New Perspectives
The
Continuing Saga of the JFK Assassination
JFK Assassination Spells Intrigue
Planners of President Kennedy's
assassination could have won a "bad guy" Oscar Award at the 1964
awards ceremonies in Los Angeles. It would be pretty difficult to come
up with a better script for a mystery/crime plot than what they
presented to the world. There are so many plots and subplots branching
out from the scene of the crime that the viewer is seemingly lost in a
maze of evidence and suspicion: it is a master of intrigue.
"Intriguing" would be the word to explain
much of the fascination in the John Kennedy assassination. Since
official investigations have chosen not to use their subpoena and/or
legal/political clout in this case, many questions remain to be
answered, if they ever will. Everyone likes a mystery, so the saying
goes, and this episode in history has certainly drawn much of its
attention on this fact alone.
Ironically, if people are asked to and
accept the official version of what transpired in and around Dallas in
late 1963, many links to our recent history will be ignored. By
accepting "history" we are ignoring history, and on a grand scale.
Within the backdrop to the assassination exists a virtual gold mine of
recent American history. The JFK assassination is a good starting and
central point to any study of recent history.
However, if the lone-nut version is
accepted, then much of the backdrop history loses its significance
here. If Lee Harvey Oswald is accepted as acting alone, then what good
is it to know that anti-Castro Cubans, rightwing groups, racist
organizations, certain Teamster officials, organized crime leaders,
etc. had a strong motive for eliminating JFK from the American scene?
What good is it to learn anything about the history of these groups in
this respect? Accepting the lone-nut theory cuts the roots to a lot of
information and history.
This, I believe, has been a positive point,
if there can be one, of the Kennedy assassination. In the search for
the real killers, researchers have turned history inside out for the
past 50 years and actually forced many Americans to take a good, hard
look at themselves and their institutions. JFK's murder is strongly
embedded in the web of history that followed World War II. By
examining the forces that guided us in those years we can understand
more the evolution from public servant(politician) to assassin's
target that Kennedy went through. JFK did not die in vain in this
regard.
No matter where you look in the JFK
assassination story, there is plenty of intrigue because of the
multitude of unanswered questions.. The following are a couple aspects
of the case that mystify me the most.
Double Arrest(?) at Texas
Theater
Were there two people brought out of the
Texas Theater under arrest on November 22, 1963? Not much has been
written about this particular possibility, even though it presents
some ominous ramifications if in fact it did happen. Many of us know
the official story of Oswald's "flight" from the Texas School Book
Depository after the assassination.
Select witnesses were chosen in the
official rendering that tended to give credibility to Oswald's
post-murder "guilt". This included his former landlady, Mary Bledsoe,
who testified to Oswald's presence on a bus immediately after the
assassination. Then there is William Whaley, the taxi-driver who
brought Oswald close to his roominghouse. Next is Earlene Roberts, the
caretaker of the roominghouse who saw Oswald come and go around 1PM.
After this, the story gets totally muddled.
Roberts last saw Oswald standing at a bus
stop, an action that generally translates to a person waiting for a
bus. Let's just stop and consider for one moment and put yourself in
his place. Somehow and in some way(short of firing a rifle at the
Presidential motorcade itself), Oswald was heading somewhere in an
action that was related to the assassination. He had picked up a 38
caliber pistol at his roominghouse. Personal protection must have been
on his mind.
Oswald's very trip to his roominghouse
seems contingent, and barely that. If he could smuggle a rifle into
the Texas School Book Depository, as the official version asserts, why
didn't he take the trouble to place his 38 pistol in a more convenient
location to be retrieved after the assassination? He could have had a
box for the curtain rod bolts! There are many places that a pistol can
be tucked away, to be picked up later, that are fairly safe from
discovery.
Obviously it would have been unwise to have
had the pistol on him in the TSBD, but Oswald could have hidden the
pistol in the path of a more direct and safe route to where he was
headed after the assassination. The Warren Commission Report
concluded, based on Marina Oswald's testimony, that Oswald had hidden
his rifle near a railroad track after the "attempt" on General Edwin
Walker's life on the evening of April 10, 1963.
It certainly appears that something did not
go according to Oswald's expectations, necessitating his "desparate"
trip to the roominghouse to get a jacket and his pistol. It was more
out of desparation than contingency planning, apparently. The official
version uses this "desparation" to bolster Oswald's guilt, but as can
be seen here, it can also be used to show his innocence.
