A New Inquiry: What would it take?

[Greg Parker]

Having given it some thought, I have my own ideas on what it should take to get a new (and hopefully independent and unfettered) inquiry.

Here are a few things I believe, in any reasonable society, would be grounds for reopening official investigations:

1. Substantive evidence that Oswald did not/could not have fired at the President.

2. Substantive evidence that Oswald was set up.

3. Substantive evidence tying Oswald to any intelligence organisation in the capacity of agent/informant or in any other capacity directly, or indirectly through cut-outs.

4. Substantive evidence that Ruby did not act under his own volition in killing Oswald.

5. New technology overturning past interpretations of some of the physical evidence.

I am interested in learning what others think.

For the purpose of the exercise, please disregard the fact that the current US regime may not be too... interested... in going down such a road under any circumstances. That's a separate problem. First things first...

[John Geraghty]

I think it would take something quite explosive to cause a new investigation to take place. As we have seen with cyril wechts conferences in pittsburgh there is a lot of evidence with regard to the medical cover-up yet that has seemingly brought no new interest in the case.

I think it might take some leaked documents or newly found evidence or a confession from someone other than mob or anri-castro related activities, say somebody in FBI or CIA, like hosty or someone on the ground level such as him.

The dictabelt is probably the best evidence to be re-examined with the use of new technology, but that alone would not warrant a new inquiry as it was already covered by the hsca and dale myers has set about discrediting it with his animation.

To be honest I dont know what would warrant a new investigation, it could come from unlikely sources.

If we are to interview people we better do it soon, because nobody is getting any younger apart from that guy on Quantum leap (he once leaped into LHO)

john

[Greg Parker]

Thanks for your reply, John.

I think it would take something quite explosive to cause a new investigation to take place. As we have seen with cyril wechts conferences in pittsburgh there is a lot of evidence with regard to the medical cover-up yet that has seemingly brought no new interest in the case.

Can't comment as I have yet to see the DVDs of the conference.

I think it might take some leaked documents or newly found evidence or a confession from someone other than mob or anri-castro related activities, say somebody in FBI or CIA, like hosty or someone on the ground level such as him.

Agreed. Any of those might do it.

The dictabelt is probably the best evidence to be re-examined with the use of new technology, but that alone would not warrant a new inquiry as it was already covered by the hsca and dale myers has set about discrediting it with his animation.

Seems like one of those areas where one expert will cancel out the other.

To be honest I dont know what would warrant a new investigation, it could come from unlikely sources.

If we are to interview people we better do it soon, because nobody is getting any younger apart from that guy on Quantum leap (he once leaped into LHO)

Which is why the research community has to to get its act together.

john

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Where I'm coming from is not worrying so much about what it would take to force a new inquiry in this particular case, per se. If we did that, we'd be beaten before we start. We have to demythologise/debuff this thing and get it accepted for what it is: an unsolved homicide so the question then becomes; what does it take to get an ordinary homicide case reopened? If we could get general agreement on that, then perhaps those areas could be targeted. We don't have to show who did do it - we only have to show for example that Oswald didn't. I believe at least that much can be achieved to a high degree of certainty. Once that's done -- then it's time to consider how to use that to force a new inquiry. If that step is acheived -- all the good work that's been done in investigating possible plots/plotters can then be put on the table.

Not saying any of this would be easy... but as you suggest, time is not a friend.

I know you and maybe one or two others have been keen in the past to get something positive happening... but in my opinion, we need to forget about putting plot scenarios together for now (and I've been just as "guilty" as anyone else) and work out how to get this case treated like any other unsolved murder - and looked at that way by the press and general public. The case has nothing to do with UFOs or the Loch Ness Monster, but it's invariably lumped in with those type of things, giving it an air of unreality, enabling those with the power to act, to ignore it/ridicule/trivialise it.

I've heard one too many times that the case can never be solved. To hell with that, and anyone who says it.

Oh, it may never be solved... but not because it can't be...

[John Geraghty]

your right greg,

and everybody knows your right, its just that we need a single body to get behind. I have talked with you before about creating a body, I talked to cyril wecht, peter dale scott, george michael evica and others over email about such a thing but the only problem is setting up such a thing on an international basis.

