Dan E. Moldea

[John Hunt]

Dan,

I appreciate your taking the time to participate in discussion of the RFK assassination evidence.

Nobody I know can say with absolute certainty what happened to the four stray bullets at the crime scene of Senator Kennedy's murder: 1) the bullet that passed through Kennedy's jacket without striking him, 2) the through-and-through bullet that exited from his chest, 3) the bullet that struck the ceiling and exited through one of the ceiling tiles, and 4) the bullet that was supposedly lost in the ceiling interspace.

Do you dispute that any of these four points of damage existed?? As a matter of clarification, when you say “the bullet that was supposedly lost in the ceiling interspace,” are you saying you have doubts about whether or not that really was a bullet hole??

In its official inventory of the bullets fired by Sirhan, the LAPD claimed that Paul Schrade was wounded by the bullet that went harmlessly through the shoulder pad of Senator Kennedy's suit coat. Some people clearly believes the LAPD's flawed and widely-discredited bullet count. I do not.

Nor I.

Instead, I believe that the shoulder-pad bullet probably struck one of the other four shooting victims - someone other than Schrade.

Firstly, the shot through the shoulder pad went upward at a severe angle. In order for that shot to have struck another victim, the holes in RFK’s jacket would have to aligned along the horizontal. (See attached graphic.) If RFK was pushed up against the steam table as you concluded, that didn’t happen.

And even if it did, that still leaves you with nine shots. To wit:

Bullet # 1 – Paul Schrade (Forehead).

Bullet # 2 – RFK (Through and through bullet hole in jacket, striking Goldstein (for instance)).

Bullet # 3 – RFK (Headshot, non-transiting).

Bullet # 4 – RFK (Armpit, non-transiting).

Bullet # 5 – RFK (Armpit, transiting upward).

Bullet # 6 – Goldstein pants (Transiting, ricocheting, and striking Stroll in the shin (non-transiting).

Bullet # 7 – Evans (For the sake of the argument we will say that she was struck in the head by the bullet which entered a ceiling tile, ricocheted of the ceiling, and reentered thorough the ceiling tiles (non-transiting))

Bullet # 8 –. Weisel (Abdomen (non-transiting)

Bullet # 9 – Hole in the ceiling tile, (Sharply upward, not recovered).

Marrying the RFK shoulder pad shot to any victim does not negate the necessity of a ninth shot if you conclude (as you have) that Schrade was hit by a shot unto itself.

Additionally, if we divorce the ceiling re-entry bullet from Elizabeth Evans’ headwound, that puts the bullet count at 10.

So, regardless of how much some critics try to twist and torture the crime-scene evidence, my explanation does not add a single bullet to the final bullet count.

Outline the plausible scenario for us.

In short, I stand by what I have written, especially my conclusion that Paul Schrade was hit by the first shot--which is completely consistent with the fact that Sirhan's eight-shot revolver could not fire more than eight bullets. Once again, the simple truth is that Sirhan murdered Senator Kennedy, and he acted alone.

I understand what you are saying, but you haven’t yet given us a plausible explanation. If you are correct in this matter, then you should be able to come up with an eight shot scenario using this “Official” evidence:

1. RFK - Shot in the head, no exit.

2. RFK - Shot in the right rear armpit, with the bullet coming to rest in the flesh beneath the skin at the base of the back of the neck. The bullet was recovered at autopsy.

3. RFK - Shot in the right rear armpit one inch above shot No. 2. The bullet exited through right front chest below the clavicle.

4. RFK - Entry and exit of a bullet which passed through the rear right shoulder of RFK’s suit jacket. The entry and exit were both behind the yolk seam at the top of the shoulder, and penetrated only the outermost layer of fabric.

5. Paul Schrade - Shot in the forehead above hairline near the apex of the head. Bullet fragments remained in the head, with a majority exiting through an exit defect several centimeters behind the entry point.

