Conspiracy Theory Forum

[pio]

there are many jfk related articles to be found all over the internet but are they accurate ? are they written from an unbiased standpoint ? are they intended as a vehicle to provide readers with as muc accurate truthfull information as is possible or simply as a vehicle for providing disinfo ? . certainly online when reading articles you will get both info and disinfo and it can be difficult especially for people just starting to research the assassination to know how accurate the info is and what sources of info should be deemed reliable or unreliable.the same sadly applies to books ,an author can be biased or have an agenda ,for instance an author may have a theory and and often when this occurs the author seeks evidence that aids his theory will dismissing evidence which would be harmfull to it . also authors can have an agenda ,for instance if the author is a warren commission appolagist and then he probably has an agenda and likely only seeks to show the warren commission /the evidence /and its lawyers in its best light .the same applies to tv documentaries especially those broadcast by discovery .


ill probably post a few different links/articles and critiques on this thread which highlight the above ,but lets start with this one
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/faq.txt now you can see in the link it says mcadams ,this means the article was posted via john mcadams site . mcadams site is a good resource for finding documents and photos but i would not rely upon the writings on the site to be unbiased and free of agenda ,ill probably speak a bit more about mcadams a bit later . now ill take a few sections from the article in the link above and review them to see if they are accurate unbiased and agenda free .

the author takes us through 10 points from 1 to 10 so lets have a look at some of these points .

"1.1 Who killed JFK?

There is no serious question that Lee Harvey Oswald shot President
Kennedy and Governor Connally. Oswald took an MC rifle into work,
claiming the long package contained curtain rods. There was no eyewit-
ness to him shooting the rifle from inside the building, though a witness
(Howard Brennan) saw him from the street and gave a rough descrip-
tion to the police. The rifle was found hidden on the sixth floor. It was
the same gun Oswald had ordered through the mail. It had Oswald's
prints on it. The bullets causing the wound to JFK and John Connally
were matched to this gun. Boxes used to make the "sniper's lair" had
Oswald's prints on them. Oswald fled the scene and later shot a patrol-
man (Officer Tippit) who had stopped him for routine questioning.
While in detention, he told numerous easily-discoverable lies to police
interrogators."

we notice from point one above the author tells us oswald is a liar "While in detention, he told numerous easily-discoverable lies to police
interrogators." ,so before this supposedly unbiased author has hardly started the article he labels oswald a liar .now does anyone see above where the author wrote the lies he says oswald told ? ,the answer is no and theres a reason for this .the only record of oswalds many hours of interrogation are the notes of agent bookhout and will fritz and these notes were not written as oswald said them they were written some days after the fact probably at a time when oswald was dead .in fact fritz denied ever having notes but this is untrue.

here you can see all the pages of fritz notes
http://jfklancer.com/Fritzdocs.html
here are hostys notes

here are bookhouts notes
http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archi ... PageId=645
the author brings to mind a line in the movie enemy of the state "i want people to believe his a liar before theyve even heard what he has to say " .

[pio]

"There is no serious question that Lee Harvey Oswald shot President
Kennedy and Governor Connally. Oswald took an MC rifle into work,
claiming the long package contained curtain rods"
the author again shows us that he makes statments as fact while not telling us or providing evidence as to how he reached his conclussion , some times the evidence in its entirety does not help the authors so it is more convenient to omit parts are all of it . so what does the author omit ? well he omits the very fact that wesley frazier the man who drove oswald to work that morning (and fraziers sister linne randall ) both said the package was just a little over two feet (about 27 inches )
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iDWaOjFqgHk

Mr. FRAZIER - Let's see, when I got in the car I have a kind of habit of glancing over my shoulder and so at that time I noticed there was a package laying on the back seat, I didn't pay too much attention and I said, "What's the package, Lee?"
And he said, "Curtain rods," and I said, "Oh, yes, you told me you was going to bring some today."
That is the reason, the main reason he was going over there that Thursday afternoon when he was to bring back some curtain rods, so I didn't think any more about it when he told me that.
Mr. BALL - What did the package look like?
Mr. FRAZIER - Well, I will be frank with you, I would just, it is right as you get out of the grocery store, just more or less out of a package, you have seen some of these brown paper sacks you can obtain from any, most of the stores, some varieties, but it was a package just roughly about two feet long.
Mr. BALL - It was, what part of the back seat was it in?

