So is David Lifton's Final Charade just going to be lost to history?

[David Von Pein]

More of David S. Lifton's nonsense (via his 14-part video series that he recorded in 2013):

Lifton wants us to take seriously the idea that Secret Service agent Paul Landis ran from the SS follow-up car and took the place of Bill Greer as the driver of Kennedy's limousine immediately after JFK was shot, and that it was Landis (and not Greer) who actually drove the limo most of the way from Dealey Plaza to Parkland Hospital.

Another of Lifton's dozens of unprovable make-believe cloak-and-dagger episodes is the one about how the wounded JFK was supposed to be transferred to an ambulance at the Trade Mart. Lifton says this transfer to the ambulance was going to be done in order to get JFK's body away from Jackie and other members of the Kennedy party. But this "ambulance" part of the plot didn't go off as planned (although I don't think Lifton, in his 2013 video interview, ever explains why it didn't).

Also: Lifton thinks Connally was shot THREE separate times (by Agent Ready, of course).

And: At the very beginning of Part 4 of Lifton's 14-part interview (see my full playlist below), we hear the interviewer say: "So the original plan was not to have the driver shoot the President...", which (I guess) means that Lifton turned into a "Greer Shot Kennedy" CTer. It sure sounds that way to me, based on the interviewer's remark at the start of Part 4.

 

Edited February 2 by David Von Pein

[Pat Speer]

3 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

 

Call it what you want... it was apparently created by multiple lacerations with a knife. And not a soul noticed it in Dealey Plaza or Parkland. Yet very pronounced at Bethesda.

 

FWIW, a large piece of bone, almost certainly the large triangular fragment, can be seen flying forward from the head into the limo in the Zapruder film.

It seems possible that the tears on the forehead were created as this piece flew forward. 

 

 

 

[Sandy Larsen]

2 hours ago, Tony Krome said:

One thing I will say, is that the photos you refer to support the top of head bullet strike and not the occipital strike.

 

It has been indisputably proven that there was a gaping hole on the back of Kennedy's head. Which in turn proves that the back-of head photos and x-rays are fraudulent. And that the Zapruder film has been altered.

I don't necessarily agree with Lifton on his body alteration theory. But the two things he got right were the ambulance chase and how the three casket entrances worked.

 

[Pat Speer]

6 minutes ago, Paula Botan said:

As someone who assisted Lifton with his research for a couple of years in the early 2000s, I can say that I highly doubt a manuscript exists. At any rate, I never saw one. He was doing research that is true, but his ideas were becoming increasingly far-fetched for me. I think he painted himself into a very tight corner with his theories and could not get himself out. 

Shout out to Northridge. (I spent most of my life in the Granada Hills/Northridge area.)

[Pat Speer]

5 minutes ago, David Von Pein said:

More of David S. Lifton's nonsense (via his 14-part video series that he recorded in 2013):

Lifton wants us to take seriously the idea that Secret Service agent Paul Landis ran from the SS follow-up car and took the place of Bill Greer as the driver of Kennedy's limousine immediately after JFK was shot, and that it was Landis (and not Greer) who actually drove the limo most of the way from Dealey Plaza to Parkland Hospital.

Another of Lifton's dozens of unprovable make-believe cloak-and-dagger episodes is the one about how the wounded JFK was supposed to be transferred to an ambulance at the Trade Mart. Lifton says this transfer to the ambulance was going to be done in order to get JFK's body away from Jackie and other members of the Kennedy party. But this "ambulance" part of the plot didn't go off as planned (although I don't think Lifton, in his 2013 video interview, ever explains why it didn't).

Also: Lifton thinks Connally was shot THREE separate times (by Agent Ready, of course).

And: At the very beginning of Part 4 of Lifton's 14-part interview (see my full playlist below), we hear the interviewer say: "So the original plan was not to have the driver shoot the President...", which (I guess) means that Lifton turned into a "Greer Shot Kennedy" CTer. It sure sounds that way to me, based on the interviewer's remark at the start of Part 4.

 

My recollection from my discussions with David was that Connally was not supposed to be shot, and that the plan was changed to try to save his life. 

[Paula Botan]

13 minutes ago, Pat Speer said:

Shout out to Northridge. (I spent most of my life in the Granada Hills/Northridge area.)

My sister and her family live in Simi! Yep, I'm a Valley girl.

 

[Greg Burnham]

.

