"And he said 'I shot Walker'"

[Bill Brown]

One, no, Sirhan has never "admitted" that he killed RFK.

In the Sirhan interview with Frost that I mentioned, in the video posted by Steve Galbraith, right at the one minute mark Sirhan said he sincerely regrets his actions.  What do you think he was talking about, i.e. what actions do you think Sirhan is saying that he regrets?

[Lance Payette]

Breaking news: Prepare yourself, people. The Walker incident has been solved. Greg Doudna has a new book coming out (yes, we NEED another book) CONCLUSIVELY proving that the Walker shooting was a publicity stunt in which Walker himself participated. Greg says "conclusively" twice in his post at the Ed Forum, https://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/31685-frontlinepbs-jfka-witness-interviews-access-issue/page/2/#comments, so you know it's the real deal. Curiously, his bombshell post was ignored by the rest of the participants.

In any event, there were three participants in addition to Walker himself - two Walker aides and, yep, Oswald. One aide was in the parking lot in a car with the engine running and the headlights on in order to blind any observer. He gave a signal to Walker and two men in the alley (another aide and Oswald), whereupon Walker hit the floor and the shot was fired harmlessly by the other aide. The aide handed the rifle to Oswald, who ran like a rabbit. Walker waited until the aides were safely home before phoning the police. You'll want to read Greg's post for yourself, which seems to me to eliminate any need to buy the book.

Yes, you're right, Greg is nuttier than the proverbial fruitcake. He is one of those JFKA researchers who actually has academic credentials (he has expertise in the Dead Sea Scrolls, another of my interests) but is, alas, nuttier than a fruitcake insofar as the JFKA is concerned. He is absolutely hellbent to break new ground in the JFKA with massive 75-page off-the-wall "analyses" to which few pay serious attention. He must be very, very bored (as am I, admittedly, but I'll get over it when I have this damn Achilles surgery tomorrow and am back in action in a few months).

You will notice that Greg's latest, like so many CT narratives, suffers from two familiar fatal flaws:

1. It makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. In the unlikely event Walker wanted to drum up sympathy for himself, he scarcely would have needed a scenario as absurdly elaborate and risk filled as the one Greg posits. Regardless of his political views and sexual proclivities, Walker was a major military figure who presumably had more planning ability than Curly, Larry and Moe.

2. It simply inserts a cardboard Oswald, the Most Interesting Man in the World, into a scenario in which the actual Oswald simply doesn't fit. What does Oswald's participation add to the scenario Greg posits? How would Walker and his aides have known anything about Oswald or have recruited him? Wouldn't the inclusion of Oswald have increased the risks by a factor of, oh, 1000 or so? What would have been Oswald's interest in participating in this nonsense? Why was it necessary for Oswald to write the note to Marina, tell Marina anything at all, or leave the other incriminating evidence? What did Oswald do with the rifle used to fire the shot? Honestly, WHAT THE HELL?

It's all totally ad hoc and very typical of Greg: Can I craft a new and innovative scenario that includes Oswald - because he pretty clearly was involved - but that nevertheless exonerates him or at least makes him just a cog in someone else's elaborate conspiracy? Well, yes, you can - but at the expense of logic, rationality and believability.

[Steve M. Galbraith]

In the Sirhan interview with Frost that I mentioned, in the video posted by Steve Galbraith, right at the one minute mark Sirhan said he sincerely regrets his actions.  What do you think he was talking about, i.e. what actions do you think Sirhan is saying that he regrets?

Sirhan admitted in his trial that he shot JFK. He claimed "diminished capacity." He also admitted to the police that he shot JFK. And he admitted in a parole hearing that he shot JFK. He said he remembered firing the first shot but not any other shots.

As we know, you cannot reason with unreasonable conspiracy believers (there are some reasonable ones remaining). Michael Griffith is a textbook example of it.

You can read about the case here (this is the appellate court decision not the trial; but it cites details of the trial): https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/ca-supreme-court/1826802.html

Note this part in particular: "At the trial it was undisputed that defendant fired the shot that killed Senator Kennedy. The evidence also established conclusively that he shot the victims of the assault counts. The principal defense relied upon by defendant was that of diminished capacity."

[Tom Graves]

Sirhan admitted in his trial that he shot JFK. He claimed "diminished capacity." He also admitted to the police that he shot JFK. And he admitted in a parole hearing that he shot JFK. He said he remembered firing the first shot but after that he couldn't.

As we know, you cannot reason with unreasonable conspiracy believers. It simply won't work.

You can read about his case here: https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/ca-supreme-court/1826802.html

Dear Steve M.,

*RFK, not JFK.

-- Tom

PS Angleton's "Byetkov(?)" (whom he talked about in his Church Committee testimony and whom you asked me about a few years ago at a JFKA Google Group) was Igor Obyedkov, a Kremlin-loyal triple agent at the Soviet Embassy in Mexico City whom the CIA mistakenly believed it had successfully recruited and who "volunteered" the Department 13-radioactive name "Kostikov" (made radioactive by Kremlin-loyal FEDORA at the FBI's NYC field office a year earlier) to Oswald or "Oswald" over a sure-to-be-tapped-by-CIA phoneline on 10/1/63.