Dr. George Burkley Paul Bleau's first chokehold is that "the official record impeaches the Warren Commission." He believes that: (page 38 in the Kindle edition of his book Chokeholds ) U.S. investigations into the assassination, statements made by investigation insiders and foreign government conclusions about the assassination prove that there is a strong consensus by the independent investigative authorities that there was a conspiracy in the murder of President John F. Kennedy. Bleau's chapter then lists out a variety of statements that seemingly prove conspiracy. Of course, Bleau doesn't tell readers the full truth about these viewpoints. Dr. George Burkley Bleau Assertion: Bleau presents the autopsy face sheet and the White House Death Certificate signed by Dr. Burkley: Bleau writes the following: (page 50 in the Kindle edition) These corroborate Sibert and O’Neill’s testimonies and contradict Gerald Ford’s (and the Warren Commission’s) description of the location of the Single Bullet entry point (back of the neck) … thus disqualifying the Single Bullet theory that it alone caused seven wounds to Governor Connally and the President. Once asked the question:  "Do you agree with the Warren Report on the number of bullets that entered the President’s body?” Burkley answered: “I would not care to be quoted on that.” In 1976, Burkley’s lawyer William Illig contacted Richard Sprague of the HSCA, saying that his client had information that “others besides Oswald must have participated.” What Bleau Doesn't Tell You: Boswell's face sheet contains his written description of the wound; 14 cm from rt acromion” (the bony tip of the outer edge of your shoulder blade) and “14 cm below tip of rt mastoid process” (a conical prominence of the temporal bone behind the ear, to which neck muscles are attached). This was all explained back in 1966: ( Baltimore Sun,  November 25, 1966) Here is an excerpt from the second page: And the JFK autopsy report confirms the location of the back wound as described in the work sheet:   Burkley simply made a mistake in his description in the death certificate of the wound being “at about the level of the third thoracic vertebra.” We know that because the pictures from autopsy show the exact location, which is about the level of the sixth cervical vertebra. Admiral Burkley was interviewed by the HSCA in August 1977:   Here we can see why Burkley was reticent to talk about bullets in his oral history interview with the Kennedy Library. He states: Dr. Burkley said the doctors didn't section the brain and that if it had been done, it might be possible to prove whether or not there were two bullets. Dr. Burkley thinks there was one but concedes the possibility of there having been two. Dr. Burkley might well have decided that the oral history interview was not the time nor place to talk about his thoughts on sectioning Kennedy's brain. After all, Dr. Burkley's specialty was "internal medicine and cardiology."  He was not a forensic pathologist and he understood the need for an autopsy. Dr. Burkley also signed an affidavit for the HSCA after a second interview:   Here is the reason why Burkley suspected others may have been involved . It has nothing to do with the medical evidence. For more information on Dr Burkley, please check my multi-part series: A Letter from Bill Baxley about Oliver Stone   Bill Baxley, former Attorney General of Alabama, sent me a letter about Oliver Stone. "JFK: Destiny Betrayed" Misleads on Admiral George Burkley   Oliver Stone's so-called documentary series, JFK: Destiny Betrayed , makes several outrageous allegations about Admiral George Burkley, JFK's personal physician, as well as a slanderous accusation. "JFK Revisited" Misleads on Dr. Burkley's Suspicions of a Conspiracy   Oliver Stone's so-called documentary, JFK Revisited: Through the Looking Glass , misleads viewers into believing that JFK's doctor, Admiral George Burkley, said that there were multiple gunmen. "JFK Revisited" Misleads on the ARRB's Quest for Dr. Burkley's Lawyer's Papers   Oliver Stone's so-called documentary, JFK Revisited: Through the Looking Glass , misleads viewers on the context of discussions between Burkley's family and the ARRB regarding supposed papers in the possession of his lawyer. "JFK Revisited" Recklessly Accuses George Burkley of being Involved in a Cover-Up   Reckless charges are made against George Burkley with no evidence. "JFK Revisited" Misleads on Admiral Burkley and the HSCA   Oliver Stone's so-called documentary, JFK Revisited: Through the Looking Glass , greatly misleads viewers on Admiral George Burkley and his interactions with the HSCA. "JFK Revisited" Misleads on Admiral George Burkley and Conspiracy Theorists Oliver Stone's so-called documentary puts words in Burkley's mouth. My book, Oliver Stone's Film-Flam: The Demagogue of Dealey Plaza, was dedicated to Dr.. George Burkley : Dedicated to the memory of Admiral George Burkley, a baselessly accused loyal American who served his country honorably. Previous Relevant Blog Posts on Paul Bleau Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 9 Bleau doesn't tell the whole story about John Sherman Cooper. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 8 Bleau claims that J. Lee Rankin questioned the findings of the Warren Report. This is just not true. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 7 Bleau tries to make it appear that Dallas policeman James Leavelle had doubts that Oswald could be found guilty at a trial. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 6 Bleau gets it all wrong on the FBI Summary Report. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 5 Bleau discusses the conclusions of the HSCA, but leaves out it most important finding. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 4 Bleau leaves out some important details about a Warren Commission staffer. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 3 Was Oswald a loner? Bleau says no, and then says yes. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 2 Bleau leaves out some important details about Malcolm Kilduff. Paul Bleau Chokes An introduction to Paul Bleau's new book,  Chokeholds . Paul Bleau on David Ferrie, the Pimp Was David Ferrie Clay Shaw's pimp? Paul Bleau and the IRS Man Did Lee Harvey Oswald have an escort? Paul Bleau and the Forger   Edward Girnus was in prison for forgery, and he told a fanciful story about Clay Shaw and Lee Harvey Oswald. Paul Bleau and the Three Tramps   Leander D'Avy told the HSCA he saw Oswald and Ferrie with the three tramps. Paul Bleau's Reign of Error   Bleau's analysis of Garrison's files is full of errors. Paul Bleau's Plots   Bleau believes there were seven plots against JFK before Dallas. Paul Bleau and the Supposed Chicago Plot Against JFK   Bolden's allegation that there was a plot against JFK in Chicago has changed over the years. "JFK: Destiny Betrayed" Misleads on Supposed Tampa 'Patsy'   There is no evidence that there was a plot against JFK in Tampa. "JFK Revisited" Misleads on the Supposed Chicago Plot   There is no evidence that there was a plot against JFK in Chicago.

Paul Bleau's first chokehold is that "the official record impeaches the Warren Commission." He believes that: (page 38 in the Kindle edition of his book Chokeholds ) U.S. investigations into the assassination, statements made by investigation insiders and foreign government conclusions about the assassination prove that there is a strong consensus by the independent investigative authorities that there was a conspiracy in the murder of President John F. Kennedy. Bleau's chapter then lists out a variety of statements that seemingly prove conspiracy. Of course, Bleau doesn't tell readers the full truth about these viewpoints. John Moss Whitten - Chief of CIA Covert Operations in Mexico and Central America Bleau Assertion: (page 56) Whitten was assigned by Richard Helms to be the CIA liaison to the Warren Commission. Though he initially posited that Oswald acted alone, he learned of hidden evidence by the CIA and argued for more examination. Helms eventually replaced him with James Jesus Angleton. Whitten was also later to discover that CIA officer George Joannides had in 1963 been the case officer for the Student Revolutionary Directorate, the Cuban exile group Lee Harvey Oswald had multiple interactions with in New Orleans. This was unknown to the HSCA when he became an obfuscating liaison for that investigation. Whitten testified to the HSCA that his team of thirty agents was provided with no details about “Oswald’s political activity in the United States, especially the ‘pro-Castro activity’ and autobiographical sketches … found among his effects.” … that had he known about Oswald’s activities in New Orleans and contacts with the DRE Cubans, he would have focused his investigation on the “possible involvement of the Miami station.” Whitten also knew nothing about William Harvey (a madman according to him) and the CIA’s executive action programs. What Bleau Doesn't Tell You: At the time of the JFK assassination, Whitten was chief of a branch responsible for operations in Mexico and Central America . Bleau makes it sound like Whitten (who testified under the name John Scelso) wanted to reexamine his conclusions that Oswald acted alone. But that is not the case. He just wanted to look at the possibility that Castro was behind the assassination. Here is an excerpt from his HSCA testimony : Mr. Goldsmith : Is there anything else that you would have done differently? Mr. Scelso : Well, if Helms had disclosed the Cuban assassination plots, we would have gone at that hot and heavy. We would have queried the agent about it in great detail I would have had him polygraphed by the best operatives security had to see if he had a double-agent informing Castro about our poison pen things, and so on. I would have had all our Cuban sources queried about it. Bleau also makes it sound like Whitten believed that the CIA's Miami Station might be involved in the assassination. He actually talked about it being involved in the investigation. Here is an excerpt from his testimony: Mr. Goldsmith : How big was your staff? Mr. Scelso : I had about 30 officers and about 30 clerical help. Not all of the officers do this, but a great many of them did. Mr. Goldsmith : What instructions, if any, were given to the field stations as to investigating the assassination? Mr. Scelso : The only station that was directly involved was Mexico. The possible involvement of our Miami station did not emerge, as I recall it, until we read the Bureau report and a few of Oswald's pro-Castro activities in the United States. Scelso clearly thought that it was possible Castro had been involved in the assassination. Bleau would certainly not quote the following : Mr. Scelso : Anything is