Basically, anyone planning to assassinate a
president, with a post-assassination weapon in the planning for
personal protection, would certainly place that weapon in a more
convenient location than where Oswald had to travel to get his
pistol.
What would you do if you felt threatened
like Oswald apparently was? What better way to insure one's saftey
than by staying in public where there are always possible witnesses?
Taking a bus to his destination would have been Oswald's best bet to
remain in a semi-secure public setting, especially if he suspected
that any fellow conspirators wouldn't risk blowing there cover to
eliminate him.
A single man walking through a neighborhood
electrified and sensitized by the assassination would certainly be a
sure way to arouse suspicions and draw the police. Further, a man who
might have suspected that he was in a "patsy" zone, like Oswald, would
be less likely to take such a route. Even if he was just a
co-conspirator and on his way to a meeting point with someone, this
would seem to hold true: stay in public and act normal.
The official version, of course, has
Oswald walking along 10th Street, after leaving his roominghouse,
where he is stopped by Officer JD Tippit. When Tippit gets out of his
police car and starts around to the curb side, Oswald pulls out his
gun and blasts away, killing the officer immediately. A final shot to
the head makes sure Tippit is dead. This action took place around
1:15, based on a
call-in , using Tippit's car radio, by Domingo Benevides. Benevides
was just a few feet from the shooting in his truck and immediately
called the Dallas Police dispatcher.
Two Places At Once?
Lee Harvey Oswald walked into the
Texas Theater, after paying, just after the beginning of a
1:00 movie.
Theater concession attendant Butch Burroughs saw Oswald enter the
theater at this time. The "historical" Oswald supposedly entered the
theater without paying at around 1:35. Burroughs stated that he
remembered hearing someone enter at this time, but he didn't see that
person. Since no one passed his concession stand, that person had to
have gone to the balcony section of the theater, Burroughs
asserted.
If the police were going to converge on
Texas Theater and any suspect, it made sense to create a scenario
where they were drawn there by a suspicious fleeting-like person. If
Oswald had gotten to the Theater under perfectly normal
circumstances(taken a bus and paid like everyone else, and in a calm
manner), then the convergence of a massive fleet of Dallas police cars
on the theater would certainly have aroused suspicions of inside
knowledge.
Even if a description or picture of Oswald
had been shown to the police and public immediately after the
assassination, the conspirators could not count on his being detained
in a conventional manner, getting noticed and reported by some
citizen. Time was of the essence in catching him before he escaped the
patsy net. It leads me to wonder just how obvious the 1:35 "Oswald"
made himself look to shoe-store manager Johnny Brewer as a suspicious,
fleeing man in light of the circumstances in the immediate
neighborhood. Brewer was the one who got the ball rolling as far as
notifiying the police(see below).
According to further Burroughs testimony,
the "1:00-1:05" Oswald came back to the concession stand to buy
popcorn at 1:15, then returned to the theater and sat next to a
pregnant woman. Another witness in the theater that day was Jack
Davis, who saw a man enter the theater and sit right next to him just
after the opening credits of the 1:00 movie. Davis thought this action
a bit peculiar since there were only about 20 people in the 900-seat
theater.
After sitting next to Davis for a few
minutes, the man got up and moved across the aisle to sit next to
another person. Shortly after this, the man got up and entered the
lobby, returning to the center section of the theater a little
afterwards. When the house lights came on about 20 minutes later,
Davis went to the lobby to inquire about it and saw policemen rush in
the front door and into the theater. The man they brought out was the
man who had sat next to him, according to Davis. That man was Lee
Harvey Oswald. The recollections of Burroughs and Davis rip the
official version of the "roominghouse to Texas Theater" Oswald trip to
shreds.
If another man had entered the theater at
around 1:35, then where did this man go? The later-arriving Texas
Theater "Oswald" was spotted by shoe-store attendant Brewer when the
suspect slipped into the store's foyer as a police car sped by. Brewer
had heard on the radio of the assassination and a policeman being
murdered just shortly before in the Oak Cliff neighborhood just
several blocks away. He watched the man enter the Texas Theater
without paying and immediately notified ticket clerk Julia Postal.
Postal called the police.
When Brewer entered the theater he asked
Burroughs if he had seen someone enter. Burroughs said he had heard
someone enter but had not seen him. This corroboration of Burroughs
non-sighting of the 1:35 "Oswald" is ignored by the official version
of events, and for obvious reasons. Someone entering the ground level
of the theater had to pass right by the concession stand and
Burroughs: Oswald was arrested on the ground level, not in the
balcony.
