Espousal of Lies
The 60's Patsy
Trio: Oswald, Ray and
Freedom of the press is one of the guarantees of
our constitution, but that freedom has been grossly abused throughout our
history. The powerful groups that steer the content of our media have absolute
control over what the American public sees and hears. Our very perceptions are
being molded by this vast grip.
This trend is probably more evident in three of
the most atrocious crimes in our history: the assassinations of President John
F. Kennedy, Martin Luther King, Jr. and Senator Robert Kennedy. In all three
cases, the mainstream media has demonstrated a blatant disregard for facts that
throw serious and reasonable doubt on the "official" versions of the
It would be so easy for the media to present the
whole story in these three shocking murders. It isn't a matter of outrageous or
unsubstantiated information brought forth by "kooks" or conspiracy nuts being
rejected. For over 30 years the testimony of people who actually witnessed or
were closely connected to these assassinations, reliable people, has been
ignored and even ridiculed by the media.
The information that contradicts the official
versions of these murders reached a "common knowledge" point long ago among the
fair and serious research community and people who really have a regard for the
truth. I say "fair and serious" because even though most books that delve into
the murders deal with the evidence that contradicts the official line, there
have been books that espouse it, choosing to ignore or distort this info to
support their views. These latter publications always get a "sweetheart"
treatment by the media while the former ones are swept under the rug. The Warren
Commission is the grandaddy of these official media sweethearts.
Let me for one moment put you, the reader, in an
imaginary position in an attempt to conjure up a feeling. Suppose someone in
your family is the victim of a crime that has a shattering effect on you and
your loved one's lives. After the trial for the "perpetrator" of the crime, you
come upon some information, reliable and substantiated, that leads you to
believe that the wrong person was convicted. Your sense of outrage is
You press the authorities with the new-found
information, hoping to right the mis-conceived conviction and bring the real
culprit to justice. Everywhere you turn the door is shut in your face, so to
speak. You can't understand why people aren't interested in the truth and real
justice. About a month later, you finally find out what you are up against- the
real culprit, the one that escaped the net of justice while the trial convicted
someone with a record that painted him a criminal in the eyes of the jury and
public- the real culprit just happens to be the son of a very important and
powerful person of the local political establishment.
Your family has been violated. Your life has
been violated. But the reality of politics has stonewalled your right to
vindication, even in a legal manner. Wouldn't you be angry and disgruntled?
Wouldn't you seek others who might be able to bring the injustice to the light
This is exactly the same scenario that was and
is being played out in the three major American assassinations of the 60s. In
all three cases, the person branded as the assassin was no more than a framed
individual surrounded in the shadows by those who made sure his portrait fit
that of a stalking and demented murderer. The real murderers are still at large
or deceased, avoiding the official prosecution of our government. Is it really
Just recently, "convicted" Martin Luther King,
Jr. assassin James Earl Ray passed away from liver malfunction. Ray had tried
for 30 years, since three days after being handed a conviction in 1969, to
receive a new trial on appeal. All of the appeals were turned down, despite the
public backing of Ray's innocence by numerous black civil rights leaders,
including the family of the slain leader ML King, Jr. One doesn't have to delve
into this case very far, just as in the Kennedy assassinations, to be swept over
with a sense of outrage over the abuses of the legal system and the subsequent
distortions and neglect by the media.
Coverups in all three cases were and continue to
be aided immensely by the legal/media establishment, a tool that the rich and
powerful have at their disposal to wash their hands with, so to speak. "Not in
this country!" . . . a mis-informed person might utter when faced with this
sentiment. Let's just take a quick look at the three "assassins" of the Kennedys
As most people are aware of, Oswald never even
lived to have a trial, being gunned down by Jack Ruby in the basement of the
Dallas Police Department two days after the assassination of President John F.
Kennedy. Despite claims that Oswald was offered the opportunity to receive legal
counsel after his arrest, the fact remains that he never received it. Oswald
apparently tried to reach attorney John Abt of New York but Abt was
Like everything else in this case, who knows for
sure the true story of Oswald's attempt to get legal representation? We know for
a fact that he did request a lawyer at the famous mid-night press conference. In
other words, ten hours after Oswald had been arrested, he still didn't have a
lawyer to represent him! If there ever was a case where one was needed, this was
There were no transcripts available of Oswald's
weekend-long interrogations, either. This is no surprise since any lawyer
representing Oswald would have insisted on this or at least his client's
Oswald's civil and legal rights were trampled
over in a frenetic, shocking weekend that we will never forget. The alleged
assassin of JFK, in examining what case there was against him, would certainly
have been acquitted of the crime. I say this for one main reason: there
was no case against him other than some far-reaching
Obviously, a patsy isn't meant to receive
justice by the very meaning of the term "patsy". He is meant to be the
scapegoat, the person blamed for the crime, hence, what need is their for
justice? The JFK conspiracy didn't need a case against Oswald because they had
Jack Ruby and who-knows-what-else as fail-safe mechenisms against the truth or
partial truths emerging.