Edited February 2 by Greg Burnham
Deleted

[David Von Pein]

.....

Edited February 2 by David Von Pein

[James DiEugenio]

Boy is that interesting Paula.

Were you working for or with Lifton? 

That is was he paying you or did you volunteer?

And how long did it last?

[Paula Botan]

22 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

Boy is that interesting Paula.

Were you working for or with Lifton? 

That is was he paying you or did you volunteer?

And how long did it last?

I was volunteering for him off and on between 2004-2007. He was not paying me. I had got in touch with him after I won a lot of items on Ebay purportedly belonging to Lee Harvey Oswald. I would not have bid on them at all except that one of the items was a Russian German textbook with Ernst Titovets' name printed inside. I knew enough about the subject to know that it might be authentic. Long story short, after I had a falling out with Lifton, I got in touch with Dr. Titovets, found out he had a manuscript and began helping him. The textbook became a very interesting and handy calling card in that regard. The research community will never know what I went through to make sure that Ernst's book saw the light of day! I'll have to write my own book someday. 

[Tony Krome]

2 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

It has been indisputably proven that there was a gaping hole on the back of Kennedy's head. Which in turn proves that the back-of head photos and x-rays are fraudulent. And that the Zapruder film has been altered.

As I said, if you had of quoted my full reply, it was occipital. And if anyone is foolish enough to refer to the Z-Film, especially after the sign, as evidence, well, you are destined for another 60 years of muddiness. 

[Keven Hofeling]

3 hours ago, David Von Pein said:

It didn't. The scalp isn't "shredded" at all. You're just misinterpreting what is seen in the top-of-the-head autopsy photo.

 

Former Bethesda Autopsy Technician James Jenkins:

"...JENKINS: "...Now the strange thing about it was at the top of this wound here there was an INCISION in the scalp [Jenkins points to parietal area above occiput on skull model] that went approximately to the coronal suture here [Jenkins demonstrates on skull model]. It went a little past here [Jenkins demonstrates on skull model].

 

QUESTION: An incision...

 

JENKINS: An incision.

 

QUESTION: ...that you saw?

 

JENKINS: Right, it was actually see...

 

QUESTION: Why would there be an incision?

 

JENKINS: That's a good question. The scalp had, you know, remember all of this area in this portion is fractured [Jenkins points to parietal area on the right side of skull model], okay, to the sagittal suture, which is this suture [Jenkins demonstrates on skull model]. All of this area was fractured now, but it wasn't gone, it was still being kept intact by the scalp. The scalp had rips and tears in it. Along this area [Jenkins points to parietal area on the right side of skull model], it seemed like some of those tears in the scalp had been surgically connected. The little connections to follow fracture line in here [Jenkins demonstrates on skull model]. And that extended to about here  [Jenkins points to parietal area on top of skull model]. Okay, you know, that was the same. When Dr. Humes took the wrappings off of the head, there was a secondary wrapping on it that I think, you know, I think was the towel, but the scalp and the whole thing, this was all matted hair, and missing scalp, torn scalp, fatty tissue from beneath the scalp...

 

QUESTION: Which is all normal?

 

JENKINS: Yea, which is all normal. Okay, it had kind of stuck to that secondary layer. So as he was taking it off this area kinda gaped open, but as soon as we separated it from the towel it went back together. Now that is significant for, the fact is you could actually, if you wanted to do that, you could actually lay this skull open. You could actually take your hands and seperate it. So that would have given you access to the brain.  

 

QUESTION: Which means?

 

JENKINS: Which... Again, speculation, is that, fact is that you would have had access, you would have had access to the brain before we received it in the morgue..."

 

[See James Jenkins answer at the following link which has been cued up for you https://youtu.be/2U7dXPA_juM?t=1823 ]

 

[Keven Hofeling]

8 hours ago, Aaron Sharpe said:

I've been revisiting Lifton recently. One of my original JFKa experiences, in the early 90s at the tender age of 19 or 20, was browsing the VHS tapes in a local video store and spotting a video called Best Evidence. I excitedly took it home and was enthralled by this little bald man whose eyes went slowly back and forth, obviously reading cue cards as he narrated. The material in the interviews was so explosive, and seemed so credible, I could hardly believe it. This went beyond anything even in Oliver Stone's movie. 