There is an independent body called 'the center for public integrity' which looks into suchthings as the patriot act, insider trading, corporate fraud and abuse of government power. they are a non-profit organisation and have done a lot of good work in showing the flaws in the patriot act and acted as a voice for the disgruntled.

Perhaps we should take a look at their model of organisation and see perhaps if we could run something along those lines with a few volunteers and some contributions.

Getting films and documentaries made is quite essential as that is the only medium where everyday average people are going to spend the time to look and think about the case, most people dont vegetate in front of books.

With the technology today it is quite simple to make even a short film. Free editing packages are available over the internet, all you need is some music, some footage, a voiceover that could be done by yourself and a bit of practising on the editing software and people could easily make a programme that would be ideal for airing on public T.V.

A body to be set up could possibly not even look and compile evidence but deal solely with public relations and aiding people getting programmes made and seen, same goes for books. Perhaps a website for all assassination related books, documents and dvds to be sold.

Im sure COPA, Lancer and any other organisations would welcome the exposure. Using existing organisations like these which have credible members would prove effective.

Greg, i know we have talked about this before but would you like to have a chat about this and the realities of creating a body such as this.

all the best

john

[Pat Speer]

In my research I have uncovered that the HSCA medical panel, which largely discredited the work of the autopsy doctors, was itself guilty of mis-representing the medical evidence. It is my hope that through embarrassment and argument an independent panel of doctors will look into the case and determine that the HSCA forensic panel, representing some of the top forensic pathologists in the world, was absolutely wrong on a number of its findings, and that there is clear and uncontrovertible physical evidence indicating there was more than one shooter. It is my hope that at that time the Justice Department will, for the first time, investigate the murder without political interference, so that we may get something closer to the truth.

The problem may very well be that doctors are no more honest and interested in the truth than politicians.

[Greg Parker]

your right greg,

and everybody knows your right, its just that we need a single body to get behind. I have talked with you before about creating a body, I talked to cyril wecht, peter dale scott, george michael evica and others over email about such a thing but the only problem is setting up such a thing on an international basis.

There is an independent body called 'the center for public integrity' which looks into suchthings as the patriot act, insider trading, corporate fraud and abuse of government power. they are a non-profit organisation and have done a lot of good work in showing the flaws in the patriot act and acted as a voice for the disgruntled.

Perhaps we should take a look at their model of organisation and see perhaps if we could run something along those lines with a few volunteers and some contributions.

Getting films and documentaries made is quite essential as that is the only medium where everyday average people are going to spend the time to look and think about the case, most people dont vegetate in front of books.

With the technology today it is quite simple to make even a short film. Free editing packages are available over the internet, all you need is some music, some footage, a voiceover that could be done by yourself and a bit of practising on the editing software and people could easily make a programme that would be ideal for airing on public T.V.

A body to be set up could possibly not even look and compile evidence but deal solely with public relations and aiding people getting programmes made and seen, same goes for books. Perhaps a website for all assassination related books, documents and dvds to be sold.

Im sure COPA, Lancer and any other organisations would welcome the exposure. Using existing organisations like these which have credible members would prove effective.

Greg, i know we have talked about this before but would you like to have a chat about this and the realities of creating a body such as this.

all the best

john

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

John, we're on the same wavelength regarding the (to my mind, unfortunate) need for PR people. I'd go one step further and add lobbyists to the wish-list.

My ever-diminishing spare time is still taken up with this case. Bear with me. I email you some ideas/thoughts in the near future.

[John Geraghty]

good good, I have three weeks off from college coming up so I wil get pen to paper and see what I come up with, read a pubric relations manual or two.

john

[William Kelly]

good good, I have three weeks off from college coming up so I wil get pen to paper and see what I come up with, read a pubric relations manual or two.

john

It's been over a year and a half John Geraghty posted that. I wonder if he's learned anything about PR and American justice while in DC.

It's been longer since Greg Parker started this thread and wrote: "...In my opinion, we need to forget about putting plot scenarios together for now...and owrk out how to get this case treated like any other unsolved murder - and looked at that way by the press and general public."

It's still an acomplishable goal if the effort is seriously applied.