possible, whether Oswald was a CIA agent, but it certainly was concealed from me if he were. I will say that Oswald was a person of a type who would never have been recruited by the Agency to work behind the Iron Curtain, or anyplace else. Mr. Goldsmith : Why not? Mr. Scelso : Because his personality and background completely disqualified him for clandestine work or for work as an agent to carry out the instructions of the Agency. Mr. Goldsmith : Could you go into more detail? This is really an important area, if you would care to elaborate a bit. Mr. Scelso : When the Agency hires an agent, engages someone to do our work and gives him a certain amount of training and places him under our guidance, whether we pay him or not or whether he signs an agreement or not, he has to meet certain standards, he has to go through a security check, a file check. And the Counterintelligence staff has to examine his personality and his background and evaluate his reliability. Well, Oswald, by virtue of his background and so on, would miserably fail to meet our minimum qualifications. Oswald would have been debriefed had he walked in and volunteered information, you see. However, he would not have been given any mission to perform. He might have been given instructions, you see, which would tend to neutralize him and make him less of a nuisance and danger than he otherwise would be, like go away and do not contact us anymore. Mr. Goldsmith : What about the flip side of all of this? Is there any reason to think that Oswald was recruited by the KGB? Mr. Scelso : Indeed, he certainly must have been debriefed by the KGB. I would think they would have debriefed him on his military information. I do not think that the KGB would have recruited him to be their agent after he left Russia. Mr. Goldsmith : Why not? Mr. Scelso : Because they were intimately acquainted with his ways and his habits and his background and would not have regarded him as a reliable collaborator. Mr. Goldsmith : Unless both, in the case of the KGB or CIA, as Epstein says in his book, Oswald's background is simply a legend, a fabrication. It does not accurately portray his true characteristics. Mr. Scelso : If Oswald, you mean, in his teens had been briefed to act like an unreliable kook and build up a legend like that. However, the Russians are just as careful, or more careful, about this kind of thing than we are and I just do not think -- Oswald's whole pattern of life was that of a very badly, emotionally unbalanced young man. Previous Relevant Blog Posts on Paul Bleau Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 10 Bleau gets it all wrong on Dr. George Burkley. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 9 Bleau doesn't tell the whole story about John Sherman Cooper. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 8 Bleau claims that J. Lee Rankin questioned the findings of the Warren Report. This is just not true. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 7 Bleau tries to make it appear that Dallas policeman James Leavelle had doubts that Oswald could be found guilty at a trial. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 6 Bleau gets it all wrong on the FBI Summary Report. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 5 Bleau discusses the conclusions of the HSCA but leaves out it most important finding. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 4 Bleau leaves out some important details about a Warren Commission staffer. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 3 Was Oswald a loner? Bleau says no, and then says yes. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 2 Bleau leaves out some important details about Malcolm Kilduff. Paul Bleau Chokes An introduction to Paul Bleau's new book,  Chokeholds . Paul Bleau on David Ferrie, the Pimp Was David Ferrie Clay Shaw's pimp? Paul Bleau and the IRS Man Did Lee Harvey Oswald have an escort? Paul Bleau and the Forger   Edward Girnus was in prison for forgery, and he told a fanciful story about Clay Shaw and Lee Harvey Oswald. Paul Bleau and the Three Tramps   Leander D'Avy told the HSCA he saw Oswald and Ferrie with the three tramps. Paul Bleau's Reign of Error   Bleau's analysis of Garrison's files is full of errors. Paul Bleau's Plots   Bleau believes there were seven plots against JFK before Dallas. Paul Bleau and the Supposed Chicago Plot Against JFK   Bolden's allegation that there was a plot against JFK in Chicago has changed over the years. "JFK: Destiny Betrayed" Misleads on Supposed Tampa 'Patsy'   There is no evidence that there was a plot against JFK in Tampa. "JFK Revisited" Misleads on the Supposed Chicago Plot   There is no evidence that there was a plot against JFK in Chicago.

Paul Bleau's first chokehold is that "the official record impeaches the Warren Commission." He believes that: (page 38 in the Kindle edition of his book Chokeholds ) U.S. investigations into the assassination, statements made by investigation insiders and foreign government conclusions about the assassination prove that there is a strong consensus by the independent investigative authorities that there was a conspiracy in the murder of President John F. Kennedy. Bleau's chapter then lists out a variety of statements that seemingly prove conspiracy. Of course, Bleau doesn't tell readers the full truth about these viewpoints. Alfreda Scobey Bleau Assertion: (page 51) Scobey wrote down notes taking the position of what a defense lawyer for Oswald could have argued with respect to the evidence presented by the Warren Commission. Her observations underscore many problems the prosecution would have faced including: The denial of Oswald’s right to legal counsel; the inadmissibility of his wife’s testimony; the poor quality of Helen Markham as witness to the Tippit assassination; the number of witnesses that refused to identify Oswald as Tippit’s assassin; the lack of pertinence of the Walker incident; the evidence obtained from the Paines without a proper warrant; the chain of possession of the rifle, etc. What Bleau Doesn't Tell You: Scobey did indeed write about some of the issues regarding a trial, but she also wrote this : If we assume that our defense counsel was very, very lucky, he would be able, if Oswald stood trial, either to exclude or impeach the testimony of a large number of key persons whose accounts add so much to the strength of the report. This is not to say that what would be left, granting the unlikely event of success in all these endeavors, would leave room for a reasonable doubt of Oswald’s guilt, but the surprising fact is that the conviction in such an event would depend to an amazing degree on documentary evidence and its interpretation by experts. You can read her article here. Previous Relevant Blog Post on Alfreda Scobey Alfreda Scobey's TV Appearance Scobey discussed on TV how Mark Lane had misinterpreted her memo.. Here is an excerpt of what she had to say: Let me begin with a personal reference. I wrote a bar journal article the thesis of which was that the evidence before the Warren Commission was like the brief of evidence on the trial of the case, but that, had Oswald been on trial, much of this testimony (for example, that of his wife) could have been excluded by defense counsel, but that nevertheless Oswald could not have been acquitted because his guilt was overwhelmingly proved by physical, documentary and circumstantial evidence. After stating what a defense counsel might delete, I wrote -- here is the language -- "This is NOT to say that what would be left would leave room for a reasonable doubt of Oswald's guilt. Mr. Lane knows as a lawyer knows that if there is no room for a reasonable doubt, the defendant in a criminal case must be convicted. If the jury believes there is a reasonable doubt he must be acquitted. I emphasized I was NOT saying there was room for reasonable doubt. Mr. Lane, on page 59 of the current issue of Playboy writes about this: "Let me add that there is no doubt in my mind that HAD OWALD LIVED TO FACE TRIAL HE WOULD HAVE BEEN ACQUITTED. A Commission attorney, Alfredda Scobey, CONCEDED THAT in the January, 1965 issue of the American Bar Association Journal. I said the admissible evidence on a trial would not leave room for a reasonable doubt of guilt. Mr. Lane quotes me as saying I concede his acquittal. Does Mr. Lane find his position so precarious that it's necessary for him to do this to gain the appearance of support in his public interviews? Previous Relevant Blog Posts on Paul Bleau Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 11 Bleau misleads readers on the testimony of John Moss Whitten. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 10 Bleau gets it all wrong on Dr. George Burkley. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 9 Bleau doesn't tell the whole story about John Sherman Cooper. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 8 Bleau claims that J. Lee Rankin questioned the findings of the Warren Report. This is just not true. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 7 Bleau tries to make it appear that Dallas policeman James Leavelle had doubts that Oswald could be found guilty at a trial. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 6 Bleau gets it all wrong on the FBI Summary Report. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 5 Bleau discusses the conclusions of the HSCA but leaves out it most important finding. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 4 Bleau leaves out some important details about a Warren Commission staffer. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 3 Was Oswald a loner? Bleau says no, and then says yes. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 2 Bleau leaves out some important details about Malcolm Kilduff. Paul Bleau Chokes An introduction to Paul Bleau's new book,  Chokeholds . Paul Bleau on David Ferrie, the Pimp Was David Ferrie Clay Shaw's pimp? Paul Bleau and the IRS Man Did Lee Harvey Oswald have an escort? Paul Bleau and the Forger   Edward Girnus was in prison for forgery, and he told a fanciful story about Clay Shaw and Lee Harvey Oswald. Paul Bleau and the Three Tramps   Leander D'Avy told the HSCA he saw Oswald and Ferrie with the three tramps. Paul Bleau's Reign of Error   Bleau's analysis of Garrison's files is full of errors. Paul Bleau's Plots   Bleau believes there were seven plots against JFK before Dallas. Paul Bleau and the Supposed Chicago Plot Against JFK   Bolden's allegation that there was a plot against JFK in Chicago has changed over the years. "JFK: Destiny Betrayed" Misleads on Supposed Tampa 'Patsy'   There is no evidence that there was a plot against JFK in Tampa. "JFK Revisited" Misleads on the Supposed Chicago Plot   There is no evidence that there was a plot against JFK in Chicago.

