Speaker 1: November fourteen, twenty twenty four, allegedly according to that thing
Speaker 1: we call a calendar, this the o'celly effect on a Thursday. Yes, indeed,
Speaker 1: I am live. But of course, if you're not hearing
Speaker 1: me just after about seven minutes after eight pm Eastern
Speaker 1: here and what we used to call the United States,
Speaker 1: you know that place. If you're not hearing me right
Speaker 1: then and there, then you're hearing the podcast. Welcome to
Speaker 1: the show, one way or another. But if you do
Speaker 1: want to hear us live, you can just catch us
Speaker 1: through your radio apps at oelly dot com radio and
Speaker 1: all that good stuff. But of course the podcast is
Speaker 1: available most places that podcasts are available, although I think
Speaker 1: I've been knocked down off of YouTube again. But anyway,
Speaker 1: it is what it is, and welcome to it. I've
Speaker 1: only gonna keep talking about JFK at least tonight, and
Speaker 1: god knows what will happen on the open mic night tomorrow,
Speaker 1: but I have a feeling it'll come up again. Why, well,
Speaker 1: you know what, I'm about a week away from when
Speaker 1: I got to leave. I'll be on the road going
Speaker 1: to the Lancer conference. Okay, so I'll be there and
Speaker 1: I'm hoping some of you will join me. Not too
Speaker 1: many people have used the coupon code. If you go
Speaker 1: to Assassination Conference dot com. You can attend virtually or
Speaker 1: in person pay over there, but you can get ten
Speaker 1: percent off with the code Ocelly ten. All right, so
Speaker 1: you do that ten percent off. Not a bad deal,
Speaker 1: virtual ticket or in person. I will be in person
Speaker 1: the MC of the event, so to speak. Anyway, one
Speaker 1: of the people I'm gonna be introducing is on with
Speaker 1: me tonight. Now. We spoke to Larry Hancock on Tuesday
Speaker 1: and definitely had fun talking about the past. But you
Speaker 1: know this guy's name. I've heard quite a bit from
Speaker 1: other people lately. Although I don't have the ability to
Speaker 1: track everybody's work on the case. Okay, it's just not possible,
Speaker 1: but some of my friends kept mentioning this guy, Matt Doalthit. Now.
Speaker 1: I don't know too much about him, but if you
Speaker 1: go in the live chat room at ocelly dot com,
Speaker 1: you'll see Facebook a couple of Facebook groups that I
Speaker 1: think are his or he's involved with. Also his YouTube
Speaker 1: channel and he's written articles for Kennedy's and King. You
Speaker 1: know that used to be the sitco website. You know
Speaker 1: Diugenio's hub over there, so he's written articles over there,
Speaker 1: which means he had to take his information seriously and
Speaker 1: offers something of interest. And he's got a YouTube channel
Speaker 1: and he does the Facebook group things and oh yeah,
Speaker 1: he's going to be presenting at the Lancer conference. So
Speaker 1: what can I say? Matt Douthitt d O U T
Speaker 1: H I t okay. Unusual name, and I have a
Speaker 1: feeling he's got some unusual things to say, maybe about
Speaker 1: a topic that I know has been covered quite often.
Speaker 1: But you know what, I'm not actually sure what his
Speaker 1: presentation is about. I know what he's got up on
Speaker 1: YouTube again, I know a little bit about what's being
Speaker 1: discussed on Facebook. One of those groups I think has
Speaker 1: to do with the Tippet shooting, and the other one is,
Speaker 1: you know, just one of those JFKs in the search
Speaker 1: for the truth kind of things, one of the many
Speaker 1: groups that frankly I don't pay as much attention to
Speaker 1: as I used to because I can't stand Facebook. Matt.
Speaker 1: But anyway, how are you doing tonight? First of all,
Speaker 1: and let let's get to know you, because you haven't
Speaker 1: been on the show before.
Speaker 2: I'm doing good check. Thanks for having me, thanks for
Speaker 2: having me.
Speaker 1: Yeah, well you were suggested several times. I want you
Speaker 1: to know that.
Speaker 2: You pay each one of those people one hundred dollars.
Speaker 1: Nice. Well, look, if you're hitting out a hundred dollars bills,
Speaker 1: I'll grab mine when I see you in Dallas. But anyway,
Speaker 1: the thing is, yeah, Jeff, it's I'm trying to joke back.
Speaker 1: It's interesting though, because your name keeps coming up. I
Speaker 1: have this interesting idea about how you might have come
Speaker 1: to the case and things like that, based on a
Speaker 1: couple of things that I've taken a look at that
Speaker 1: you've done. But why don't you tell us this story?
Speaker 1: Why the hell do you care about the Kennedy assassination.
Speaker 1: I have this feeling that you weren't born at the
Speaker 1: time it occurred. Neither was I by the way, But
Speaker 1: you know, I have this feeling that you're younger than
Speaker 1: I am, And actually I know you're younger than I am,
Speaker 1: But you know, tell me about this. How did you
Speaker 1: get into the case? Let's start there.
Speaker 2: Well, well, first of all, my aunt and uncle saw
Speaker 2: the motor case, saw the motorcaid that day.
Speaker 3: They didn't see the shooting, but they saw the motor paid.
Speaker 2: They saw him about twenty minutes before.
Speaker 3: And they went they went out.