Mr. BALL. About how long would you think the package would be, just measure it right on there.
Mrs. RANDLE. I would say about like this.
Mr. BALL. You mean from here to here?
Mrs. RANDLE. Yes, sir; with that folded down with this much for him to grip in his hand.
Mr. BALL. This package is about the span of my hand, say 8 inches, is that right? He would have about this much to grip?
Mrs. RANDLE. What I remember seeing is about this long, sir, as I told you it was folded down so it could have been this long.
Mr. BALL. I see. You figure about 2 feet long, is that right?
Mrs. RANDLE. A little bit more.
Mr. BALL. A little more than 2 feet.

the reason im posting the above is because the rifle they found in the texas school book depository even when broken down is 35.8 inches long ,if the package frazier says oswald carried contained the carcano he couldnt possibly have held the package cupped in his hand and the other end under his armpit (it would be far to long ) dont take my word for this get a stick or simmilar that is 35.8 inches long and try and hold it in the manner which frazier says oswald held the package and you will see it wont fit unless you have exceptionaly longs arms which oswald did not .then try and hold the stick as randall described oswald doing and see if the stick hits the ground below you ,im betting the 35.8 inch long stick will scrape on the floor and we know this did not happen on 22/11/63 as the bag wasnt scratched or torn .the author also omits the fact that there was no evidence found to show that the rifle or any rifle was ever in the paper sack they found in the texas school book depository ,in fact a further omition is that the paper sack said to have layed on the floor in the snipers nest area is not once seen in all the many photos and films taken of the snipers nest that day ,not one photo or piece of film shows the paper sack in situ . so we see omiting evidence in part or in whole to give the reader a false impression is just as usefull to a biased author as is posting evidence and distorting it .

[pio]

"There was no eyewit-
ness to him shooting the rifle from inside the building, though a witness
(Howard Brennan) saw him from the street and gave a rough descrip-
tion to the police"

the above statment is reasonably accurate tho vague ,yes no witness saw oswald on the 6th floor at any time from about 11.45 and 12.30 . the people who did see oswald were bill shelly oswalds supervisor /charles givens an employee and eddie piper another employee and also caroln arnold . now shelly came down stairs for lunch at about 11.45 am oswalds co workers followed shelly down leaving oswald alone for a few minutes . bill shelly then told us he saw oswald at about 11.50 on the 1st floor
Mr. BALL. On November 22, 1963, the day the President was shot, when is the last time you saw Oswald?
Mr. SHELLEY. It was 10 or 15 minutes before 12.
Mr. BALL. Where?
Mr. SHELLEY. On the first floor over near the telephone.

charles gives gave a statment to the fbi that he saw oswald reading the paper in the lunchroom


givens later told the warren commission he gave no such statment (clearly we see he was either mistaken or lying ) the commission didnt see fit to present him with the statment and ask him about ,they just took his word for it it seems.
eddie pipper saw oswald at about midday again on the 1st floor
Mr. BALL. Was that the last time you saw him?
Mr. PIPER. Just at 12 o'clock.
Mr. BALL. Where were you at 12 o'clock?
Mr. PIPER. Down on the first floor.

now we come to carolyn arnold
"When I found Mrs. Arnold in 1978 to get a firsthand account, she was surprised to hear how she had been reported by the FBI. Her spontaneous reaction, that she had been misquoted, came BEFORE I explained to her the importance of Oswald's whereabouts at given moments. Mrs. Arnold's recollection of what she really observed was clear--spotting Oswald was after all her one personal contribution to the record of that memorable day. As secretary to the company vice- president she knew Oswald; he had been in the habit of coming to her for change. What Mrs. Arnold says she actually told the FBI is very different from the report of her comments and not vague at all. She said: "About a quarter of an hour before the assassination [12:15], I went into the lunchroom on the second floor for a moment . . . . Oswald was sitting in one of the booth seats on the right-hand side of the room as you go in. He was alone as usual and appeared to be having lunch. I did not speak to him but I recognized him clearly." Mrs. Arnold has reason to remember going into the lunchroom. She was pregnant at the time and had a craving for a glass of water. (14:77)