Burt Griffin Paul Bleau's first chokehold is that "the official record impeaches the Warren Commission." He believes that: (page 38 in the Kindle edition of his book Chokeholds ) U.S. investigations into the assassination, statements made by investigation insiders and foreign government conclusions about the assassination prove that there is a strong consensus by the independent investigative authorities that there was a conspiracy in the murder of President John F. Kennedy. Bleau's chapter then lists out a variety of statements that seemingly prove conspiracy. Of course, Bleau doesn't tell readers the full truth about these viewpoints. Burt Griffin and Leon Hubert Bleau Assertion: (pages 51 - 52) Burt Griffin and Leon Hubert were charged with investigating Jack Ruby and while they had not concluded that Ruby was involved in a conspiracy, they were clearly not satisfied with the investigation and information transferred to them by the FBI or CIA. This is made clear by memos written by them and answers Judge Griffin gave in his HSCA testimony. In the documentary  The Killing of President Kennedy , Griffin is even blunter: “I feel betrayed … the CIA lied to us…” He goes on to state that the CIA concealed their efforts to kill Castro and their links with the mafia, which would have been very important for the investigation. Griffin also is on the record as saying: “In any area where Oswald’s relation to the FBI… We could not trust Hoover.” What Bleau Doesn't Tell You: Here is the full quote from Griffin from Anthony Summers' documentary, The J.F.K. Conspiracy: (52:34) Interviewer : Did you trust J. Edgar Hoover? Griffin : I don't think any of us trusted J. Edgar Hoover when it came to the question of the image of the FBI. Interviewer : But do you think that, for one reason or another, the FBI deliberately misled the Warren Commission? Griffin : I think in any area where Oswald's relationship to the FBI, even as a suspect from the FBI, could have supplied a motive for Oswald. In those areas we could not trust Hoover. The fact that the Warren Commission didn't always trust Hoover is not a bad thing. It says something about their understanding of where they had to probe more deeply, and that they could not just take Hoover's word. Despite issues he might have had with the FBI and the CIA, Burt Griffin still believed that Oswald was the lone gunman. Bleau wouldn't dare quote this testimony from Griffin's HSCA appearance: Mr. Blakey : Let me ask you, then, a general point. As you know the conclusion of the Warren Commission was that Lee Harvey Oswald was the assassin of the President. Are you satisfied with that conclusion? Judge Griffin : Yes, I am. There is no doubt about that. Mr. Blakey : The central conclusion from many people's point of view was that there was no evidence found of a conspiracy to assassinate the President. Are you satisfied with that conclusion? Judge Griffin : I am satisfied that that statement is true. Bleau might have a look at Burt's new book, JFK, Oswald, Ruby: Politics, Prejudice and Truth . Here is a short excerpt: (page 654 in the Kindle edition) If reasonableness is the standard of history, there should be no reasonable doubt that Lee Oswald killed both President Kennedy and police Officer J.D. Tippit. There can be no doubt that Jack Ruby killed Oswald. The Warren Commission and the House Assassinations Committee conducted their investigations fourteen years apart. They agreed that Oswald fired his rifle from the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository and killed Kennedy. Neither of those exhaustive investigations, nor any investigation since, has produced probative evidence linking Lee Oswald to a conspiracy to assassinate President Kennedy. Previous Relevant Blog Posts on Paul Bleau Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 12 Bleau leaves out an important paragraph from Alfredda Scobey's article on the Warren Commission. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 11 Bleau misleads readers on the testimony of John Moss Whitten. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 10 Bleau gets it all wrong on Dr. George Burkley. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 9 Bleau doesn't tell the whole story about John Sherman Cooper. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 8 Bleau claims that J. Lee Rankin questioned the findings of the Warren Report. This is just not true. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 7 Bleau tries to make it appear that Dallas policeman James Leavelle had doubts that Oswald could be found guilty at a trial. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 6 Bleau gets it all wrong on the FBI Summary Report. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 5 Bleau discusses the conclusions of the HSCA but leaves out it most important finding. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 4 Bleau leaves out some important details about a Warren Commission staffer. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 3 Was Oswald a loner? Bleau says no, and then says yes. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 2 Bleau leaves out some important details about Malcolm Kilduff. Paul Bleau Chokes An introduction to Paul Bleau's new book,  Chokeholds . Paul Bleau on David Ferrie, the Pimp Was David Ferrie Clay Shaw's pimp? Paul Bleau and the IRS Man Did Lee Harvey Oswald have an escort? Paul Bleau and the Forger   Edward Girnus was in prison for forgery, and he told a fanciful story about Clay Shaw and Lee Harvey Oswald. Paul Bleau and the Three Tramps   Leander D'Avy told the HSCA he saw Oswald and Ferrie with the three tramps. Paul Bleau's Reign of Error   Bleau's analysis of Garrison's files is full of errors. Paul Bleau's Plots   Bleau believes there were seven plots against JFK before Dallas. Paul Bleau and the Supposed Chicago Plot Against JFK   Bolden's allegation that there was a plot against JFK in Chicago has changed over the years. "JFK: Destiny Betrayed" Misleads on Supposed Tampa 'Patsy'   There is no evidence that there was a plot against JFK in Tampa. "JFK Revisited" Misleads on the Supposed Chicago Plot   There is no evidence that there was a plot against JFK in Chicago.

Paul Bleau's first chokehold is that "the official record impeaches the Warren Commission." He believes that: (page 38 in the Kindle edition of his book Chokeholds ) U.S. investigations into the assassination, statements made by investigation insiders and foreign government conclusions about the assassination prove that there is a strong consensus by the independent investigative authorities that there was a conspiracy in the murder of President John F. Kennedy. Bleau's chapter then lists out a variety of statements that seemingly prove conspiracy. Of course, Bleau doesn't tell readers the full truth about these viewpoints. President Lyndon Johnson Bleau Assertion: (page 58) In a 1969  interview with  Walter Cronkite, Lyndon Johnson said that he had not completely discounted the possibility of international connections to the murder.  He is also on the record for stating the following: “I never believed that Oswald acted alone ….” He added that the government “had been operating a damned Murder Inc. in the Caribbean.” What Bleau Doesn't Tell You: Yes, the United States was trying to kill Fidel Castro. So, Johnson thought perhaps the assassination had been a retaliation for these attempts. Johnson didn't have any special knowledge about a plot, just a suspicion, much like Robert Kennedy,  that the Cubans might have retaliated. Here is a transcript of that section : Johnson : I can't honestly say that I've ever been completely relieved of the fact that there might have been international connections. Cronkite : You mean you still feel that there might have been? Johnson :  Well, I have not completely discounted. Cronkite :  That would seem to indicate that you don't have full confidence in the Warren Commission report. Johnson :  No, No, I think the Warren Commission study and I think, first of all, it’s composed of the ablest, most judicious bipartisan men in this country. Second, I think they had only one objective and that was the truth. Third, I think they were competent and did the best they could, but I don't think that they, or me, or anyone else, is always absolutely sure of everything that might have motivated Oswald or others that could have been involved. Johnson also sat down for an interview with Leo Janos : During coffee, the talk turned to President Kennedy, and Johnson expressed his belief that the assassination in Dallas had been part of a conspiracy. "I never believed that Oswald acted alone, although I can accept that he pulled the trigger." Johnson said that when he had taken office he found that "we had been operating a damned Murder Inc. in the Caribbean." A year or so before Kennedy's death a CIA-backed assassination team had been picked up in Havana. Johnson speculated that Dallas had been a retaliation for this thwarted attempt, although he couldn't prove it. "After the Warren Commission reported in, I asked Ramsey Clark [then Attorney General] to quietly look into the whole thing. Only two weeks later he reported back that he couldn't find anything new." Disgust tinged Johnson's voice as the conversation came to an end. "I thought I had appointed Tom Clark's son — I was wrong." Bleau left out this bit: " ... although I can accept that he pulled the trigger." Previous Relevant Blog Posts on Paul Bleau Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 13 Bleau leaves out some important details about the beliefs of Burt Griffin. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 12 Bleau leaves out an important paragraph from Alfredda Scobey's article on the Warren Commission. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 11 Bleau misleads readers on the testimony of John Moss Whitten. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 10 Bleau gets it all wrong on Dr. George Burkley. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 9 Bleau doesn't tell the whole story about John Sherman Cooper. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 8 Bleau claims that J. Lee Rankin questioned the findings of the Warren Report. This is just not true. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 7 Bleau tries to make it appear that Dallas policeman James Leavelle had doubts that Oswald could be found guilty at a trial. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 6 Bleau gets it all wrong on the FBI Summary Report. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 5 Bleau discusses the conclusions of the HSCA but leaves out it most important finding. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 4 Bleau leaves out some important details about a Warren Commission staffer. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 3 Was Oswald a loner? Bleau says no, and then says yes. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 2 Bleau leaves out some important details about Malcolm Kilduff. Paul Bleau Chokes An introduction to Paul Bleau's new book,  Chokeholds . Paul Bleau on David Ferrie, the Pimp Was David Ferrie Clay Shaw's pimp? Paul Bleau and the IRS Man Did Lee Harvey Oswald have an escort? Paul Bleau and the Forger   Edward Girnus was in prison for forgery, and he told a fanciful story about Clay Shaw and Lee Harvey Oswald. Paul Bleau and the Three Tramps   Leander D'Avy told the HSCA he saw Oswald and Ferrie with the three tramps. Paul Bleau's Reign of Error   Bleau's analysis of Garrison's files is full of errors. Paul Bleau's Plots   Bleau believes there were seven plots against JFK before Dallas. Paul Bleau and the Supposed Chicago Plot Against JFK   Bolden's allegation that there was a plot against JFK in Chicago has changed over the years. "JFK: Destiny Betrayed" Misleads on Supposed Tampa 'Patsy'   There is no evidence that there was a plot against JFK in Tampa. "JFK Revisited" Misleads on the Supposed Chicago Plot   There is no evidence that there was a plot against JFK in Chicago.