Throwing further suspicion on the arrest
episode at the theater was the testimony of Bernard Haire, who had a
hobby shop just two doors away. Haire, unaware of the assassination,
was startled by the appearance of so many police cars in front of the
theater at once and went outside to see a man being brought out under
arrest. Haire proceeded to walk through his store and back into the
alley, where there were more police cars.
Just as he got to the theater a door opened
and police bought out another man who appeared to have been in a
struggle and under arrest. This was a young white man dressed in a
pull-over shirt and slacks. The man was put in a police car that
quickly left the scene. Haire said he was shocked when he learned the
real Oswald had been brought out front.
If we are to trust or at least give some
credence to Haire's account, why hasn't this lead been further
pursued? Everything here seems to point to two "Oswalds" entering the
theater, the first one in an apparent attempt to establish some sort
of contact and the second to provide an excuse for police convergence
on the scene. It smells of an obvious trap. And it also raises a lot
of suspicions about the Dallas Police Department.
Haire's account adds credibility to the
accounts of Burroughs and Davis, but only Brewer has become cemented
in the official version's historical lineup of major witnesses because
he did not witness the "1:00-1:05" Oswald. And being so close to the
assassination epicenter it is easy to see why Haire, Davis and
Burroughs didn't press their stories further for fear for their
lives.
What happened to the "1:35" Oswald? Who
knows? With all of the attention directed to the front of the Texas
Theater, little focus existed on what was transpiring in the alley.
The decoy "Oswald" if that's what the man actually was, could have
very easily been driven somewhere and dropped off, or even released as
a mistaken-identity arrest. The first possibilty is far more likely.
The latter scneario would have drawn even more unwanted attention. Of
significance here, of course, are the officers and car that sped away
with the alley arrestee and the other people in the alley that
witnessed this episode.
The lack of attention given to this part of
November 22, 1963 stands out like a Texas longhorn in a pack of sheep
to me! Anytime there is a conspiracy there are points in its execution
that come dangerously close to the publics' eye, and this was
certainly one of those points. If there indeed were two suspects
brought out of the Texas Theater under arrest around 1:45-1:50PM that
day, then whatever happened to the alley arrestee and what was he
being detained for? There is a vast ocean of scrutiny in this case,
and the conspiracy whale, so to speak, came to the surface, I believe,
at the Texas Theater!
I have further suspicions about the famous
picture of Oswald(below) being led out of the Texas Theater under
arrest between a plainclothes cigar-smoking officer and another
policeman. When Oswald was being cornered on the ground floor of the
theater, a scuffle ensued in which he supposedly tried to shoot
arresting officer M. N. McDonald. After a click was heard, supposedly
of a gun not firing, Oswald shouted "I am not resisting arrest, I am
not resisting arrest!"
If he had just tried to kill a police
officer, would he have changed horses so fast and taken the
non-resistance approach to his situation? Or was that "click" from a
police officer's gun instead, prompting Oswald to advertise his
non-resistance to the witnesses in the theater so as to forestall any
further attempts on his life during the arrest?
The Oswald in the picture below is a man
who is still apparently in a resistance mode of mentality, not one who
has become subdued by his situation. It just doesn't appear to be the
same man that many of us saw during that weekend, being led from one
interrogation seession to another in the halls of the Dallas Police
Department. That Oswald was calm and subdued, almost in a confident
way.
Take a close look at the facial demeanor of
the man in the picture and compare it to the one of Oswald below . It
is like two different people! Was this picture taken in the front of
the Texas Theater or the back? Was the picture touched up a bit to add
a little more deviousness to Oswald's demeanor? And why is this
picture so dark: it was 1:45 when Oswald was arrested, not night time?
The Texas Theater faces more south than east, so there should be more
light here.
Texas Theater
Arrest of Oswald?
If anyone reading this has any
information, I would sure like to know. This picture is actually
historically captioned as Oswald being led out of the front of the Texas
Theater.
The pictures below are from the Dallas
Police station. The left one is obviously the Oswald that Jack Ruby
killed two days later. The right one is supposedly Oswald, but at
5'10-11", the Oswald in this photo makes the plainclothes officers
well over six feet. I see facial dissimilarities between the two
Oswalds in these pictures. Also, the right photo looks like a
posed-for picture. What were these officers actually doing when this
photo was taken . . . waiting for a bus? Or was it a sort of "hunting"
picture? (More information on the Tippit
case.)
