Is this possible?

[Paul May]

Yet, when one begins with an incorrect premise, conspiracy and spends 30 years attempting to prove it, yet failures, what does that tell us?

[Paul May]

Preponderance of evidence in totality along with consciousness of guilt. Damn strong circumstantial case that has stood the test of time for 58 years. There is no conspiracy argument that can say that.

[Tim Nickerson]

I agree.

I disagree with his support of Jim Garrison but outside of that, it's undeniable that Jim Di knows his stuff.

He may know his stuff but his stuff does not match up very well with reality. I've run up against him a number of times in the past few months and I've come to realize that he's not very bright and his knowledge of the JFK assassination does not go very deep. He can carry on about the case but so much of what he says and writes is just not true. He now has me blocked.

[Tim Nickerson]

"We don't have any proof that Oswald fired the rifle, and never did. Nobody's yet been able to put him in the building (Texas School Book Depository) with a gun in his hand."

Dallas Police Chief, Jesse Curry, in 1969

Curry never said that.

[Walt Cakebread]

He may know his stuff but his stuff does not match up very well with reality. I've run up against him a number of times in the past few months and I've come to realize that he's not very bright and his knowledge of the JFK assassination does not go very deep. He can carry on about the case but so much of what he says and writes is just not true. He now has me blocked.

I agree with much of what you've written here Tim,.....  IMO Mr D is not an asset to the CT community.... 

[Jon Banks]

Curry never said that.

The quote is attributed to a 1969 Dallas Morning News interview of Curry

[Jon Banks]

He may know his stuff but his stuff does not match up very well with reality. I've run up against him a number of times in the past few months and I've come to realize that he's not very bright and his knowledge of the JFK assassination does not go very deep. He can carry on about the case but so much of what he says and writes is just not true. He now has me blocked.

I've read two of his books.

I found most of his defenses of Jim Garrison unpersuasive but outside of that, I don't think it's inaccurate to say Jim has an encyclopedic knowledge of the JFK assassination investigations.