The Clay Shaw jury. Paul Bleau's first chokehold is that "the official record impeaches the Warren Commission." He believes that: (page 38 in the Kindle edition of his book Chokeholds ) U.S. investigations into the assassination, statements made by investigation insiders and foreign government conclusions about the assassination prove that there is a strong consensus by the independent investigative authorities that there was a conspiracy in the murder of President John F. Kennedy. Bleau's chapter then lists out a variety of statements that seemingly prove conspiracy. Of course, Bleau doesn't tell readers the full truth about these viewpoints. The Jim Garrison Investigation Bleau Assertion : (page 17) Starting in 1966, New Orleans DA Jim Garrison investigated the assassination. This led to the 1969 trial of Clay Shaw, a well-known local businessman, who was accused of being part of a conspiracy. While the jury found Shaw not guilty, according to Mark Lane—who had advised Garrison—most jurors felt there had nevertheless been a conspiracy. What Bleau Doesn't Tell You: Mark Lane promised that he would write an article about his discussions with the jurors in the Shaw case. He never did. However, James Kirkwood, author of American Grotesque , did speak to most of the jurors and many were not convinced of a conspiracy.   Here is what Sidney Hebert, the jury foreman, told Kirkwood (page 511) Mr. Hebert folded up his souvenirs with great care and replaced them in their envelope. He spoke again of his fondness for his fellow jurors, especially for Larry Morgan, one of his roommates and a boy the same age as his son. He also passed a remark that would not have pleased Mr. Garrison, who, despite the adverse verdict, claimed he had proven the Warren Report to be a pack of lies. Said Hebert, "In fact, I didn't think too much of the Warren Report either until the trial. Now I think a lot more of it than I did before the trial." Of course, the jury's job was to determine whether Clay Shaw was guilty of the charge of conspiracy; not whether there was a conspiracy in the JFK assassination. Here is a relevant paragraph from James Kirkwood's American Grotesque: (page 466) Later, in the massive post-verdict confusion, after the courtroom had been hastily cleared and the defendant, oddly enough, had been spirited down the back passageways to the Parish Prison one last time, the courthouse steps were flooded with lights while cameras whirred away. TV reporters grabbed at any and every principal emerging. As we walked down the steps Judge Haggerty appeared with his kewpie-doll wife, Yolande, blond hair done up in intricate ringlets. He was besieged. He looked happy and tired, and proudly told the newsmen -- with five or six microphones jammed into his face -- that he'd predicted Mr. Hebert would be the foreman and that he'd had an idea the verdict would not take long. Asked if he was surprised at the verdict itself, he said, "No," but would not elaborate. When a reporters questioned him about what effect the trial might have upon the Warren Report, the judge replied he had no idea, adding, "The Warren Report was not on trial, Clay Shaw was." Previous Relevant Blog Posts on Paul Bleau Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 14 Bleau doesn't tell you everything about Lyndon Johnson's feelings towards the Warren Report. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 13 Bleau leaves out some important details about the beliefs of Burt Griffin. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 12 Bleau leaves out an important paragraph from Alfredda Scobey's article on the Warren Commission. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 11 Bleau misleads readers on the testimony of John Moss Whitten. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 10 Bleau gets it all wrong on Dr. George Burkley. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 9 Bleau doesn't tell the whole story about John Sherman Cooper. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 8 Bleau claims that J. Lee Rankin questioned the findings of the Warren Report. This is just not true. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 7 Bleau tries to make it appear that Dallas policeman James Leavelle had doubts that Oswald could be found guilty at a trial. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 6 Bleau gets it all wrong on the FBI Summary Report. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 5 Bleau discusses the conclusions of the HSCA but leaves out it most important finding. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 4 Bleau leaves out some important details about a Warren Commission staffer. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 3 Was Oswald a loner? Bleau says no, and then says yes. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 2 Bleau leaves out some important details about Malcolm Kilduff. Paul Bleau Chokes An introduction to Paul Bleau's new book,  Chokeholds . Paul Bleau on David Ferrie, the Pimp Was David Ferrie Clay Shaw's pimp? Paul Bleau and the IRS Man Did Lee Harvey Oswald have an escort? Paul Bleau and the Forger   Edward Girnus was in prison for forgery, and he told a fanciful story about Clay Shaw and Lee Harvey Oswald. Paul Bleau and the Three Tramps   Leander D'Avy told the HSCA he saw Oswald and Ferrie with the three tramps. Paul Bleau's Reign of Error   Bleau's analysis of Garrison's files is full of errors. Paul Bleau's Plots   Bleau believes there were seven plots against JFK before Dallas. Paul Bleau and the Supposed Chicago Plot Against JFK   Bolden's allegation that there was a plot against JFK in Chicago has changed over the years. "JFK: Destiny Betrayed" Misleads on Supposed Tampa 'Patsy'   There is no evidence that there was a plot against JFK in Tampa. "JFK Revisited" Misleads on the Supposed Chicago Plot   There is no evidence that there was a plot against JFK in Chicago.

Francis Fruge Paul Bleau's first chokehold is that "the official record impeaches the Warren Commission." He believes that: (page 38 in the Kindle edition of his book Chokeholds ) U.S. investigations into the assassination, statements made by investigation insiders and foreign government conclusions about the assassination prove that there is a strong consensus by the independent investigative authorities that there was a conspiracy in the murder of President John F. Kennedy. Bleau's chapter then lists out a variety of statements that seemingly prove conspiracy. Of course, Bleau doesn't tell readers the full truth about these viewpoints. Francis Fruge—Garrison Case Investigator—Louisiana State Police Lieutenant Bleau Assertion : (page 64) Francis Fruge’s entry into the case  actually began a few days before the assassination when he first encountered and questioned Rose Cheramie, a heroin-addicted call girl and drug courier, who predicted the assassination, and talked about her links with Jack Ruby while she was hospitalized from November 20 to 22, 1963. He met her again right after the murder. Fruge later became an important investigator for Jim Garrison. His account of this extremely incriminating story was summarized in a thoroughly documented July 1999  Probe Magazine  article: Bleau then quotes from James DiEugenio's Probe Magazine article . What Bleau Doesn't Tell You: James DiEugenio claims that a Dr. Wayne Owens was told of the plot; The word spread throughout the hospital that she had predicted Kennedy’s murder. Dr. Wayne Owen, who had been interning from LSU at the time, later told the Madison Capital Times that he and other interns were told of the plot in advance of the assassination. Amazingly, Cheramie even predicted the role of her former boss Jack Ruby because Owen was quoted as saying that one of the interns was told “ … that one of the men involved in the plot was a man named Jack Rubinstein.” (2/11/68) Owen said that they shrugged it off at the time. But when they learned that Rubinstein was Ruby they grew quite concerned. “We were all assured that something would be done about it by the FBI or someone. Yet we never heard anything.” (Ibid) In fact, Cheramie’s association with Ruby was also revealed to Dr. Weiss. In an interview with him after the assassination, Rose revealed that she had worked as a drug courier for Jack Ruby. But DiEugenio gets it all wrong: Did Dr. Wayne Owens Hear Rose Cherami Predict the JFK Assassination?   No. Dr. Owens did not corroborate the Cherami story in any way, shape, form, or manner. And Francis Fruge really doesn't have much credibility . In addition, I have thoroughly debunked the stories about Rose Cherami. Was Rose Cherami Murdered? The medical evidence is clear that Cherami was not murdered. An Important New Find Regarding Rose Cherami   An article from 1957 relates to her credibility. Did Dr. Wayne Owens Hear Rose Cherami Predict the JFK Assassination?   No. Dr. Owens did not corroborate the Cherami story in any way, shape, form, or manner. Did Rose Cherami Ever Work For Jack Ruby?   There is no evidence she ever worked for Jack Ruby Did Rose Cherami Watch the Dallas Motorcade on Television?   Joan Mellen claims Cherami was watching the motorcade on television. This is ridiculous. Francis Fruge's Conversations with Rose Cherami about the JFK Assassination   He claims she told him she was going to kill JFK. Did Anybody Hear Rose Cherami Predict the JFK Assassination?   There is no firm evidence that she predicted the assassination. Did Rose Cherami Provide Valuable Information on Dope Smuggling?   No, her information was useless. Jim Garrison (and Others) on Rose Cherami Some conspiracy theorists are admitting the Rose Cherami story is nonsense. Was Sergio Arcacha Smith with Rose Cherami in November 1963?   It is doubtful Arcacha Smith was with Cherami. Previous Relevant Blog Posts on Paul Bleau Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 15 Bleau claims the Shaw jury believed there was a conspiracy in the JFK assassination. This is just not true. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 14 Bleau doesn't tell you everything about Lyndon Johnson's feelings towards the Warren Report. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 13 Bleau leaves out some important details about the beliefs of Burt Griffin. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 12 Bleau leaves out an important paragraph from Alfredda Scobey's article on the Warren Commission. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 11 Bleau misleads readers on the testimony of John Moss Whitten. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 10 Bleau gets it all wrong on Dr. George Burkley. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 9 Bleau doesn't tell the whole story about John Sherman Cooper. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 8 Bleau claims that J. Lee Rankin questioned the findings of the Warren Report. This is just not true. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 7 Bleau tries to make it appear that Dallas policeman James Leavelle had doubts that Oswald could be found guilty at a trial. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 6 Bleau gets it all wrong on the FBI Summary Report. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 5 Bleau discusses the conclusions of the HSCA but leaves out it most important finding. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 4 Bleau leaves out some important details about a Warren Commission staffer. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 3 Was Oswald a loner? Bleau says no, and then says yes. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 2 Bleau leaves out some important details about Malcolm Kilduff. Paul Bleau Chokes An introduction to Paul Bleau's new book,  Chokeholds . Paul Bleau on David Ferrie, the Pimp Was David Ferrie Clay Shaw's pimp? Paul Bleau and the IRS Man Did Lee Harvey Oswald have an escort? Paul Bleau and the Forger   Edward Girnus was in prison for forgery, and he told a fanciful story about Clay Shaw and Lee Harvey Oswald. Paul Bleau and the Three Tramps   Leander D'Avy told the HSCA he saw Oswald and Ferrie with the three tramps. Paul Bleau's Reign of Error   Bleau's analysis of Garrison's files is full of errors. Paul Bleau's Plots   Bleau believes there were seven plots against JFK before Dallas. Paul Bleau and the Supposed Chicago Plot Against JFK   Bolden's allegation that there was a plot against JFK in Chicago has changed over the years. "JFK: Destiny Betrayed" Misleads on Supposed Tampa 'Patsy'   There is no evidence that there was a plot against JFK in Tampa. "JFK Revisited" Misleads on the Supposed Chicago Plot   There is no evidence that there was a plot against JFK in Chicago.