[pio]

a lot of authors say carolyn arnold in her fbi statment never mentioned seeing oswald ,in fact they say she says she didnt see oswald . but what the authors dont mention is that j edgar hoover sent instructions to his dallas investigators instructing them to ask the witness a very specif question "did you see oswald at 12.30 the time of the shots " carolyn arnold truthfully answered no to this question but she had made it clear that she saw oswald around 12.15 or so but the fbi statment doesnt accurately reflect miss arnolds witness testimony .one can only say that the specific question was designed to give the impression that no one saw oswald at all between 11.45 and 12.30 and we know that was most certainly not the case .

author gerald posner in his book case closed tells his readers that when shelly and oswalds co workers went down for lunch about 11.45 that oswald stayed up on the 6th floor never ever coming down stairs ,where he went about constructing the snipers nest and assembling the carcano and he lay in wait for jfks arrival at 12.30 .we see from the information aboyve and in the last post that this is completely inaccurate ,one then has to ask a very important question how can posner who has studied this case for years not be aware of the info i posted above ? .the answer is there is no way a man of his experience and research in this case can not know the above info which i posted ,then one has to ask themselves if he knew oswald came down to the first floor and was seen by no less than 4 witnesses why would he tell his readers that oswald stayed on the 6th floor knowing that his statment is 100% inaccurate ,ill let you guys reading have a think about that .

i dont think howard brennan lied i believe he did see a man in 6th floor window however i dont believe that he clearly saw the man hence thats the reason why he initially refused to identify oswald as the man he saw ,he said he was afraid that he may be in danger if he identified oswald . strangely for a man who said he was afraid he gave plenty of interviews so i dont think fear was a factor .it is said that brennan attended a police lineup where he picked out oswald as the man he saw (there are 3 problems with this ) the first being we have a list of all people present at and appearing in the lineups brennans name does not appear on this list . secondly brennan claimed he attended the same linep as barbara and jeanette davis neither of these ladys remembered brennan being there ,thirdly brennan said that will fritz was also at the lineup when the warren commission asked will fritz if he attended the lineup he said "i doubt it " .

brennan said the man he saw as standing and he gave a description of the man height and weight etc .he said the man was about 150 pounds and about 5 feet 10 ,it was impossible for brennan to be able to judge this .the reason being that the man in the window was not standing ,the window sill was low it was only about a foot off the ground (see picture in next post )

[pio]

[pio]

[pio]

notice how low the window sill in the picture above is ? so the sniper can only have been kneeling either on one or both knees and not standing ,therefore its impossible for brennan to only see a man from the waist up and judge his height and weight .

[pio]

in the next segment the author discusses some books,i wont discuss all of these but here are a few

"Epstein, Edward J., "Counterplot": About the Garrison investigation of
the assassination. Exposes the weakness of Garrison's case and the
dubious methods used to develop the evidence. Published before
the actual trial of Clay Shaw. (Reprinted in "The Assassination
Chronicles")"

"Exposes the weakness of Garrison's case and the Exposes the weakness of Garrison's case and the dubious methods used to develop the evidence "
the above is another example of bias the author speaks of dubious methods used ,garrisson was falsely accused by the nation media newspapers /magazines and tv channels of offering criminals parole to lie about clay shaw /falsely accused of planting evidence and other false accusations . but as we see the author chose to perpetuate the lies rather than tell people the truth ,one of the biggest hatchet jobs done on garrisson was done by nbc and nbc had to give garrisson air time because of how they misrepresented garrison to the people in a previous broadcast . see the video below .
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hqo2c_Sx ... re=related

"Lattimer, John K., M.D., "Kennedy and Lincoln": Discusses the medi-cal and ballistic aspects of both assassinations."
the same dr lattimer who said the wound on connallys back was elongated and 3cm long and that the elongated wound was evidence of the bullet tumbling having left jfks throath and having hit connally side ways as opposed to point first like this diagram
[img]matters.com/essays/jfkmed/BigLieSmallWound/sbt.jpg[/img]
this is a complete fabrication the wound on connallys back was no more than 1.5 cm and is evidence of the bullet entering at an angle as opposed to sideways ,here is a link regarding lattimer and connallys back wound .
http://www.history-matters.com/essays/j ... lWound.htm

the same dr lattimer told us how he bought a carcano with the exact same serial number as the serial number on the rifle in the archives ,a serial number the warren commission said was unique to one rifle .

"If there was ever proof that there was more than one rifle with the serial number C2766, it would come from the most unlikeliest of sources, Warren Commission supporter the late John K. Lattimer. In his book Kennedy & Lincoln ( 1980 ) , on page 250 he alludes to an experiment he did with his sons back in the 70's using a Mannlicher Carcano 91/38 rifle with a serial number of C2766."