Speaker 2: With their school and then when they got back they
Speaker 2: got the words. A nun came running in and said,
Speaker 2: the President's been shot. So I heard that story when
Speaker 2: I was a kid, But really I was into the
Speaker 2: Lincoln assassination first when I was in about twelve years old,
Speaker 2: and I asked my parents, can we go to Fort's
Speaker 2: Theater and I was and they were like, yeah, no,
Speaker 2: but we can take you right down the road to
Speaker 2: Galey Plaza. And I was like, oh, okay, Oh, let's
Speaker 2: just see what this is about.
Speaker 3: So I went.
Speaker 2: So they took me there, and you know, and I
Speaker 2: watched a documentary or two and I wasn't really into it,
Speaker 2: but I really got into it on the fiftieth anniversary.
Speaker 1: Ah okay, because I was just about to ask you
Speaker 1: what year it was that you went to see Daley
Speaker 1: Plaza because different times, depending on when you went, you
Speaker 1: might have encountered different things. And after the fiftieth the
Speaker 1: plaza was sort of rehabilitated a bit after the fish fieth,
Speaker 1: And you know, I'm old enough that the first time
Speaker 1: I went to Dallas actually the sixth floor museum had
Speaker 1: not been established yet, and a lot of the people
Speaker 1: that I know are much older than myself even and
Speaker 1: you know, it goes even further back to the point
Speaker 1: where there was a lot of wood missing from the fence.
Speaker 1: People kept stealing planks out of the fence, you know,
Speaker 1: over the years and stuff like that. So what year
Speaker 1: did you visit the plaza? When was it that you
Speaker 1: kind of went, Okay, I guess i'll go see where
Speaker 1: Kennedy was killed.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I think that's like the ninth or tenth, maybe
Speaker 2: the eleventh fence since nineteen sixty three. But anyway, it
Speaker 2: was two thousand and eight. When I first went there,
Speaker 2: I was I was twelve years old. I was born
Speaker 2: in nineteen ninety six. So yeah, I okay, So yeah,
Speaker 2: two thousand and eight. And then twenty thirteen I started
Speaker 2: looking into it more and I just naturally, naturally believed
Speaker 2: the official sorry for about two years, and then in
Speaker 2: about a year and a half, and then twenty fourteen,
Speaker 2: twenty fifteen.
Speaker 3: I found Pat spears website.
Speaker 2: He's a wonderful, wonderful researcher and a great friend of mine,
Speaker 2: and he just had his If you go to his
Speaker 2: website patspear dot com. It's just a plethora, plethora of information,
Speaker 2: and he's just a of a researcher and he has
Speaker 2: so much details.
Speaker 1: And indeed, indeed, I've had Pat on the show first
Speaker 1: of all, and I love the video series The Mysterious
Speaker 1: Death of Number thirty five. That is one of the
Speaker 1: I mean, I actually I'm so happy that I was
Speaker 1: able to reacquire a DVD of it not too long ago,
Speaker 1: because I loved it, and I remember when he was
Speaker 1: creating that set, and I think Pat is one of
Speaker 1: the most underrated researchers in the community period. You know,
Speaker 1: it's amazing the stuff that Pat put together. So I'm
Speaker 1: really happy to hear a younger person that knows Pat
Speaker 1: number one and is aware of his work, because a
Speaker 1: lot of guys missed things, you know. Anyways, No, Pat,
Speaker 1: Pat's great, and I was so happy to even have
Speaker 1: him on the show because, uh, for a while there,
Speaker 1: it seemed like he wasn't going to be doing any
Speaker 1: more work, and uh, then he came back. He's still
Speaker 1: adding to that site, isn't he.
Speaker 2: Yeah, he yeah, He's a wonderful researcher. He's just a
Speaker 2: beast of a researcher. Yeah, so everyone go check out
Speaker 2: patspeed dot com. And as a matter of fact, he
Speaker 2: and he and I did a five hour, five hour
Speaker 2: masterclass on the JFK assassination, which which you guys can
Speaker 2: check out on my YouTube channel five.
Speaker 3: It's five hours.
Speaker 2: But if any anyone wants to know just about everything
Speaker 2: they ever want to know about the case, I would
Speaker 2: go check that out.
Speaker 1: So okay, So now now I'm getting and I didn't
Speaker 1: know that there was a five hour masterclass with him
Speaker 1: on there. I did look at a couple of your
Speaker 1: your pieces up there, but I didn't notice that. I'm
Speaker 1: gonna have to go back and check out the YouTube
Speaker 1: channel and I'll give you guys the link to it.
Speaker 1: Do you have a short name for your YouTube channel?
Speaker 2: No, it's just Mt douth But if you go there,
Speaker 2: that's where you can find the video that he and.