Roger Craig Paul Bleau's first chokehold is that "the official record impeaches the Warren Commission." He believes that: (page 38 in the Kindle edition of his book Chokeholds ) U.S. investigations into the assassination, statements made by investigation insiders and foreign government conclusions about the assassination prove that there is a strong consensus by the independent investigative authorities that there was a conspiracy in the murder of President John F. Kennedy. Bleau's chapter then lists out a variety of statements that seemingly prove conspiracy. Of course, Bleau doesn't tell readers the full truth about these viewpoints. Roger Craig -- Dallas Deputy Sheriff Bleau Assertion : (pages 41 -42 in the Kindle edition) Roger Craig was very well regarded up until the assassination. He was on duty and in Dealey Plaza at the time of the murder. In a number of interviews he explains what  he witnessed on November 22, 1963 : He was in the Book Depository when the alleged murder weapon was found which he confirmed to be a Mauser and not the Mannlicher-Carcano that the Warren Commission claimed Oswald owned. Furthermore, Craig said he had seen Oswald entering a station wagon a few minutes after the murder, which would contradict the Warren Commission’s chronology of Oswald’s movements and implicated a getaway driver—the following is part of his Warren Commission testimony: David Belin:  All right. Then, what did Captain Fritz say and what did you say and what did the suspect (Oswald) say? Roger Craig:  Captain Fritz then asked… “What about this station wagon?” And the suspect interrupted him and said, “That station wagon belongs to Mrs. Paine”… I believe that is what he said. “Don’t try to tie her into this. She had nothing to do with it.” Craig’s description of the Rambler driver goes a long way in vindicating his account: He said that the man driving the vehicle was not a Negro but that he was dark-skinned—possibly Latin. His skin, he said, appeared to be very smooth. The driver had a powerful face, neck and shoulders. Craig repeatedly used the words “powerful” and “muscular” to describe his neck and shoulders. The description of this escort comes up repeatedly in other sightings of Oswald with a stocky homunculus. What Bleau Doesn't Tell You Bleau doesn't discuss the credibility of Roger Craig . There is firm evidence that Oswald left the Depository in a bus and then a taxi. None of the officers present in Fritz's office back up Craig's story. Craig initially said the station wagon was a white  Rambler but Ruth Pained owned a green Chevrolet. As for Oswald's supposed escort, I have already written about the man with a scar.  Here is a look at one of Bleau's supposed witnesses  to an Oswald escort, and here is  another supposed witness. Don't miss Dave Perry's excellent essay on Roger Craig. Here is what Harold Weisberg thought about Craig : Roger Craig's daughter wrote that he was a "disturbed man." His death was not mysterious. More on Roger Craig here. Previous Relevant Blog Posts on Roger Craig Mary Ferrell and Sylvia Meagher on Roger Craig Both Ferrell and Meagher didn't think much of Roger Craig. Mark Lane Interviews Roger Craig   Craig told Lane some really crazy stuff. Marina Oswald's Doctor was a Homosexual!   Roger Craig wrote a memo to Jim Garrison about Marina Oswald's doctor. Jim Garrison Finds Another JFK Assassination Conspirator!   Garrison charges Edgar Eugene Bradley with conspiracy to kill JFK, and Roger Craig says that Bradley was the Secret Service man he encountered outside the TSBD. Was Edgar Eugene Bradley One of the Three Tramps?   Some conspiracy theorists believe that Bradley was one of the three tramps. A few letters in this post mention Roger Craig. Previous Relevant Blog Posts on Paul Bleau Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 16 Bleau believes the Rose Cherami story. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 15 Bleau claims the Shaw jury believed there was a conspiracy in the JFK assassination. This is just not true. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 14 Bleau doesn't tell you everything about Lyndon Johnson's feelings towards the Warren Report. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 13 Bleau leaves out some important details about the beliefs of Burt Griffin. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 12 Bleau leaves out an important paragraph from Alfredda Scobey's article on the Warren Commission. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 11 Bleau misleads readers on the testimony of John Moss Whitten. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 10 Bleau gets it all wrong on Dr. George Burkley. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 9 Bleau doesn't tell the whole story about John Sherman Cooper. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 8 Bleau claims that J. Lee Rankin questioned the findings of the Warren Report. This is just not true. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 7 Bleau tries to make it appear that Dallas policeman James Leavelle had doubts that Oswald could be found guilty at a trial. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 6 Bleau gets it all wrong on the FBI Summary Report. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 5 Bleau discusses the conclusions of the HSCA but leaves out it most important finding. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 4 Bleau leaves out some important details about a Warren Commission staffer. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 3 Was Oswald a loner? Bleau says no, and then says yes. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 2 Bleau leaves out some important details about Malcolm Kilduff. Paul Bleau Chokes An introduction to Paul Bleau's new book,  Chokeholds . Paul Bleau on David Ferrie, the Pimp Was David Ferrie Clay Shaw's pimp? Paul Bleau and the IRS Man Did Lee Harvey Oswald have an escort? Paul Bleau and the Forger   Edward Girnus was in prison for forgery, and he told a fanciful story about Clay Shaw and Lee Harvey Oswald. Paul Bleau and the Three Tramps   Leander D'Avy told the HSCA he saw Oswald and Ferrie with the three tramps. Paul Bleau's Reign of Error   Bleau's analysis of Garrison's files is full of errors. Paul Bleau's Plots   Bleau believes there were seven plots against JFK before Dallas. Paul Bleau and the Supposed Chicago Plot Against JFK   Bolden's allegation that there was a plot against JFK in Chicago has changed over the years. "JFK: Destiny Betrayed" Misleads on Supposed Tampa 'Patsy'   There is no evidence that there was a plot against JFK in Tampa. "JFK Revisited" Misleads on the Supposed Chicago Plot   There is no evidence that there was a plot against JFK in Chicago.

Aloysius Habighorst Paul Bleau's first chokehold is that "the official record impeaches the Warren Commission." He believes that: (page 38 in the Kindle edition of his book Chokeholds ) U.S. investigations into the assassination, statements made by investigation insiders and foreign government conclusions about the assassination prove that there is a strong consensus by the independent investigative authorities that there was a conspiracy in the murder of President John F. Kennedy. Bleau's chapter then lists out a variety of statements that seemingly prove conspiracy. Of course, Bleau doesn't tell readers the full truth about these viewpoints. Aloysius Habighorst -- New Orleans Police Officer Bleau Assertion : (pages 61 - 63) Many witnesses have confirmed that Clem and Clay Bertrand were Clay Shaw aliases. He used this name in an airport lounge and in a probable moment of absent-mindedness gave it away to Officer Aloysius A. Habighorst after he was arrested. (See line 10 to the left in the Alias box.) Even though Judge Haggerty ruled the following piece inadmissible… There is no reasonable explanation for the name Bertrand being in this field. This would have gone a long way in proving Shaw’s connections to Oswald. What Bleau Doesn't Tell You: It's laughable that Paul Bleau believes this ridiculous story. Even Judge Haggerty, normally disposed towards the prosecution, thought that Officer Habighorst was lying. I debunked this story here.   Jonas Butzman was another policeman who was there and he said he never heard any questions about an alias . Here is an internal defense memo: And, of course, Butzman testified in court that Shaw was not asked his alias by Officer Habighorst . But please read my entire post on this incident. Here is an excerpt from James Kirkwood's American Grotesque : The following is from AMERICAN GROTESQUE, pp. 353-359. In the summer of 1968 the District Attorney's office had authorized the release to the press of information contained on the fingerprint card made out at the Police Bureau of Identification on the night of Clay Shaw's arrest. the STATES-ITEM printed a photograph of the card July 30, 1968, and ran an accompanying article which quoted police officer Aloysius J. Habighorst as stating Clay Shaw had freely admitted he used the Clay Bertrand alias. The alias was typed out on the card, which Shaw had signed. Shaw had steadfastly denied ever using the alias. The District Attorney's release of this purported incriminating evidence to the press was in strict violation of the pretrial guidelines; nevertheless this information had been widely circulated and highly publicized. Now the state attempted to enter into evidence the fingerprint card together with the oral testimony of Officer Habighorst. Knowing he was in tricky territory, James Alcock wisely began by suggesting the jury be removed from the courtroom while the judge heard oral arguments pertaining to the admissibility of this matter. Louis Ivon, Garrison's smooth-looking investigator, was sworn in and proved to be a somewhat groggy witness. Whether he wanted to discourage a lengthy session of questioning or whether he was simply having an off day of it was not known. He had been importantly present at Shaw's arrest, but when Dymond asked Ivon if ho knew what an arrest sheet looked like, the investigator replied, "I may have seen them. I may have filled some out." DYMOND: Did you examine the original Clay Shaw arrest form? IVON: I don't know. Dymond exhibited the form which Ivon had actually signed and asked where he'd filled it out. Ivon could not remember if he'd signed the arrest form or not, or the search affidavit. Only when shown his signature did this come back to him and then he was unable to recall when or where he'd signed them. Now Officer Habighorst, natty in a snug-fitting dark suit and vest, was called to the stand. The good-looking police officer told James Alcock he had fingerprinted Shaw inside the Bureau of Investigation room the night of his arrest and that he'd not gotten the information he'd put down on the fingerprint card from Shaw's arrest record sheet, but from the defendant himself, including name, age, weight and, Habighorst and the state claimed, the alias Clay Bertrand. Habighorst detailed the procedure to Alcock and testified he had not threatened the defendant, not offered him promises of any sort in return for information, or abused him physically. The policeman was cross-examined by Billy Wegmann, not Irvin Dymond. There was an interesting reason for the substitution. Officer Habighorst's brother had been driving across a bridge several years previously and gotten into a contretemps with another motorist. They stopped their cars, argued, and then Habighorst's brother had taken out a gun, shot and killed the man. Dymond, who defended the brother, succeeded in reducing the crime from murder to manslaughter and the defendant had served four years in prison. It was widely rumored that Officer Habighorst thought his brother should have gotten off scot free, and his feelings toward Dymond were not friendly. In an attempt not to crank up an already hostile witness, Billy Wegmann handled the questioning. Billy Wegmann, however, was not wearing kid gloves. His voice rang loud and clear and he did not permit time to swat flies between questions, nor did he allow the witness to dance rings around the answer. Wegmann headed immediately for a controversial area, wanting to know if Clay Shaw's lawyer, Eddie Wegmann, had been excluded from the B of I room when the defendant was being fingerprinted. Officer Habighorst said, "He was there for a time. If he was excluded, I don't know why." Was his attorney present, Billy Wegmann wanted to know, when Mr. Shaw signed the card? "Yes, sir," the policeman replied. "Are you sure?" Billy Wegmann pressed. Now Habighorst hedged: "I recall he was inside the door. I would say he was more inside the Bureau of Identification than outside the door in the booking area." Hammering at the police officer, Wegmann asked if it wasn't a fact he had seen the arrest register on Clay Shaw before he was finger- printed. Habighorst denied this, repeating his claim that he'd received the information directly from Shaw himself. BILLY WEGMANN: Was Mr. Shaw's attorney there