6. Ira Goldstein - Shot in the left buttock/thigh. The bullet was recovered during surgery.

7. Ira Goldstein - Entry and exit of a bullet that passed cleanly through his left pant leg without striking him.

8. Irwin Stroll - Shot in the left shin. The bullet was recovered during surgery.

9. Elizabeth Evans - Shot in the center of the forehead one inch below the hairline. Fragments of a bullet recovered during surgery were too light to comprise a full .22 round. There was no exit point in the scalp.

10. William Weisel - Shot in the left abdomen. The bullet was recovered near the spine during surgery.

11. Ceiling Tile Hole #1 - A bullet penetrated an acoustic ceiling tile (A), proceeding into the drop-ceiling interspace.

12. Ceiling Tile Hole #2 - That bullet (No. 11) struck the concrete ceiling above the tiles, and ricocheted back down into the pantry through a second ceiling tile (.

13. Ceiling Tile Hole #3 - A bullet entered the same tile as No. 11 above (A), but, we are told, did not exit back down into pantry. That bullet was “lost in the ceiling interspace,” and apparently never recovered.

John Hunt

Once again, the simple truth is that Sirhan murdered Senator Kennedy, and he acted alone.

[Dan E. Moldea]

John Hunt:

You are making the same mistake I once made. Just as I cautioned against on page 312 of my book, you are trying to characterize "the people at the crime scene, including Senator Kennedy and the other five victims, as being stick figures, standing tall and upright throughout the incident. Many of us failed to consider realistically the kinetic movement of the crowd, that everyone in that room must have been in motion after the first or second shot."

With regard to the Moldea-extra-bullet scenario you have been peddling for the past several months, my position, as stated earlier on this thread, is completely consistent with the eight-shot reality. And I will leave it to legitimate ballistics and firearms-identification experts to take this issue further. I am not a forensics specialist--and neither are you. However, to be clear, I continue to support those who want to reopen the RFK case. I would like to see these matters resolved once and for all.

John, you can waste as much time as you want on the minutia of the case. But you are never going to be able to prove that a second shooter was at the crime scene--because there wasn't one.

I walked away from my three interviews with Sirhan completely convinced that he was guilty--and that he acted alone. I'll be interested to hear what you think of his story if and when you ever interview him.

Dan Moldea

[Dan E. Moldea]

Stephen Turner wrote:

In "The Killing of Robert F Kennedy" you [Moldea] write.

Quote on " If Sirhan could not achieve the American dream, as well as a level of public appreciation and respect, murdering this popular symbol provided the means by which he could achieve, at the very least, a level of notoriety." Quote off.

[Turner to Moldea:] I personally find this tired old excuse an insult to our collective intellegence, its the same bunch of week old [baloney] the W/C wheeled out to tar Oswald with, and with the same result, a person who kills for infamy, but then denies doing it, and keeps on denying it. . . .

I apologize, Stephen, for appearing to insult your "collective intelligence," but consider what I wrote in context with what Sirhan actually said: "They can gas me, but I am famous. I have achieved in one day what it took Robert Kennedy all his life to do." (Quoted in Time magazine, April 13, 1981)

[Lee Forman]

I walked away from my three interviews with Sirhan completely convinced that he was guilty--and that he acted alone. I'll be interested to hear what you think of his story if and when you ever interview him.

Dan Moldea

Is there an easy way to get in touch with him? Can one write him a letter? I will gladly post the result.

- lee

[Michael Hogan]

Forgive me for interjecting Mr. Moldea. I never interviewed Sirhan and am by no means an expert but isn't it possible Sirhan actually believed (or came to believe) that his shots were fatal, when in fact, as some have posited, the fatal shot originated elswhere? I know you have additional reasons for your conclusion that it was Sirhan, and Sirhan alone and I respect those.

In otherwords, Sirhan may or may not have believed what he told Time Magazine, but that quote does little to convince one that it was he and he alone. The physical evidence and eyewitness accounts are entirely different matters.

Mike Hogan

[Shanet Clark]

I would tend to agree.