Speaker 1: I did so excellent. Oh, by the way, I'm trying
Speaker 1: to put together somebody to help me with Dally Plaza
Speaker 1: early on Friday, so I might want to talk to
Speaker 1: you off air about that real quick before we hang up,
Speaker 1: because I guess nobody organized a good look. Here's where
Speaker 1: this person was standing here's this particular historical spot in
Speaker 1: the plaza, and I was kind of asked if I
Speaker 1: could do that, but I said, I need somebody to
Speaker 1: help me. And by the way, your name came up again,
Speaker 1: and somebody said, you know, Matt would be the guy
Speaker 1: to try and help you out, because you know, I'm aware,
Speaker 1: I have all the information, and certainly I know where
Speaker 1: people were standing and all those kinds of things. But
Speaker 1: my slight visual issue more than a slight issue. But
Speaker 1: that's okay, my visual issue. Not only do I need
Speaker 1: a ride to the plaza, but I also might need
Speaker 1: a little bit of help making sure that I'm precise
Speaker 1: about some landmarks. So I'm going to ask you about
Speaker 1: that after we're done talking here, because I'm thinking we
Speaker 1: need to give people that as opposed to some of
Speaker 1: the other events that might occur on the noll and
Speaker 1: around the knoll that morning, I think it would be
Speaker 1: good to give people historical context, show them where the
Speaker 1: Warren Commissions, you know, star Witness was standing, show them
Speaker 1: why that looks a certain way, and why it is
Speaker 1: that it might be a little unbelievable that you can
Speaker 1: tell how tall somebody is if you're looking up six floors,
Speaker 1: you know, stuff like that. Yeah, I might need somebody
Speaker 1: to help me out with it a little bit, and
Speaker 1: I was thinking about recruiting you and maybe Doug Campbell
Speaker 1: to help me out with it. But I'll bother Doug
Speaker 1: that day when I get there. Anyways, So that's great stuff. Anyway,
Speaker 1: let's get back to what it is that brought you
Speaker 1: in so you get to visit dely Plaza. What grabbed
Speaker 1: you though? I mean, was it like just the oddity
Speaker 1: of the space. Did you find it strange the official story? No,
Speaker 1: you said you believe the official story for a couple
Speaker 1: of years. So, and by the way, that's the way
Speaker 1: I started out with the case. I thought maybe I
Speaker 1: could knock away all the conspiracy nonsense and maybe I
Speaker 1: could make a clearer case out of this. Of course,
Speaker 1: I was dealing with it in the nineteen eighties, being
Speaker 1: a teenager a little bit older than what you're talking
Speaker 1: about at twelve. But that's where I started, is around
Speaker 1: the twenty fifth anniversary, because you know, I'm a bit older.
Speaker 1: I was born in seventy two as opposed to being
Speaker 1: born in the nineties. Okay, so anyway, but what really
Speaker 1: grabbed you about it.
Speaker 2: It sort of just fill into place again. When I
Speaker 2: was seventeen in twenty thirteen for the for the fiftieth anniversary,
Speaker 2: that's when it really grabbed me.
Speaker 3: For some reason.
Speaker 2: In my young mind, I thought, oh, I'm gonna debunk
Speaker 2: I'm gonna debunk all these crazy theories or anything. But
Speaker 2: of course I barely I knew any of the details.
Speaker 2: So yeah, like I get, like I said, a few
Speaker 2: documentaries here and there, and then it was again I
Speaker 2: found spears Pat's website and uh and also oh also.
Speaker 3: I really in my mind I wanted to.
Speaker 2: Make like this master volume set of addressing, you know,
Speaker 2: address every point in the entire case. And I was like,
Speaker 2: you know what, this isn't really original. So I literally
Speaker 2: shoved everything off of my desk, and that's when I
Speaker 2: started calling up eye witnesses.
Speaker 3: Particularly.
Speaker 2: The witnesses in the JFK autopsy room. That night, I
Speaker 2: spoke to everyone who was alive, who was still alive
Speaker 2: back at that time. So this is about This is
Speaker 2: twenty sixteen when I placed my first call, and then
Speaker 2: I did the medical evidence for a few years, and
Speaker 2: then I decided to switch gears a little bit and
Speaker 2: focus on the Tipic case, which.
Speaker 3: It's a very very underlooked topic.
Speaker 1: Yeah, the Typic case is really tough because it's the
Speaker 1: afterthought that's still after the thought, right, I mean, everybody
Speaker 1: focuses on the murder of Kennedy, the wounding of Connolly,
Speaker 1: and the death of Oswald. But you know, the Typic
Speaker 1: case is sort of just like a tangential thing in
Speaker 1: a lot of cases, right where people sort of ignore it.
Speaker 1: But it's important because this is one of the real
Speaker 1: you know, this is one of the things that helps
Speaker 1: build the case allegedly right against Oswald, which you and
Speaker 1: I both know, you know, kind of falls apart when
Speaker 1: you look at it. By the way. That means you
Speaker 1: would have had to have encountered William Law and his
Speaker 1: incredible uh uh you know, grouping of interviews that he
Speaker 1: did in the eye of history, because I mean he
Speaker 1: started a bit earlier than you uh and and he
Speaker 1: put together an amazing uh group of eyewitnesses. Whereas it
Speaker 1: concerns the body, the casket, uh you know, the people
Speaker 1: at Bethesda, the people at Parkland, et cetera. So you
Speaker 1: would have had to have encountered, uh, you know, William
Speaker 1: Law's work as well, right, oh.
Speaker 3: Of course I did.
Speaker 2: Yeah, he and I spoke to both of the the
Speaker 2: same witnesses. In fact, he he uh. I was writing
Speaker 2: a manuscript at that time. It was called the JFK
Speaker 2: The Missing Witnesses. His book in the Eye of History
Speaker 2: inspired me to structure that book in a similar way,
Speaker 2: you know, reaching out to these people. So yeah, I
Speaker 2: have a great respect for him and that manuscript will
Speaker 2: it'll come out one day. Keeps getting a little bigger
Speaker 2: here and there, but it'll come out one day. But yeah,
Speaker 2: William was a big influence on the structure of writing back.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean, but it's kind of hard, you know,
Speaker 1: for me, Like when you say, okay, I could talk
Speaker 1: to all the witnesses, I'm thinking to myself, we lost
Speaker 1: quite a few by the time you started, which is unfortunate.
