Lee Harvey Oswald feasibly had no consistent Rifle Practice

Despite supporting suppressed evidence and a feasibly small conspiracy, I do not support that most official evidence is tainted. However, key moments and official assertions are deficient in my view. Namely, the assertion by the Commission that Lee Harvey Oswald regularly practiced with his Carcano rifle. i. This idea while supported by many critics of conspiracy is not as reliable as some imagine.

In 1956, Lee Harvey Oswald achieved the rank of Sharpshooter once; officials consider this "a rather good shot". Yet in 1959, Oswald once qualified for the rank of Marksman, and this is considered "a fairly poor shot". ii. This would infer with increased practice and Marine instruction Oswald was able to hone his abilities. Yet it also reveals that without the regular practice or instruction, Oswald feasibly would revert to his prior "poor shot" status. Years pass with little evidence Oswald ever attempted to regain his former proficiency. Officials note Oswald hunting with his brother only three times before he leaves for Russia. iii.    

After his arriving in Russia Oswald did join a hunting club according to Marina, but never went the practice meetings. iv. During his stay in Russia, Oswald hunts "about six times." v. Oswald went on a single hunting trip with Marina; he did not want to take the rifle along. Mariana asserts he took the rifle because "...one of my friends was laughing at him and said," You have a gun hanging here and you never use it. Why don't you bring it along and see if you can use it." vi.

Marina later asserts he sold the hunting rifle upon his return to America. Oswald goes hunting a final time with his brother Robert using a borrowed rifle. During his years since leaving the Marines, he has actually fired a rifle on less than a dozen occasions. This does not resemble the highly proficient status critics attribute to Oswald.   

The Commission states distributor Crescent Firearms shipped the Carcano to Klein's Sporting Goods to have a scope mounted. It was a surplus military rifle, yet it did undergo a refurbishment and was test fired and found to be in working order and priced at 19.95. According to the Commission, the Carcano is shipped to A. Hidell. The rifle is sent to Texas on March 20, 1963. vii. Additionally, considering 2-7 days for delivery, Oswald received the weapon no earlier than March 22. On September 24, the Carcano was stored in Paine's garage wrapped in a blanket. viii. Thus, Oswald only had 6 months in which to practice.

Officials state Oswald fired at General Walker on April 10, 1963. This would imply Oswald had less than 18 days to prepare. He according to the Commission made the attempt and failed. He allegedly made a single missed shot upon the stationary Walker with time to aim. Marina further states Oswald buried and left the rifle multiple times before and after the Walker attack. These burials remove additional time.

Marina stated during testimony to the Commission that Oswald and she had a domestic incident about "10 to 12 days" after the Walker shooting. It occurs three days before they left for New Orleans. ix. Marina does not observe him with the weapon again until the summer of 1963. x. The Oswald family moves to New Orleans. Excluding the move time, Oswald now has just about 5 months left.

In New Orleans, many of his well-documented activities include, handing out fliers for the Fair Play for Cuba Committee, yet Oswald never attended a meeting. Federal Bureau of Investigations files reveal the group held all meetings in New York, no chapter existed in New Orleans, and Oswald was not a member. xi. He allegedly went to political meetings, possibly staged a public brawl, and faces arrest. Oswald requests and subsequently was interviewed by an agent of the FBI. No witness observes him firing a rifle in New Orleans.

The Commission states, "It appears from Mariana's testimony that Oswald may have sat on a screened in porch at night practicing with a telescopic sight and operating the bolt." xii. However, the infrequent dry firing that "may have" occurred is not practice. If Oswald dry fired on a consistent basis weekly it would offer advantages. Yet according to the only witness and the Commission's evidence, he did not. According to Marina Oswald when Bureau agents originally ask her in December if she observed Lee "practice" anywhere beyond the porch, Marina answered "in the negative". xiii.

Oswald and his family then return to Dallas, it is now September; Oswald has less than 24 days left to consistently practice. Marina states "Lee didn't tell me when he was going out to practice. I only remember one time distinctly that he went out because he took the bus." xiv. Subsequently Marina testifies, "I don't know where he practiced. I just think the bus goes to, went to Love Field." Commission Lead Counsel Rankin states "So the record will be clear on this...investigation has shown there is one place in the immediate neighborhood where there is gun practice carried on." However, if this is the case, it is merely a single occasion, not regular practice. xv.

Indeed Marina did testify that Oswald stated he was practicing with the rifle. Yet the evidence for this is not present. Consider that Oswald denied his guilt and ownership of the Carcano. Oswald also claimed to be a patsy, thus his many contending statements do infer he is not a credible witness in my view. Reasonably, we cannot value his word over the consistent evidence.

The statement of George De Mohrenschildt similar to Marina relies on Oswald's credibility. xvi We largely have Oswald's word he practiced, and that is not sufficient evidence. The Carcano is stored within a blanket according to Mr. Paine and Marina Oswald. Oswald travels to and from Mexico City and is out of time for practice. 

An FBI interview claimed Oswald was "observed" practicing at a local Dallas rifle range repeatedly in November. However the Commission would later dispel these claims, “...there was other evidence which prevented the Commission from reaching the conclusion that Lee Harvey Oswald the person these witnesses saw." xvii Oswald takes the concealed rifle and the morning of the assassination feasibly opens the blanket. Fibers noted on the Carcano found by investigators match the shirt Oswald is wearing on November 22, 1963. These fibers are clean and infer recent material transfer. xviii This forensic evidence supports the rifle has remained covered.

Despite the prior refurbishment Commission officials questioned, "Was the firing pin of the rifle replaced? Does the FBI know the availability of spare parts?" J. Edgar Hoover advises, "The assassination rifle has been examined and nothing was found to indicate that the firing pin had been replaced." Hoover also noted "the firing pin has been used extensively as shown by wear on the nose...further, the presence of rust...this rust would have been disturbed had the firing pin been changed subsequent to the formation of rust...the firing pin and spring are well oiled and the rust present necessarily must have formed prior to the oiling of these parts." xix

The residue and use the Commission attributes to Oswald was also from prior use. Evidence and testimony agree Oswald cleaned the weapon far more than he used it. Commission evidence demonstrates Oswald did not regularly use or practice with the Carcano. This inconsistency supports Oswald is a deficient sniper.  