when you got an alias? HABIGHORST: He could have been. I don't know. Judge Haggerty interrupted, asking the police officer how far the defendant had been from his attorney during the fingerprinting. "I would say twenty feet," Habighorst ventured. "As far as I am from Mr. Alcock." Judge Haggerty surveyed the distance and said, "That's about thirty feet." Billy Wegmann wanted to know if Habighorst had been speaking in a normal voice; the policeman said he could not say whether Eddie Wegmann had heard him or not. At one point, Officer Habighorst was completely thrown by the use of the word "subsequent" in a question and Billy Wegmann was forced to rephrase the sentence. Now the all-important questions: BILLY WEGMANN: Did Ivon tell you that Mr. Shaw was not to be questioned? HABIGHORST: I don't recall. BILLY WEGMANN: Did you advise him [Shaw] of his constitutional rights? HABIGHORST: No, I explained the booking procedure to him. After a short afternoon recess, Dymond began to attack Habighorst's testimony by putting on the stand Captain Louis Curole, who had been on duty at Central Lockup when Shaw was arrested and had assigned a Sergeant Butzman to guard Shaw until his booking and fingerprinting were completed. Captain Curole testified that, as a rule, attorneys are not permitted in the B of I room with their clients. He went on to say Edward Wegmann had *not* been allowed to go into the room with Clay Shaw. He further testified that a copy of the arrest record is almost always sent to the B of I room and that this form would include any aliases attributed to the arrestee. Dymond asserted that the credibility of Habighorst's version was now seriously in doubt in light of Captain Curole's testimony. Alcock objected strenuously but the judge overruled him. Judge Haggerty's face was now tightening into a mold of absolute seriousness of purpose. His eyes were unblinking, as if he'd sighted a target that did not please him one bit. Sergeant Jonas Butzman followed Captain Curole to the stand. He had been within five or ten feet of Clay Shaw all the time the defendant was in the B of I room. Butzman testified he had heard Habighorst ask Clay Shaw only one question and that was about the spelling of a name. Dymond's next question was "Did you ever hear the name Clay Bertrand mentioned?" "No," was the reply. The sergeant said he did not know if Habighorst had a copy of the field arrest form but indicated Eddie Wegmann had *not* been in the room at all. The defense was picking up speed and called Police officer John Perkins to the stand, again over Alcock's objections, but the judge, now pursed of mouth, quickly overruled him. Although Perkins was not on duty at the time of Shaw's arrest he was assigned to the B of I room. Questioned about standard operating procedure, the police officer testified he had never fingerprinted a person without the field arrest record. More damaging, he claimed that the fingerprints are applied to the card, after the arrestee signs the card, and the information is put on the card last of all. Now Eddie Wegmann was called to the stand and questioned by his confrere Irvin Dymond. Eddie's face had never displayed such angry signs of colic as when he testified this day about Clay Shaw's arrest and the booking procedure. It was obvious he had much more on his mind than the specific testimony he was called to give this afternoon. Those were not acorns puffing out Ed Wegmann's cheeks. He was bursting with a sweeping blanket denunciation of the entire unspeakable injustice heaped upon his client from March 1, 1967, moment-to-moment, up until this very minute. If the jury had not still been playing poker in their waiting room upstairs, I think he might just have let it out in one ringing explosion. He snapped out his answers with bare civility to his own co- attorney in the case: No, he had not been allowed in the B of I room with his client. No, there had been nothing about an alias on any report sheet, no alias, in fact, had been mentioned that evening. He also testified about his meeting with Shaw in one of the D.A.'s offices after Clay had been told he was being charged with the crime and was being placed under arrest. Eddie Wegmann said they'd kept the conversation to a minimum because he had been warned the room might be bugged. After Eddie Wegmann was excused, Sal Panzeca, the junior member of the defense team, was questioned by Irvin Dymond. Short, compact and snappy, Panzeca had been the first legal counsel to see Clay Shaw on the day of his arrest. He testified he'd told Louis Ivon and other members of the D.A.'s staff that Clay Shaw was not to be questioned and that he would, under no circumstances, answer questions. Panzeca also testified he believed the room they were in was bugged, that communication between him and Clay Shaw was mostly accomplished by writing questions and answers on a pad, adding, "I told him not even to say hello or goodbye to anyone." Now Clay Shaw took the stand--the jury was still out--and in a firm, clear voice began his testimony regarding the circumstances of his arrest. The press and spectators granted him complete silence and attention. Here was the Big Boy himself. Clay stuck to the questions asked him, never volunteering more information than was requested, as he testified that he had obeyed the orders of his attorneys and spoken to no one. In no uncertain terms, he testified he had signed a completely blank fingerprint card, had not been asked about an alias, had certainly never told anyone he had used an alias, and that his lawyer, Eddie Wegmann, had not been permitted to enter the B of I room with him. Under cross-examination by James Alcock, Clay got a laugh when he testified about giving information to an officer who typed up his original arrest sheet, before going to the B of I room. Clay said he had been standing three or four feet away from the booking officer and had not seen exactly what the man was typing. The judge asked, "Was there anything preventing you from seeing over the counter?" To this, the six-foot-four defendant replied in an easy going voice, "No, that's never been a problem with me." The spectators and press laughed, and order in the court was called. Clay Shaw also stood for no loose dangling ends. He had testified earlier that Habighorst told him it was necessary to sign the blank card in order to get bail, to which Clay said he replied, "In that case, I'll sign it." Now Alcock asked if Officer Habighorst had asked him any questions, to which Clay replied, "No." "You did not utter one word?" Alcock asked. Clay made no bones about correcting the attorney: "That was not my testimony. I said I was asked no questions." It was after the defendant was excused that the fun and fireworks began. Alcock sought to enter into evidence and before the jury--who had spent the afternoon upstairs--the fingerprint card and Habighorst's testimony. Dymond objected on the grounds that the witness testified he'd signed a blank card. This brought forth the no-nonsense ruling of Judge Haggerty. He had been wound up by the preceding testimony of two lawyers, the defendant, and three members of the New Orleans Police Department, all in direct conflict with Officer Habighorst's testimony. Now he faced James Alcock squarely from his bench, saying he would not allow the fingerprint card or the testimony of Officer Habighorst introduced into the trial. He would hold to this ruling, no matter whose testimony was to be believed. Either way, the judge claimed a foul. Two policemen had violated Shaw's constitutional rights, he said, by not permitting the defendant to have his lawyer with him during the fingerprinting--in direct contravention of the famed Escobedo decision, which allows an arrestee to have his attorney with him at all stages of the booking, fingerprinting, and questioning process. Judge Haggerty also announced that Officer *Habighorst* (and when he hit the name of the officer, the judge hit it hard) had violated in spirit the effect of the Miranda decision by not forewarning Clay Shaw of his right to remain silent. The judge went on to say Habighorst also violated Shaw's rights by asking him the alleged question about an alias, adding, now that he was revved up and clearing his mind of feelings built up by this afternoon's performance, "Even if he did [ask the question about an alias] it is not admissible" Judge Haggerty then spit out, "If Officer Habighorst *is* telling the truth--and I seriously doubt it!" Alcock leaped up from his chair at this remark, his cheeks instantly crimson and his voice highly shrill and trembling with anger as he shouted, "Are you passing on the credibility of a state witness in front of the press and the whole world?" Judge Haggerty jutted his head forward and said, "It's outside the presence of the jury, Mr. Alcock." He then sat back and spoke in a loud voice. "I don't care. The whole world can hear that I disbelieve Officer Habighorst." He gave Alcock a what-do-you-think-of-that look and then, as if to punctuate his feelings for all time and leave no doubt whatsoever, Judge Haggerty leaned forward once again and said, "I do not believe Officer Habighorst!" Here is an excerpt from above that might explain Habighorst's testimony: Officer Habighorst's brother had been driving across a bridge several years previously and gotten into a contretemps with another motorist. They stopped their cars, argued, and then Habighorst's brother had taken out a gun, shot and killed the man. Dymond, who defended the brother, succeeded in reducing the crime from murder to manslaughter and the defendant had served four years in prison. It was widely rumored that Officer Habighorst thought his brother should have gotten off scot free, and his feelings toward Dymond were not friendly. In an attempt not to crank up an already hostile witness, Billy Wegmann handled the questioning. Previous Relevant Blog Posts on Paul Bleau Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 17 Bleau doesn't tell his readers about Roger Craig's credibility problems. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 16 Bleau believes the Rose Cherami story. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 15 Bleau claims the Shaw jury believed there was a conspiracy in the JFK assassination. This is just not true. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 14 Bleau doesn't tell you everything about Lyndon Johnson's feelings towards the Warren Report. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 13 Bleau leaves out some important details about the beliefs of Burt Griffin. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 12 Bleau leaves out an important paragraph from Alfredda Scobey's article on the Warren Commission. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 11 Bleau misleads readers on the testimony of John Moss Whitten. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 10 Bleau gets it all wrong on Dr. George Burkley. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 9 Bleau doesn't tell the whole story about John Sherman Cooper. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 8 Bleau claims that J. Lee Rankin questioned the findings of the Warren Report. This is just not true. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 7 Bleau tries to make it appear that Dallas policeman James Leavelle had doubts that Oswald could be found guilty at a trial. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 6 Bleau gets it all wrong on the FBI Summary Report. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 5 Bleau discusses the conclusions of the HSCA but leaves out it most important finding. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 4 Bleau leaves out some important details about a Warren Commission staffer. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 3 Was Oswald a loner? Bleau says no, and then says yes. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 2 Bleau leaves out some important details about Malcolm Kilduff. Paul Bleau Chokes An introduction to Paul Bleau's new book,  Chokeholds . Paul Bleau on David Ferrie, the Pimp Was David Ferrie Clay Shaw's pimp? Paul Bleau and the IRS Man Did Lee Harvey Oswald have an escort? Paul Bleau and the Forger   Edward Girnus was in prison for forgery, and he told a fanciful story about Clay Shaw and Lee Harvey Oswald. Paul Bleau and the Three Tramps   Leander D'Avy told the HSCA he saw Oswald and Ferrie with the three tramps. Paul Bleau's Reign of Error   Bleau's analysis of Garrison's files is full of errors. Paul Bleau's Plots   Bleau believes there were seven plots against JFK before Dallas. Paul Bleau and the Supposed Chicago Plot Against JFK   Bolden's allegation that there was a plot against JFK in Chicago has changed over the years. "JFK: Destiny Betrayed" Misleads on Supposed Tampa 'Patsy'   There is no evidence that there was a plot against JFK in Tampa. "JFK Revisited" Misleads on the Supposed Chicago Plot   There is no evidence that there was a plot against JFK in Chicago.