"Posner, Gerald, "Case Closed": Single best book on the assassination.
Provides a solid biography of Oswald and discusses all the evidence
that implicates Oswald, including a lengthy discussion of the physi-
cal evidence, referencing much of the scientific confirmation of the
shots that has gone on behind the scenes. Also debunks the most
common conspiracy myths. (See Web page http://ourworld.com-
puserve.com/homepages/posner.)"

ive allready mentioned posner briefly but so numerous are the errors /omitions /distortions and lies in posners book case closed that it deserves to be discussed in detail .

[pio]

One Dozen "Posnerisms"
by David Starks
Copyright 1997, Imagi-Vision, Inc.

This is a list of twelve of the most surprising examples of author Gerald Posner's mistakes and misrepresentations in his book on the assassination of John F. Kennedy entitled Case Closed: Lee Harvey Oswald and the Assassination of JFK. Posner's supporters have been asking for examples of deliberate deception. I challenge his defenders to show how all of these examples could be explained as carelessness, sloppiness or incompetence on Posner's part? Perhaps we should propose a new word for the English language. On pages 468-9 of his book, Posner provides a definition of a "Posnerism." He is engaging in one of his many attacks on Warren Commission critics when he states that "an increasing amount of published work is a dangerous mixture of good information with a liberal dose of falsehoods." Below you will find one dozen examples from a much larger list of one hundred mistakes I have collected. The full list is available for anyone to see (at no cost) in a longer article published at http://home.cynet.net/jfk. Many of the mistakes that I document were found by other Posner critics and are also posted at this same Web site in the form of articles. The collection of articles comprises the first issue of a free electronic newsletter. If someone wants to write a response defending Posner and explaining the items listed in this article, please feel free to send it to the site and it could be included in the newsletter. It must be substantive, must address the issues presented in this list and must be civil in tone. If Posner himself wants to refute these examples we welcome (and will also post) his response in the newsletter.

The following items from the pages of Case Closed show:

1) Page 4. A reference to non-existent testimony.
2) Page 12. Use of a discredited witness to show a potential for violence.
3) Page 13. The same witness and two false references used to misrepresent Oswald's potential for violence and to attack a Warren Commission critic.
4) Page 127. A citation that contradicts the statement that it is supposed to support.
5) Page 224. Combination of two witnesses' testimony to deliberately misrepresent.
6) Page 225. Selecting from various conflicting accounts given by the same witness.
7) Page 227. Misrepresentation of an entire group of witnesses' stories.
8) Page 233. Repetition of an easily disproven lone-assassin myth.
9) Page 247. Having it both ways with an astonishing example of self-contradiction.
10) Page 260. References to contradictory sources to argue a clearly false assertion.
11) Page 321. Taking credit for a "discovery" and then citing the article where the person first revealed this discovery as a source on another related topic.
12) Page 496. Attempting to debunk a mysterious death with unsourced, false information.


1) Page 4. The author cites Dallas Police Detective Bob Carroll, who participated in the arrest of Lee Harvey Oswald at the Texas Theater, as a source for Oswald "smirking and hollering, 'I protest this police brutality.'" When we check the actual testimony of Bob Carroll to the Warren Commission, there is a similar quote but no mention of any Oswald facial expression. (1) The implication of this invented grin is that a fanatical political assassin is proud of his deed and must be smirking in smug satisfaction because of his accomplishment.(2)

(1) WC Vol. 7, p. 21.
(2) Jerry Rose, "The Deadly Smirk and Other Inventions," The
Fourth Decade, November, 1993.

2) Page 12. The author gives us some proof of Oswald's psychological potential to become an assassin by quoting from a discredited witness by the name of Renatus Hartogs. Hartogs did a psychological evaluation of Oswald when, as a child, Oswald was caught skipping school. Hartogs told the Warren Commission that Oswald had "definite traits of dangerousness." (3) In fact Warren Commission attorney Wesley Liebeler challenged him on this point and revealed that Hartogs had said no such thing in his report in 1953. (4) Hartogs then retracts this statement and Liebeler calls for the addition of the actual text of Hartogs' 1953 report to be added to the end of the record of his April 16, 1964 deposition.

