Jump to content
The Education Forum

Recommended Posts

If one recalls, back in the days, JFK Facts was a very vituperative and vindictive place where people like McAdams, Davison, and Paul May, under the alias of Photon, would hang out. I was there for awhile until I caught McAdams misrepresenting a piece of evidence, as he had done in my debate with him.  So I wrote that and I advised Jeff Morley that his idea of any kind of honest debate with "Ozzie did it" advocates was unsound since they resorted to things like this.  I also wrote my demolition of Davison's book, Oswald's Game,  to show why she was not worth arguing with since she simply ignored anything that did not fit in with her rerun of the WR.  Her reply to me about that review misrepresented what I wrote.  It was not an exchange of opinions.  I was referring to facts she ignored, like Ruby's phony polygraph, as exposed by the HSCA, which she did not mention even though her book came out four years after the HSCA volumes were released. And she made her readers think Ruby had passed the test.

https://kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-reviews/davison-jean-oswald-s-game

Paul May might be the worst of the lot. Gil Jesus was going to file suit against him but found out he lived in Georgia.  May told me he lived in California, but if he would not reveal his true name why should I buy that?  One poster, Arnaldo Fernandez  brought up the exchange in Kill Zone between the author former military officer and sniper Craig Roberts, and his friend Carlos Hathcock.  Hathcock was the greatest sniper of the Vietnam War.  Something like 95 confirmed kills.  So dangerous Hanoi put a bounty on his head. For 25 years, he held the record for the longest kill shot, he killed someone from a mile and a half away. Craig's book noted that  Carlos said that he had tried to do what Oswald did, since he ran a SWAT team school with an obstacle course.  They set up everything just like the WC said.  He tried it more than once and could not duplicate it. Well May said that Craig was full of it, that his other book on snipers had been "discredited" and therefore this one should be also, so we should ignore it since it was BS that only "low info"  newbies would buy.  So both Arnaldo and Pat Speer seemed to back off of it.

But, as there always is, there was a problem in May's argument.  He never talked to Craig, the author of Kill Zone.  (Which is a problem with the Ozzie did it crowd.  For instance, Davison never went to New Orleans to interview anyone.  In fact, there is no evidence she even called anyone.). This bothered me, so I contacted Craig and he gave me permission to print his reply on this point. Which I will now do, both parts of it.

 

Edited by James DiEugenio
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 51
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Jim,

 
I’ve been asked this question of whether Carlos said this or not many times. I can assure you he did. He was a personal friend of mine, and when I was doing the research on Kill Zone I called him and asked what he thought about the “official” story of Oswald being the lone nut with a Carcano could do what the Warren Commission said. He laughed and said that they tried to duplicate it at Quantico at the USMC Sniper Instructor School. He said they used a 6.5 Carcano with 4x scope (he didn’t mention if it was a cheap Hollywood Optics scope like what was mounted on the “Oswald” rifle.) But I’m sure they bore sighted it before trying to duplicate the feat of 3 shots in 5.6 seconds on a moving target in a high to low angle. He said after several tries they simply could not duplicate it on the conditions Oswald would have had. It takes time to fire a shot, work the bolt, get back on target and get the proper eye relief from the scope to fire the next shot.
 
I didn’t record the phone call but I took notes. When I wrote that part of Kill Zone I sent it to him to make sure it was correct.  He said it was.
 
A few years back a Japanese film company came over here and did a feature piece on the JFK assassination. One thing they did was come to me to try and duplicate it here. I was referred to by Jim Marrs.  They had managed to obtain a Carcano from a Hollywood arsenal that had film props and weapons, and it was better than the Oswald weapon as it was a 7.35mm from Mussolini’s elite guard troops which had a much smoother action.  It still jammed when I tried to rapid fire it.  
 
We set up on a balcony of a friend’s house out here in the country overlooking a valley. We set up a man-size target at 88 yards which was the longest shot according to the WC.  We set up a window frame on the railing of the balcony/deck and I took up a position similar to what the 6th Floor Museum has set up.  I shot a total of 18 rounds in total, firing 3 rounds on the clock timer at a time. On most strings I managed the first two shots in the target but not all three before the clock ran out.  Then I took my Remington 700 Police Sniper rifle, .308 caliber, and shot four strings with three hitting the target inside the time limit.  The action was much smoother, the rifle much more accurate, and a good scope.
Edited by James DiEugenio
Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is his reply to the May comments on his previous book, which he co authored, being fraudulent.