Two Oswalds(?)
at Dallas Police Dept.
The Magic
Throat
At a Parkland Hospital news conference,
moments after the announcement of President Kennedy's death, Doctor
Kemp Clark described the throat wound in the front of Kennedy's neck
as one of entrance. A tracheotomy tube had actually been placed in
this wound, after slight incisions on the sides of it.
By the next day, this wound had officially
become one of exit. The autopsy at Bethesda Naval Hospital on Friday
night didn't even notice or mention a wound in the front of the
throat. The doctors assumed that the hole was there because of the
tracheotomy performed earlier in the day at Parkland. When Dr. James
Humes talked to Dr. Clark on Saturday, however, he became aware of the
frontal wound.
Four main things became accountable to
Humes. The wound itself had to be included in his autopsy report.
Second, was it an exit or entrance wound? Thirdly, since Oswald was
pretty much conceded at this point to be the assassin, and his shots
came from above and behind, any autopsy revisions would be influenced
by this. Finally, Humes, being a naval officer, was accountable to his
superiors.
What came out of all this, of course, was
the "magic bullet" theory. This official scenario has been rehashed
countless times throughout the years, so I won't delve into it in
detail. President Kennedy's front-neck wound became an exit wound,
caused by a neck-transiting bullet shot from above and behind which
entered the back lower neck area. This bullet continued on to strike
Governor John Connally and pass all the way through his chest and
wrist, finally coming to rest in his thigh.
Even the Bethesda autopsy, as inadequate as
it proved to be, did not stipulate a wound in the back of Kennedy's
neck. There was nothing in the back of Kennedy's body to account for
the front throat wound. This was why the Bethesda autopists assumed it
was a tracheotomy incision, "knowing" that the shots had come from
behind. The only wound in the back was about 6 inches below the neck
and it couldn't be probed more than an inch.
For anyone beginning a study of the Kennedy
assassination, this is a good place to start, along with a look at the
Dealey Plaza layout and a viewing of the Zapruder film. The official
version of the assassiantion rests totally on the "magic bullet"
theory, incredible as it seems! Orson Wells had many of us believing
in martians 60 years ago too.
Two more things make the "magic bullet"
untenable- 1) angle of flight and 2) post-wound appearance of the
bullet. The alignment of Kennedy and Connally during the shooting
makes the "wounds" incurred impossible from a 6th floor sniper's
perch. Second, the condition of the bullet was near pristine when
found in a stretcher at Parkland Hospital. A bullet causing 7 separate
wounds in two adult men would certainly be deformed badly after
inflicting such damage.
This theory became necessary only when the
Zapruder film indicated that the first and second shots were too close
together to have been both fired from Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano
rifle. If Kennedy and Connally's wounds are from separate shots, it
indicates conspiracy(two shooters). To make Oswald the lone-nut
assassin, one bullet had to go through both men. I think the
destruction of this theory by common sense is old news among Kennedy
researchers and its resurfacing only tends to distract from the real
facts of the case. People should be aware, however, of why this theory
is so ridiculous, studying the position of the motorcade, Kennedy and
Connally with respect to the alleged sniper's perch during the
shooting.
I would like to make one more observation
about the "magic bullet" before moving on. If Kennedy was hit in the
back of the neck and the bullet exited in the front-center, why wasn't
there any spinal cord damage? The presidential limousine was moving
almost directly away from the 6th floor sniper's perch, so a bullet
going straight out the front(or almost thereof) would most certainly
have made major contact with the spinal cord. A bullet to the right of
the cord puts Connally almost in the middle of his seat, next to his
wife. A bullet to the left of the cord puts the shooter somewhere in
the Dallas County Records building on Houston street.
The obviousness of the impossibility of the
magic bullet scenario has me wondering whether someone who had a final
say in the editing of the Warren Report was trying to send a message
to the American people. It is hard for me to accept that the Warren
Commission staffers who shaped the final statement could think the
public was that stupid! Maybe it was their confidence in the power of
government confidentiality, something most government agencies base
their lives on.
Frontal shot?
Another explanation put forward for the
front-throat wound is a frontal shot. In a film taken from behind the
presidential limousine a "black dog" like figure appears behind a
cement embankment in front of the grassy knoll at the time of the
first shot. It then quickly disappears. A shooter at this position
would have been in the right position as far as the angle to Kennedy's
neck was concerned.