(3) WC Vol. 8, p. 217.
(4) Gary Aguilar, "Letter to the Editor of the Federal Bar News
and Journal," Federal Bar News and Journal, 1994.
James R. Folliard, "Gerald Posner Closes the Case,"The Fourth
Decade, November, 1993.
Peter Dale Scott, "A Review of Gerald Posner, Case Closed: Lee
Harvey Oswald and the Assassination of JFK, Deep Politics II:
Essays on Oswald, Skokie, Illinois, Green Archives Publications,
1995.

3) Page 13n. Mr. Posner uses false background information to attack the credibility of the late, highly respected author, Sylvia Meagher, and to rehabilitate the discredited witness, Dr. Renatus Hartogs. Sylvia Meagher concluded that there was no reason to find Oswald mentally unsound. (5) Posner cites Hartogs and the reports of two Soviet psychiatrists to refute her. (6) We already know about Hartogs' unreliability from the previous item. One of the reports concluded that Oswald was, "not dangerous to other people." (7) The other report describes Oswald's attitude as being "completely normal" (8) and finds that "no psychotic symptoms were noted." (9) This is an example of Posner citing sources that show the exact opposite of what he claims they show. (10)

(5) Sylvia Meagher, Accessories after the Fact: The Warren
Commission, The Authorities and the Truth, NY, Vintage Books,
1967, 1976, p. 244.
(6) James R. Folliard, "Gerald Posner Closes the Case,"The
Fourth Decade, November, 1993.
(7) WC Vol. 18, p. 464.
(8) WC Vol. 18, p. 468.
(9) WC Vol. 18, p. 473.
(10) Peter Dale Scott, "A Review of Gerald Posner, Case Closed:
Lee Harvey Oswald and the Assassination of JFK," Deep Politics
II: Essays on Oswald, Skokie, Illinois, Green Archives
Publications, 1995.

4) Page 127. Posner claims that on May 29, 1963 Oswald "'went to the Jones Printing Company" to order 1000 pro-Cuba handbills. His reference for this is an FBI report by Special agent John M. McCarthy concerning McCarthy's interview of Myra Silver. (11) When shown a photograph of Oswald she was unable to recognize him as the man who ordered the handbills from her. So what we have here is a classic Posnerism. He cites testimony that contradicts the point it is supposed to support. (12)

(11) WC Vol. 22, p. 797.
(12) Martin Shackelford,"Case Closed:
Lee Harvey Oswald and the Assassination of JFK, by Gerald Posner:
A Preliminary Critique," The Investigator, August-September, 1993.

5) Page 224. According to Gerald Posner, Oswald's neighbor Linnie Mae Randle saw Oswald on the morning of the assassination carrying a package "under his armpit, and the other end did not quite touch the ground." This is a classic Posnerism. (13) He has combined Randle's testimony with her brother's to give a deliberate false impression. Her brother, Buell Wesley Frazier (who saw Oswald at a different time carrying the package), said that Oswald had one end in his right hand and the other end under his armpit. (14) In Frazier's description, he mentions nothing about the package being anywhere near "the ground." In Linnie Mae Randle's statement to the FBI of Dec. 2, 1963, she said Oswald was carrying a package in his right hand and that it was long but it did not touch the ground as he walked across the street. (15) She said nothing about it being "under his armpit." In Randle's testimony in Washington, DC, she further clarified this by saying that Oswald held it at "the top with just a little bit sticking up." (16) To the FBI she demonstrated that it was 27 inches long. (17) To attorney Ball she said it was "a little bit more than two feet long." (18) This was much shorter than the three foot length of the package in evidence and much too short to have contained the rifle, even in a disassembled state.

(13) James R. Folliard, "Gerald Posner Closes the Case, "The Fourth
Decade, November, 1993.
(14) WC Vol. 2, p. 228.
(15) WC Vol. 24, p. 407.
(16) WC Vol. 2, p. 248.
(17) WC Vol. 24, p. 408.
(18) WC Vol. 2, p. 249.