Although I am not an expert on this, it looks like

Sirhan was influenced and supported by shadowy handlers,

and once the shooting started others close in "guaranteed" the deed .........

But thanks for joining and debating it with us.

And welcome to Peter Dale Scott and Barr McClellan, too ........

we are getting to be quite an international research consortium.

Shanet

[Dan E. Moldea]

To Lee Forman:

I'm pretty sure that Sirhan is still at Corcoran State Prison in California. My third and final interview with him was on June 5, 1994, the 26th anniversary of the shooting. Other than sending him the composite transcript for his approval--and receiving that approval both from him and his brother, Adel, who witnessed all three interviews--I have not had any further contact with Sirhan.

To Michael Hogan:

Come on, Michael. You're suggesting that Sirhan thought he did it and took credit for doing it--but didn't really do it. Once again, prove that there was a second shooter at the crime scene. Believe me, you can't do it. With regard to the apparent discrepancies in the physical evidence and eyewitness accounts, I refer you to my book. In my opinion, there are simple answers to just about everything.

To Shanet Clark:

Sorry, I found no proof that "Sirhan was influenced and supported by shadowy handlers." Prove that they existed, and you will make history. You gotta have more than "it looks like."

To John Geraghty:

Regarding your post on May 9 at 12:47 P.M., thank you for the kind words about The Hunting of the President documentary. I was very proud to be part of it. Bill Clinton is still my favorite President.

With regard to Larry Teeter, he and I didn't agree on very much about the Senator Kennedy murder case. However, I always maintained a grudging respect for him, and I was sad when I heard that he had passed away.

To John Simkin:

On May 3 at 7:55 A.M., in your post about my book on Senator Kennedy's murder, you flat-out accused me of being corrupted by a publisher's advance and suggested that I was controlled by the CIA and/or the FBI. I can assure you both of these allegations are not true.

With that aside, though, I appreciate your invitation to participate in this forum.

[Michael Hogan]

Mike Hogan wrote:

.....isn't it possible Sirhan actually believed (or came to believe) that his shots were fatal, when in fact, as some have posited, the fatal shot originated elswhere? I know you have additional reasons for your conclusion that it was Sirhan, and Sirhan alone and I respect those.

In otherwords, Sirhan may or may not have believed what he told Time Magazine, but that quote does little to convince one that it was he and he alone. The physical evidence and eyewitness accounts are entirely different matters.

Dan Moldea replied:

Come on, Michael. You're suggesting that Sirhan thought he did it and took credit for doing it--but didn't really do it. Once again, prove that there was a second shooter at the crime scene. Believe me, you can't do it. With regard to the apparent discrepancies in the physical evidence and eyewitness accounts, I refer you to my book. In my opinion, there are simple answers to just about everything.

Yes, Dan that is exactly what I was suggesting. I took great care in my post to indicate that if the other evidence implicated Sirhan, then so be it. In that case Sirhan and you are both right. My only point was that a quote that Sirhan gave Time magazine in and of itself is not enough to incriminate him and, in fact has little, if any bearing on the actual evidence as to whether or not he acted alone.

Although its been years, I did read your book. I made no claim in my post of Sirhan's singular guilt or innocence. And I didn't refer to any discrepancies in the physical evidence and eyewitness accounts, even though they may have existed. I just feel like you missed my point. Or perhaps I didn't do a very good job of making it.

The murder of Robert Kennedy's brother sure seems to be an exception to your dictum that there is a simple answer to just about everything.

With that said, thanks for joining the forum and sharing your views.

Mike Hogan

Edited May 11, 2006 by Michael Hogan

[John Simkin]

But thanks for joining and debating it with us.

And welcome to Peter Dale Scott and Barr McClellan, too ........ we are getting to be quite an international research consortium.