When you look at the way Oswald's legal rights
were treated, you have to wonder if he really needed them. When conspiracies
have their way, there is never really a case against a patsy. If the real facts
emerge, maybe he could be tried as a co-conspirator at most. To prevent
acquittal and an eventual reopening of a case, the patsy must be either
eliminated or put in a position of legal exile where his story will never reach
the public. Sound familiar?
After Senator Robert Kennedy made his California
primary victory speech at the Ambassador Hotel in Los Angeles on the evening of
June 4, 1968, he was led through a kitchen pantry to a waiting press conference.
Kennedy was headed in another direction as he left the stage but was diverted at
the last minute by a hotel official.
Waiting in the pantry area was 21-year old
Sirhan Bishara Sirhan, a Palestinian refuge who had spent most of his life
living in the Pasadena area northwest of Los Angeles. As Kennedy approached
Sirhan's position, Sirhan shouted out "Kennedy, you son-of-a-bitch" and
proceeded to draw a .22 pistol and began shooting at the victorious
According to all the witnesses present, Sirhan
never got within three feet of Kennedy and always remained in front as he
emptied his pistol. Kennedy fell backwards as the shooting
started. Sirhan was wrestled away from Kennedy right after he opened fire
by several men. These have become established facts of this case. However, the
autopsy of RFK clearly revealed that the fatal wound was a point-blank shot that
entered the back of the head just below the right ear. Two other wounds in
Kennedy were also inflicted from the same position: behind and at
This discrepancy, this impossibility of
ballistics, was never given the slightest play in Sirhan's eventual trial. Add
this to the fact that about 13 separate bullet marks were accounted for in the
pantry area, and Sirhan's gun was an 8-shooter! One of the panels from the
pantry with bullet holes in it was destroyed by the LAPD, which called it
Security guard Thane Eugene Cesar was in the
postion to inflict RFK's wounds, trailing the candidate closely to the right
rear. One witness actually saw Cesar draw and fire his weapon the moment Sirhan
started firing, hitting Kennedy in the process. With the shock of Sirhan's
initial shots all attention in the crowded pantry was either diverted or blocked
out. Cesar's actions were never investigated thoroughly by the
While many people were trying to get into the
pantry right after the shooting began, two people were suspicious in their
attempt to flee the area. Several witnesses spoke of an attractive young lady in
a polka dot dress who seemed to be speaking with Sirhan right before he went on
his shooting binge. One witness, Sandra Serrano, who was sitting outside on a
fire escape, saw three people, including Sirhan and the "polka dot dress" woman
with another man, enter the hotel where she was seated. After hearing what she
thought sounded like a "backfire", she saw two of the same people, minus Sirhan,
exit the premises excitedly shouting, "We shot him! We shot him!" When Serrano
asked who they had shot they replied "We shot Senator Kennedy!"
An All Points Bulletin was issued for the "polka
dot dress" lady, but this was inexplicably quickly cancelled by LAPD. They had
their man at the Ambassador Hotel. Despite public interest in the "polka dot"
mystery, the girl who was with Sirhan and another man was never found. From the
beginning, Sirhan was, like Oswald, molded in the public's eye as the lone,
deranged, mal-contented assassin. The police handling of the case revolved
around this strict established premise.
All winesses who had more to add to the
investigation or information that threw doubt on the official LAPD position of
the crime were intimidated and coerced into changing their testimony by members
of the Special Unit Senator(SUS) force that was formed to look into the
Sirhan never had a chance, like Oswald, to
actually flee the scene of the crime. He was quickly detained by several men
much larger than him in the crowded room. It leaves me to wonder whether some of
the shots from behind RFK weren't meant for him. California Senator and Kennedy
booster Jesse Unruh actually rode with Sirhan in the patrol car that brought him
to police headquarters, fearing another appearance of "Jack
Despite the contradictory testimony of witnesses
and the non-corroborating evidence, Sirhan was convicted as the lone assassin of
Robert Kennedy and languishes today in California State prison at Corcoran. He
has been denied parole seven times.