Speaker 1: And you have to go back now and look at
Speaker 1: a whole lot of other people's work in order to
Speaker 1: even get an idea about what some people saw, you know,
Speaker 1: because there's so many of them have now passed away. Again,
Speaker 1: you're talking twenty thirteen, that's the fiftieth anniversary, so half
Speaker 1: a century later, you know, people that were adults might
Speaker 1: no longer be alive. And I always like to mention
Speaker 1: Larry Snead at this point too, because he's a guy
Speaker 1: who collated a whole bunch of interviews of policemen. Again,
Speaker 1: they're in a book called No More Silence, which is,
Speaker 1: you know, an excellent, an excellent and underrated volume of
Speaker 1: interviews that Larry did there and a lot of people
Speaker 1: have passed, even some of the researchers that were great
Speaker 1: and some of the people that guaranteed were also inspirations.
Speaker 1: And you're looking at the medical evidence. I mean, we
Speaker 1: just lost Sirah Wek this year.
Speaker 2: Yeah, that book that Larry's that you just mentioned by
Speaker 2: Larry Snead, that book, every witness in that book that
Speaker 2: he interviewed is dead except for Bill Newman.
Speaker 3: They're all dead.
Speaker 2: And that was only twenty six years ago, right, So
Speaker 2: it just goes to show, you know, I mean that
Speaker 2: at one point it'll be I mean, at one point,
Speaker 2: for the Lincoln assassination, it's like this is it.
Speaker 3: The last witness has died right here.
Speaker 2: That's all we're gonna get from witness statements right slowly
Speaker 2: getting there.
Speaker 3: With the Keny assassination, there'll be a day.
Speaker 2: Where it's like that's it from sixty three to this day.
Speaker 3: Right here. That's all we have of eyewitness accounts.
Speaker 1: Right, and we'll just be left with what people like yourself,
Speaker 1: William Law and others have archived. That'll be it, because
Speaker 1: you won't be able to talk to the dead, at
Speaker 1: least not according to what I understand, although some people
Speaker 1: disagree with me. But yeah, anyway, yeah, here we go.
Speaker 1: So all right, the medical evidence? Why the medical evidence? Though?
Speaker 1: Did you think it was? As you know, David Lifton
Speaker 1: definitely coined it well when he said the best evidence.
Speaker 1: And I would say that a lot of older people
Speaker 1: than myself even often cite David Lifton for inspiring their
Speaker 1: desire to look into the medical evidence, you know, not
Speaker 1: just because of his theories about body alteration and all that.
Speaker 1: Although that is intriguing. There's a lot more to it
Speaker 1: when you take a look at Lifton's work. Anyway, I
Speaker 1: don't want to keep going into homages about other people.
Speaker 1: I want to talk about what it is you decided
Speaker 1: to do. So take us through it a little bit.
Speaker 1: How do you wind up, you know, doing a master
Speaker 1: class with Pat Spearwall people? Eventually? I mean, how is
Speaker 1: it you get from again going to the plaza because
Speaker 1: you couldn't go see where where Lincoln was assassinated. To
Speaker 1: this point of doing a master class, I mean take
Speaker 1: us there.
Speaker 2: It's one of those things that just fell fell into place.
Speaker 2: We did the master class in April of this year,
Speaker 2: and and what we did was we reacted to an
Speaker 2: hour long presentation. Can you believe it when reacting to it?
Speaker 2: One hour presentation ter stretch into five hours.
Speaker 3: But what we.
Speaker 2: Reacted to was a presentation that doctor John Latimer did
Speaker 2: at the famous JFK Chicago conference in nineteen ninety three.
Speaker 3: For those that don't know, John Latimer.
Speaker 2: Was the chief apologist for the Warren Commission report from
Speaker 2: nineteen sixty eight until he died in two thousand and seven.
Speaker 3: And hit and so what.
Speaker 2: The title of our masterclass is called Latimer Revisited JEFFK
Speaker 2: Medical and Ballistic Evidence. It tells you pretty much everything
Speaker 2: you need to know about the case, and it's also
Speaker 2: reacting in real time to the chief apologist and what
Speaker 2: his evidence are so called evidence is.
Speaker 1: So, yeah, Latimer's been an interesting character and you're not
Speaker 1: the first people to ever react to something that he's done.
Speaker 1: But that idea that you're reacting to something that was
Speaker 1: done at the thirtieth anniversary twenty years later, right, is
Speaker 1: kind of rough, I mean, because you know, for all,
Speaker 1: Latimer really did convince a lot of people to, you know,
Speaker 1: I guess, get on board with Gerald Posner's book, and
Speaker 1: get on board with the idea that again it was
Speaker 1: the idea I started with, that this is too crazy.
Speaker 1: They have too many theories, this is all over the place.
Speaker 1: It must be. You know, it only happened one way.
Speaker 1: That's a certainty, right, And a lot of these things
Speaker 1: and a lot of bad stuff is out there that
Speaker 1: doesn't show us, you know, anything like resembling the truth
Speaker 1: or or a look near the truth. So you know, again,
Speaker 1: what is it? You know, what did why did you
Speaker 1: pick that one? Or were you inspired by somebody else
Speaker 1: to choose that one particularly?
Speaker 2: Well, like I said, he was the chief apologist for
Speaker 2: the Warrant Commission for Rome decades and decades and decades,
Speaker 2: and he was really influential, as you said on Posner
Speaker 2: and uh which really all the arguments that Latimer did
Speaker 2: and ended up in his in Gerald Posner's book. So
Speaker 2: while you know, X amount of people might have bought
Speaker 2: Latimer's book, you know, millions and tens of millions bought
Speaker 2: Posner's book, which was a New York Times bestseller, and
Speaker 2: he was all over all over the morning shows and everything.