6) Page 225. Posner says Bonnie Ray Williams saw Oswald at 11:40 AM on the east side of the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository, "near the windows overlooking Dealey Plaza." On March 19, 1964 Williams said, in an FBI interview, that the last time he saw Oswald was "at about 11:40 AM. At that time Oswald was on the sixth floor on the east side of the building." (19) But then we check his Warren Commission testimony of March 24, 1964 and he marks a spot on a chart at the north side of the building where he last saw Oswald at 11:45-11:50 AM. (20). To show just how bad this particular witness was we can refer to Williams' sworn affidavit from Nov. 22, 1963 where he says he didn't see Oswald at all after he "saw him at 8 AM." (21) Posner took his pick from three different versions to find one that was consistent with the lone assassin theory and completely ignored the other versions given by the same, unreliable witness. (22)


(19) WC Vol. 22, pp. 681-2.
(20) WC Vol. 3, p. 167.
(21) WC Vol. 24, p. 229.
(22) Jerry Rose, "The Deadly Smirk and Other Inventions," The
Fourth Decade, November, 1993

[pio]

7) Page 227. We find out from Posner that Lee Harvey Oswald wasn't in the Texas School Book Depository lunchroom around noon like he had claimed to be when questioned by authorities after his arrest. How does Posner know? We find out that three of the Warren Commission's most pliable witnesses say they were eating in that lunchroom in their later Commission testimony. When we check Posner's references for Charles Givens we see he said no such thing. (23) When asked by attorney Belin if he ate in the Texas School Book Depository that day, Givens says, "No sir." (24) Danny Arce said in his Warren Commission testimony that he ate "In that little Domino Room there." (25) In Arce's affidavit of Nov. 22, 1963 he said, "At lunch time at 12:00 noon I went down on the street to see the parade." (26) He said he was standing at "Elm and Houston" at 12:30 PM when he heard shots. (27) Jack Dougherty does say he ate "In the Domino Room" when he testified to the Warren Commission on April 8, 1964, but he says on the next page of the testimony that he thinks he ate lunch after the assassination. (28) The Warren Commission Report describes Dougherty as being "confused." (29)

(23) Peter Dale Scott, "A Review of Gerald Posner, Case Closed:
Lee Harvey Oswald and the Assassination of JFK, "Deep Politics II:
Essays on Oswald, Skokie, Illinois, Green Archives Publications,
1995.
(24) WC Vol. 6, p. 352.
(25) WC Vol. 6, p. 365.
(26) WC Vol. 24, p. 199.
(27) WC Vol. 6, p. 378.
(28) WC Vol. 6, p. 379.
(29) WC Report, p. 153.
8) Page 233. Posner parrots the often-repeated myth that "no Secret Service men rode on the running boards attached to the rear" of JFK's limousine. (30) Posner ignores or doesn't know about agent Clint Hill's testimony to the Warren Commission that he rode on the back of the limousine "approximately four times." (31) And now, thanks to the work of the Assassination Records Review Board, we have corroboration for Clint Hill's testimony. A recently discovered film taken from the car immediately following the limousine shows Hill riding on the back of the Limousine. (32) Although no reference is given, William Manchester seems to be the source of this error. (33)

(30) Martin Shackelford, "Case Closed: Lee Harvey Oswald and the
Assassination of JFK, by Gerald Posner: A Preliminary Critique,"
The Investigator, August-September, 1993.
(31) WC Vol. 2, p. 136.
(32) Dave Powers film, National Archives.
(33) William Manchester, The Death of a President, NY,
Harper & Row, 1967, p. 37.
9) Page 247. Posner accepts the witness, James Worrell, who claims to have seen "what you might call a little flash of fire and then smoke." (34) Posner embraces this description uncritically because it presumably gives him a witness to a rifle firing in the Texas School Book Depository window where Oswald is supposed to be. Actually, Posner combines two similar but different statements on the same page of testimony into one. This compositing of testimony doesn't appreciably change the meaning. Quote number one is, "Well I saw what you might call a little flame and smoke." Quote number two describes a third shot and Worrell says, "same thing, a little flash of fire and then smoke." What Worrell says after this is something that Posner, in his selective, deceptive style, has to avoid. Worrell says, I didn't see it on the fourth one." It is inconvenient that this witness clearly describes four shots and not the three that Posner's flavor of lone assassin theory depends upon. In an affidavit signed by Worrell on Nov. 22, 1963 he said that he didn't see the first shot's fire and smoke, he did see it on the second and he ran and (while running) heard, but did not see, a third and fourth shot. (35) This is another example of Posner's choice of witnesses with evolving and changing testimony that he so often uses to "close" the case. But this is not the worst part about this example. With prosecutorial zeal Posner does everything he can to discredit several Grassy Knoll witnesses. Some witnesses noticed what appeared to be a puff of smoke rising up from the Knoll area. To counter these witnesses Posner completely reverses himself in relation to the fire and smoke aspect nine pages later. He makes a truly mindless error of self-contradiction by stating categorically that "modern ammunition is smokeless." (36)