 Sincerely,

C.  A. A. Savastano

i. Report of the President's Commission, Chapter IV, the Assassin, Oswald's Rifle Capability, p. 195


ii. Report of the President's Commission, Chapter IV, the Assassin, Oswald's Marine Training, p. 191


iii. Report of the Pres. Com., Chapter IV, Oswald's Rifle Practice Outside the Marines, p. 192


iv. Hearings of the President's Commission, Volume V, Testimony of Mrs. Lee Oswald, p. 405


v.  Report of the Pres. Com, Chapter IV, p.192


vi. Hearings of the Pres. Com., Vol. V, p. 406


vii. Report of the Pres. Com., Chapter IV, p.121


viii. Ibid, p. 128


ix. Hearings of the Pres. Com., Volume V, p.392


x. Report of the Pres. Com., Chapter IV, p.128


xi. Department of the Treasury Document, Secret Service Phone Report of ASAIC George Jukes, November 25, 1963, p. 0369 


xii. Report of the Pres. Com., Chapter IV, p.128


xiii. Hearings of the President's Commission, Volume XXIII, Commission Ex. No. 1789, 1790, pp. 402,403


xiv. Hearings of the Pres. Com., Volume V,   p. 397


xv. Ibid, p. 398


xvi. Report of the Pres. Com., Chapter IV, p. 192


xvii. Report of the Pres. Com., Chapter VI, Investigation of Other Activities, pp. 318-320 


xviii. Report of the Pres. Com., IV, p.124-125


xix. Hearings of the President's Commission, Volume XXVI, Commission Exhibit 2974, p. 455

Carmine, nice job.

Quick question and observation:You say "Marina later asserts he sold the hunting rifle upon his return to America." 

But this is what she said in testimony:

Mr. RANKIN. Do you know what happened to the gun that you had in Russia? Was it brought over to this country?

Mrs. OSWALD. No, he sold it there. I did not say so when I had the first interviews. You must understand this was my husband. I didn't want to say too much.

She reconfirms this in Marina and Lee. Mailer's book even states what he sold it for: 18 rubles.

Do you have a cite for her saying he brought it to the US?

On the dry firing issue... again, you have to consider Marina's credibility due to her inconsistent statements. Every single neighbor Lee had in New Orleans was interviewed by the FBI and questioned over anything they noticed. They all noticed a LOT. I mean, it's almost like every single one of them was deliberately keeping close tabs on him and know all of the comings and goings from the house, as well as all of his habits around the house. I'm not saying any of them WERE deliberately keeping an eye on him... but the difference between these neighbors noticed and the people he allegedly lived with in Dallas boarding houses is stark. Anyhow... bottom line. They nearly all noticed him sitting on the porch quite often - READING.

Greg,

          Marina indeed has credibility issues. Unfortunately she is the only witness to some portions of the Commission's asserted story. Gerald Ford asked what was done with the rifle from Russia when they returned to America and Marina says "I think he sold it". This vague statement in the Hearings is the source I used. I have no doubt it might have been sold prior but I just referenced that specific answer. Hope it did not cause too much confusion. I attempted to use only the Commission's sources to refute its findings in this article. Seems poetically just. Hope your well.


President's Commission Hearings, Volume V, Testimony of Mrs. Lee Oswald Resumed, p. 405

Carmine Savastano wrote:In 1956, Lee Harvey Oswald achieved the rank of Sharpshooter once; officials consider this "a rather poor shot". Yet in 1959, Oswald once qualified for the rank of Marksman, and this is considered "a fairly good shot". ii. This would infer with increased practice and Marine instruction Oswald was able to hone his abilities. Yet it also reveals that without the regular practice or instruction, Oswald feasibly would revert to his prior "poor shot" status. Years pass with little evidence Oswald ever attempted to regain his former proficiency. Officials note Oswald hunting with his brother only three times before he leaves for Russia. iii.    

I think you have this reversed, Carmine. First there are three levels of marksmanship in the Marine Corps (highest to lowest): Expert, Sharpshooter, and Marksman. In 1956, Oswald scored at the Sharpshooter level while in boot camp where a Marine receives a great deal of training and practice. In 1959 when he re-qualified, he got a lower score putting him in the Marksman category. This means, score-wise, his skills diminished, although, according to the testimony of Major Anderson, there may have been extenuating circumstances for the lower score. i.
 
Bottom line: a Sharpshooter is a better shot than a Marksman. During my son's four years in the Marine Corps, he scored at the Expert level twice. He's real good.
 
i. http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?absPageId=20312

Carmine Savastano wrote:Greg,

          Marina indeed has credibility issues. Unfortunately she is the only witness to some portions of the Commission's asserted story. Gerald Ford asked what was done with the rifle from Russia when they returned to America and Marina says "I think he sold it". This vague statement in the Hearings is the source I used. I have no doubt it might have been sold prior but I just referenced that specific answer. Hope it did not cause too much confusion. I attempted to use only the Commission's sources to refute its findings in this article. Seems poetically just. Hope your well.


President's Commission Hearings, Volume V, Testimony of Mrs. Lee Oswald Resumed, p. 405

Thanks Carmine.

I think what you've quoted wasn't (in this instance) deliberately misleading on her part - just an incomplete answer. She did give the complete answer to Rankin. "No, he sold it there."

Stan,

        Thanks, corrected.

Good post. 

It's worth noting that New Orleans in 1963 had relatively strict gun laws. Unlike Dallas, Oswald would've had to be a member of a club to practice with his rifle in public.

So based on this and Marina's testimony, there is no confirmed evidence of Oswald practicing with a rifle between April of 63' and 11/22/63. 

It's also important to note that the Carcano was a piece of junk and not as easy to operate as the rifles Oswald practiced with while in the Marines.

None of this proves Oswald wasn't involved in shooting Kennedy. However, it raises questions given the relative accuracy of the shooting at Kennedy on 11/22.

IMO ("in my humble n00b opinion"), Oswald's actions, practice history, itinerary, and condition upon arrest (like the failure of the paraffin tests and so on), are consistent with the actions of a breakdown guy.

NOT consistent (at all) with the actions of a shooter.

If Oswald was a shooter, he was dumb as a skunk and he was completely unprepared, no one would have coached him to be such an idiot.

However the breakdown guys, they're the one who typically sit there playing with the rifle for a few days before the job, to make sure they can do it efficiently and in their sleep.

I'm gonna "coin a phrase" here - Brown Coat Man. He's the guy we want. He's the guy the inmates saw through the open TSBD window, playing with the rifle, and he's the guy four eyewitnesses saw from the street, and he's the guy two other eyewitness saw running from the TSBD after the shooting.