Speaker 2: So it's like all these all this stuff that Latimer said,
Speaker 2: it kind of spilled over here. It's kind of been
Speaker 2: in in these main these talking points that he brought
Speaker 2: up have been there ever since.
Speaker 3: So we kind of wanted.
Speaker 2: To uh challenge ourselves to really go point by point
Speaker 2: into what this guy was saying. And really, when you
Speaker 2: look at it, it just really falls fall falls apart.
Speaker 3: On every single level.
Speaker 2: And believe me, every when I say every single level,
Speaker 2: it really falls apart on every single level. But when
Speaker 2: but no one who's ever seen it it looks convincing.
Speaker 2: But you know, check out our video and you'll see
Speaker 2: what I'm talking about.
Speaker 1: Okay, well, let's move on to what it is you're
Speaker 1: gonna do this year on the sixty first anniversary. Dear lord,
Speaker 1: I can't believe I'm still talking about this. You know,
Speaker 1: it was the twenty fifth anniversary that the media blitz
Speaker 1: that took place at that time was you know, I know,
Speaker 1: we didn't have the Internet and we didn't have a
Speaker 1: lot of things that we have today. But quite honestly,
Speaker 1: the JFK case was all over the place in nineteen
Speaker 1: ready for this eighty eight, and it was on the radio,
Speaker 1: it was on TV, it was in it was mentioned
Speaker 1: in popular culture, et cetera, et cetera. The twenty fifth
Speaker 1: anniversary moved me to become more interested, even though in
Speaker 1: third grade I found it fascinating when it was sort
Speaker 1: of explained in short that Oswald died in police custody,
Speaker 1: and my nine year old hand goes up in the
Speaker 1: air and says, you mean to tell me this guy
Speaker 1: died and the cops didn't kill him and it wasn't
Speaker 1: somebody that was in a cell with him that killed him.
Speaker 1: Oh something's wrong here. And I knew nothing, you know,
Speaker 1: I'm nine years old. I just had a little bit
Speaker 1: of street knowledge, and that made no sense. If you're
Speaker 1: gonna die in police custody, either the cops killed you
Speaker 1: or somebody else who's in the lockup killed you. This
Speaker 1: makes no sense. So how did this happen? I got
Speaker 1: shut down and didn't really give it that much thought,
Speaker 1: you know, but that's third grade. But yeah, yeah, So anyway,
Speaker 1: but the media blitz that went on at the fiftieth.
Speaker 1: It definitely had to influence you. I mean I noted
Speaker 1: it at the time. I was still recovering from a
Speaker 1: superstorm Sandy, I think at the time in New Jersey,
Speaker 1: you know, So I wasn't going to any conferences or
Speaker 1: getting involved in the madness that was going to happen
Speaker 1: on the on the fiftieth because there were problems in
Speaker 1: Dallas and all that stuff. But I found it interesting
Speaker 1: the new interest and the revival sort of that took
Speaker 1: place on the fiftieth, and maybe that's part of what
Speaker 1: pushed you. So tell us about what it is you're
Speaker 1: going to present this year a little bit.
Speaker 2: Okay, So last year I did a basic presentation on
Speaker 2: the on the murder of JD. Tippett, just you know,
Speaker 2: basic facts about the case and you know, here's the
Speaker 2: overall view, something that a newcomer would be able to
Speaker 2: grasp this time around this year next week, I'm going
Speaker 2: to be presenting something similar. But it's called the Minimal
Speaker 2: Facts Approach to the Tip of Murder. And this is
Speaker 2: based off of a method by doctor Gary Habermass, who
Speaker 2: is who is a theologian. He set out to prove
Speaker 2: historically the resurrection of Jesus.
Speaker 3: Christ, and he DIDs.
Speaker 2: He attempted to do so by inventing a method called
Speaker 2: the minimal facts approach. So what the minimal facts approach says, hey,
Speaker 2: I can take these small number of facts that everyone
Speaker 2: agrees upon everyone and say I and then say, based
Speaker 2: on these four or five facts that everyone agrees upon,
Speaker 2: I can therefore conclude X. Now he did that for
Speaker 2: the resurrection of Jesus. That's something totally different. But I
Speaker 2: wanted to use his method on the tip it murders.
Speaker 2: And of course with the Canny assassination, there ain't about
Speaker 2: there ain't much that we can all agree on. You know,
Speaker 2: it was a Friday, you know, you know, Candy was killed,
Speaker 2: you know, Ruby died in Oswald was shot rebly down
Speaker 2: in prison. But I but we very interestingly, there are
Speaker 2: a good size number of facts on the tip of
Speaker 2: murder that everyone, no matter their school of thought.
Speaker 3: Agrees upon.
Speaker 2: And I was and I was like, wow, So I
Speaker 2: compiled these lists, this list of ten facts, and I'm
Speaker 2: going to present them and say, you know, based on
Speaker 2: this that these facts that everyone agrees upon, I can
Speaker 2: conclude X, Y, and Z about.