But the shooter here would have also been
in view of several witnesses who were in that immediate area. There is
not enough cover at this possible firing point for a conspiracy of
this type to have taken such risk. If a 6th floor patsy was in store,
then why give away the scenario by advertising a shooter from the
front? A shooter from the "black dog" position would have had to run
up the knoll in plain view of hundreds of people, and this just didn't
happen.
When Kennedy reacts by putting his hands up
to his throat, the limousine is still about 200 feet from the "black
dog" point and even further from the picket fence and beyond it. Any
shot from these points would have had to rely on a high-velocity
projectile to insure accuracy. This bullet would have almost certainly
passed through Kennedy's neck, maybe even causing extensive spinal
cord damage and instant paralysis. Of course, there was no hole in the
back of Kennedy's neck and his spinal cord remained intact. Kennedy
remained sitting upright as he grasped for his throat with both
hands.
A high-velocity projectile striking Kennedy
in the front of the throat would have also driven him back discernably
in his seated position.. The presidential limousine is behind the
freeway sign in the Zapruder film when the front-throat wound is
incurred, so the film is useless in this regard. However, the bullet
velocity required to insure accuracy from 200 feet and beyond would
have made a sudden backward jolt of Kennedy's head obvious to many
witnesses standing within feet of the limousine. No one has ever
testified to such a movement.
Even a shot from one of the storm drains on
the North side of Elm street would have created more damage to
Kennedy's neck, unless such a shot wasn't intended to be fatal. This
shot could have been fired concurrent with a diversionary shot from
behind the motorcade, and with a silencer to further hide its origin.
A shooter in the storm drain would have had plenty of time to sight
Kennedy in. The drain is about four feet in width and the limousine
was coming almost directly towards it.
I have always wondered why JFK, a World War
II veteran who earned medals for heroism in saving men after a
Japanese Destroyer plowed his PT boat in two on a dark South Pacific
night, didn't duck down into the limousine after he incurred the
throat wound. He had about five seconds in which to do so and
certainly a man of JFK's intelligence would have had the presence of
mind to do so.
Kennedy was well aware of the dangers of a
motorcade in a city like Dallas, and this precautionary state of mind
would have made a self-protective action even more likely. One would
even have expected him to take action to shield his wife from harm.
Who knows what first entered his mind when he felt something strike
his throat? Something obviously kept him from exercising
self-preservation, an act that would have been quite simple under the
circumstances. Governor Connally got down after he was hit, and his
initial wound was far more debilitating than Kennedy's initial
wound.
In 1967 Josiah Thompson put forth a
theory in "Six Seconds In
Dallas" to explain the throat wound. Thompson
stated that the small wound and the hole in Kennedy's necktie could
very well have been the result of a piece of the President's skull
blasting downward through the brain and out through the neck. There
was no metallic residue in the wound or tie. This indeed might have
occured during the fatal head shot, but Kennedy had his hands raised
to his throat well before this point, obviously reacting to something
that had struck him in this area, not in the back, as Thompson
suggests.
In "The Taking
of America"(1975)
author Richard E. Sprague claims that a
drug/poison dart-like projectile had been fired in to Kennedy's neck
to immobilize him for the last fatal shots to the head. He attributes
this role to the so-called "umbrella man", who was in a good position
to have inflicted such a wound. This spectator, standing on the curb
to the front right of the presidential limousine and right next to the
freeway sign, was only about 30 feet from the President when the
"throat clenching" action began.
No one else had an umbrella in Dealey Plaza
that day. The skies had long cleared after early-morning showers,
allowing the presidential limousine to go through Dallas without its
"bubbletop" cover . The skies were clear and
non-threatening.
After the first shot was heard, the
"umbrella man" opened his umbrella and raised it up and down in a sort
of symbolic gesture. There has been speculation that this was just
that, a symbolic gesture reminding Kennedy of his refusal to provide
an "umbrella" cover(US air strikes) for the Bay of Pigs invaders in
April, 1961. A man standing beside the "umbrella man", and apparently
with him, raised a black-gloved fist into the air at this point,
furthering the appearance of some sort of political
gesture.