Two months before Robert Kennedy was murdered,
Martin Luther King, Jr. was in Memphis supporting a sanitation workers' strike.
On the evening of April 4, as King and his entourage were preparing to leave the
Lorraine Motel for dinner, an assassin shot the civil rights leader as he was
talking to someone in the parking lot from the second-floor balcony. The bullet
entered King's face and traversed his neck, coming to rest just inside the skin
of his right shoulder blade. He was pronounced dead an hour
Several witnesses saw a man crouching in some
bushes across the street from the Lorraine Motel and one actually saw smoke
rising from them(sound familiar?). One witness, chaffeur Solomon Jones, saw this
man actually climb down an 8-foot retaining wall in front of the bushes across
Mulberry Street and run to a parked Memphis PD patrol car down the
Police quickly and conveniently found a
blanketed bundle in front of the Canipe Amusement Company, located across the
street and under a rooming house. In it were numerous items, including a 30.06
Remington rifle that became the official murder weapon.
Right after the shooting, a citizen picked up an
apparent chase on his CB radio that was relayed to a policeman, who in turn
relayed it to dispatch. This CB broadcast was later determined to be a bogus one
intended to draw the police in the wrong direction.
James Earl Ray, eventually convicted of the
murder, had purchased the gun, he said, under orders from a man named Raul, whom
he had met in Toronto a few months previous and had offered to include him in a
gun-running and smuggling operation. Ray has stated that he was having a flat
spare tire fixed during the shooting a couple blocks away at a service station.
Raul had told him to go to the movies for a couple hous right before the
assassination, but he elected to fix the flat tire because Raul might be using
The state eventually established that the shot
was fired from a bathroom window adjacent to a sleeping room(above the bush
area) that Ray had rented in the roominghouse above the Canipe Amusement Company
and Jim's Grill. This despite the fact that cabdriver James McGraw, who was at
the roominghouse to pick up a fare, saw no one in the bathroom very shortly
before 6:00 when King was shot. Also, the angle of the shot from the window was
a very difficult one.
After firing at Dr. King, Ray allegedly quickly
gathered his possessions in the blanketed bundle and hurriedly left the
building, exiting from the Canipe Amusement Co. entrance downstairs. When he saw
a police car parked as he exited the building, parked at the corner of South
Main and Butler Streets, just down the street, Ray is supposed to have dropped
the bundle and fled in his white Mustang.
This story is the official rendition despite the
fact that the police officer in the car, Emmett Douglass, says he was parked
further back from the intersection and behind some shrubs that would have made
sighting his car from the front of Canipe Amusement Co. impossible. Those shrubs
were completely cut down the next morning, helping to facilitate the official
version of the story.
The mass of trees and bushes between the
roominghouse and the 8-foot retaining wall were also completely cut down early
the next morning by the same Memphis City maintenance crew. The shot from the
bathroom window had to pass through this thicket and there is strong conjecture,
as in the police car "sighting" by Ray on South Main and Butler, that this
cleanup operation made the shot more offficially plausible.
The state's star witness became Charles
Stephens, a man in the roominghouse who was "too drunk to stand" at the time,
according to a Memphis police officer who questioned him right after the
shooting. Stephens stated that he saw a man fitting Ray's description in the
hallway right after the shot. However, Grace Walden, Stephens' common-law wife,
testified to seeing a man who didn't come close to Ray's description. Stephens
was given the royal treatment while Walden was committed to a mental hospital.
Disclosure can be so messy!
What the general public doesn't know, thanks to
the media coverup in this case, is that there was a real confession in
this case. Loyd Jowers, the owner of Jim's Grill, stated on national
television(ABC Nightline) in December, 1993 that he aided in the killing of
Martin Luther King, Jr. and that James Earl Ray was just an innocent
Substantiating Jowers testimony is the
recollection of one of his waitresses, Betty Spade, who saw Jowers run back into
the kitchen of Jim's Grill from the backyard bushy area carrying a rifle right
after King was shot. Cabdriver McGraw also remembers Jowers showing him a rifle
from under the counter that he said was the murder weapon of King. Jowers said
that the hit on King was coordinated through the mafia with local produce man
Frank Liberto handling the Memphis strategy and money. Liberto admitted this to
several people before he died.