I posit that Oswald was the breakdown guy for Brown Coat Man.

(that's "not yet a theory", just a question I'd like to ask a computer or something)

nonsqtr wrote:IMO ("in my humble n00b opinion"), Oswald's actions, practice history, itinerary, and condition upon arrest (like the failure of the paraffin tests and so on), are consistent with the actions of a breakdown guy.

NOT consistent (at all) with the actions of a shooter.

If Oswald was a shooter, he was dumb as a skunk and he was completely unprepared, no one would have coached him to be such an idiot.

However the breakdown guys, they're the one who typically sit there playing with the rifle for a few days before the job, to make sure they can do it efficiently and in their sleep.

I'm gonna "coin a phrase" here - Brown Coat Man. He's the guy we want. He's the guy the inmates saw through the open TSBD window, playing with the rifle, and he's the guy four eyewitnesses saw from the street, and he's the guy two other eyewitness saw running from the TSBD after the shooting.

I posit that Oswald was the breakdown guy for Brown Coat Man.

(that's "not yet a theory", just a question I'd like to ask a computer or something)

Brian, is it your opinion that Oswald might have brought the rifle into the TSBD that day via Frazier? Is that what a breakdown guy also does?
The reason I ask is because I don't think Oswald had anything to do with anything that day. That is just my own humble opinion and it has been known to be off more times than not. I believe his only role that day was that of a patsy but wasn't advised of it. Its something he realised later on.
Don't get me wrong. I think Oswald didn't get the job at the TSBD by accident and he had his reasons for being there, but I don't think he knew about what was to happen that day. He comes across too dumbstruck for that IMHO.
Also it would be interesting to know what others think about how long Oswald was meant to survive as the patsy or if he was meant to survive at all. I'd like to ask a computer that as well. 

Paul Klein wrote:

nonsqtr wrote:IMO ("in my humble n00b opinion"), Oswald's actions, practice history, itinerary, and condition upon arrest (like the failure of the paraffin tests and so on), are consistent with the actions of a breakdown guy.

NOT consistent (at all) with the actions of a shooter.

If Oswald was a shooter, he was dumb as a skunk and he was completely unprepared, no one would have coached him to be such an idiot.

However the breakdown guys, they're the one who typically sit there playing with the rifle for a few days before the job, to make sure they can do it efficiently and in their sleep.

I'm gonna "coin a phrase" here - Brown Coat Man. He's the guy we want. He's the guy the inmates saw through the open TSBD window, playing with the rifle, and he's the guy four eyewitnesses saw from the street, and he's the guy two other eyewitness saw running from the TSBD after the shooting.

I posit that Oswald was the breakdown guy for Brown Coat Man.

(that's "not yet a theory", just a question I'd like to ask a computer or something)

Brian, is it your opinion that Oswald might have brought the rifle into the TSBD that day via Frazier? Is that what a breakdown guy also does?
The reason I ask is because I don't think Oswald had anything to do with anything that day. That is just my own humble opinion and it has been known to be off more times than not. I believe his only role that day was that of a patsy but wasn't advised of it. Its something he realised later on.
Don't get me wrong. I think Oswald didn't get the job at the TSBD by accident and he had his reasons for being there, but I don't think he knew about what was to happen that day. He comes across too dumbstruck for that IMHO.
Also it would be interesting to know what others think about how long Oswald was meant to survive as the patsy or if he was meant to survive at all. I'd like to ask a computer that as well. 

Hi Paul - erm... "I don't have an opinion yet, I'm just a n00b".

(whew, that was close)   

Yes, I'm with you. Let me rephrase: Oswald was "at most" a breakdown guy. How's that?

nonsqtr wrote:

Paul Klein wrote:

nonsqtr wrote:IMO ("in my humble n00b opinion"), Oswald's actions, practice history, itinerary, and condition upon arrest (like the failure of the paraffin tests and so on), are consistent with the actions of a breakdown guy.

NOT consistent (at all) with the actions of a shooter.

If Oswald was a shooter, he was dumb as a skunk and he was completely unprepared, no one would have coached him to be such an idiot.

However the breakdown guys, they're the one who typically sit there playing with the rifle for a few days before the job, to make sure they can do it efficiently and in their sleep.

I'm gonna "coin a phrase" here - Brown Coat Man. He's the guy we want. He's the guy the inmates saw through the open TSBD window, playing with the rifle, and he's the guy four eyewitnesses saw from the street, and he's the guy two other eyewitness saw running from the TSBD after the shooting.

I posit that Oswald was the breakdown guy for Brown Coat Man.

(that's "not yet a theory", just a question I'd like to ask a computer or something)

Brian, is it your opinion that Oswald might have brought the rifle into the TSBD that day via Frazier? Is that what a breakdown guy also does?
The reason I ask is because I don't think Oswald had anything to do with anything that day. That is just my own humble opinion and it has been known to be off more times than not. I believe his only role that day was that of a patsy but wasn't advised of it. Its something he realised later on.
Don't get me wrong. I think Oswald didn't get the job at the TSBD by accident and he had his reasons for being there, but I don't think he knew about what was to happen that day. He comes across too dumbstruck for that IMHO.
Also it would be interesting to know what others think about how long Oswald was meant to survive as the patsy or if he was meant to survive at all. I'd like to ask a computer that as well. 

Hi Paul - erm... "I don't have an opinion yet, I'm just a n00b".

(whew, that was close)   

Yes, I'm with you. Let me rephrase: Oswald was "at most" a breakdown guy. How's that?

Fair enough, Brian.
I believe the fact that the Commission went out of its way to highlight Oswald's practice with a rifle highlights how little confidence they had he was the shooter. I mean they asked all and sundry about Oswald and his rifle like Greg has already mentioned. Even George De Mons wife was asked what Marina had said about it. If you recall she mentioned the absurd story that Marina had told her how Oswald would stroll June in her pram to the local park and he would practice shooting leaves. WTF!
It seems it was a case of any practice makes perfect for the WC.

Carmine Savastano wrote:Despite supporting suppressed evidence and a feasibly small conspiracy, I do not support that most official evidence is tainted. However, key moments and official assertions are deficient in my view. Namely, the assertion by the Commission that Lee Harvey Oswald regularly practiced with his Carcano rifle. i. This idea while supported by many critics of conspiracy is not as reliable as some imagine.