Jim,

 
I’ve never heard about anyone questioning anything in One Shot—One Kill. I used personal recorded interviews with individuals whose names I got from the US Marine Corps archives and Museum, plus the USMC sniper schools, and also the US Army Small Arms Committee (which has their sniper training) at Ft. Benning.  But, it doesn’t matter what the lone nutters say, they can’t be convinced that Oswald didn’t act alone and will never be convinced.  I gave up on them a long time ago. They are plainly unreasonable....
 
 
 
There’s a newer follow-on book after One Shot (which is in 19th printing) titled “Crosshairs On The Kill Zone,” which has stories from Vietnam up to Iraq and a photo section.
 
You can post my reply, but there will still and always be nay sayers.
Edited by James DiEugenio
Link to post
Share on other sites

Since May never does any real firsthand research I think he got those criticisms of the previous book from Amazon.

Obviously, if they would have been fraudulent, and since Craig was working with the Marine Corps, and the Marine Sniper schools and the Army, and the book went through 19 printings, is it not logical that someone would have filed suit against him?  May's other excuse was that Hathcock had MS and he eventually died of it.  That is true but he died in 1999.  The first book was from 1990, and Kill Zone was 1994. There is a video of Hathcock on You Tube from 1993 which he is perfectly intelligible in. If the book came out in 1994, that was when he was likely working on it.

Therefore, with all  the above, the Hathcock story is accurate.

BTW, Craig sent me two pictures of himself with Hathcock, and one of himself as a sniper in action.

 

Edited by James DiEugenio
Link to post
Share on other sites

One last point, which both McAdams and May mentioned.

They said that CBS replicated what Oswald had done.  In other words they took the CBS demonstration at face value in the 1967 series. So they then asked well if they could do  why could Hathcock not do it?    The likely reason is that Hathcock did not cheat.

The following is from part 2 of my article based upon Roger Feinman's work at CBS.

For the whole article, click here https://kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-articles/why-cbs-covered-up-the-jfk-assassination-2

Edited by James DiEugenio
Link to post
Share on other sites

"Why did Rather and Wyckoff have to stoop this low? Because of the results of their rifle firing tests. As the critics of the Warren Report had pointed out, the Commission had used two tests to see if Oswald could have gotten off three shots in the allotted 5.6 seconds revealed in the Warren Commission, through the indications on the Zapruder film. These tests ended up failing to prove Oswald could have performed this feat of marksmanship. What made it worse is that the Commission had used very proficient rifleman to try to duplicate what the Commission said Oswald had done. (See Sylvia Meagher, Accessories After the Fact, p. 108)

So CBS tried again. This time they set up a track with a sled on it to simulate the back of Kennedy’s head. They then elevated a firing point to simulate the sixth floor “sniper’s nest”, released the target on its sled and had a marksman fire his three shots.

In watching the program, a question most naturally arises. CBS had permission to enter the depository building for a significant length of time, because Rather was running around on the sixth floor and down the stairs. In the exterior shots of Rather, it appears that the traffic in Dealey Plaza was roped off. So why didn’t CBS just do the tests right then and there under the exact same circumstances? It would appear to be for two reasons. First, the oak tree would have created an initial obstruction for the first shot. Second, there was a rise on Elm Street that curved the pavement. This was not simulated by CBS.

CBS first tried their experiment in January of 1967. They used a man named Ed Crossman. Crossman had written several books on the subject and many articles. He had a considerable reputation in the field. But his results were not up to snuff—even though CBS had enlarged the target size! And even though they gave him a week to practice with their version of the Mannlicher Carcano rifle. (Again, CBS could not get the actual rifle the Warren Report said was used by Oswald.) In a report filed by Midgley, he related that Crossman never broke 6.25 seconds, and even with the enlarged target, he only got 2 of 3 hits in about 50% of his attempts. Crossman stated that the rifle had a sticky bolt action, and a faulty viewing scope. What the professional sniper did not know is that the actual rifle in evidence was even harder to work. Crossman said that to perform such a feat on the first time out would require a lot of luck.

Since this did not fit the show’s agenda, it was discarded: both the test and the comments. To solve the problem, CBS now decided to call upon an actual football team full of expert riflemen—that is, 11 professional marksmen—who were first allowed to go to an indoor firing range and practice to their heart’s content. Again, this was a major discrepancy with the Warren Report, since there is no such practice time that the Commission could find for Oswald.