Don’t forget (in no particular order) Joe Trento, Alfred McCoy, Anthony Summers, Lamar Waldron, Gerald McKnight, William Pepper, Joan Mellen, G. Robert Blakey, Larry Hancock, Barr McClellan, Josiah Thompson, Matthew Smith, Jim Feltzer, Don Bohning, William Turner, Jim Marrs, William Reymond, Dick Russell, Nina Burleigh, Craig Roberts, David Talbot, Walt Brown, Jeff Morley, James Richards, Ron Ecker, Pat Speer, Nick Cullather, Joel Bainerman, Lee Israel, William E. Kelly, Robert Charles Dunne, John Hunt, Robin Ramsay, J. Raymond Carroll, Jack White, David Mantik, Greg Parker, Martin Shackelford, Alan J. Weberman, Steve Thomas, Gary Buell, Ryan Crowe, Lee Forman, Tosh Plumlee, Gerry Hemming, Stephen Roy, Doug Caddy, Mark Knight, Alan Kent, Robin Unger, Peter Lemkin, David Boylan, Dawn Meredith, Robert Howard, Al Carrier, Harry J. Dean, Vaughn Marlowe, Antii Hynonen, Nathaniel Heidenheimer, Mark Stapleton, Doug Horne, Pamela McElwain-Brown, Bill Miller, David Healey, Stephen Turner, etc. etc.

I am currently trying to persuade Philip Agee to join our discussions (that might frighten a few observers). Gaeton Fonzi, Garry Cornwell, Mark Lane, David Lifton, Richard D. Mahoney, Norman Redlich, Victor Marchetti, Noel Twyman, Nigel Turner, Jim Hougan, Peter Kornbluh, Billy Sol Estes, are others I have been trying very hard to get involved in these debates.

My main disappointment has been my failure to persuade “lone gunman” theorists to join the Forum. Gerald Posner, Gus Russo, Dale Myers, John McAdams, Edward Jay Epstein, Kenneth A. Rahn (he said it was not academic enough), Hugh Aynesworth, David Reitzes and Dave Perry have all turned me down.

One thing is clear, lone gunman theorists are much more reluctant to join open debate on these cases. Dan E. Moldea is an exception and is much admired for showing his courage in joining the Dragons Den.

[Pat Speer]

Mr. Moldea, I agree with you that the movement of the crowd may have made matching the number of shots with wounds near-impossible. (Even so, I support John Hunt's efforts.) I've also read a number of your other books and appreciate the efforts you've undertaken in exposing the seamy underbelly of American political life. That said, when I read your book on the RFK slaying I was a bit disappointed when you jumped from Sirhan acted alone to Sirhan acted alone for the purpose of getting attention, etc. At the time, I felt your realization that Sirhan was a BS artist led you to swing too far to the right, like a pendulum. Why couldn't Sirhan have been working for someone else? An "offer-he-couldn't-refuse" type thing? I mean, the notebook? Doesn't that sound like something someone would create in order to plead insanity? And, doesn't it strike you as an amazing coincidence that, after JFK was killed by Oswald, and a number of Jewish liberals became obsessed with proving he was killed by a right-wing conspiracy, that his brother would be killed by a Palestinian, thereby disarming many of those most likely to suspect a conspiracy? Doesn't that sound a bit convenient?

Whether or not Sirhan triggered the fatal bullet, he triggered some bullets designed to be fatal. To my mind, the real research that needs to be done is in Sirhan's background. Did you ever dig into Rosselli and Cohen and their crowd to see if any of them had ties to Sirhan, beyond their sharing lawyers? It's always amazed me that Gerry Owen's alibi for the night of the shooting was Slapsie Maxie Rosenbloom, who just so happened to have been a partner of Mickey Cohen's. Thank you for your participation. Hopefully, William Turner will chime in with his thoughts as well.

Edited May 11, 2006 by Pat Speer

[Lee Forman]

To Lee Forman:

I'm pretty sure that Sirhan is still at Corcoran State Prison in California. My third and final interview with him was on June 5, 1994, the 26th anniversary of the shooting. Other than sending him the composite transcript for his approval--and receiving that approval both from him and his brother, Adel, who witnessed all three interviews--I have not had any further contact with Sirhan.