In 1956, Lee Harvey Oswald achieved the rank of Marskman once; officials consider this "a rather poor shot". Yet in 1959, Oswald once qualified for the rank of Sharpshooter, and this is considered "a fairly good shot". ii. This would infer with increased practice and Marine instruction Oswald was able to hone his abilities. Yet it also reveals that without the regular practice or instruction, Oswald feasibly would revert to his prior "poor shot" status. Years pass with little evidence Oswald ever attempted to regain his former proficiency. Officials note Oswald hunting with his brother only three times before he leaves for Russia. iii.    

After his arriving in Russia Oswald did join a hunting club according to Marina, but never went the practice meetings. iv. During his stay in Russia, Oswald hunts "about six times." v. Oswald went on a single hunting trip with Marina; he did not want to take the rifle along. Mariana asserts he took the rifle because "...one of my friends was laughing at him and said," You have a gun hanging here and you never use it. Why don't you bring it along and see if you can use it." vi.

Marina later asserts he sold the hunting rifle upon his return to America. Oswald goes hunting a final time with his brother Robert using a borrowed rifle. During his years since leaving the Marines, he has actually fired a rifle on less than a dozen occasions. This does not resemble the highly proficient status critics attribute to Oswald.   

The Commission states distributor Crescent Firearms shipped the Carcano to Klein's Sporting Goods to have a scope mounted. It was a surplus military rifle, yet it did undergo a refurbishment and was test fired and found to be in working order and priced at 19.95. According to the Commission, the Carcano is shipped to A. Hidell. The rifle is sent to Texas on March 20, 1963. vii. Additionally, considering 2-7 days for delivery, Oswald received the weapon no earlier than March 22. On September 24, the Carcano was stored in Paine's garage wrapped in a blanket. viii. Thus, Oswald only had 6 months in which to practice.

Officials state Oswald fired at General Walker on April 10, 1963. This would imply Oswald had less than 18 days to prepare. He according to the Commission made the attempt and failed. He allegedly made a single missed shot upon the stationary Walker with time to aim. Marina further states Oswald buried and left the rifle multiple times before and after the Walker attack. These burials remove additional time.

Marina stated during testimony to the Commission that Oswald and she had a domestic incident about "10 to 12 days" after the Walker shooting. It occurs three days before they left for New Orleans. ix. Marina does not observe him with the weapon again until the summer of 1963. x. The Oswald family moves to New Orleans. Excluding the move time, Oswald now has just about 5 months left.

In New Orleans, many of his well-documented activities include, handing out fliers for the Fair Play for Cuba Committee, yet Oswald never attended a meeting. Federal Bureau of Investigations files reveal the group held all meetings in New York, no chapter existed in New Orleans, and Oswald was not a member. xi. He allegedly went to political meetings, possibly staged a public brawl, and faces arrest. Oswald requests and subsequently was interviewed by an agent of the FBI. No witness observes him firing a rifle in New Orleans.

The Commission states, "It appears from Mariana's testimony that Oswald may have sat on a screened in porch at night practicing with a telescopic sight and operating the bolt." xii. However, the infrequent dry firing that "may have" occurred is not practice. If Oswald dry fired on a consistent basis weekly it would offer advantages. Yet according to the only witness and the Commission's evidence, he did not. According to Marina Oswald when Bureau agents originally ask her in December if she observed Lee "practice" anywhere beyond the porch, Marina answered "in the negative". xiii.

Oswald and his family then return to Dallas, it is now September; Oswald has less than 24 days left to consistently practice. Marina states "Lee didn't tell me when he was going out to practice. I only remember one time distinctly that he went out because he took the bus." xiv. Subsequently Marina testifies, "I don't know where he practiced. I just think the bus goes to, went to Love Field." Commission Lead Counsel Rankin states "So the record will be clear on this...investigation has shown there is one place in the immediate neighborhood where there is gun practice carried on." However, if this is the case, it is merely a single occasion, not regular practice. xv.

Indeed Marina did testify that Oswald stated he was practicing with the rifle. Yet the evidence for this is not present. Consider that Oswald denied his guilt and ownership of the Carcano. Oswald also claimed to be a patsy, thus his many contending statements do infer he is not a credible witness in my view. Reasonably, we cannot value his word over the consistent evidence.

The statement of George De Mohrenschildt similar to Marina relies on Oswald's credibility. xvi We largely have Oswald's word he practiced, and that is not sufficient evidence. The Carcano is stored within a blanket according to Mr. Paine and Marina Oswald. Oswald travels to and from Mexico City and is out of time for practice. 

An FBI interview claimed Oswald was "observed" practicing at a local Dallas rifle range repeatedly in November. However the Commission would later dispel these claims, “...there was other evidence which prevented the Commission from reaching the conclusion that Lee Harvey Oswald the person these witnesses saw." xvii Oswald takes the concealed rifle and the morning of the assassination feasibly opens the blanket. Fibers noted on the Carcano found by investigators match the shirt Oswald is wearing on November 22, 1963. These fibers are clean and infer recent material transfer. xviii This forensic evidence supports the rifle has remained covered.

Despite the prior refurbishment Commission officials questioned, "Was the firing pin of the rifle replaced? Does the FBI know the availability of spare parts?" J. Edgar Hoover advises, "The assassination rifle has been examined and nothing was found to indicate that the firing pin had been replaced." Hoover also noted "the firing pin has been used extensively as shown by wear on the nose...further, the presence of rust...this rust would have been disturbed had the firing pin been changed subsequent to the formation of rust...the firing pin and spring are well oiled and the rust present necessarily must have formed prior to the oiling of these parts." xix

The residue and use the Commission attributes to Oswald was also from prior use. Evidence and testimony agree Oswald cleaned the weapon far more than he used it. Commission evidence demonstrates Oswald did not regularly use or practice with the Carcano. This inconsistency supports Oswald is a deficient sniper.  

