JFK Assassination Forum

Here is a bit from Larry Hancock's blog:

The RFK file ‘release’ has not drawn the media attention the earlier JFK releases did, nor have there been extended remarks from RFK Jr. on the release. Of course what we are now seeing going online are relatively routine FBI RFK Name files, basically correspondence directed the FBI – much of it calling for an investigation of Sirhan in terms of communist or radical Arab or Palestinian influence. There are also requests from LAPD for routine background checks on individuals and copies of LAPD investigative materials and evidence (including autopsy photos) – as well as newspaper coverage of the trial.

This is the sort of thing we would expect given that the FBI was simply supporting LAPD in a criminal investigation, not itself ‘working’ the crime. As to the evidence itself, and the extensive LAPD investigative files, much of it has been available at the California Archives, Dartmouth and other institutions (including the Mary Ferrell Foundation) for many years.

https://www.maryferrell.org/pages/RFK_Assassination_Documents.html

It's not that the RFK releases don’t give us further insight into the context of the crime, but primarily they simply broaden our historical view. We are not seeing brand new investigative files with the RFK materials, we are seeing history – history from bulk files (many simply copies from LAPD or elsewhere) not withheld or secret, simply from FBI records setting in the National Archives.

But is that really all there is?

Anyone reviewing the press coverage of Sirhan, or the witness statements made at his trial would have found ample indications of his Palestinian advocacy, of his hatred of Israel, and his negative view of his experience in America. He had made no effort to conceal those feelings. There were also LAPD reports of Sirhan in the company of others – young people of apparent Arab descent – both before the assassination and at the Ambassador Hotel the evening of the crime. And the FBI and the CIA were well aware of activist Arab, pro-Palestinian student groups in the U.S. – including groups Sirhan might have encountered during his two years at Pasadena City College.

The FBI and CIA were also aware that foreign nation’s intelligence services were actively working in the United States – working to counter opposition from expatriates and students studying in American colleges. Perhaps the most active of those was Iranian intelligence, known as SAVAK. Initially established with CIA assistance to support the newly installed Shah of Iran. SAVAK was particularly active in its overseas missions.

https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP81M00980R000600050015-5.pdf

Click to access Meisels-Eitan_SNR-Thesis_web.pdf

In that regard we know that a series of reports given to both the FBI and LAPD identified the Khan family of Iran as being associated with Sirhan immediately before the assassination (the family being ex-patriots with their own problems with the Shah and SAVAK).

All of this raises the question of whether any element of the American Intelligence community – CIA, FBI, NSA – held files which might have been relevant to foreign involvement in the RFK assassination. Files which would have pointed towards potential influence, contact or even influence over Sirhan – provoking or otherwise taking advantage of his own publicly stated political views (which testimony showed he was never hesitant to express to friends and acquaintances).

LAPD certainly collected numerous leads and reports which would have had at least suggested the possibility of foreign involvement in the crime. While they, and the LA District Attorney, ultimately chose not to pursue the question of influence and conspiracy at trial, did the American intelligence community choose to ignore it as well? Or are did relevant files exist which might truly expand our view of the murder of an American Senator and Presidential candidate?

If so, bringing something new to the RFK assassination is going to take more than simply scanning bulk files at NARA. Someone with major authority would have to order an actual search for such files – files the CIA in particular would have not been anxious to share back in the 1970’s – or even now.

---30---

If Larry Hancock thinks there is more to the RFKA story...then there probably is.

Hancock recommends the book Buried in Plain Sight by John Hunt to understand the mechanics or physical aspects of the RFK1A. I read the book, which is a difficult read, but by far the best on that aspect topic. I have read the usual works on the topic, which are not impressive. Lisa Pease is a joke.

One thing I was somewhat reminded of, when I read the Hunt book:

RFK’s head wound had been debrided, his head had been shaved around the wound (which was within the hairline), carefully scrubbed (surgery prep), bones removed from the skull, and the wound stitched up before Noguchi ever examined RFK. Of course, this all makes sense as RFK was alive after the shooting. I had never pondered that aspect of the autopsy before.

Hunt, and Hancock, think the Noguchi autopsy is somewhat overrated.

I have to wonder how accurate an assessment can be made from powder burns, aka stippling, on RFK1's skull, after the surgery prep, scrubbing, shaving, and any number of hours before Noguchi could even make an examination. Noguchi fired handguns into muslin-covered balls or pig's ears to try to approximate the stippling that remained visible on RFK. I guess that was all he could do. Seemingly, no one ever challenged how accurate such procedures could be given the condition of the body when Noguchi received it.

LAPD tests on RFK1A's coat show a close-range shot, but not point blank.

But the testimony of Ed Uecker, he (Uecker) was holding RFK1's wrist, when Sirhan brushed past him and extended his arm towards RFK. How close was that? 

