The assassination of John F. Kennedy has been an enduring story, there are as many explanations as I have hot dinners. I want to state right away that I am not a student of the subject, I just read books. And Books I have aplenty on the subject.
I doubt that the whole story will ever be told, and I doubt the exact truth will ever meet the cold light of day. When you look at the preponderance of evidence you do discover some interesting facts.
This young and charismatic president, with a young and attractive wife had powerful enemies. Not everyone was quite as keen on the Camelot lifestyle that they portrayed. We in Europe were delighted to see a new broom, one that represented a new way forward, the hard core republicans in America viewed him through different criteria. Many of them were ticked off, a young democrat upstart, spoiling the fun!
With this background it is easy to see how the conspiracy theory becomes popular.
I am in the majority when I say that about the only thing these conspiricists agree on is that the Warren Commission did a horrible job. Much hard evidence was either ignored, or conveniently went missing. Just how do you misplace a dead presidents brain?
My quest for the truth was refueled a few months ago when Larry Hancock published â€˜Someone Would Have Talkedâ€™, this is an interesting book, it draws no conclusions but rather explores the interesting interplay between the persona involved.
Many of the JFK theorists rely heavily on the Zapruder home video of the assassination. It is that grainy home video that everyone has seen 8 gazzilion times. What you may not realize though is that the original super 8 film has rarely been seen. What we are treated to is the 3 copies that Zapruder had made by Kodak. And just like a cassette, when you make a copy you lose some quality. Several years ago the Zapruder family agreed to let MPI have access to the original version. The technique for enhancement was fascinating, using a medium format camera (donâ€™t let the name fool you, this is really high end photography) they created a frame by frame still version. This was then bolted back into a video. This enhanced version is light years beyond the versions previously seen.
Dan Robertson uses this new version as the backdrop to his new book. While I am not sure that I agree with Dan in his analysis, I have to admit that there are some unanswered questions.
In what has become a very rare event in my life, I actually ran out of book to read. So I devilled in my pile of books I should read when I get time. In the pile was High Treason by Robert J. Groden and Harrison Edward Livingstone. This is an older book, I believe it was first released in 1980, but it is impeccably researched and adds yet more gold nuggets to the illusive story. Â
These authors do not make accusations as to who did it, rather they concentrate on the what happened after. They present a disturbing litany of conflicting stories about the medical and later autopsy staff. The official version that the Warren commission released seems to have little to do with the recollections of the people involved.
The preponderance of evidence shows that at least one, and more likely two shots did not come from the back, rather they were shots from the front. Yet the Warren commission still insisted that the â€˜lone gunmanâ€™ was responsible.
So what do we end up with? The answer is, I have no clue. The more I read, the more confused I become.
I doubt that the actual truth will ever come out. Even though these events happened over 40 years ago, there does seem to be a reticence to release much of the information from the event.
Whatâ€™s not to love about a great conspiracy?