 Sincerely,

C.  A. A. Savastano

i. Report of the President's Commission, Chapter IV, the Assassin, Oswald's Rifle Capability, p. 195


ii. Report of the President's Commission, Chapter IV, the Assassin, Oswald's Marine Training, p. 191


iii. Report of the Pres. Com., Chapter IV, Oswald's Rifle Practice Outside the Marines, p. 192


iv. Hearings of the President's Commission, Volume V, Testimony of Mrs. Lee Oswald, p. 405


v.  Report of the Pres. Com, Chapter IV, p.192


vi. Hearings of the Pres. Com., Vol. V, p. 406


vii. Report of the Pres. Com., Chapter IV, p.121


viii. Ibid, p. 128


ix. Hearings of the Pres. Com., Volume V, p.392


x. Report of the Pres. Com., Chapter IV, p.128


xi. Department of the Treasury Document, Secret Service Phone Report of ASAIC George Jukes, November 25, 1963, p. 0369 


xii. Hearings of the President's Commission, Volume XXIII, Commission Exhibit No. 1789, 1790, pp. 402,403


xiii. Hearings of the President's Commission, Volume XXIII, Commission Ex. No. 1789, 1790, pp. 402,403


xiv. Hearings of the Pres. Com., Volume V,   p. 397


xv. Ibid, p. 398


xvi. Report of the Pres. Com., Chapter IV, p. 192


xvii. Report of the Pres. Com., Chapter VI, Investigation of Other Activities, pp. 318-320 


xviii. Report of the Pres. Com., IV, p.124-125


xix. Hearings of the President's Commission, Volume XXVI, Commission Exhibit 2974, p. 455

Carmine, this is a great post. And I didn't mean to make light of it. (Just having a little fun, that's all, hopefully it wasn't perceived as a neg). I'd like to ask you something - and it may seem unrelated at first, but that's why I'm asking.

Are you familiar with Robert Morrow, and his story of the four specially ordered rifles from Eladio del Valle? What do you know about the research community's take on that story, is there anything I may not be aware of that tends to cast doubt on that story?

Reason I'm asking - is Morrow makes specific mention of rifles that are being modified to be "easily disassembled". Correct me if I'm wrong, but part of the concept of "easy disassembly" also relates to the concept of "small size" as it relates to "portability". The only reason you'd want something "easy to disassemble" is if you need to move it somewhere on short notice - 'cause otherwise you just give it to Jack's Rifle Shop and let them worry about it, right? And if all you need is a small package, then you don't need "ease", you just need "small". Ease means, you're going to be breaking it down either frequently or in a tight time frame.

This whole thing with the curtain rods is most interesting. There were "curtain rods", apparently. There are "many" (several) reports about Oswald carrying the curtain rods (including one where he's supposedly hitch-hiking and gets picked up) - and in all cases the package with the curtain rods is reported to be "smaller than" the length of a broken-down Carcano. (I seem to remember reading 20", 22", like that, "two feet or less" I remember reading somewhere - which dovetails with everything everyone else said, Frazier, Randle, all of the above - the package was too small to be an ordinary broken-down Carcano).

But wherever "Oswald" is taking this thing, it's not to the house, right? (Probably not, according to all we know including the pieces you cited about Marina). And it's "probably" not to his room either, otherwise nosy old Mrs. Roberts would have noticed. It's "somewhere else". What else do we know about the endpoints of those curtain rod stories?

The other important thing is, Oswald had no cleaning kit! If he was cleaning the rifle, he must have had a cleaning kit, right? But he didn't. What does that tell us? (He had no ammo either, by the way - neither rifle ammo nor revolver ammo - no ammo, no cleaning kit, and only a 12 dollar rusted-out WW2-surplus piece-o'-junk mail order rifle).

The interesting thing about the Carcano is the 6.5 mm ammo. Apparently they used to lovingly (jokingly) call it "the Humanitarian Rifle" during the war, because the bullets were well jacketed and almost never came apart. They went "through" stuff, they didn't fragment - and they didn't make firecracker noises either. "Humanitarian". Can't hear it, can't even barely feel it. Not the kind of thing that could hit you in the right temporal or parietal area and make the cerebellum appear on the operating table. You gotta think about that one - if you know anything about brain trauma, that is a violent f'in hit, you almost never see anything like that in the ER. You even almost never see anything like that on the battlefield! This is allegedly a glancing shot that hit the brain with such force that it made the cerebellum come up all the way from the brainstem out through the top of the head. Dude... that is... violent. Very forceful. I'm pretty sure that waren't no Carcano bullet, gnome sain'? No dinky little 6.5 mm fragment is going to scoop out a part of the brain that's attached by wires, and deposit it somewhere else. That just doesn't happen.

Maybe Oswald really did have something in those curtain rod packages. Maybe he thought it was something special too (after all, he seemed to be taking really good care of those packages, right? Always kept 'em wrapped up and close by, was "diligent" with them). Hm. Maybe we ought to be looking at this from a different angle. What are the job roles in a "hit" like that? If a guy's going to be preparing for such a job (assuming he knows it's coming, a few days in advance), what does he have to do? If the designated assassination rifle is in one place and he's in another, what does he have to carry back and forth to get his job done? (The ammo? The cleaning kit? Spare parts? I dunno...) How about if his job is just to get something to the site - something that works? A gun or some ammo or something like that? Maybe he has no shooting role at all - and maybe Mr. Brown Coat Man is just bein' nice to him as a n00b, letting him play with the rifle for a while like Files says Nicoletti did for him - that's the stuff legends are made of - yuk  

Something's definitely up with those curtain rod packages, that's a pretty odd thing to be carrying around town. (Especially if you're working in a Book Depository, heck, you could just put stuff in a big ol' box and tell people it's books and they'd believe you). And the bit about the bag is pretty odd too (both the bit "in" the book depository, and the bit outside it with the undeliverable mail and all that). The bag that the FBI "found" is allegedly much bigger than the bag Oswald was carrying around town - almost twice as long! So, that couldn't have been the "curtain rod bag", right? (Even though that's what the Warren Commission seems to want us to believe). The curtain rod bag must have been "some other bag", and they didn't seem to find anything appropriate when they searched Oswald's various hideouts - so... what happened to the "curtain rod bag"? It went in but it didn't come out, kinda thing?

Paul Klein wrote:

nonsqtr wrote:

Paul Klein wrote:

nonsqtr wrote:IMO ("in my humble n00b opinion"), Oswald's actions, practice history, itinerary, and condition upon arrest (like the failure of the paraffin tests and so on), are consistent with the actions of a breakdown guy.

NOT consistent (at all) with the actions of a shooter.

If Oswald was a shooter, he was dumb as a skunk and he was completely unprepared, no one would have coached him to be such an idiot.

However the breakdown guys, they're the one who typically sit there playing with the rifle for a few days before the job, to make sure they can do it efficiently and in their sleep.

I'm gonna "coin a phrase" here - Brown Coat Man. He's the guy we want. He's the guy the inmates saw through the open TSBD window, playing with the rifle, and he's the guy four eyewitnesses saw from the street, and he's the guy two other eyewitness saw running from the TSBD after the shooting.