BK

[Thomas H. Purvis]

In my research I have uncovered that the HSCA medical panel, which largely discredited the work of the autopsy doctors, was itself guilty of mis-representing the medical evidence. It is my hope that through embarrassment and argument an independent panel of doctors will look into the case and determine that the HSCA forensic panel, representing some of the top forensic pathologists in the world, was absolutely wrong on a number of its findings, and that there is clear and uncontrovertible physical evidence indicating there was more than one shooter. It is my hope that at that time the Justice Department will, for the first time, investigate the murder without political interference, so that we may get something closer to the truth.

The problem may very well be that doctors are no more honest and interested in the truth than politicians.

and that there is clear and uncontrovertible physical evidence indicating there was more than one shooter.

Pat;

So long as this approach is taken, it is most unlikely that you will find too many qualified and reliable forensic pathologists to take up the cause.

On the other hand, a presentation of the evidence which mere "questions posed" frequently may gain a response.

There is some "new blood" among many in the medical/forensic positions who are willing to independently and openly examine the known evidence.

However, not unlike most of the other aspects of the case, assimilation and presentation of the exact known facts for presentation, appears to have eluded most who have even attempted such an endeavor.

[Thomas H. Purvis]

In my research I have uncovered that the HSCA medical panel, which largely discredited the work of the autopsy doctors, was itself guilty of mis-representing the medical evidence. It is my hope that through embarrassment and argument an independent panel of doctors will look into the case and determine that the HSCA forensic panel, representing some of the top forensic pathologists in the world, was absolutely wrong on a number of its findings, and that there is clear and uncontrovertible physical evidence indicating there was more than one shooter. It is my hope that at that time the Justice Department will, for the first time, investigate the murder without political interference, so that we may get something closer to the truth.

The problem may very well be that doctors are no more honest and interested in the truth than politicians.

and that there is clear and uncontrovertible physical evidence indicating there was more than one shooter.

Pat;

So long as this approach is taken, it is most unlikely that you will find too many qualified and reliable forensic pathologists to take up the cause.

On the other hand, a presentation of the evidence which mere "questions posed" frequently may gain a response.

There is some "new blood" among many in the medical/forensic positions who are willing to independently and openly examine the known evidence.

However, not unlike most of the other aspects of the case, assimilation and presentation of the exact known facts for presentation, appears to have eluded most who have even attempted such an endeavor.

[Terry Adams]

Bill,

I know that you are actively seeking a grand jury investigation. Does this require a District attorney to bring the information in front of such a jury? And, would it not be a good idea that this be brought from Texas, possibly arguing jurisdiction? It has always been stated that the feds had no right to remove JFK's body, car, etc. from dallas, as it was supposed to be a murder case tried locally, by the laws that were in place in 1963.

Terry

[Greg Parker]

good good, I have three weeks off from college coming up so I wil get pen to paper and see what I come up with, read a pubric relations manual or two.

john

It's been over a year and a half John Geraghty posted that. I wonder if he's learned anything about PR and American justice while in DC.

It's been longer since Greg Parker started this thread and wrote: "...In my opinion, we need to forget about putting plot scenarios together for now...and owrk out how to get this case treated like any other unsolved murder - and looked at that way by the press and general public."

It's still an acomplishable goal if the effort is seriously applied.

BK

Bill, at the time I wrote the above, I was aware of your work with COPA, but thought personal circumstances had led you away from the case, and the effort would have to start again from scratch.

I think part of the answer is in getting professionals in relevant fields such as forensics to study the areas within their expertise, and to present their findings. I think it would be especially beneficial to credbility that such professionals are new to the case and can be seen to have no axe to grind, no agenda to follow.

But more than that is needed. Erich Fromm concluded from his Institute of Social Research study in 1931 that German workers were overwhelmingly against Hitler, but that this would not translate into his being removed from power. In fact, he correctly predicted the small percentage who would actively resist, those who would become active members of the Nazi Party, and the majority who would merely accept their rule without active involvement for or against.

Why I mention this is because it reminds me of the oft-quoted high percentage of people who believe a conspiracy was behind the assassination. It's virtually meaningless. The problem is the same as in Fromm's study - the low percentage who turn that belief into action and the vast majority who meekly accept they've been lied to.

