Larry Hancock, Someone Would Have Talked (2nd edition)

[Larry Hancock]

Hi Francesca, you are correct, the RFK film does not address conspiracy and as I understand it that was a conscience

decision on the film maker who has said something to the effect that he did not want to go through what Oliver Stone did.

Apparently he is persuaded there was a conspiracy but he didn't want to tackle that with his film....

As to my book, well as it turns out it is going to be a work on both RFK and MLK (and that probably says something right

there) so its going to take a bit longer than planned. The case for conspiracy in both is relatively easy to make and much of the

work in that vein has been done, I've drafted several chapters on RFK already. However going to the next stage and

dealing with the actual conspiracy is where the challenge lies. Much research is being done now and I owe thanks to a small

group of researchers who are driving the effort on.

As to a date, I might have a research level manuscript done this year but I don't see any actual book until sometime in 2008,

when it is done it will be at the same level of detail as Someone Would Have Talked. l

-- Larry

Francesca, nothing more on Sanchez Diaz from me. As in most cases anything I could find is in the book. I'm afraid the chance

for a real investigation of many of these subjects has passed with this much time. I must say though that as I reread the HSCA

report I'm impressed by how many times they chide the FBI for not really following leads...and for putting things aside without

serious investigation. I probably should have mentioned that in the book.

I am investigating some of the sources on the leads a bit further and may add end notes or points on the web site in regard

to them as time permits.

Thanks for the offer but the good news is that with my shift in focus to RFK/MLK I doubt that many of my sources are going

to need translation...grin.

-- Larry

Hi Larry,

I would like to research this Sanchez Diaz further sounds interesting but as you say with the passage of time, these things get more and more difficult. I wish the HSCA had investigated more leads themselves but with someone like Blakey in charge that was never going to happen.....

Do you have any idea of a date for your RFK book yet? I see over here that the film Bobby is going to be released in a few days but I understand it isn't a 'conspiracy' film, but part fictional?

[Larry Hancock]

Thanks for the kid words Francesca.

As to your question on Johnson - I'm still of a mixed mind. I certainly do think there is a case to be made that Johnson was forced into some level of participation in order to ensure that he took an offer he couldn't refuse. However proving that

largely lies in the Wallace prints and Loy Factor. I can tell you that I am inclined towards that and have actually written six

unpublished chapters that would lay that out in great detail....some of that is posted in the papers section of this forum.

However, Estes has done so much in the last couple of years to compromise himself as a source that he really had

contaminated the Johnson side of the story.

If we are to stick with "beliefs" I do tend to belive the print matches, Glen Samples work and Jenkins statements. Which means Johnson was forced into contaminating himself and essentially leaving "fingerprints" which would likely have emerged in any real criminal investigation....ensuring that he preventing that from occuring. As it happens the timing of events fits perfectly to support that scenario.

If we just had a few print experts with the guts to go on record it would be a done deal...or if only one law enforcement agency had the nerve to pursue that aspect of the case. Not sure that will ever happen though.

-- Larry

Hi Larry,

on another note, I'm nearing the end of your book and it is great reading. Congratulations on such a well researched book! You make the point that the plot was to portray Oswald as part of a communist conspiracy and the cover up was to portray Oswald as a 'lone nut' and erase any thought in the mind of the public of him acting with others. This is something that is so clear from looking at the evidence, yet is is a point which never occurred to me until you pointed it out! It makes total sense now how the whole thing was put together I don't know how I didn't see this before. That the plot and cover-up were two separate things. I'm reading your chapter on Bobby Baker and Johnson. Do you believe that Johnson was activelyinvolved in the conspiracy? I'm not sure whether I believe he was actively involved in the conspiracy or that he knew something was going to happen but didn't act to stop it. If you believe Wallace was on the 6th floor as I do, then I wonder if Johnson would have known about it?

[Francesca Akhtar]

Hi Francesca, you are correct, the RFK film does not address conspiracy and as I understand it that was a conscience

decision on the film maker who has said something to the effect that he did not want to go through what Oliver Stone did.

Apparently he is persuaded there was a conspiracy but he didn't want to tackle that with his film....