I posit that Oswald was the breakdown guy for Brown Coat Man.

(that's "not yet a theory", just a question I'd like to ask a computer or something)

Brian, is it your opinion that Oswald might have brought the rifle into the TSBD that day via Frazier? Is that what a breakdown guy also does?
The reason I ask is because I don't think Oswald had anything to do with anything that day. That is just my own humble opinion and it has been known to be off more times than not. I believe his only role that day was that of a patsy but wasn't advised of it. Its something he realised later on.
Don't get me wrong. I think Oswald didn't get the job at the TSBD by accident and he had his reasons for being there, but I don't think he knew about what was to happen that day. He comes across too dumbstruck for that IMHO.
Also it would be interesting to know what others think about how long Oswald was meant to survive as the patsy or if he was meant to survive at all. I'd like to ask a computer that as well. 

Hi Paul - erm... "I don't have an opinion yet, I'm just a n00b".

(whew, that was close)   

Yes, I'm with you. Let me rephrase: Oswald was "at most" a breakdown guy. How's that?

Fair enough, Brian.
I believe the fact that the Commission went out of its way to highlight Oswald's practice with a rifle highlights how little confidence they had he was the shooter. I mean they asked all and sundry about Oswald and his rifle like Greg has already mentioned. Even George De Mons wife was asked what Marina had said about it. If you recall she mentioned the absurd story that Marina had told her how Oswald would stroll June in her pram to the local park and he would practice shooting leaves. WTF!
It seems it was a case of any practice makes perfect for the WC.

Kids with PTSD? Yikes, poor June. She seems normal in that video, I dunno... (gasp)   

Brian,

        Your assessment of a break down weapon being used is possible. I agree a feasible conspiracy occurred based on the substantial contending evidence. I'm a conspiracy minimalist and contend a small group could have undertaken the plot. Most officials would seek to cover it up to protect themselves and their incompetence. Most others in my view would have unknowing pawns, as is usually the case in many official and criminal actions. While it upsets some we must also concede in light of no conclusive evidence that it is possible Oswald fired. Yet it is highly improbable. 

As the great Bill Hicks stated, the 6th floor Museum is incredibly accurate because Oswald is not in the window.

Carmine Savastano wrote:Brian,

        Your assessment of a break down weapon being used is possible. I agree a feasible conspiracy occurred based on the substantial contending evidence. I'm a conspiracy minimalist and contend a small group could have undertaken the plot. Most officials would seek to cover it up to protect themselves and their incompetence. Most others in my view would have unknowing pawns, as is usually the case in many official and criminal actions. While it upsets some we must also concede in light of no conclusive evidence that it is possible Oswald fired. Yet it is highly improbable. 

As the great Bill Hicks stated, the 6th floor Museum is incredibly accurate because Oswald is not in the window.

Hi Carmine - heh heh that's funny, that's exactly the word I would have used too - "incredibly" accurate!   

Yes, that makes sense to me too. If I had my 'druthers (if I were planning such a thing) I'd want to limit scope.

But "scope" is a very relative term - I mean, for someone like me, a Giancana-type or even a corporate CEO is a big deal, y'know, jet-setting, interests all over the world, snap your fingers and make money move from Bombay to Paraguay, that kind of thing. But if you're there, "scope" is what's in front of you. It's what you "can" do. It's the assets you actually "do" have. For someone like that, "increasing scope" doesn't necessarily mean adding geography, it just means cluttering the playing field. And that concept there, "clutter", can be used strategically. Battlefield clutter can be used to advantage.

Well, okay - so let's run with the "minimalist" concept for a minute. One of the biggest pieces of contending evidence there, would be the Chauncey Holt story. I don't know what kind of confidence you place in that, but if it's true it would seem to indicate the scope was pretty vast. Well.... at least that's how it would seem to a peon like me on the ground. Chauncey Holt tells the story about this guy Twombly, who was first based overseas as some kind of sugar-planation soda-bottling guy, but then became a (corrupt) banker in Fullerton CA. The orders for Chauncey's badges supposedly came down from Twombly, who was a CIA assets, and on paper that kind of activity would fall within a specific budget in the CIA, it would have to be charged to "operations not plans" or some such thing. (That's the kind of thing EH Hunt supposedly did, move money around so it could be more freely used in the field - which links him to black funds and the rest).

I'm thinking, that if the CIA was involved, the scope was indeed "vast". (Plus we have that very oddball story about Rose Cheramie... gee, there's that narcotics thing again... hm...). So let us consider a few possibilities in this area - first of all, Johnny Roselli was wearing an Army uniform at that point, courtesy of the CIA - so he was practically an insider - "all but" an insider. Did he have any authority to initiate operations or plans, or spend any money? Well, I'm guessing "yes" on the money, because apparently they were flying him around the country on military transport planes so he could more easily do business with Santos Trafficante down in Miami, y'know...

So I guess this "badges" thing would be the low hanging fruit when considering the size of a possible conspiracy. If you believe that there were "fake" Secret Service agents on the knoll, then you almost have to believe that they had badges, which means they had to come from someplace, which means someone had to make 'em. If Chauncey Holt is telling the truth, then the orders came down "through" the CIA, so either someone like Roselli managed to slip in an order or two, or, someone high up in the CIA was in it up to their nipples. My question is: where did the MONEY for the badges come from? In other words, from what I glean from Chauncey's story, the company he was working at (LA Stamp & Stationery) treated the special request "just like a regular order" except they tried to get it done a little faster - and then Chauncey relates how "because" they couldn't get 'em done fast enough, they ended up having to hand-deliver them. All this costs money - who paid? The CIA? Or was this one of those cases where the mob bosses were doing their patriotic duty "for free" (which they'd done many times before)?

And, we could do this the other way too. Let's say Chauncey Holt is lying through his teeth, and there was no mob or CIA involvement, and we're back to looking for a "small conspiracy". Who would be your favorite candidates? I posted something just a minute ago about Bernard Weissman, but more specifically about the people in the John Birch Society who funded his full-page ad and gave him the "task" of placing it in the newspaper and paying for it. Are you thinking along the lines of something like this, a right-wing group maybe, or a group of rich but disgruntled oilmen "funding" such a group of political malcontents? There were plenty of people who said "good" when Kennedy got shot, and some of 'em were even saying "I hope they get Jackie too". There was a lot of hate goin' around in the South in the early 60's.