Thanks. Maybe I'll give it a go.

Anyone seen the photos? In particular I am interested in the polka dot dress.

- lee

The Sunday Times April 30, 2006

Scots photograher reveals pictures of Kennedy killing

Karin Goodwin

PREVIOUSLY unpublished photographs of the assassination of Robert Kennedy, taken by Harry Benson, the renowned Scots photographer, are to be unveiled in Edinburgh.

The series of eight pictures was shot by Benson at the Ambassador hotel in Los Angeles on the evening the senator was gunned down by Sirhan Sirhan, the Palestinian assassin.

Benson, who in his 50-year career has worked with eight presidents, was at Kennedy’s side in 1968 when he was shot three times after celebrating victories in the Democratic primaries which paved the way for him to be nominated as the party’s presidential candidate.

Benson’s first solo exhibition in Scotland, which will be displayed at the National Portrait Gallery before transferring to the Smithsonian Institute in the United States later this year, includes images of Kennedy as he slumped to the ground, the senator’s wife Ethel screaming and the shocked crowd watching the assassination unfold.

“I was with Bobby Kennedy all evening,” said Benson. “I saw the man murdered right in front of me. People said, ‘How could you lift your camera, Harry?’, but I felt I had to.

“As you can imagine, photographers weren’t made welcome and I was under a lot of duress, getting punched as I was taking the pictures. I still wake up sometimes in the middle of the night and go over the whole thing. I can hear Ethel screaming, ‘I’m with you baby’ over and over again.”

Sirhan, who is serving a life sentence, initially claimed he shot Kennedy because of his public support for Israel. He later recanted, claiming he had no memory of the killing. This fuelled conspiracy theories similar to those surrounding the murder of his brother, John F Kennedy, five years earlier.

According to some witnesses, a woman in a polka dot dress was seen fleeing the hotel shouting jubilantly, “We shot him”. One of the images taken by Benson shows the back of a woman who seems to fit the description.

Although Benson rejects the conspiracy theories, he called the FBI twice to ask it to examine the picture, but his calls were never returned.

Although two of his photographs were published in magazines across the world, the rest have remained hidden in his vast archive.

The exhibition will include photographs of the Beatles and a portrait of Michael Jackson.

James Holloway, director of the Scottish National Portrait Gallery, said: “It is exhilarating to see history through his eyes.”

[John Hunt]

> John Hunt:

>

> You are making the same mistake I once made. Just as I cautioned against on

> page 312 of my book, you are trying to characterize "the people at the crime

> scene, including Senator Kennedy and the other five victims, as being stick

> figures, standing tall and upright throughout the incident.

Your assumption is incorrect. I am very much in touch with the dynamism of the event. In fact, I put the assassination in motion in Dallas last November with John Simkin as RFK and Pat Speer as Schrade. We broke some new ground that day.

The purpose of the illustration (which is to scale) is to demonstrate the approximate locations of the victims when they were shot. It also demonstrates that your suggestion that the shoulder-pad shot hit a victim is not in keeping with the evidence.

Many of us

> failed to consider realistically the kinetic movement of the crowd, that

> everyone in that room must have been in motion after the first or second

> shot."

>

> With regard to the Moldea-extra-bullet scenario you have been peddling for

> the past several months, my position, as stated earlier on this thread, is

> completely consistent with the eight-shot reality.

You tell us that. But you have yet to back it up with anything of substance. Simply stating that the shoulder-pad shot hit someone else still leaves you with a nine shot scenario. I assume you are spending time here because you are interested in discussing the evidence.

I couldn’t help but notice that you ignored my questions- “Do you dispute that any of these four points of damage existed?? As a matter of clarification, when you say “the bullet that was supposedly lost in the ceiling interspace,” are you saying you have doubts about whether or not that really was a bullet hole??”

And I will leave it to

> legitimate ballistics and firearms-identification experts to take this issue

> further. I am not a forensics specialist--and neither are you.