I don't think it's absolutely necessary to completely turn those numbers around, but certainly getting more people actively interested at a grass roots level in something like your march toward a Grand Jury would be of great value. Politicians notice such things.

[Greg Parker]

dup post deleted

Edited October 24, 2006 by Greg Parker

[William Kelly]

Bill,

I know that you are actively seeking a grand jury investigation. Does this require a District attorney to bring the information in front of such a jury? And, would it not be a good idea that this be brought from Texas, possibly arguing jurisdiction? It has always been stated that the feds had no right to remove JFK's body, car, etc. from dallas, as it was supposed to be a murder case tried locally, by the laws that were in place in 1963.

Terry

Hi Terry,

Glad you are interested.

The answer to your question is yes, the first of our grand jury petition-requests will be directed at the Federal District Court of North Texas, in Dallas, and to be successful, it will require an attachment with enough documented evidence to convince an assisant DA to convince the District Attorney to take the case to a special grand jury that will be conveined expressly for the purpose of handling this one case.

As for jurisdiction, it was then and is now a federal crime to conspire to kill the President, there was no federal jurisdiction only if there was no conspiracy. Evidence of conspiracy makes it a federal crime.

As for the local, Dallas city, county and Texas state, also have grand juries, and petition-requests may be submitted to them in the future, but they've had the opportunity to solve the murders of JFK, JDT and LHO and neglected to do so.

I suspect that when a Special Federal Grand Jury is actively investigating the murder of JFK, the Texans will suddenly decide it is their jurisdiction and want a piece of the action, but it will be too late.

For more information about Grand Juries and how they work in the American system of justice see Susan Brenner's site:

http://campus.udayton.edu/~grandjur/

Even if the North Texas Federal Court declines to accept our request and take the evidence before a grand jury, it will have to legally respond to our petition, so we are nudging them, even if only with pins and needles.

Bill Kelly

[William Kelly]

In my research I have uncovered that the HSCA medical panel, which largely discredited the work of the autopsy doctors, was itself guilty of mis-representing the medical evidence. It is my hope that through embarrassment and argument an independent panel of doctors will look into the case and determine that the HSCA forensic panel, representing some of the top forensic pathologists in the world, was absolutely wrong on a number of its findings, and that there is clear and uncontrovertible physical evidence indicating there was more than one shooter. It is my hope that at that time the Justice Department will, for the first time, investigate the murder without political interference, so that we may get something closer to the truth.

The problem may very well be that doctors are no more honest and interested in the truth than politicians.

Pat,

I know a lot of people have devoted a lot of time into the medical evidence, none of it can be used in court because of the uncertainty of its origin and the debate over what it says.

The only thing that the medical evidence does say, is that JFK was killed as a result of murder - and that is undisputed, and that's all that a district attorney needs to legally convene a grand jury.

If a grand jury is convened, oneof the first things that they will order is a routine Forensic autopsy of the victim, something that's never been done.

Then all of the medical questions can be addressed directly rather than through pictures and x-rays that have lost their provenance - source and chain of possession.

Photos and x-rays, etc. cannot be introduced as evidence unless accompanied by a witness - who took them. We don't know who took some of the medical photos and x-rays and those technicians who we knew took photos and x-rays sometimes can't identify their work.

A regular autopsy, as performed on JFK, only determines the cause of death - which we knew was a bullet shot to the head - and therefore murder. A Forensic autopsy does not just determine cause of death, but develops different types of evidence that can be used to determine responsibility and be presented as exhibits in a court of law.

In order to establish New - Evidence - phtos/x-rays and other Exhibits and Expert Witnesses (autopsy doctors), which is capable of being introduced as evidence in the court, a new Forensic Autopsy will be ordered.

Rather than a military lab, a new autopsy will be conducted at an independent, civilian lab, such as those at George Washington Univeristy or nearby insitute., with the latest technology available.

The same grand jury could order additional forensic autopies of related victims - Connally, Tippitt, Oswald and Ruby.The families of the victims cannot block a forensic autopys ordered by a court, as it's a matter of police procedure in investigating homicides.

Once a proper forensic autopsy is performed, then the real debates can begin.

BK