(34) WC Vol. 2, p. 200.
(35) WC Vol. 16, p. 959.
(36) James R. Folliard, "Gerald Posner Closes the Case," The Fourth
Decade, November, 1993.
10) Page 256. On the day of the assassination Posner says, "there was a stiff wind blowing north to south." This is an attempt to explain why people in the motorcade smelled gunpowder immediately after the shots were fired. When we check his references for this claim we see Posner at his deceptive best on this issue. Mrs. Robert Reid said, "the wind was blowing a little bit," but gives no direction at all. (37) Luke Mooney says, "The wind was blowing pretty high," and again we see he gives no direction at all. (38) James Romack states, "The wind was blowing a little bit from the south that day." (39) Only two of his cited five witnesses talk of wind from the north. Tom Dillard said, "there developed a very brisk north wind." (40) James Altgens says, "The north wind caught her (Jackie Kennedy's) hat and almost blew it off." (41) So on this point we have two supporting witnesses, two who offer no verification and one that flatly contradicts Posner's statement. (139) The House Select Committee on Assassinations checked the wind direction for that day and found that at 12:30 PM the wind was blowing from the west. (46) This wind direction suggests that the occupants of the cars traveling west would not have smelled gunpowder at all if the smell was originating from Texas School Book Depository. In fact it would not have entered the Dealey Plaza zone at all and would have headed east from Oswald's alleged perch. For the purpose of this study we will count this as one error, even though it involves three misrepresentations of testimony.

(37) WC Vol. 3, p. 273.
(38) WC Vol. 3, p. 282.
(39) WC Vol. 6, p. 280.
(40) WC Vol. 6, p. 165.
(41) WC Vol. 7, p. 517.
(42) Michael M. Dworetsky, "Wind and Gunsmoke: A Deception in
Gerald Posner's Case Closed," Electronic Assassinations Newsletter,
Issue #1, http://home.cynet.net/jfk/
(43) HSCA Vol. 8, pp. 21, 173-4.

11) Page 321. Occasionally Posner refers to mysterious new "enhancements" of the Zapruder film. He never really explains what he means by this, but he attempts to use this to prove parts of his case. He claims that these "enhancements" helped him deduce that a shot was fired around frame Z162. This is because he has noticed that 10-year-old Rosemary Willis stops running alongside the limousine and looks back toward the Texas School Book Depository just after Z162. Posner claims this is new when it was actually first discovered by David Lui back in the 70s. Lui noticed this when viewing a bad, bootleg copy of the film. (44) He even has the nerve to cite David Lui's article as a reference for a quote from Rosemary Willis later in his text. (45)

(44) Harold Weisberg, Case Open: The Omissions, Distortions and
Falsifications of Case Closed, NY, Carroll and Graf, 1994, p.
11-14.
(45) David Lui, "The Little Girl Must Have Heard," The Dallas Times
Herald, June 3, 1979.
12) Page 496. One of Posner's "debunked" mysterious deaths is that of Mary Sherman. As author Jim DiEugenio points out, Mary Sherman was not killed in an accidental fire (as Posner would have you believe). Posner gets the cause of death wrong. She didn't die as a result of burns or smoke inhalation. If you consider the knife wounds in her arm, leg, stomach and one that pierced her heart, it makes little sense to label her death as an accident. (46) There is another mistake in his evaluation of the death of Mary Sherman that has no bearing on conspiracy. It is just another example of his carelessness. Posner says Sherman died in 1967. Dr. Mary Sherman (who was an associate of David Ferrie) died in 1964 on the day that the Warren Commission began taking testimony in New Orleans. (47) Her death is still considered an unsolved murder by New Orleans Police. (48)

(46) New Orleans Parish Coroner's Office, Autopsy Report on
Mary Sherman, July 21, 1964.
Edward T. Haslam, Mary, Ferrie and the Monkey Virus,
Albuquerque, NM, 1995, pp. 248-50.
(47) Jim DiEugenio, "Posner in New Orleans: Gerry in Wonderland,"
Dateline Dallas, November 22, 1993.
(48) Kermit Tarleton, "Clues Lacking in Killing of Dr. Mary
Sherman," New Orleans States Item, July 21, 1964.

Click here for the full length article THE POSNER REPORT