Speaker 1: The typic case, Now, this is a bit of a
Speaker 1: tough haul for you because, quite frankly, over you know,
Speaker 1: thirty years in and out of the community myself, I
Speaker 1: have seen several times people try to assemble groups of
Speaker 1: people for committees, for organizations, and they try to come
Speaker 1: up with a set of facts, let's agree on this
Speaker 1: small set of facts and ideas, and you know what,
Speaker 1: there's always been a problem. I have never seen a
Speaker 1: more diversified group of disagreements in any other aspect of
Speaker 1: my life outside of the JFK research community. So trying
Speaker 1: to assemble a handful of things that everybody can agree
Speaker 1: to is very difficult because it seems like there is
Speaker 1: always a contrary something which has been on earthed, which
Speaker 1: has been revealed, which has been produced by someone, whether
Speaker 1: it is well backed by solid evidence or not. There
Speaker 1: is always an argument about seemingly everything. I mean, even
Speaker 1: the fact that Kennedy died has been argued against by
Speaker 1: some people. I'm not saying it's been credibly done. I'm
Speaker 1: just saying it's been done. So the idea that you
Speaker 1: can assemble even a small set of facts that say
Speaker 1: nearly everyone in that room that you're going to be
Speaker 1: speaking to can agree with is going to be a
Speaker 1: bit difficult, I think, so I can't wait to see
Speaker 1: how this goes. So the methodology makes sense and in
Speaker 1: most cases, in most controversies, or you know, if you're
Speaker 1: on the other side of the pond controversies, you know
Speaker 1: it makes sense. But this is a tough haul, especially
Speaker 1: with Tippet, where I think there's a lot of things
Speaker 1: that are difficult to nail down, you know, and there's
Speaker 1: a lot of unanswered questions regarding the Tippet situation due
Speaker 1: to the fact that I think it was so long
Speaker 1: ignored by the majority of people that really could have
Speaker 1: undearthed a great deal of interesting knowledge about this. What
Speaker 1: are your thoughts about that?
Speaker 2: Yeah, so I'm pretty much going for a.
Speaker 3: You have a point there.
Speaker 2: It's never going to be one hundred percent, but you know,
Speaker 2: I go to a ninety something percent, except.
Speaker 3: Between ninety and.
Speaker 2: Ninety five percent, because there'll always be five or ten
Speaker 2: percent of people who are jerks and be like, oh,
Speaker 2: I don't agree with that. So it's not always one
Speaker 2: hundred percent, like you said, some people and Kennedy doesn't,
Speaker 2: but even eighty percent is fair think. But yeah, you're
Speaker 2: right that the Tippet shooting is overlooked. I mean, you know,
Speaker 2: it's as the late researcher Larry Harris once said. He
Speaker 2: said that the shooting of Officer Tippett has been regulated
Speaker 2: to footnote status in history. He said that what happened
Speaker 2: over there on Patton Avenue and Tenth Street may be
Speaker 2: central to understanding the assassination, but unfortunately it's been overshadowed
Speaker 2: by the President's murder and Oswald's murder, and.
Speaker 3: It may be lost to history.
Speaker 1: But so well, I don't think it's entirely lost to history.
Speaker 1: But even if you achieve the eighty percent agreement in
Speaker 1: that room, I will be impressed. I'm just going to
Speaker 1: tell you that now, because again, it is extremely difficult.
Speaker 1: I mean, you do realize there are people out there
Speaker 1: that and I'm not kidding here. I know it sounds
Speaker 1: like a joke, but there are people that think that
Speaker 1: JFK returned to the White House because he wasn't actually killed,
Speaker 1: and he returned as guess what, Jimmy Carter. Okay, I
Speaker 1: have had people seriously tell me this, Oh, look at
Speaker 1: the pictures of the two of them, don't they look similar?
Speaker 1: And I'm like, no, they don't, but I don't know
Speaker 1: what it is you're driving at. Yes, indeed the assassination
Speaker 1: was faked, Okay, wasn't really his body? In fact, Tippet
Speaker 1: becomes involved in this. People think that JD. Tippet's body
Speaker 1: was actually used for Kennedy's autopsy. There are people out
Speaker 1: there touting that theory. Uh, you're aware of this right
Speaker 1: for that?
Speaker 3: I you know, there's a great quote. I believe. I
Speaker 3: believe it was Oh, oh it was a It was Dick,
Speaker 3: not Dick Dick.
Speaker 2: Who released who was the Silver Arights activist who was
Speaker 2: with Robert Grodin on.
Speaker 3: Her other show, Dick Gregory, Dick Gregory.
Speaker 2: Sorry, I wanted to Yeah, having a brain threat there.
Speaker 3: Anyway, he.
Speaker 2: Made a great point about he said, quote, before you
Speaker 2: argue with someone, ask yourself, is this person mentally mature
Speaker 2: enough to grasp the concept of different perspectives?
Speaker 3: If if not, there is no point to argue.
Speaker 2: So I kind of stand by that, you know what
Speaker 2: I mean, before I get into those fringe theories so
Speaker 2: to speak.
Speaker 1: Oh, I totally understand. And you know, look, my question
Speaker 1: always is what do you have that you could possibly
Speaker 1: begin to consider entering into evidence in a court of law.
Speaker 1: You know, don't tell me about Oh well, I looked
Speaker 1: at a picture and this looks the same. No, no, no, no,
Speaker 1: Tell me about what it is you think you could
Speaker 1: enter as evidence. Tell me what expert you would need
Speaker 1: to use, or what scientific method you could utilize in
Speaker 1: order to get pieces of data that back up your supposition.
Speaker 1: Show me that kind of stuff before he is start
Speaker 1: telling me about the wildest I mean, look, if you're
Speaker 1: gonna make extraordinary claims, you're gonna need extraordinary evidence, So
Speaker 1: you know how much of that do you have? Or
Speaker 1: you're just gonna show me two pictures and say, doesn't
Speaker 1: this guy look like this guy?
Speaker 3: Yeah?
Speaker 1: I mean, you know, because I've been through that enough.