I've already written eighteen blog posts about the book Chokeholds . But there is so much more to write about. Here is one story from the book that is completely fictional. Here is an excerpt from Chokeholds : (from Chapter 10: Sixty Years of Obstruction of Justice by Paul Bleau and Andrew Iler) About Larry Crafard: “Crafard had worked at Jack Ruby’s Carousel Club before he was seized by FBI men as he was hightailing it out of town the day after the assassination, having told someone, “They are not going to pin this on me!” In the interview, Warren asks Crafard what he did before he was a bartender. “I was a master sniper in the Marine Corps,” Crafard answered. The next question that Warren immediately asked was: “What kind of entertainment did they have at the club?”[549] Footnote 549 is as follows: Gaeton Fonzi, speech on receiving the Mary Ferrell-JFK Lancer Pioneer Award [21st November, 1998], https://spartacus-educational.com/JFKcrafard.htm It's a great story except that it's completely made up. Fonzi got this story from comedian Mort Sahl who included it in his act "Mort Sahl's America." Here is an excerpt from The New Yorker of April 25, 1994: His America turns out to be talk shows, movie studios, cocktail parties, and Presidential banquets, with an occasional detour into the Warren Report. In fact, he reads verbatim a snatch of Earl Warren and the then Representative Gerald Ford interviewing a barman, Curtis LaVerne Crafard, who had worked at Jack Ruby’s Carousel Club before he was seized by F.B.I. men as he hightailed it out of town the day after the Kennedy assassination, saying, “They are not going to pin this on me.” In the interview, Warren asks him what he did before he was a bartender. “I was a master sniper in the Marine Corps,” Crafard says. Warren’s next question is “What kind of entertainment did they have at the club? It’s the one pure moment of political comedy in a show that otherwise bears out one of Sahl’s best quips: “An intellectual in show business is like the smartest bear in the zoo.” Of course, this is not verbatim testimony from the Warren Commission. Crafard never said anything about being a master sniper, and he never thought that anything was being pinned on him. Here is the actual quote from Fonzi's speech : There is a brief glimpse, an illustration of the level at which that deceit was carried out, in an incident that occurred during the Warren Commission’s investigation. Commission chairman Earl Warren himself, with then Representative Gerald Ford at his side, was interviewing a barman, Curtis Laverne Crafard. Crafard had worked at Jack Ruby’s Carousel Club before he was seized by FBI men as he was hightailing it out of town the day after the assassination, having told someone, “They are not going to pin this on me.” In the interview, Warren asks Crafard what he did before he was a bartender. “I was a Master sniper in the Marine Corps,” Crafard answered. The next question that Warren immediately asked was: “What kind of entertainment did they have at the club?” You can read Crafard's testimony here , and here . You won't find anything about Crafard being a master sniper in the Marines. Did anybody do any fact checking for Chokeholds ? Previous Relevant Blog Posts on Chokeholds : Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 18 Chokeholds leaves out a lot of information about Aloysius Habighorst. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 17 Bleau doesn't tell his readers about Roger Craig's credibility problems. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 16 Bleau believes the Rose Cherami story. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 15 Bleau claims the Shaw jury believed there was a conspiracy in the JFK assassination. This is just not true. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 14 Bleau doesn't tell you everything about Lyndon Johnson's feelings towards the Warren Report. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 13 Bleau leaves out some important details about the beliefs of Burt Griffin. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 12 Bleau leaves out an important paragraph from Alfredda Scobey's article on the Warren Commission. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 11 Bleau misleads readers on the testimony of John Moss Whitten. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 10 Bleau gets it all wrong on Dr. George Burkley. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 9 Bleau doesn't tell the whole story about John Sherman Cooper. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 8 Bleau claims that J. Lee Rankin questioned the findings of the Warren Report. This is just not true. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 7 Bleau tries to make it appear that Dallas policeman James Leavelle had doubts that Oswald could be found guilty at a trial. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 6 Bleau gets it all wrong on the FBI Summary Report. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 5 Bleau discusses the conclusions of the HSCA but leaves out it most important finding. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 4 Bleau leaves out some important details about a Warren Commission staffer. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 3 Was Oswald a loner? Bleau says no, and then says yes. Paul Bleau Chokes, Part 2 Bleau leaves out some important details about Malcolm Kilduff. Paul Bleau Chokes An introduction to Paul Bleau's new book,  Chokeholds .

Dick Russell makes the claim in his book, The Man Who Knew Too Much , that Richard Case Nagell was taken to Moscow by the East Germans for questioning: (page 657) Little more is known about Nagell’s time behind the then Iron Curtain. In 1977 we were watching the traffic go by along Sunset Boulevard when Nagell told me that he had already put much of his historic tale on the record. “Do I have most of that?” I asked naively. “No,” Nagell replied. “The Soviets have a lot of it, in my own handwriting. “Oh,” I said, “from when you were in East Germany. “I didn’t spend all my time in East Germany,” Nagell said evenly. Isn't it interesting? Nagell never tells Dick Russell his full story, but he writes it down for the Soviets. A few years ago, Russell discussed Nagell at Judyth Vary Baker's 2018 conference in Dallas . Here is an excerpt from a transcript: (47:55) Russell : There's a lot of questions and a lot of things that still haven't surfaced in these East German documents. I know that there were 39 missing days. Nagell was held there for four months, and he was released in the fall of ’68 in a prisoner exchange where Wolfgang Vogel, who was a major spy master at the time for the for the communists, was very involved in negotiating this. And shortly … then there's a story in the Washington Post , no reference to the bank robbery or anything—attempted bank robbery, so called—but to this guy being released at the border. And so, Nagell’s last 39 days behind the Iron Curtain, and he told me that he wasn't only in East Berlin, East Germany, that he was taken to Moscow, and that he wrote out a confession, or if you call it that, but he wrote out all the reasons why he did what he did in walking into the bank. There is nothing in the Stasi files that indicates that Nagell was taken to Moscow. There was no need to question him there. Nagell told the East Germans that he was involved in a provocation against the Soviet Embassy in Mexico City in 1962. The East Germans checked with the Soviets who said that it never happened. That was the start of the East Germans realizing that Nagell was not being truthful and that he was seriously affected by his 1954 plane crash. If you go through the Stasi documents on Nagell, you will find that he didn't say much about the JFK assassination. He spoke a lot about American intelligence in the 1950s and his supposed work with the CIA in the 1960s. But he just repeated the basics of his story about Oswald and the assassination. In the end, the East Germans only believed what he said about 1950s American intelligence in the far east. They did not believe his stories about the CIA, the JFK assassination, and his supposed connection to the People's Republic of China. Click here to find out why Nagell shot up the bank in El Paso. You can read the entire Richard Case Nagell story in my new book, A Heritage of Nonsense: Jim Garrison's Tales of Mystery and Imagination. Additional Posts on Richard Case Nagell Richard Case Nagell's Stasi File A Wrap-Up of the Richard Case Nagell Story   Why do People Believe the Richard Case Nagell Story? The Importance of Richard Case Nagell to Some Conspiracy Theorists Was Richard Case Nagell the "Most Important Witness There Is"?   Jim Garrison and a few conspiracy theorists think Nagell is a very important witness. But is he really? Genesis of the Richard Case Nagell story Did David Kroman Crack the JFK Assassination Conspiracy?   David Kroman met Richard Case Nagell at the Springfield Medical Center for Federal Prisoners. Stephen Jaffe, a Garrison volunteer, wrote a memo, relating Nagell's story through the eyes and ears of David Kroman. Richard Case Nagell Shoots Up the State National Bank in El Paso...   Nagell was convicted of armed robbery and was sentenced to ten years, but his conviction was overturned because of startling new evidence. Richard Case Nagell and the JFK Assassination Did Richard Case Nagell Have Foreknowledge of Oswald and the JFK Assassination?   There is no credible evidence that Nagell had any foreknowledge of either Lee Harvey Oswald or the JFK assassination. Did Richard Case Nagell Meet Lee Harvey Oswald?   Nagell claims he met Oswald in Japan, Texas, Mexico City, and New Orleans. There is no credible evidence that he ever met Oswald. Did Richard Case Nagell Warn Fidel Castro about the Assassination?   Nagell went to Cuba and met with Fidel Castro and even played ping-pong with the man.   