As to my book, well as it turns out it is going to be a work on both RFK and MLK (and that probably says something right

there) so its going to take a bit longer than planned. The case for conspiracy in both is relatively easy to make and much of the

work in that vein has been done, I've drafted several chapters on RFK already. However going to the next stage and

dealing with the actual conspiracy is where the challenge lies. Much research is being done now and I owe thanks to a small

group of researchers who are driving the effort on.

As to a date, I might have a research level manuscript done this year but I don't see any actual book until sometime in 2008,

when it is done it will be at the same level of detail as Someone Would Have Talked. l

-- Larry

Hi Larry,

thanks for the info, I wasn't aware of that. It is a shame the film maker didn't have the guts to tackle the idea of conspiracy as I think it would bring about a bigger awareness of the RFK case as Oliver Stone did for JFK. Maybe one day!

I look forward to reading your book on RFK for the future. Hoepfully in the near future, there will be more internet resources such as databases were to be made, particularly a photo database as has been done with JFK. It would be interesting to study photos of the ballroom etc to see if any other interesting or recognisable figures pop up as in the oneson Main and Houston street in JFK.

[Larry Hancock]

Hi Francesca, actually as you noted, one of the big obstacles in RFK research is that aside from a very limited number of

researchers mostly tied either to Sirhan's legal process or towards commercial book projects, there really is not a research

base for RFK as there is for JFK. There are great collections of documents in archives in California, at Dartmouth etc but again

nothing like what we enjoy for JFK. I've issued an open call for individuals who want to work on that process but still the

response is very small, right now two people are slogging through film and photo records simply trying to locate known

persons of interest like Cesar and Wayne in footage. Or to do even more basic things like build collections of people going

in and out the service pantry access doors....just the basic slogging that was done by hundreds and thousands of people to

establish basic reference data for DP. It's clear that LAPD never really considered the crime scene to involve more than

a small area of the service pantry where Sirhan was (reminds one of the TSBD and DP) so there work is

of limited help in studying movements of other people...heck, they never even prepared a consolidated illustration of all

the witnesses reporting the movements of the polka dot dress girl and her companions (probably decided it would be

better not to; much easier to difuse that if you considere everything separately).

--- Larry

Hi Francesca, you are correct, the RFK film does not address conspiracy and as I understand it that was a conscience

decision on the film maker who has said something to the effect that he did not want to go through what Oliver Stone did.

Apparently he is persuaded there was a conspiracy but he didn't want to tackle that with his film....

As to my book, well as it turns out it is going to be a work on both RFK and MLK (and that probably says something right

there) so its going to take a bit longer than planned. The case for conspiracy in both is relatively easy to make and much of the

work in that vein has been done, I've drafted several chapters on RFK already. However going to the next stage and

dealing with the actual conspiracy is where the challenge lies. Much research is being done now and I owe thanks to a small

group of researchers who are driving the effort on.

As to a date, I might have a research level manuscript done this year but I don't see any actual book until sometime in 2008,

when it is done it will be at the same level of detail as Someone Would Have Talked. l

-- Larry

Hi Larry,

thanks for the info, I wasn't aware of that. It is a shame the film maker didn't have the guts to tackle the idea of conspiracy as I think it would bring about a bigger awareness of the RFK case as Oliver Stone did for JFK. Maybe one day!

I look forward to reading your book on RFK for the future. Hoepfully in the near future, there will be more internet resources such as databases were to be made, particularly a photo database as has been done with JFK. It would be interesting to study photos of the ballroom etc to see if any other interesting or recognisable figures pop up as in the oneson Main and Houston street in JFK.

[Larry Hancock]

Hi Francesca, actually as you noted, one of the big obstacles in RFK research is that aside from a very limited number of

researchers mostly tied either to Sirhan's legal process or towards commercial book projects, there really is not a research

base for RFK as there is for JFK. There are great collections of documents in archives in California, at Dartmouth etc but again

nothing like what we enjoy for JFK. I've issued an open call for individuals who want to work on that process but still the

response is very small, right now two people are slogging through film and photo records simply trying to locate known

persons of interest like Cesar and Wayne in footage. Or to do even more basic things like build collections of people going

in and out the service pantry access doors....just the basic slogging that was done by hundreds and thousands of people to

establish basic reference data for DP. It's clear that LAPD never really considered the crime scene to involve more than

a small area of the service pantry where Sirhan was (reminds one of the TSBD and DP) so there work is

of limited help in studying movements of other people...heck, they never even prepared a consolidated illustration of all

the witnesses reporting the movements of the polka dot dress girl and her companions (probably decided it would be

better not to; much easier to difuse that if you considere everything separately).

