Two Princes and a King

[James DiEugenio]

Carmine Savastano's book deals with all three murders, concentrating on JFK first and lengthiest.

A nice approach with a very adroit title.  I had some disagreement with the execution.

 

https://kennedysandking.com/reviews/carmine-savastano-two-princes-and-a-king

[Steve Cearfoss]

In your review of Savastano's Robert Kennedy section, you say that he gives short shrift to the 'girl in the polkadot dress' angle. I'm not at all sure that this angle merits much attention. I could never fathom why a woman, complicit in the shooting, would have been running away shouting, ''We shot him! We shot him!” It always seemed more likely to me that this woman was simply frightened and shouted, 'They shot him! They shot him!' Also, yelling  that 'We shot him!' would of course irrationally call attention to herself. Her purportedly demonstrative physical and vocal exhibitions certainly do not seem like something a member of what seems to be a fairly professional and sophisticated hit would be inclined to do. 

 

Edited April 8, 2017 by Steve Cearfoss
Spelling change

[James DiEugenio]

Steve:

Let me point out, she did not say that until she was out of the building and running down the stairs. So its not like she said it at the scene of the crime.

Secondly, Serrano saw this girl come up the stairs with a man she said resembled Sirhan, and another taller gentleman, likely the man she left with.

Third, Sirhan's last memory is of her stirring coffee for him, and then leading him from their table back to the  pantry.

Fourth, there were previous sighting of SIrhan with a girl who resembled the PDDG.(see Philip Melanson, The Robert F. Kennedy Assassination pgs. 218-20)

FIfth, she seemed to signal Sirhan before he started shooting.

Sixth, Pepper's expert on hypnosis has stated that the design of her dress was a trigger for the commencement of the shooting.

Seventh, after Fernando Faura's book and the evidence of her afternoon trip with the man to Oxnard, which now checks out, its pretty clear she was part of some kind of operation.

In my opinion, she was a key part of the plan.

The net result of her blurting out those words,was what?  I have always stated that in these cases you don't have to pull off the perfect crime.  You just have to control the cover up. Which is what happened.

 

[Steve Cearfoss]

Thanks for your response, Jim. I can see now why you think it's an angle that should be explored more thoroughly. Enjoyed your thoughtful review of Savastano's book. 

[James DiEugenio]

Thanks Steve.

 

Those books are really hard to review since they take in such a large expanse of territory.

[Ron Ecker]

JIm,

In your review you state, "Haldeman was tasked by Nixon to ask Director Dick Helms for the CIA report on the Bay of Pigs. Haldeman could not understand why Helms, who was usually unflappable, got so upset at this request. So he took it to mean that Nixon was using the Bay of Pigs as code for the Kennedy assassination."

According to Haldeman's book The End of Powers (pp. 37-38), his meeting with Helms had nothing to do with a report. The purpose of the meeting was simply to get the CIA to stop the FBI investigation of Watergate. Helms's "violent reaction" in the meeting was caused by Haldeman saying, "The President asked me to tell you this entire affair may be connected to the Bay of Pigs, and if it opens up, the Bay of Pigs may be blown." Helms shouted, "The Bay of Pigs had nothing to do with this. I have no concern about the Bay of Pigs." Haldeman told Helms that he was only following instructions. Helms settled down, and as Haldeman later learned, Nixon's message was duly conveyed to the FBI.

 

Edited April 8, 2017 by Ron Ecker

[Cliff Varnell]

38 minutes ago, Ron Ecker said:

JIm,

In your review you state, "Haldeman was tasked by Nixon to ask Director Dick Helms for the CIA report on the Bay of Pigs. Haldeman could not understand why Helms, who was usually unflappable, got so upset at this request. So he took it to mean that Nixon was using the Bay of Pigs as code for the Kennedy assassination."

According to Haldeman's book The End of Powers (pp. 37-38), his meeting with Helms had nothing to do with a report. The purpose of the meeting was simply to get the CIA to stop the FBI investigation of Watergate. Helms's "violent reaction" in the meeting was caused by Haldeman saying, "The President asked me to tell you this entire affair may be connected to the Bay of Pigs, and if it opens up, the Bay of Pigs may be blown." Helms shouted, "The Bay of Pigs had nothing to do with this. I have no concern about the Bay of Pigs." Haldeman told Helms that he was only following instructions. Helms settled down, and as Haldeman later learned, Nixon's message was duly conveyed to the FBI.

 

 On 3 occasions (in '69, '71, & '72) Nixon sent top aide John Ehrlichman to Langley for all the files on the BOP, the assassinations of Diem and Trujillo.

CIA Director Helms stonewalled him.

Edited April 8, 2017 by Cliff Varnell

[Ron Ecker]

9 minutes ago, Cliff Varnell said:

 On 3 occasions (in '69, '71, & '72) Nixon sent top aide John Ehrlichman to Langley for all the files on the BOP, the assassinations of Diem and Trujillo.

CIA Director Helms stonewalled him.

But that's not why Nixon had Haldeman meet with Helms. It was to get the FBI investigation of Watergate stopped.

 

[Cliff Varnell]

3 minutes ago, Ron Ecker said:

But that's not why Nixon had Haldeman meet with Helms. It was to get the FBI investigation of Watergate stopped.

 

Correct.

[James DiEugenio]

If you read Carmine's book, that is what he says in that section, that Haldeman came to think that the Bay of Pigs nomenclature was referring to the JFK murder.

Which is what Haldeman came to think.  

As Cliff writes, Nixon actually wanted the Bay of Pigs report, for personal reasons i Noted in the review.  And Helms knew that Nixon was wrong about the report blaming the failure on JFK.  Which I also note.

 

Technically, you are correct.  And I will revise it to be more precise.