Insane Conspiracy Theories about Richard Case Nagell Who was Leon Oswald?   Richard Case Nagell said that he knew the two Oswalds - Lee Harvey and Leon. Some conspiracy theorists believe this madness. Richard Popkin Melds the Second Oswald Theory with the Richard Case Nagell Story Combine one part crazy and one part ridiculous and what do you come up with? An early attempt at a unified conspiracy theory of the JFK assassination. Paul Bleau's Plots   Was there a plot in Los Angeles against JFK? Two Smoking Guns of the Richard Case Nagell Story Is this Document the Smoking Gun on the Richard Case Nagell Story?   Nagell sent conspiracy theorist Dick Russell one page of a military intelligence file which seemed to indicate that he was monitoring Oswald and his wife on behalf of the CIA. But does the whole document really show that? Dick Russell's Second Smoking Gun on the Richard Case Nagell Story   Did Richard Case Nagell have an Oswald Military ID in his possession when he was arrested in September 1963? Richard Case Nagell and Jim Garrison Why Didn't Richard Case Nagell Testify at Clay Shaw's Trial?   Richard Case Nagell believes that he wasn't called to testify at Clay Shaw's trial because his testimony would have blown up Jim Garrison's case. Jim Garrison Discusses Richard Case Nagell   At a conference in September 1968, Garrison and his investigators discuss his face-to-face meeting with Nagell in New York City. Richard Case Nagell Sends Jim Garrison on a Wild-Goose Chase   William Martin, an Assistant District Attorney working for Jim Garrison, tried to retrieve a tape that Nagell said contained the voices of three JFK assassination conspirators. Richard Popkin Writes Garrison About Richard Case Nagell   Richard Popkin, author of "The Second Oswald," writes Jim Garrison about Richard Case Nagell. Garrison staffer Tom Bethell thought the Nagell lead was useless. Richard Case Nagell's Mental Health Richard Case Nagell's Lawsuit   A lawsuit by Nagell proves his mental issues. Richard Case Nagell's Fight for a Disability Pension   Nagell won a full disability pension in 1982 and the 60+ page court case provides complete details on his mental problems. Why Did Richard Case Nagell Shoot Up the First National Bank of El Paso? Richard Case Nagell told a psychiatrist why he shot up the bank in El Paso in 1963. Richard Case Nagell's Family Speaks about his Mental Health   The FBI spoke to Nagell's ex-wife, his mother, his sister, and one of his friends. They all agreed that Nagell had significant mental health problems. Richard Case Nagell Visits Europe in 1969...   Nagell visited the American consulates in Zurich and Barcelona in 1969. He was a deeply disturbed man. Richard Case Nagell in Europe, 1970 Edition   More shenanigans in Europe in 1970. Richard Case Nagell Visits Zurich His mental issues were apparent during this visit. Richard Case Nagell's Evidence Richard Case Nagell's Nonexistent Evidence   None of the so-called evidence that Nagell promised would materialize on his death has shown up. Did this evidence ever exist? Thomas Samoluk on Richard Case Nagell Samoluk was Deputy Director of the ARRB and he doesn't think much of the Nagell story. You can read the whole Nagell story in my new book, A Heritage of Nonsense: Jim Garrison's Tales of Mystery and Imagination .

Rick Perlstein has written an excellent article on the worship of the Kennedys. The reason this culture was so impervious to serial evidentiary disappointments was because it was motivated by a myth: If only the threads of this dastardly crime could be unraveled, it would finally reveal what kept America from becoming a land of milk and honey. A lot of apparently sophisticated people succumbed to that silly temptation. “Members of his own government felt he must be eliminated,” Martin Sheen confidently blurbed in a 2010 book, JFK and the Unspeakable , that did a great deal to keep that myth alive. Said Yoko Ono: “I cried all night reading it, and didn’t sleep a wink.” And many conspiracy authors today hold on to the belief that JFK was going to end the war in Vietnam and usher in a whole new world of peace and security: This reverence owes little to what JFK accomplished in office, which was very little. To be blunt, it has more to do with how he died. When I needed to get across the Kennedy assassination’s impact in my first book, I chose unadorned brevity: “The bottom had dropped out of the United States of America.” Had I chosen to elaborate, I might have documented all the ways that baby boomers, who were children when the trauma was visited upon them, remain in the denial phase of their mourning to this day. Their failure to mourn became a species of magic thinking. As Ettingermentum, who is 22, puts it: Boomers came to “believe that Kennedy was going to do something that some people really didn’t want him to do, that those people took drastic action to prevent it, and that this was followed by the end of the American Golden Age.” And there is the corollary view that America can only return to greatness when it uncovers the truth about the JFK assassination. Here is an excerpt from my book, Oliver Stone's Film-Flam: The Demagogue of Dealey Plaza : (pages 577 - 579) The crux of JFK: Destiny Betrayed is a jejune political theory that JFK was going to withdraw from Vietnam and usher in an era of peace and detente. The CIA and the military-industrial establishment had to stop this, and the only way was to have JFK killed. Emerging from this erroneous reading of history is a nihilist prescription, that unless we unravel the JFK conspiracy, the United States can never fully realize the promise of democracy. Here is author David Talbot: (54:11 in Episode 4 of Oliver Stone's documentary series JFK: Destiny Betrayed ) I think there's a direct thread between the events of 1963, and the kind of horror show that America is having to endure right now. And I think once you kill a president in broad daylight on the streets of an American city, and everyone knows that powerful forces did it, and it can never be solved, that crime, that sends a signal, not only to the American people, but to the American media, to American future leaders. And if American really wants a democratic society, then we should get to the bottom of this traumatic crime that continues to reverberate throughout American history. What kind of message is this? Telling people that their actions are useless unless the supposed JFK conspiracy and cover-up are revealed? Is this not a nihilist recipe for inaction? A minute later (55:30) the narrator asks this question: Can a democracy survive if it does not know its deepest secrets about the darkest days of its past? None of this is new. Stone is just recycling the discredited theories of Fletcher Prouty, the model for Mr. X in his film JFK. Here is what Prouty wrote in his article “The Shadow of Dallas” in the January 1974 issue of Genesis magazine: Until our government moves positively against this continuing cover-up of the three assassinations, and the many related crimes, we shall not have a free and unfettered country. The “offer they cannot refuse” hangs over the head of every man in office and over his every decision. Watergate has helped us considerably. It has shown us what the will of the people can do. But until the people of this country rise up and demand that the stains of Dallas be removed, we shall continue in an uncertain manner and with an unknown shadow over us all. This message of hopelessness is courtesy of a man who believes that Russian dictator Vladimir Putin is rational, calm, and thoughtful. This naive theory rests on the belief that JFK wanted to completely withdraw from Vietnam, an assertion that is not backed up by the evidence. Previous Relevant Blog Posts on RFK Jr. Sanitising a Paranoid Crank Efforts are being made to try and make RFK Jr. look sane Aaron Rodgers Should be RFK Jr.'s Running Mate! He spouts the same nonsense. RFK Jr.'s Super Bowl Ad was a Disgrace The ad puts RFK Jr. into a JFK television ad. What in the world happened to Robert F. Kennedy Jr.? Cartoonist Jack Ohman has a good op-ed in the San Francisco Chronicle . RFK Jr.'s Campaign of Conspiracy Theories Politifact has named RFK Jr's campaign of conspiracy theories their 2023 Lie of the Year. RFK Jr. Says Woody Harrelson's Dad was Involved in the JFK Assassination Just when I thought he couldn't get any wackier. Is RFK Jr. a 9/11 Truther?   Of course, RFK Jr. is unclear as to what happened on 9/11. RFK Jr. Puts Words in Allen Dulles's Mouth   RFK Jr. is interviewed by Tucker Carlson and tells a story about Allen Dulles that is just not true. RFK Jr. Lauds Jim Garrison   Of all the people to quote, RFK Jr chooses a charlatan. RFK Jr. Disrespects the Memory of his Father   RFK Jr. can't even quote his father properly. The RFK Jr. Bullshitosphere   An examination of RFK Jr's latest comments on Covid-19. RFK Jr. Names the Mastermind of the JFK Assassination   Finally, RFK Jr. gives us the name of one of the masterminds. RFK Jr. for President?   Two articles on RFK Jr. RFK Jr. Shows He's Not a Serious Candidate   His beliefs on Ukraine show that RFK Jr. is just not serious. Does RFK Jr. Have a Leaky Brain?   RFK has some wacky views on Wi-Fi. Did RFK Jr. Tell Tony Muhammad that the CDC is Killing Black and Latino Boys?   RFK Jr. has a disturbing relationship with the Nation of Islam. RFK Jr. is Taking Precautions to Avoid being Assassinated   Besides being paranoid, RFK Jr. is naive about the world in which we live. Russian Propaganda Outlets are Pushing RFK Jr.   Putin knows which candidate to back. RFK Jr. Misquotes JFK   He can't even quote his uncle properly. RFK Jr. on the JFK Assassination and Jim Garrison He gets the Garrison story all wrong. RFK Jr.'s JFK Assassination Guru Promotes Crackpot Theories   RFK Jr.'s favorite JFK assassination book is full of crackpot theories.