--- Larry

Hi Francesca, you are correct, the RFK film does not address conspiracy and as I understand it that was a conscience

decision on the film maker who has said something to the effect that he did not want to go through what Oliver Stone did.

Apparently he is persuaded there was a conspiracy but he didn't want to tackle that with his film....

As to my book, well as it turns out it is going to be a work on both RFK and MLK (and that probably says something right

there) so its going to take a bit longer than planned. The case for conspiracy in both is relatively easy to make and much of the

work in that vein has been done, I've drafted several chapters on RFK already. However going to the next stage and

dealing with the actual conspiracy is where the challenge lies. Much research is being done now and I owe thanks to a small

group of researchers who are driving the effort on.

As to a date, I might have a research level manuscript done this year but I don't see any actual book until sometime in 2008,

when it is done it will be at the same level of detail as Someone Would Have Talked. l

-- Larry

Hi Larry,

thanks for the info, I wasn't aware of that. It is a shame the film maker didn't have the guts to tackle the idea of conspiracy as I think it would bring about a bigger awareness of the RFK case as Oliver Stone did for JFK. Maybe one day!

I look forward to reading your book on RFK for the future. Hoepfully in the near future, there will be more internet resources such as databases were to be made, particularly a photo database as has been done with JFK. It would be interesting to study photos of the ballroom etc to see if any other interesting or recognisable figures pop up as in the oneson Main and Houston street in JFK.

[Anthony Thorne]

I'm 185 pages in to SOMEONE WOULD HAVE TALKED and am enjoying it so far. It's interesting to see that BOBBY director Emilio Estevez acknowledges the likelihood of a conspiracy in the RFK killing, particularly when his brother - actor Charlie Sheen - has been quite vocal about his misgivings regarding the official 9/11 story. On days when the whole family gets together they must have some interesting discussions before and after dad Martin runs off to play the President on THE WEST WING.

I personally feel that it could have been productive to discuss the RFK conspiracy on film, simply as I've had the impression recently that most status-quo authorities in the US would prefer that the subject was ignored completely. How much attention Stateside did that recent UK television news-story on the RFK killing receive I wonder, (that is, attention on mainstream TV and in mainstream papers, rather than just the usual blogs)? Maybe blogs and websites are becoming the new mainstream nowadays, anyway.

[Larry Hancock]

Hi Anthony, glad you are enjoying the book so far.

I also think that avoiding the whole subject in terms of issues with

the RFK assassination is a bit hard to understand. Especially since

he didn't have to turn it into a conspiracy film to do so. Clearly

there were individuals in the pantry and individuals in the area that

experienced things that are hard to explain with Sirhan as a lone nut.

In making the film he could simply have picked one or more of those

people and covered their experience without being judgemental...why

not introduce a figure who sees something they cannot explain even to

themselves with Sirhan as the single shooter...could have some interesting

dialog or introspection. That would be a perfectly honest way to handle

the controversy...and there surely was controversy.

-- Larry

[Pat Speer]

Hi Anthony, glad you are enjoying the book so far.

I also think that avoiding the whole subject in terms of issues with

the RFK assassination is a bit hard to understand. Especially since

he didn't have to turn it into a conspiracy film to do so. Clearly

there were individuals in the pantry and individuals in the area that

experienced things that are hard to explain with Sirhan as a lone nut.

In making the film he could simply have picked one or more of those

people and covered their experience without being judgemental...why

not introduce a figure who sees something they cannot explain even to

themselves with Sirhan as the single shooter...could have some interesting

dialog or introspection. That would be a perfectly honest way to handle

the controversy...and there surely was controversy.

