Jump to content
The Education Forum

'Mortal Error' Lives On


Recommended Posts

Menninger's book citing SS agent Hickey as accidental shooter is reinforced by an upcoming television program. This theory researched in depth and never appreciably debunked as far as I have seen.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/28/jfk-second-shooter-documentary_n_3667317.html?icid=maing-grid7%7Cmain5%7Cdl4%7Csec1_lnk3%26pLid%3D350520

A brief discussion of the 1992 book:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=20021&hl=%2Bgeorge+%2Bhickey

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nothing ever goes away....it was a fascinating book and has some good ballistics and fragment pattern info. What the author did not know is that the photo of the security car taken at the time he says the agent made the accidental shot clearly shows no weapon in evidence. The author was sued, settled out of court as I recall...but certainly somebody will add more detail. But hey, its the 50th anniversary, everything that was old is new again..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nothing ever goes away....it was a fascinating book and has some good ballistics and fragment pattern info. What the author did not know is that the photo of the security car taken at the time he says the agent made the accidental shot clearly shows no weapon in evidence. The author was sued, settled out of court as I recall...but certainly somebody will add more detail. But hey, its the 50th anniversary, everything that was old is new again..

In April, 1995, George Hickey sued Bonar Menninger for what he said about him in his book, Mortal Error: The Shot that Killed JFK. However, the court judge in Baltimore said the suit by Hickey was filed too long after publication of the book.

The reason this story has reemerged is that Hickey died two years ago.

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JFKhickey.htm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This story won't go away because it is attractive to a certain mind-set. When one studies the wound ballistics/medical evidence, it is obvious that the official story is wrong, wrong, wrong. This leads some to jump to the head shot came from the front theory.

For some, however, this is too big a leap, so an alternate scenario becomes palpable.

While the resurrection of this theory is bound to cloud the issue as to what really happened, it seems quite likely the program will present some solid evidence debunking the official story, and that some of this mud will stick.

So, in sum, this is a good thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


While it's longevity exists in not being substantially proven or disproven, it most certainly has been reborn through intrinsic monetary motives and the window afforded by Hick's passing, as noted by John. I also agree the book is a good read, but the raising and inadvertent discharge of an AR-15 in the follow vehicle would have been significantly observed and impossible to suppress. As well, the weapon's striking of the President's head from that position would have to rate as the worst misfortune in history, and closely rank with the plausibility of the stories of Jackie having shot John in the left temple with a pistol during her 'lean in'.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Steven I certainly agree with your ranking in plausibility! It is an interesting read on a stand alone basis and might very will convince someone coming to the case for

the first time.

Pat, I've become conflicted about whether a resurfacing of so many scenarios will help or hurt. I think if we could all have agreed just to focus on how many elements of the basic WC

story and initial FBI investigation have been brought into question we could really have done some good in opening peoples minds. However it appears what is really going to happen

is that everyone is jumping beyond that to pitch their scenario and evil doers of choice - and since who the bad guys were is always more interesting than issues of evidence we may

just end up with such a jumble that newcomers to the case will throw up their hands.

Very hard to say which message may stick once the year is done...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're right, Larry. Reelz pushing this issue might only convince people there's no there there when it comes to the possibility more than one shooter was involved.

This November sure will be confusing. At least for newbies...aka 80% of the public.

We have O'Reilly's Oswald did it movie, and this rehash of the Hickey did it theory, pushed on TV.

We have Hanks' Oswald did it melodrama.

We have, if I'm not mistaken, at least two Mafia-did-it movies coming out, one by DiCaprio, and one by Scorcese.

We have a David Mamet film, apparently touching on the film alteration angle.

And dozens of books and re-issues, including one guaranteed best-seller, an Oswald-did-it rehash by James Swanson, and another one sure to receive a warm response in the media, by Howard Willens.

Mayhem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What the author did not know is that the photo of the security car taken at the time he says the agent made the accidental shot clearly shows no weapon in evidence.

Larry, according to Robert Groden, Menninger visited Groden's home and viewed this photo while writing Mortal Error. He chose to ignore the photographic evidence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's very interesting Josh, thanks for the information! It appears the current production company is in the same state, my friend Stu Wexler has contacted them and referred them to two separate photos which clearly show the SS agent was not holding the AR-15 during the period of the shooting or afterwards. They were totally unresponsive to him and stated they had other information which would corroborate the scenario and their film.

So these guys are going into it with open eyes as well... Larry

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Robert Morrow

My friends have already emailed me 4 times within one day about this stupid movie. Is it a good thing? No, because a million dollar + produced crock of bull is never a good thing. Nobody credible in JFK research believes this ______ .

The only good thing is that it gets people talking about the JFK assassination and when they start looking for the higher quality material on this topic, they can easily find it - i.e. LBJ: The Mastermind of the JFK Assassination by Nelson and JFK and the Unspeakable by Douglass.

Edited by Robert Morrow
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Robert, I agree. The Douglas book is one of the best. Mortal Error was an interesting but flawed piece of work. Neither the photographs nor the witnesses support its premise.
I suspect that more interesting "theories" will resurface soon.(eg. Jackie did it, Greer did it, a fellow hiding in the trunk did it,

JFK faked his death......). I think that someone will link it to King Tut's death.

On a personal note, thanks to all who extended best wishes and support. I'm recovering from 8 weeks of radiation therapy, and am thankful that this Forum is back up again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Probably the best evidence against this theory is that Tim McIntyre, the Secret Service Agent standing next to Hickey at the time also confirmed there was no shot. Later, McIntyre also sued the publishers of the book.

Hickey's lawyer, Mark S. Zaid, has told me by email that they sued Howard Donahue and St. Martin's Press and not Bonar Menninger in 1995: "We settled the case then but only if it included an apology from the publisher that would send the message to most reasonable people that the theory was flawed."

The story got a lot of coverage in the Daily Mail yesterday. This follows a long article in the Huffington Post.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2380691/President-JFK-documentary-alleges-WAS-second-shooter-assassination--Secret-Service-agent.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/28/jfk-second-shooter-documentary_n_3667317.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...