The eleven men then took 37 runs at duplicating what Oswald was supposed to have done. There were three instances where 2 out of 3 hits were recorded in 5.6 seconds. The best time was achieved by Howard Donahue—on his third attempt. His first two attempts were complete failures. It is hard to believe, but CBS claimed that their average recorded time was 5.6 seconds. But this did not include the 17 attempts CBS had to throw out because of mechanical failure. And they did not tell the public the surviving average was 1.2 hits out of 3, and with an enlarged target. The truly striking characteristic of these trials was the number of instances where the shooter could not get any result at all. More often than not, once the clip was loaded, the bolt action jammed. The sniper had to realign the target and fire again. According to the Warren Report, that could not have happened with Oswald."

Link to post
Share on other sites

In other words, after Crossman failed to do what CBS wanted him to do, they dumped him and kept his failure secret.

With an enlarged  target the marksman were allowed to make at least three runs apiece. And they practice to their heart's content before.  Roger was not sure how much the target was broadened, but he said it was probably at least twice as much as the real target would have been, and probably even more.

Another lie--which I did not know about at the time-- is what I wrote about the show dumping 17 runs because of mechanical failure.  Tink Thompson communicated with one of the producers.  He told Tink that was not accurate.  Most of those were simply failures of marksmanship, not mechanical. And it was not just 17.

In other words, no one has ever done what the Commission says Oswald did in a real and accurate reconstruction of the crime.  And just remember: there is no credible evidence of any practice by Oswald. And every person, including the FBI, said that his alleged rifle was just about inoperable.  This is why Craig had to use a completely  different model in every way. 

CBS was lying and they knew they were lying.  And they fired Roger for exposing their lies.

Edited by James DiEugenio
Link to post
Share on other sites

Have yet to read Part 2....but all guns blazin' at Davison's book.  (Thankfully not in my collection.)

Recently inherited Mark Fuhrman's 'A Simple Act of Murder' from Ian Griggs' collection which could get similar treatment to 'Oswald's Game'.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

One last point, which both McAdams and May mentioned.

They said that CBS replicated what Oswald had done.  In other words they took the CBS demonstration at face value in the 1967 series. So they then asked well if they could do  why could Hathcock not do it?    The likely reason is that Hathcock did not cheat.

The following is from part 2 of my article based upon Roger Feinman's work at CBS.

For the whole article, click here https://kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-articles/why-cbs-covered-up-the-jfk-assassination-2

Jim,

     In addition to the evidence about expert snipers failing to replicate Oswald's alleged three shot feat, didn't the FBI find that Carcano shots fired from the TSBD blew off the right half of the cadaver's face?

     Can't recall where I read about that story, but it may have been in Sylvia Meagher's book, Accessories After the Fact.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for that Pete.

Davison was Von Pein's favorite author on the JFK case, before Bugliosi.  As anyone can with my review of her book, there were simply too many errors and misrepresentations in her book.  I mean to talk about the Clinton/Jackson incident and a.) To not go there, and b.) Not to read the reports that were available at the AARC or c.) Not to call anyone up or talk to the investigators, that is just inexcusable.  And to rely on Ruby's polygraph to discredit Mark Lane?  When the HSCA, four years previous, had discredited it?

And those are just two among many in that review.  I did not read Fuhrman's book.  From Pat Speer, I understand that it is an Ozzie did it tome.  Which is odd, because when he  interviewed me up in Spokane, about The Assassinations, its clear he was on my side.  He brought me back for a second day after one hour on the first day.

Edited by James DiEugenio
Link to post
Share on other sites

He let it slip once Larry.

And then when he did, clearly his cohorts said, no don't admit it, but as a lawyer would say, its what he says first that should count.

As for his claims, they were numerous and munificent.

Like above with Craig's book.  And no one asked him, well how has it been discredited?  And did you talk to the author?

Getting all three of them into one location just made it all a circus.

Edited by James DiEugenio
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

Ron, 

Everyone but him, according to McAdams,  uses factoids.  In fact, the WR is one big factoid.  Because the information it relies upon for its data and conclusions is not reliable in any way or hardly on any subject.  Yet this is what McAdams, May and Davison  were using.  That is why I reviewed her book.  What a pile of malarky it is.  She actually says that Ruby only knew about 50-60 cops.  LOL 🤮

 

Edited by James DiEugenio
Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...