I tend to favor a somewhat larger scope just for one main reason: because the Giancana types are very good with people, and personalities. In this JFK story there's all kinds of people running around who seem to want to be big shots - like, maybe Ruby, or maybe Oswald himself. And, the mobsters know how to use people like that - they were skilled at the art long before Sidney Gottlieb came along. The angry political types in the suburbs, they're mostly kinda "less skilled" in this particular area, they'll give a guy a rifle without even thinking he might be an FBI informant (happens all the time, I can't even believe our local FBI busted like three dozen murder-for-hire efforts in the last few months, and in every case the guy turned out to be an FBI agent, so like, we gotta a lotta pissed off but pretty dumb people runnin' around, it seems).

My observation is that most of the wanna-be big-shots in this story are already in some kind of "role", and in many cases that role seems to be "perfect", it seems to fit the personality perfectly. Jack Ruby as a nightclub owner - perfect! (With Eva behind the scenes, that's even more perfect!) If I were to venture a guess I'd guess that some of these people were "placed" in these specific positions. Even Chauncey Holt talks about that, the way the mob would try to "find" something for you where you could succeed. They knew that everyone's different, so they're place you where you had talents. If you liked numbers they'd make you a bookie or an accountant, and if you liked hacking people up there was a place for you too. Everyone could succeed and make money, everyone had a place. The only thing you couldn't do is talk. And, that's what we have now, right? "No one talked", they were all too scared. (Well, they didn't have any place to run to, is what it was - we had the double whammy from the mob on one side and the government CYA'ers on the other).

The other thing that's been leaping out at me from these timelines is how much of an "element of chance" there is in a lot of this stuff. Sheer luck. If they'd moved Oswald ten seconds earlier, if Vickie Adams had waited another five seconds at the window, if Helen Markham... y'know... so, I've been searching for a conspiracy "template" that allows a wide latitude in the actions of the individuals. One whose success does not depend on the success or failure of any single participant. That's a tall order, there aren't many scenarios like that (that I can think of).

So, I'm kinda back to, "the best they could do was that party on the 21st", if that's for real then that would be most of the scope right there, yes? Herminio Diaz was supposed to be there, waiting for Chauncey and them - and Yaras, he was there - and Braden/Brading, and innocent-sounding types like Ed Meyers from NY (who owned a Pepsi-Cola bottling franchise and who was registered at the Adolphus Hotel right across the street from the Carousel Club) and even Jack Lawrence (supposedly, in disguise) - but the interesting thing being "not" LHO and "not" JD Tippit. I don't suppose there's a manifest lying around somewhere in Doris Day's old storage locker? Nah... Another interesting connection on this one though, is that Lawrence Meyers who was also there that day, had a son Ralph who was in army intelligence, stationed at the U-2 base in Turkey where Gary Powers was flying out of. When Ralph left the army, he went to work as a bus driver at the Chicago Transit Authority - with Homer Echevarria! Bah bah bleat bleat...

What was it McArthur said (or was it Churchill) - once is random, twice is a coincidence, and three times is enemy action.

(Or maybe it was Patton.... or maybe it was Sun Tzu.... I forget).  

I think my head's commencing to throb.
 
A lot of things surely could have happened. I favor a more simple approach where this is treated more like a murder investigation where we consider credible evidence. And then go wherever that may lead. I leave high octane speculation to the deep thinkers.

Wow, we've been busy. "The Strange Story of Ralph Leon Yates" thread is already pushed to page 2.

Brian,
          In Chauncey Holt's case I have serious reservations. In my view Holt is unnecessary and so are the other alleged tramps. Thus, I do not contend the Tramps, the files do exist offering there identities and do exist in the DPD archive. I am content to study areas of more compelling interest.I would contend that members of some groups could have been involved without the knowledge of the rest of the group.
 
              For instance using your Giancana idea, which is supported by some important evidence, and I support it as well. Sam Giancana, Johnny Roselli, Santo Trafficante, and Robert Maheu of the CIA had multiple meetings conspiring to assassinate Castro. The tactics and connections the Agency offered would arm the Mafia and perhaps a highly placed conspirator or two to kill Kennedy with indirect means. In this scenario only Trafficante, Giancana, Roselli and perhaps at most two snipers need ever have direct knowledge. Others might know, but they could never admit their complicity or actually prove it without connecting officials to the original plot. Did I mention Giancana and Roselli were both murdered days before their Congressional testimony? I am a possible murdered victims minimalist as well, only 4 deaths in direct relation do I find have compelling connections. Those are two of them.

Stan Dane wrote:I think my head's commencing to throb.
 
A lot of things surely could have happened. I favor a more simple approach where this is treated more like a murder investigation where we consider credible evidence. And then go wherever that may lead. I leave high octane speculation to the deep thinkers.

Wow, we've been busy. "The Strange Story of Ralph Leon Yates" thread is already pushed to page 2.

Stan,

My head too.
(And I do not get a chance to buy MORE Drago blocks until payday, so my take on the conspiracy is definitely going to have to be smaller.)

Oh, my aching head!

I believe some members of the mob, the CIA, and the Cuban Exile community conspired against Kennedy(and Oswald). 

The Mob's role was the logistics of hiring the assassins and getting them into and out of Dallas. 

The rogue CIA agents and Cuban Exiles worked on Oswald(Fair Play For Cuba, Mexico City, Silvia Odio, etc)...

Carmine Savastano wrote:Brian,
          In Chauncey Holt's case I have serious reservations. In my view Holt is unnecessary and so are the other alleged tramps. Thus, I do not contend the Tramps, the files do exist offering there identities and do exist in the DPD archive. I am content to study areas of more compelling interest.I would contend that members of some groups could have been involved without the knowledge of the rest of the group.
 
              For instance using your Giancana idea, which is supported by some important evidence, and I support it as well. Sam Giancana, Johnny Roselli, Santo Trafficante, and Robert Maheu of the CIA had multiple meetings conspiring to assassinate Castro. The tactics and connections the Agency offered would arm the Mafia and perhaps a highly placed conspirator or two to kill Kennedy with indirect means. In this scenario only Trafficante, Giancana, Roselli and perhaps at most two snipers need ever have direct knowledge. Others might know, but they could never admit their complicity or actually prove it without connecting officials to the original plot. Did I mention Giancana and Roselli were both murdered days before their Congressional testimony? I am a possible murdered victims minimalist as well, only 4 deaths in direct relation do I find have compelling connections. Those are two of them.