I also recommend Larry Hancock's excellent monograph at the MFF website:

https://www.maryferrell.org/pages/Featured_Incomplete_Justice_Series_Complete.html


Caveat emptor, and draw your own conclusions. I will post more on this topic soon.

Well, I quickly skimmed the entire book. It is well-researched and well-written, by no means a schlock effort. The authors shared their work with the Houston Police Deparment. They state that the book is "true," being fictionalized only in the sense that the murders of Fred and Edwina Rogers are technically still unsolved and much dialogue is fact-based speculation. It is clearly intended to be taken seriously.

The Gerharts are not bit players. They are major characters throughout the book. There is an extensive biography of Rev. Gerhart that is entirely accurate as far as I can tell. The authors also explain his long connection with the retired CIA guy. The interaction with Oswald is fleshed out at great length and has to be largely speculative.

The authors note the passing of Marietta Gerhart in 1990 but do not acknowledge her as one of their sources. They say that she confided in several close friends with the stipulation that they not speak until after her death.

The bottom line, as it always seems to be, is "Who knows?" The story - meaning specifically the Gerharts' alleged encounter, not the Three Tramps stuff - involves real and seemingly unlikely people and has the ring of truth, but now we'll never know. If true, it would put a huge hole in the LN narrative. (FWIW, Carlos Marcello figures prominently in the book.)

Anyway, I look forward to reading the whole thing.

I'm surprised the book seems to have received so little attention in the ensuing 34 years. Shouldn't the Gerharts' tale alone be kind of a big deal conspiracy-wise even if one rejects much of the rest of the book? And Charles Frederick Rogers absolutely sounds like yet another candidate, along with Oswald and Ferrie, for The Most Interesting Man in the World.

Dear FPR,

The book would have been a lot more popular if Marietta had been abducted and inseminated by aliens (no, not those pet-eating Salvadorians; the UFO kind), don't you think?

-- Tom

One of the primary reasons I am not "back," and will not be "back," is because you are the single most boring, repetitive, obsessive, one-dimensional participant I believe I have ever encountered on any internet forum of any type.

On my last post before this thread, some 2+ months ago, I concluded by stating "I would note that I have observed the curious phenomenon that both this forum and the Other One seem to be solidly in the grip of tedious characters who have taken lessons in 'How to Kill an Internet Forum.'"

In the forefront of those tedious characters would be: you.

Dear Fancy Pants Rants,

Just remember that Lt. Col. Putin thanks you for supporting his favorite "useful idiot," The Traitorous Orange Bird (rhymes with "Xxxx"), and for minimizing the KGB*.

-- Tom

*Today's SVR and FSB

Here is the well-researched piece at the Texas True Crime blog that set me off on this tangent: https://txtruecrimeblog.com/blog-archive/ice-box-murders.

The author acknowledges the fictional nature of The Man on the Grassy Knoll but clearly takes it quite seriously. The book is also cited several other places, seemingly with respect, although I found nothing further about the Gerharts' tale.

I was able to view some pages of the book here: https://archive.org/details/manongrassyknoll00crai/mode/2up . It is dedicated to the memory of Edwina Rogers, the mother of Charles Frederick Rogers who was ostensibly butchered (literally butchered) by him.

There is a short 2005 thread at the Ed Forum on "The Gerhart Incident" that really doesn't go anywhere in terms of the authenticity of the Gerharts actually making such a claim. It mentions that Craig, one of the authors of The Man on the Grassy Knoll, was the first to videotape an interview with Chauncey Holt, so he must've been doing some actual research and presumably didn't simply invent the Gerhart incident.

All very weird. The sort of thing I'd spend time on if I were more CT-oriented. If one takes the LN narrative as straight-line truth from A to Z, I must say that there are enough genuinely weird and puzzling tangents at every point from A to Z to give anyone this side of a complete LN fanatic considerable pause. Ferrie's trip to the ice skating rink in Houston, for example - really?

On another thread, Steve M. Galbraith posted an excerpt from a Gus Russo book that mentions Gilberto Policarpo Lopez and the fact that his possible involvement in the JFKA wasn't adequately investigated by the FBI.

FWIW, Gilberto Policarpo Lopez's estranged daughter contacted me here about five years ago and we exchanged emails. She sent me two photos of him, one of which as a young man. It's kinda sepia colored and I put on the Internet. The other is much more recent, and she asked me to not make it public until he'd passed away.

She said he was violently pro-Castro ("his brother fought for Castro in the Congo"), that he was very good at faking epileptic seizures, that he'd never been sick a day in his life, that he sometimes bragged about the big empty airplane that flew him from Mexico City to Havana a couple of days after the assassination, and that, yes, like the "Oswald" that Roger Craig claimed to watch run down the slope from the general direction of the TSBD and get into a Rambler Station wagon on Elm Street about ten minutes after the assassination, he could whistle very loudly -- "he did it all the time when I was young."