Jump to content
The Education Forum

Slightly OT: Cyril Wecht Indicted


Nic Martin
 Share

Recommended Posts

I wonder why the FBI would be so concerned about the business practice of a county coroner in Pennsylvania. Even if Wecht were guilty on any of the counts, it's not like he was killing anybody. The people were already dead when they got to his office.

After a four-year investigation and counting, the FBI still doesn't have a clue (so we're supposed to believe) who was behind the anthrax attacks in October 2001, even though they know the anthrax came from a military base lab. (Seems like that would kind of narrow it down.) Maybe more agents on the case might help, if they weren't so busy with the nailing of Cyril Wecht. (Then again maybe more agents wouldn't help, if the military or someone has simply told the FBI to stay out of the military's business, which appears to be the case.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder why the FBI would be so concerned about the business practice of a county coroner in Pennsylvania. Even if Wecht were guilty on any of the counts, it's not like he was killing anybody. The people were already dead when they got to his office.

The UK abolished Grand Juries a long time ago. Grand juries are a throwback to a less enlightened era. As Caroline Kennedy notes in her book on the Bill of Rights, it is a truism that any DA worth his salt could persuade a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich.

I personally have no particular fondness for Cyril Wecht, but I tthink the idea of hitting him with a 60-odd count indictment is no way to treat a ham sandwich. If they had ONE charge against him I would be more impressed, but a 60-odd count indictment screams out the bankruptcy of the prosecution case. As Ron points out, the people were already dead when they got to Wecht's office. Are they alleging that he made personal phone calls from the office?

Students of the JFK assassination are sometimes considered paranoid. The case of Dr. Wecht is evidence that even paranoids have enemies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

J. R. Carroll wrote:

I wonder why the FBI would be so concerned about the business practice of a county coroner in Pennsylvania. Even if Wecht were guilty on any of the counts, it's not like he was killing anybody. The people were already dead when they got to his office.

The UK abolished Grand Juries a long time ago. Grand juries are a throwback to a less enlightened era. As Caroline Kennedy notes in her book on the Bill of Rights, it is a truism that any DA worth his salt could persuade a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich.

I personally have no particular fondness for Cyril Wecht, but I tthink the idea of hitting him with a 60-odd count indictment is no way to treat a ham sandwich. If they had ONE charge against him I would be more impressed, but a 60-odd count indictment screams out the bankruptcy of the prosecution case. As Ron points out, the people were already dead when they got to Wecht's office. Are they alleging that he made personal phone calls from the office?

Students of the JFK assassination are sometimes considered paranoid. The case of Dr. Wecht is evidence that even paranoids have enemies.

2 year investigation 60-odd count indictment... makes one wonder if Monica Lewenski is busy again. What this means is; Cyril is through making talking points and countering same on CNN/FOX/MSNBC --

Bet prices for his Pittsburg high brow JFK seminar in 2004 [or was it 2005] just went in the toilet

Yes, Virginia there IS a price for fame

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In an earlier post I mistakenly said that the Wecht indictment has only 60-odd counts. Having re-read Nic Martin's original post I now realize that the indictment is on 80-odd counts. (call me a xxxx if I'm off by twenty criminal charges. Who's counting anyway?)

Jesus H. Christ, but if Jack the Ripper was allive today and was being indicted, I do not believe that an honest prosecutor could come up with an 80-plus count indictment against him. I am not a big fan of Cyril Wecht, but for God's sake he is not Jack the Ripper.

There is something radically wrong here. This prosecution is politically motivated and has "phoney" written all over it. Bye bye Miss American Pie, and Goodbye Liberty.

With the greatest respect to David Healy, it is not enough to say that there is a price to fame. Anyone who speaks out on any issue acquires some degree of fame. That should not be a license for the government to launch an 80-plus count indictment charging someone with using the office telephone for private business.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In an earlier post I mistakenly said that the Wecht indictment has only 60-odd counts. Having re-read Nic Martin's original post I now realize that the indictment is on 80-odd counts. (call me a xxxx if I'm off by twenty criminal charges. Who's counting anyway?)

Jesus H. Christ, but if Jack the Ripper was allive today and was being indicted, I do not believe that an honest prosecutor could come up with an 80-plus count indictment against him. I am not a big fan of Cyril Wecht, but for God's sake he is not Jack the Ripper.

There is something radically wrong here. This prosecution is politically motivated and has "phoney" written all over it. Bye bye Miss American Pie, and Goodbye Liberty.