The matter is one of math, geometry, and the ingredients (the official evidence) with which to cook the stew. Being an expert in anything is not requisite for the thinking man.

It took me, a non-scientist, to figure out that you, and Melanson, and Stone, and Charach all erred by accepting the notion that the shot that went through RFK’s chest did so at an upward angle of 59 degrees. It did not. It was 33 degrees in the anatomical. Once the arm is raised as it was when RFK was shot, the trajectory flattens even further. In the irony of ironies, the illustration on page 57 of the SUS report is more accurate that the one in your book. Interestingly, you attribute that image to the LAPD, and Melanson attributes it to Stone. Either way, the direction of the shots is grossly misrepresented in that diagram.

Once that “59-degree” misconception is identified and corrected, the case for Sirhan putting two bullets into RFK’s upper torso becomes stronger. I also demonstrated that in Dallas.

However, to

> be clear, I continue to support those who want to reopen the RFK case. I

> would like to see these matters resolved once and for all.

>

> John, you can waste as much time as you want on the minutia of the case.

Busting you making an error that destroys the conclusion in your book is not minutia. That fact is that you have yet to spell out a plausible 8-shot scenario using your Schrade conclusion. That you refuse to defend what you have written is your choice. I’m ready to discuss the evidence whenever you are ready.

But

> you are never going to be able to prove that a second shooter was at the

> crime scene--because there wasn't one.

>

> I walked away from my three interviews with Sirhan completely convinced that

> he was guilty--and that he acted alone. I'll be interested to hear what you

> think of his story if and when you ever interview him.

I have no desire to speak with Sirhan. Regardless of whether or not he remembers the crime, Sirhan tried very hard to kill RFK. If I am right, he failed:

http://www.jfklancer.com/hunt/rfk_pt1.htm

It is my conclusion that Sirhan shot RFK twice in the armpit, with the one that left the chest hitting Schrade in the forehead. I also believe Sirhan put a bullet in Wiesel and probably Goldstein as well. Sirhan does not get a free pass with me. Having said that, the evidence indicates the round that hit RFK in the head was larger than a .22.

John Hunt

[John Geraghty]

Dan,

Thank you for the comment. Are you aware of the fact that this August there will be an exhibition of the photographic work of Harry Benson. In this exhibition is a photo of Senator Kennedy slumped after the shooting. As well as many others I would very much like to see this new photo that has (to my knowledge) never been seen.

See here the forum thread about the photo

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=6796

and here is the listing for the exhibition at the national portrait gallery in Scotland. Click on upcoming exhibitions.

http://www.natgalscot.ac.uk/index.asp?cent...asp?gallery=2-b

I must add that you also took part in the documentary 'Unsolved History: The assassination of Robert Kennedy'.

This was an excellent reconstruction of the shooting and covered all the angles (no pun intended).

Who produced this programme and who, besides yourself, were the contributors?

If anyone has the opportunity to view this programme I thoroughly reccommend it.

See the thread here, http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=5955

Dan, do you accept the possibility of some of the scenarios played out in this programme?

All the best,

John Geraghty

[Guest Stephen Turner]

I apologize, Stephen, for appearing to insult your "collective intelligence," but consider what I wrote in context with what Sirhan actually said: "They can gas me, but I am famous. I have achieved in one day what it took Robert Kennedy all his life to do." (Quoted in Time magazine, April 13, 1981)

Dan, you are forgiven, but rest assured that I do not posess a "collective intelligence" indeed some assert that I barely posess one at all..I still find this weak though, I mean he certainly didnt claim this at the time, what he says in the Time interview sounds like bravado, said in a very different time (Chapman-Lennon) and place from 1968...Regards, Steve.

[Len Colby]

Dan,

Sorry if I'm asking you a question you probably addressed in your book but I haven't had a chance to read it yet.

Noguchi determined that RFK was shot at point blank range but no witnesses (that I know of) put Sirhan close enough.

Len

PS – John shouldn't this thread be moved to the "History Books" or "RFK" sections?

Edited May 12, 2006 by Len Colby