Yikes. We need an auto-save. I just lost a big long reply here.... oh well... I'll circle back and re-post later in the day. Gr... I hate it when that happens.  

Capone,

             Indeed. In my view it is more feasible a handful of people, members past or present of some agencies and criminals could undertake such an operation with minimal chance of discovery. Officials, whether complicit or not in the JFK assassination, may eventually be implicated and reveal the very illegal programs that trained some of the assassins. That would necessitate the original cover-up. I contend a feasible conspiracy, but it size and scope need to just enough to get the job done in my view. They could let officials handle the damage control with appropriate incompetence.

capone81 wrote:I believe some members of the mob, the CIA, and the Cuban Exile community conspired against Kennedy(and Oswald). 

The Mob's role was the logistics of hiring the assassins and getting them into and out of Dallas. 

The rogue CIA agents and Cuban Exiles worked on Oswald(Fair Play For Cuba, Mexico City, Silvia Odio, etc)...

I think it more likely it was a local domestic job. I have little doubt that some at the TSBD and DPD were involved not only in the covering it up, but in aiding and abetting the crime.
I don't believe the mafia were involved other than play their part of the usual suspects.
That is not to say that others didn't know what was just about to go down. They just didn't do anything about it before or after. They helped let it happen, maybe. Oswald was then simply left hung out to dry.

Paul Klein wrote:

capone81 wrote:I believe some members of the mob, the CIA, and the Cuban Exile community conspired against Kennedy(and Oswald). 

The Mob's role was the logistics of hiring the assassins and getting them into and out of Dallas. 

The rogue CIA agents and Cuban Exiles worked on Oswald(Fair Play For Cuba, Mexico City, Silvia Odio, etc)...

I think it more likely it was a local domestic job. I have little doubt that some at the TSBD and DPD were involved not only in the covering it up, but in aiding and abetting the crime.
I don't believe the mafia were involved other than play their part of the usual suspects.
That is not to say that others didn't know what was just about to go down. They just didn't do anything about it before or after. They helped let it happen, maybe. Oswald was then simply left hung out to dry.

Motive!

Who wanted Kennedy dead? Who benefits from Kennedy's death?

See, this is the interesting thing about the "Carlos Marcello did it" theory. Carlos had two things going on - first, he had a desire to get the mob casinos back (the ones in Havana). That was a 2 billion dollar a year revenue stream for the Mafia (in 1960 dollars), which they lost because of Castro. And the second thing was of course Marcello's personal hatred for Bobby Kennedy (which by all reports was just about at the level of a vendetta - a matter of honor and pride).

BUT - in the month immediately preceding the assassination, Kennedy was about ready to start talking with Castro - and if you were a mobster interested in reclaiming your casinos that had to be a GOOD thing - and Carlos Marcello would have known about that 'cause he knew about everything! Whereas, it was widely known that Johnson didn't give a patootie about Cuba and wasn't going to treat it as a priority - and Carlos Marcello would have known that too (you don't get to be a Carlos type without knowing stuff like that).

If you were Carlos and you became aware of some of the back-channel discussions taking place, you'd try to INSERT into them, right? You'd do your best to get someone in place on the ground who would follow your orders and obey your instructions and be your eyes and ears. The last thing in the WORLD you'd want is to see all that go away, because it's your best possibility for reclaiming your casinos and the related income stream.

Brian,

      I agree. Marcello and his lawyer were also deported by the Kennedy Justice Department to Guatemala. Additionally the many Justice Department investigations he and other Mafia leaders were more recently enduring. (Trafficante, Marcello, Giancana) Kennedy lack of commitment to continue Vietnam meant any chance of reclaiming revenues was lost. All these factors would support motivation. In my view it was not a coincidence that the Mafia was largely ignored until Robert Kennedy ran the Justice Department.

nonsqtr wrote:

Paul Klein wrote:

capone81 wrote:I believe some members of the mob, the CIA, and the Cuban Exile community conspired against Kennedy(and Oswald). 

The Mob's role was the logistics of hiring the assassins and getting them into and out of Dallas. 

The rogue CIA agents and Cuban Exiles worked on Oswald(Fair Play For Cuba, Mexico City, Silvia Odio, etc)...

I think it more likely it was a local domestic job. I have little doubt that some at the TSBD and DPD were involved not only in the covering it up, but in aiding and abetting the crime.
I don't believe the mafia were involved other than play their part of the usual suspects.
That is not to say that others didn't know what was just about to go down. They just didn't do anything about it before or after. They helped let it happen, maybe. Oswald was then simply left hung out to dry.

Motive!

Who wanted Kennedy dead? Who benefits from Kennedy's death?

See, this is the interesting thing about the "Carlos Marcello did it" theory. Carlos had two things going on - first, he had a desire to get the mob casinos back (the ones in Havana). That was a 2 billion dollar a year revenue stream for the Mafia (in 1960 dollars), which they lost because of Castro. And the second thing was of course Marcello's personal hatred for Bobby Kennedy (which by all reports was just about at the level of a vendetta - a matter of honor and pride).

BUT - in the month immediately preceding the assassination, Kennedy was about ready to start talking with Castro - and if you were a mobster interested in reclaiming your casinos that had to be a GOOD thing - and Carlos Marcello would have known about that 'cause he knew about everything! Whereas, it was widely known that Johnson didn't give a patootie about Cuba and wasn't going to treat it as a priority - and Carlos Marcello would have known that too (you don't get to be a Carlos type without knowing stuff like that).

If you were Carlos and you became aware of some of the back-channel discussions taking place, you'd try to INSERT into them, right? You'd do your best to get someone in place on the ground who would follow your orders and obey your instructions and be your eyes and ears. The last thing in the WORLD you'd want is to see all that go away, because it's your best possibility for reclaiming your casinos and the related income stream.

Who wanted Kennedy dead? Who benefits from Kennedy's death?


I think too much is made from the repercussions of Kennedy's assassination. Many of them would not directly relate to why it happened. They are a natural consequence and perhaps best understood that way.
It is detrimental, in my view, to get too far ahead with motives and benefits when talking about this case. His death, any way it happens, is going to provide a seismic shift of order, power and influence. And not just political.
My only personal concern with this case is to extract the truth from the lies that have covered it and continue to do so. I don't even admire Kennedy or agree with his legacy. I find political leadership in any governing form offensive. But what I find even more reprehensible is being lied to for 50 years on top of it all.