These two mysterious men were not
questioned after the assassination. They sat down on the curb for
awhile and then just calmly walked away in opposite directions. It
wasn't until 1978 that the world got its first glimpse of the
"umbrella man" and his "weapon" during the House Select Committee on
Assassinations hearings. However, there is no way to corroborate that
this was the same person with the same umbrella as on November 22,
1963! Obviously, even if it was the same person, he wouldn't be
foolish enough to bring a dart-firing umbrella onto Capitol Hill!
(HSCA "Umbrella Man"
testimony)
I don't know what type of
bullets/darts/projectiles were available in 1963 that could have
accomplished the purpose of immoblizing someone like Kennedy seemed to
be before the head shot. However, the Sprague scenario is far more
believable to me, combined with either some exotic "umbrella gun" or
storm-drain shot, than any high velocity bullet frontal shot. The
nature of the wound strongly suggests something other than a
high-velocity bullet entered the throat.
If it was a chemical-carrying projectile
that struck Kennedy's throat, would it have immobilized him so quickly
as he seemed to be? If an immobilizing chemical was introduced to the
throat this way, it would still take a couple of seconds for the agent
to reach the brain and take effect, despite its short journey in the
blood system. Also, would conspirators take a chance that a foreign
substance might somehow be detected in Kennedy's blood?
Even an injection of the chemical right
into the jugular vein would have a slight delay before taking effect.
Kennedy's wound was in an area where the veins are quite miniscule. No
one in the car who glanced back at JFK noticed any blood on him as he
grasped for his throat. This includes the First Lady, who was seated
next to her husband, and Nellie Connally, seated in the seat ahead of
the Kennedys. If a projectile did cause Kennedy to be momentarily
immobilized, it had to carry with it something quicker-acting than a
chemical agent targeted to the blood.
There is an experience quite common to all
of us that Kennedy may have experienced in the last seconds of his
life, right up to the fatal head shot. Obviously, something entering
the front of your throat would be painful and shocking to you, whether
it be a beebee pellet or a bullet. JFK undoubtedly felt something
sting his throat. There is another possibility, however, to account
for Kennedy's sudden stunned immobility as he reached for his
throat.
How many times have you "had the wind
knocked out of you," to use the phrase? When this happens, whether
from falling down awkwardly, being blind-sided or whatever, you go
through a momentary period of shock and immobility as your respiratory
system attempts to get back into rhythm. There are certain things in
our environment that can also cause us to lose our breath, such as
dust, pollen, exhaust, strong chemicals, etc.: things that the
respiratory system rejects automatically to protect us. It is quite
possible that Kennedy could have had the "wind knocked out of him" by
whatever struck him in the throat combined with what that projectile
transported..
When a person is aware of and prepared for
a sudden change to an environment that can cause loss of breath, all
he has to do is hold his breath to protect himself. However, when a
person is surprised and unprepared for such a sudden change, that
environment(substance) can cause the respiratory system to seize up in
an automatic, self-protective state: you lose your breath. I am sure
all of us have experienced this situation many times. Some allergic
reactions can also tie up the respiratory system, causing a person to
instantly lose their breath. People with asthma can also attest to
this shocking sensation. The respiratory tract is very sensitive: how
many times have you had food "go down the wrong pipe," to use the
age-old phrase?
It seems more plausible to me that the
throat wound may have been caused by a chemical-carrying projectile of
some sort that caused an instantaneous lockup of Kennedy's breathing:
it literally knocked the wind out of him. This caused him shock and
immobility long enough for a clear head shot to be attempted. He was
trying to regain his breath when the last shot was fired.
The throat shot must have been fired from a
close range, probably within 50 feet of the limousine. A lower
velocity projectile had to be fired at closer range to insure
accuracy. I base this, as stated above, on the lack of extensive
damage to Kennedy's neck that a high-velocity bullet would have
caused.
Of all the shots that were fired on the
motorcade that day, the fatal head shot has received more attention
because of its gruesome damage and the obvious direction from which it
came, the front right. The puzzling aspect of the throat wound only
obscures what is apparently another key player in Dealey Plaza. And
unlike the magic bullet, the "magic" throat wound described here was
very much a realistic consequence of the presidential
ambush!
Sources: (1) Crossfire: The Plot That Killed
Kennedy; Jim Marrs (2) The Taking of America;
Richard E. Sprague (3) Six
Seconds In Dallas; Josiah Thompson (4)
Report of the Warren Commission
On the Assassination of President Kennedy; New York Times
Paperback edition (5) The
Last Investigation; Gaeton
Fonzi