-- Larry

To Estevez's credit, he never depicts Sirhan closer than a few feet from RFK. When I announced to the crowd of screenwriters gathered for the the screening I attended that the autopsy report concluded that the fatal bullet came from behind at point blank range, there was an audible gasp from the audience. Most people, even today, just don't know this important fact. Also to Estevez's credit, the week of Bobby's U.S. theatrical release the cable channels ran a couple of RFK specials. These specials were quite well done, and gave the conspiracy angle its due, featuring Phil Melanson and Larry Teeter, among others. These programs were sponsored by the film Bobby. I just wish there'd been something over the final credits stating that Sirhan's motivation or possible involvement in a conspiracy has never been conclusively determined. I don't see how that would have hurt the film.

[Francesca Akhtar]

Hi Larry,

thanks for your thoughts on this. I also beleive the Loy Factor story and that the fingerprints are Wallace's. As you say, it is very frustrating that no fingerprint expert is willing to go on record. Wasn't Nathan Derby the expert that confirmed they were Wallace's prints in 'The Men Who Killed Kennedy: The Guilty Men?' Did he back out later then?

By the way, a lot of what I read in your book fits in with Factor's story. E.g. of the conspirators meeting at a safe house. What I found interesting is that you said the house on Harlandale was a meeting place for several DRE members which is interesting if you consider that Factor said this 'Ruth Ann' was there and she was I believe a DRE member.

Thanks for the kid words Francesca.

As to your question on Johnson - I'm still of a mixed mind. I certainly do think there is a case to be made that Johnson was forced into some level of participation in order to ensure that he took an offer he couldn't refuse. However proving that

largely lies in the Wallace prints and Loy Factor. I can tell you that I am inclined towards that and have actually written six

unpublished chapters that would lay that out in great detail....some of that is posted in the papers section of this forum.

However, Estes has done so much in the last couple of years to compromise himself as a source that he really had

contaminated the Johnson side of the story.

If we are to stick with "beliefs" I do tend to belive the print matches, Glen Samples work and Jenkins statements. Which means Johnson was forced into contaminating himself and essentially leaving "fingerprints" which would likely have emerged in any real criminal investigation....ensuring that he preventing that from occuring. As it happens the timing of events fits perfectly to support that scenario.

If we just had a few print experts with the guts to go on record it would be a done deal...or if only one law enforcement agency had the nerve to pursue that aspect of the case. Not sure that will ever happen though.

-- Larry

[Larry Hancock]

Nathan Darby was indeed the extremely experienced fingerprint expert who did the Wallace match....and based on Glen Samples posts I belive that Glen made contact with Darby and became convinced by Darby's continued conviction and elaboration. At least one other print expert also give a positive match to Wallace, he was hired by Barr McClellan - however when he became aware of exactly what was involved in his match he backed off permission to use his ID and officially began to hedge. Of course the FBI responded that it was not a match to Wallace...but refused to provide any detail and of course they did not consult with Darby.

And of course now the prints are being very closely held by Houston PD and it would require an official investigation to get another good set released.

In regard to Harlandale, my understanding is that as in other locations, many DRE members also were active in Alpha 66 and both DRE and Alpha members frequented Harlandale. I don't know of any specific leads tieing "Ruth Ann" to DRE though....I would not be surprized if she had some connection to the Brigade though, perhaps a relative. Which could well have associated her with Alpha circa 1963.

Actually the fact that Loy Factor would - out of the blue - associate to young Latino's Wallace and then specifically state that

the young woman was effectively in charge and brought in both intelligence and directions to their planning meetings strikes

me as something very unlikely to come from Factor's imagination.

[Dawn Meredith]

Hi Larry,

thanks for your thoughts on this. I also beleive the Loy Factor story and that the fingerprints are Wallace's. As you say, it is very frustrating that no fingerprint expert is willing to go on record. Wasn't Nathan Derby the expert that confirmed they were Wallace's prints in 'The Men Who Killed Kennedy: The Guilty Men?' Did he back out later then?