With the greatest respect to David Healy, it is not enough to say that there is a price to fame. Anyone who speaks out on any issue acquires some degree of fame. That should not be a license for the government to launch an 80-plus count indictment charging someone with using the office telephone for private business.

*************************************************************

It still looks like a frame, to me. Either that, or Pittsburgh should be declaring bankruptcy. I like the "small claims court" remark, though. More apropo.

Edited by Terry Mauro
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am a middle aged novice to the worlds of autopsies and spelling. Will try to improve in at least one of these lush fields.

I have read Breach of Trust and found it good at laying out the groundwork of the autopsy disputes. I had thought that this guy Wecht was a doctor with a hospital named after him in Pittsburgh, who fundementally disputed the WC version of " amature night at Bethesda".

Can someone explain the resentment and/ or disagreement about this guy. I have occasionally tried to follow some of these more specialized threads, but always seem to not grasp what is being disagreed about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am a middle aged novice to the worlds of autopsies and spelling. Will try to improve in at least one of these lush fields.

I have read Breach of Trust and found it good at laying out the groundwork of the autopsy disputes. I had thought that this guy Wecht was a doctor with a hospital named after him in Pittsburgh, who fundementally disputed the WC version of " amature night at Bethesda".

Can someone explain the resentment and/ or disagreement about this guy. I have occasionally tried to follow some of these more specialized threads, but always seem to not grasp what is being disagreed about.

I had the pleasure of meeting with Dr. Wecht last year when we covered some details of the book I am working on. HE was EXTREMELY helpful with his comments and helped me piece together some details that previously had escaped me. I have been working on an update for him but I had not sent to him as I have a few more details to straighten out. He is an extremely busy man and I didn't want to waste any of his time with inaccuracies. His son Ben was also there for our meeting and he is also an extremely fine man, just like his father.

As I set up the appointment, I had interractions with both the Coroner's office and his private consulting business.

Of course Dr. Wecht will always be the main critic of the single bullet/magic bullet/magnificient missle as he sometimes called it, probably the biggest, silliest lie in human history. Dr. Wecht is right about that, of course, he just didn't know what really happened.

Bill

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When the FBI "raided" the offices and all of Dr.C.Wecht....

They also, took with them, all his JFK, assassination files, documentation

and such...which has and had absolutely nothing to do with his

actions as a coroner.......

As far as I know, at present nothing has been

returned.

He has spoken out for many years, publicly...against the government

and the findings of the WC...

Could it possibley be that they

finally got him and his information, by the use of an AT...?. :blink:

B..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First comment: As to anyone who is indicted, we must presume that Dr. Wecht is innocent of ALL counts against him until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.

That being said, surely Dr. Wecht should not be granted immunity from criminal wrongdoing if in fact he did violate the law merely because he is a member of the "assassination research committee". And the charges against him involve more than just trading in unclaimed cadavers.

I found this part of one of the articles posted by Ron interesting:

The reaction to Dr. Wecht's indictment yesterday among his friends was one of regret.

Former county Chief Executive Jim Roddey, who helped create the Wecht Legal Defense Fund in May, said he hoped his friend will be able to recover from this.

Mr. Roddey, a Republican, defeated Dr. Wecht, a Democrat, in 1999 to become the county's first chief executive.

"First of all, I'm very sorry that this has happened," Mr. Roddey said of the indictment. "I hope he is found to be innocent of the charges."

But when told of the allegations against Dr. Wecht, Mr. Roddey said: "If he did that, that's wrong, and he should have to account for that."

Mr. Roddey said he never saw any problems in the coroner's office.

"We saw evidence of [misusing county employees and resources] in other row offices, but we never saw anything that blatant in Cyril's office."

If Wecht did what is alleged, he should be brought before the bar of justice EVEN if he believes a conspiracy killed Kennedy. But again, I will presume he is innocent of each and every charge until he is convicted.

I also noted his defense team is headed by former U.S. Attorney General Dick Thornburg. I suspect Dr. Wecht will mount a most vigorous defense!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At the risk of repeating myself, we must assume that Dr. Wecht is innocent of all charges brought against him.

Not sure if we accomplish much here by reviewing the CHARGES against Dr. Wecht. He will have a vigorous defense and the jury will decide whether any of the charges are true beyond a reasonable doubt. And I have no doubt that if he is convicted on any count, there will be an appeal.

It is sad that, if true, a man of Dr. Wecht's credentials engaged in the conduct charged against him. But let us simply assume (as we should) that he is innocent and let the criminal justice system sort this out.

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...