation was thrown to us (in the person of Michael Eddowes) in order to create a negative precedent to be used against a JFK exhumation - a cultural precedent, if not a legal one.  A court remembering this might be influenced to feel, "Well, Oswald was exhumed to no demonstrable effect, so why go as far as a president?"  An attorney arguing against a JFK exhumation might throw that in as a potent aside.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2013/11/exhuming-lee-harvey-oswald-jfks-killers-corpse-was-raised-based-on-a-conspiracy-theory.html

From that article: "Eddowes believed that after Oswald moved to the Soviet Union, the KGB’s Department 13 (its much-feared assassination squad) trained a look-alike to assume his identity. This deadly body double was the man who met Marina Prusakova at a dance in Minsk, married her six weeks later, and returned to the United States in 1962 with his wife and infant daughter in tow. This was the Oswald who went on to work at the Texas School Book Depository, kill the president, and be killed himself."  -- In effect, Eddowes was parroting one of CIA's propaganda lines.

However, there was this intervention attempt by a guy whp always did as told:

"Oswald’s brother Robert battled in court to stop the exhumation, but eventually ran out of emotional and financial resources to continue the fight."

 

The government itself has acknowledged that the autopsy was grossly inadequate. Forensic science then and now requires a higher standard for the autopsy of a President. There was also the law broken in Texas. The only question is whether this inadequacy was by design to help the lone gunman narrative. We also have solid evidence that members of the Kennedy family were at fault for their disregard towards those gathering forensic evidence. There is enough sworn testimony to present this case, and there is also a lot of juicy information contained in unsworn statements through the past years. It wouldn't actually matter if a new autopsy uncovered no new information, because it isn't really a choice whether or not a new autopsy needs to be done.

 

This problem is similar to how 9/11 truthers can legally prove, citing stuff like the NFPA standards, that the WTC did not receive a proper arson investigation.

Edited October 1, 2021 by Micah Mileto