Speaker 1: I mean, people trying to put George H. W. Bush
Speaker 1: and Dealey Plaza and all that. And you know, our
Speaker 1: our friend Russ Baker there is not too thrilled with me.
Speaker 1: But even though he asked him up to me face
Speaker 1: to face and shook my hand once finally, since it's
Speaker 1: a very awkward situation a couple of years ago, but
Speaker 1: you know, here we go. Don't show me two pictures
Speaker 1: and don't show me a blurry picture and try to
Speaker 1: convince me that the roar shock thing is your evidence
Speaker 1: not good enough. You're gonna need more anyway, But also
Speaker 1: the idea that did does someone have the ability to
Speaker 1: grasp the sophisticated argument you're about to make. Yeah, that's
Speaker 1: a good way to figure out whether you're gonna waste
Speaker 1: your breath or not. So yeah, excellent anyway, So you're
Speaker 1: gonna come out with these facts, and you're gonna explain this,
Speaker 1: and you're obviously gonna give us a conclusion here, a
Speaker 1: summary conclusion, right.
Speaker 3: I wouldn't say a conclusion.
Speaker 2: I would say based on this, we can probably, we
Speaker 2: can most likely.
Speaker 3: Assume X Y and z ah.
Speaker 2: Okay, Yeah, My conclusion is has always been not that
Speaker 2: Oswald didn't shoot Tip, but it's that the official story
Speaker 2: hasn't met its burden of proof.
Speaker 3: But based on these facts that are can I.
Speaker 2: Could that I considered noble history, most likely we can
Speaker 2: conclude I'll tell y'all, X Y and Z.
Speaker 1: And it's difficult because again, I mean, we got mismatched rounds,
Speaker 1: We've got you know, somebody showing up with a with
Speaker 1: a casing for a bullet way later after they allegedly
Speaker 1: turned over all the evidence. You know, you've got conflicting eyewitnesses,
Speaker 1: You've got you know, a lot of stuff happening here
Speaker 1: regarding tipp It. Tipp It wasn't even in the place
Speaker 1: he was supposed to be. You have the witness account
Speaker 1: that he's receiving a phone call then goes into another direction.
Speaker 1: There is a lot of strange stuff happening here, and
Speaker 1: it's difficult to nail down. I got to be honest
Speaker 1: with you, it's probably one of the least informed areas
Speaker 1: of the entire situation for me personally, because it's just
Speaker 1: so frustrating, to be honest with you, Trying to assemble
Speaker 1: a fairly good narrative that explains what happened once and
Speaker 1: for all is difficult, and accepting what the Warrant Commission
Speaker 1: did is ridiculous anyway. But you're going beyond that. You're
Speaker 1: going to try and reassemble this and say, based on
Speaker 1: a few things that we can all basically agree on,
Speaker 1: this is what we can conclude. And that's the thing
Speaker 1: that they're going to get to see if they watch
Speaker 1: your presentation, either online or in person. Is there anything
Speaker 1: that I don't know that you could tell us about
Speaker 1: this present I don't want you to give it away.
Speaker 1: I'm trying to think of how to ask this question
Speaker 1: without asking you to give away something big or good here.
Speaker 1: But I want to get an idea of how far
Speaker 1: you're going to go. I mean, are you going to
Speaker 1: explain the timing and the ballistics and I mean what
Speaker 1: areas are you going to really deeply focus on? Can
Speaker 1: you give me that?
Speaker 2: What if I told you that you can take just
Speaker 2: any one of these facts and build a case off
Speaker 2: of that. You don't even need ten, you don't even
Speaker 2: need five. You can take in just have your pick
Speaker 2: any one of these facts, and you can say, based
Speaker 2: upon just this one fact, we can most likely conclude X, Y,
Speaker 2: and z H.
Speaker 3: It has to be. It has to be. The requirement
Speaker 3: for it to.
Speaker 2: Be a minimal fact is that it's well evidenced, and
Speaker 2: too that nearly every researcher accepts it.
Speaker 1: Well, that would be interesting because again, like I said, uh,
Speaker 1: and and I've looked at ballistics on this, it's a
Speaker 1: bit messy and hard to get get you know, get
Speaker 1: things to be coherent. The way I see it, the
Speaker 1: eyewitnesses are a mess, right, because you've got from my memory,
Speaker 1: I know that there was more than one. No, there's
Speaker 1: at least one eyewitness who said there was two guys there,
Speaker 1: which is weird because uh, there's another completely conflicting eyewitness
Speaker 1: that's that absolutely says there was not two people there.
Speaker 1: You have the uh you know, like Aquila Clemens, for instance,
Speaker 1: has a completely different account that nobody took into account
Speaker 1: at the time.
Speaker 3: I get so many you will chuck.
Speaker 2: You won't believe how many times a week I have
Speaker 2: people messaging me asking me what do you think of
Speaker 2: missus Clemens? And I'm like, so, I made a whole
Speaker 2: video just on her, so you guys can go. I
Speaker 2: want to try and put that to an end. So
Speaker 2: I'm telling you guys right now, just go watch that video.
Speaker 2: I'm so many questions about missus Clemens.
Speaker 3: Watch the video. I think you guys will find what
Speaker 3: you're looking for.
Speaker 1: So, okay, I'll put your link. I'll put the link
Speaker 1: in the show notes for the Akila Clemens video specifically,
Speaker 1: so after his YouTube channel in the show notes I
Speaker 1: should if I remember to do this correctly, I'll put
Speaker 1: in the specific link to that video on his YouTube channel.
Speaker 1: So go go ahead. Sorry, good good.