Jowers didn't actually fire the rifle at King,
but retrieved it after the real shooter had done his job. He brought it back
into Jim's Grill and put it under a counter. It was picked up the next day by
the mysterious Raul.
As in the Kennedy assassinations, plenty of
prime suspects have surfaced over the years, even suspects, like Jowers, that
have offered up self-incriminating statements, but James Earl Ray has remained
tucked away by the legal abuses of the powerful since being apprehended two
months after the shooting at London's Heathrow Airport.
Extradited back to the states(on the basis of
the drunk Charles Stephens' testimony), he was kept in solitary confinement for
nine months, under constant surveillance, in a room that was always lighted, and
was slowly coerced and tricked into signing a confession for the crime. Ray
waived his right to a trial and escaped the death penalty by signing a
confession. Three days after his conviction he recanted and wanted a trial. He
never got one.
The most galling thing to me in the James Earl
Ray episode has been the media treatment of him. Every story, and I
mean every story, about Ray over the years by the
media has begun with the same phrase:
"James Earl Ray, the confessed killer of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. . . .
This is a perfect example of truth distortion.
People who don't how Ray was slowly-but-surely coerced into signing the
confession are quick to accept the media's closed-case branding of this episode
and move on to something else. "Confessed killer", a brand that the media has
burned on Ray, doesn't even come close to telling the story. It is a lie that
has been maliciously perpetrated on the American public for 30 years! It was not
a true confession.
Not in this country? I think we've all seen too
many movies depicting legal abuse and injustice in other countries. Too many of
us have become conditioned that this cannot happen in a free country like the
United States. If people want to keep dreaming and let injustice go unnoticed,
then the Oswalds, the Rays, the Sirhans will go down in our history as murderous
criminals when in fact they were duped pawns of a power elite. If you really
care about truth and justice, then learn more about these episodes and let
others know about it!
Kill An Enemy
Obviously, there is a lot more to all three of
the cases mentioned here. I have just scratched the surface to demonstrate a few
of the outrageous abuses of justice that have occured. There are many more too
numerous to mention in just one column. Anyone who takes the time and has the
heart to care for the truth and justice can find out more by accessing the
tremendous amount of literature that covers these crimes.
William Pepper's "Orders To Kill" is a
comprehensive undertaking about Dr. King's murder. Pepper had a long association
with both King and Ray, putting him in a unique position among assassination
researchers. He also had to deal with the legal establishment of Tennessee in
trying to get more evidence on record in the case and his story only led me to
conclude there was no justice at all in this case!
By far and away, President Kennedy assassination
literature far outweighs the material on King and Robert Kennedy. JFK's murder
was far more traumatic to this nation because 1) he was a very popular
president, 2) he was president, 3) the times were peaceful generally- the public
perception was that there was no war and everything was, well to borrow a
phrase, "Camelot"- generally people never expected a president like Kennedy to
be the victim of assassination, and 4) the manner in which JFK was killed-
having his brains splattered in clear public view.
The doors to critical literature were opened
with the publication of the Warren Commission, which despite a massive
investigative effort, stuck to the lone-nut scenario in the face of countless
evidence and leads that begged to differ. Basically Commission Report critics
saw smoke that darkened the whole landscape of the American public's right to
know. Official backers in all three cases have stated that the "smoke" comes
from the critics' campfires and no where else.
One thing is certain in all this: there
is smoke and the backers of official "truth" in all three murder cases
have never been able to prove that the smoke is only coming from the critics'
campfires. Also, they have never been able to disprove that the smoke is not
coming the official side. The forces that want to bury the truth from the
American public cannot resort to facts because the facts don't support them.
Instead, they must resort to legal/media manipulation to keep the truth under
the rug. It is a "might makes right" contest if there ever was
Getting back to my little personal make-believe
scenario that I conjured up previously, I feel sorry for the families of Lee
Harvey Oswald, James Earl Ray and Sirhan Bishara Sirhan. Their American
experiences have been forever violated and poisoned by the abuses of powewrful
forces above the law of the common man. If these forces can eliminate such loved
public men like JFK, MLK and RFK, do you think they care about using and
destroying common people like Oswald, Ray and Sirhan?
As long as the legal/media establishment is
controlled and used for propoganda purposes instead of informational ones, we
are all possible victims of injustice. The actual crime doesn't have to be
orchestrated even near perfection when you have the tools of the media and law
at your disposal. The glaring amount of loose strings in all three assassination
cases mentioned above, and the continued media espousal of official versions
without any general public outcry, is sad evidence to this!