Hi Francesca,

Nathan Darby went to his grave believing 100% in his print match. He was never afraid, even when his home was broken into and his Wallace file was removed. Nothing else, just that file. Nathan Darby was one of the most honest, honorable men I have ever had the privilege of knowing and sharing his friendship for nearly eight years.

Dawn

Ps I believed Loy Factor as well. There was just too much he could not have possibley known. He was a very simple man, not the type who could come up with such a complicated tale.

[Francesca Akhtar]

Hi Francesca,

Nathan Darby went to his grave believing 100% in his print match. He was never afraid, even when his home was broken into and his Wallace file was removed. Nothing else, just that file. Nathan Darby was one of the most honest, honorable men I have ever had the privilege of knowing and sharing his friendship for nearly eight years.

Dawn

Ps I believed Loy Factor as well. There was just too much he could not have possibley known. He was a very simple man, not the type who could come up with such a complicated tale.

Hi Dawn,

thanks for your input. The fact his home was broken into and he was targeted makes me even more convinced he was on the right track! He gives a very convinving account of his work in 'TMWKK: The Guilty Men'. Sorry to hear he is no longer with us.

I agree with you about Loy Factor. On first hearing about his story I was somewhat sceptical but after reading the book believed him. As yyou say he was a simple man who lived a simple life, in a hut in the middle of nowhere if I remember rightly. He did not have access to the internet or other places where he could have read all this information. He knew things were not widely known then, like the fact the TSBD had a loading dock at the back which was later removed. How could he have known this if he had not been there?

Plus of course all the info on Mac Wallace which was then corroborated.

Edited February 1, 2007 by Francesca Akhtar

[Francesca Akhtar]

Nathan Darby was indeed the extremely experienced fingerprint expert who did the Wallace match....and based on Glen Samples posts I belive that Glen made contact with Darby and became convinced by Darby's continued conviction and elaboration. At least one other print expert also give a positive match to Wallace, he was hired by Barr McClellan - however when he became aware of exactly what was involved in his match he backed off permission to use his ID and officially began to hedge. Of course the FBI responded that it was not a match to Wallace...but refused to provide any detail and of course they did not consult with Darby.

And of course now the prints are being very closely held by Houston PD and it would require an official investigation to get another good set released.

In regard to Harlandale, my understanding is that as in other locations, many DRE members also were active in Alpha 66 and both DRE and Alpha members frequented Harlandale. I don't know of any specific leads tieing "Ruth Ann" to DRE though....I would not be surprized if she had some connection to the Brigade though, perhaps a relative. Which could well have associated her with Alpha circa 1963.

Actually the fact that Loy Factor would - out of the blue - associate to young Latino's Wallace and then specifically state that

the young woman was effectively in charge and brought in both intelligence and directions to their planning meetings strikes

me as something very unlikely to come from Factor's imagination.

Hi Larry,

well trust the good ole FBI to refuse to help! How very annoying. Sorry if this is a stupid question but how did the prints come to be in the care of the Houston PD? I thought they would have been in the care of the Dallas police seeing as they were found in the TSBD?

Do you know if the freedom of information act could be used to try and get the prints released?

As for Ruth Ann, sorry I got my facts muddled up. I meant to say I believe she associated with some people in the DRE not that she was herself a member.

[Larry Hancock]

Francesca, there are some great posts on the fingerprint issue in Glen Samples book thread and by Richard Bartholemew (sp...sorry Richard, I know I get that spelling wrong way to frequently) on the forum...you might do a search for his posts.

The issue with the prints is twofold (as I understand it). One is obtaining the originals of the prints which are on the boxes from the snipers nest. The other involves obtaining comparison prints of very good quality for Malcolm Wallace....that's where Houston PD comes into the picture. Again, as I understand it, the master prints used by Nathon Darby were obtained by Jaye Duncanson and are now in possession of Walt Brown, don't know what Walt is doing with the material left to him by Jaye.

Dawn has asked Glen if he is doing something further with the prints...perhaps some more discussion will emerge on that thread. Also, you do need to find and read

Richard B's great paper on the fingerprings, he posted a link to an updated version last year.

-- Larry

[John Simkin]

Larry, have you read this?

http://blogcritics.org/archives/2007/02/01/203843.php