I'm sure everyone has a story about how they first became obsessed with the JFKa. My obsession began in my single-digit ages, with the 'official' facts as printed in a history book, published by an encyclopedia company, given to me by my grandfather. My other grandparents had some of the original Life magazines dedicated to the assassination that were published in the 60s. When I got a bit older and was a big-time movie buff, I heard that Oliver Stone was going to make a movie about the assassination. I was excited to see it, and though I understood that it was going to offer a 'conspiracy' point of view, that wasn't at all why. In fact, I knew nothing about the conspiracy beyond those few elements that had seeped into the popular culture. Ie, the term "grassy knoll,' and the idea that there was more than one shooter. I was simply excited at the prospect of a top-notch, Hollywood-level, big-budget recreation of the events. That's it.

I could write for days on how that movie changed my life, but I won't. I found the Lifton video shortly afterward, and as a result Best Evidence became one of the first 5 or 10 books I read on the subject. This was some years before Amazon (or the Internet, for that matter), and I must've gotten the book from a library because I don't seem to have a copy anywhere. It's disappointing that there is no Kindle/e-book version. I don't know why Lifton—or any author, for that matter—would let such an opportunity go by, but used copies aren't exactly cheap. 

Among the many authors and researchers I've come across, Lifton stands out for a few reasons. I believe his 'body alteration theory' is representative of the assimilation and maturing of evidence in the case over time. Simply put: What once seemed crazy now feels like yesterday's news. 

I spent most of 2023 reading Doug Horne's 5 volumes (again, no ebook??). It certainly appears to me that Lifton's primary "theory" is more than fully validated—to the point that we are no longer asking Did it happen? That's established. In fact, now we're even beyond asking How did it happen? (Yes, there are definitely holes, but the ARRB established a lot. I'm convinced Horne is correct that Lifton was wrong in one important respect—that the body was altered "between Dallas and Bethesda;" the body was most likely altered AT Bethesda, most likely by Humes himself). 

What once seemed crazy now feels like yesterday's news. 

I've been aware of Zapruder-alteration theories since at least 2000, but it always felt like a bridge too far. The explanations in favor of alteration provided by those who are "certain" of it are mostly buried in physics and not very accessible to the layman. On the other hand, the anti-alteration argument is straightforward ("...but the sprocket hole images man!" "There was no time!")

But what once seemed crazy ...

I recently read Lifton's long essay Pig on a Leash. I hadn't known that he suspected alteration, and in fact had for a very long time, practically since his first viewings of the film. I know he planned a book on the subject, to be the last in a trilogy after Final Charade, but that obviously won't happen.

Say this of Lifton: He was slow. Perhaps he was meticulous and wanted to produce the most reliable information possible, but sadly, he ran out of time. 

I'd be immensely interested in reading his thoughts on Oswald, and seeing what evidence he must have amassed over the years he worked on his unpublished book. He didn't appear to have much of a social life, but does he not have surviving family who are handling his estate? Either that, or surely he bequeathed his research to a trusted fellow researcher. I'd like to think that, after all this time, Final Charade was completed except for the index and cover art. But maybe not. 

Does anyone know anything about the status or future plans for his unpublished work?

Maybe we'll never see it. But what once seemed crazy ...

 

The following is a Facebook post made by Matt Douthit who indicated that David Lifton was his mentor. Matt can be contacted on Facebook via the following link: https://www.facebook.com/matt.douthit.1

 

https://www.facebook.com/groups/387164721481044/posts/2322006114663552/

 

 

[Greg Doudna]

1 hour ago, Paula Botan said:

I was volunteering for him off and on between 2004-2007. He was not paying me. I had got in touch with him after I won a lot of items on Ebay purportedly belonging to Lee Harvey Oswald. I would not have bid on them at all except that one of the items was a Russian German textbook with Ernst Titovets' name printed inside. I knew enough about the subject to know that it might be authentic. Long story short, after I had a falling out with Lifton, I got in touch with Dr. Titovets, found out he had a manuscript and began helping him. The textbook became a very interesting and handy calling card in that regard. The research community will never know what I went through to make sure that Ernst's book saw the light of day! I'll have to write my own book someday. 

Interesting Paula, and thank you for your behind-the-scenes assistance to Titovets in helping his good book see the light of day.

[Paula Botan]

4 minutes ago, Greg Doudna said:

Interesting Paula, and thank you for your behind-the-scenes assistance to Titovets in helping his good book see the light of day.

Thanks Greg.