Speaker 4: Yeah.
Speaker 2: The thing is that you know, I don't a what
Speaker 2: if I told you that I don't consider testimonies in
Speaker 2: to be strong evidence in the tipic case. That's how
Speaker 2: bad the witness accounts are. There's not there's no two
Speaker 2: accounts that match up. They're all different.
Speaker 1: Yeah, well that's what I concluded years ago. And this
Speaker 1: is why I threw out my hands. I've got nobody,
Speaker 1: you know, you go even to the guy who gets
Speaker 1: on the radio and actually makes the call in his
Speaker 1: account doesn't match the other guy who's picking up the
Speaker 1: shells off the ground and putting him in a cigarette pack.
Speaker 2: Right yeah, let me let me give you a little sample.
Speaker 2: This is from a list I made. Five witnesses said
Speaker 2: it wasn't Oswald, seven refused to identify Oswald, four said
Speaker 2: it was Oswald. Four witnesses are worthless, two are two
Speaker 2: are useless, and three are suspect. So yes, I don't
Speaker 2: consider these testimonies to be strong evidence. So ultimately it
Speaker 2: all boils down to the ballistics, which is a mess.
Speaker 1: Which is another mess and why because first of all,
Speaker 1: the strangest thing to me, which is kind of explainable,
Speaker 1: because okay, when they ship the handgun and they ship
Speaker 1: it with enough rounds in it to load it. They
Speaker 1: don't necessarily care if they put all the same companies
Speaker 1: rounds in it, and he might have only had what
Speaker 1: was shipped doing. But here's the thing. Those things don't match.
Speaker 1: They're from completely different companies.
Speaker 2: The only way for it, well, you can fire different
Speaker 2: different brands of shells in a revolver.
Speaker 1: Of course, the problem, the problem.
Speaker 2: The problem here is that they don't match each other.
Speaker 1: So well, see there's here's your issue, right, and theoretically,
Speaker 1: now I don't remember the specific number, but you've got
Speaker 1: let's just say, for argument's sake, three Western Cartridge, right
Speaker 1: and three Remington okay, And then when you take a
Speaker 1: look at the rounds, not the casings that let's say
Speaker 1: that's the casings. You look at the rounds, it's not
Speaker 1: the same as the casings. Like the casings don't match
Speaker 1: the rounds numerically, if I remember correctly, isn't that right?
Speaker 3: Exactly?
Speaker 2: So in order to get so, the only way around
Speaker 2: this to make it work is that either a.
Speaker 3: Fifth shot was fired.
Speaker 2: Which or missed and one shell and one bullet has
Speaker 2: never been found, or these were what we call reloads
Speaker 2: for you put which he can do if you go
Speaker 2: to a gun store and you want to save money,
Speaker 2: and you want to save money, but or if you
Speaker 2: have a hit to do that, which Oswell did not have.
Speaker 2: So the only other, really, the only logical possible option
Speaker 2: to even consider, would be if there was a missed shot.
Speaker 2: But if if you look at the trajectory, it would
Speaker 2: have gone into the house across the street, and the
Speaker 2: guy in that house ran out and he never said
Speaker 2: anything about you ain't gonna believe what happened, this bullet
Speaker 2: crashing in my house. So that's out the window. So
Speaker 2: I think it's just the only thing necessary to ken
Speaker 2: Oswald on this case is to take his handgun and
Speaker 2: to fire four shells and fire four rounds and substitute
Speaker 2: the shells that were found at the scene.
Speaker 3: That's the only thing needed to do that.
Speaker 2: So and I think that in doing that they probably
Speaker 2: messed up, and that accounts for the mismatching.
Speaker 3: Of the of the of the of the brands.
Speaker 1: So well. The other option that was given to me
Speaker 1: is that possibly one shell had been fired previously and
Speaker 1: was just in the revolver already fired, and when he
Speaker 1: emptied it, you end up with the wrong number, which
Speaker 1: I found strange because you still have to lose a cartridge,
Speaker 1: don't you, So one cartridge has to be lost, And
Speaker 1: then I find that almost credible considering that at one
Speaker 1: point didn't Fritz turn up with an extra cartridge like
Speaker 1: in his drawer that wasn't turned over.
Speaker 3: What happened was.
Speaker 2: Three bullets hit Officer Tippet and then one was stopped
Speaker 2: by by a button.
Speaker 3: On his on his uniform so didn't really go in.
Speaker 2: So he was shot four times, right, only they only
Speaker 2: had one of these bullets. And then a quarter of
Speaker 2: a year later they were like, oh, here's three more,
Speaker 2: and someone opens up a drawer and it's like, so
Speaker 2: those wouldn't have been admitted into evidence. And with the shells,
Speaker 2: the shells were not entered into evidence into for six days.
Speaker 3: And there's other problems with them.
Speaker 2: But other than that, we just have too many bullets
Speaker 2: and too many shells. I made this list years ago,
Speaker 2: as I, like I said, four bullets.
Speaker 4: Hit Tippet, one bullet supposedly missed. Officially, we have another
Speaker 4: pair of us because another bullet was kicked out of
Speaker 4: the ambulance and onto the hospital parking lot by one
Speaker 4: of the ambulance attendants. As for the shells, two shells
Speaker 4: were found in the bush by Donnie Benavide's. One automatic
Speaker 4: shell apparently was observed at the scene by Sergeant Jerry Hill.
Speaker 4: But that night two more shells were found by two
Speaker 4: witnesses on the side of their house. Said officially one
Speaker 4: shell is supposedly missing. Then two other witnesses.
Speaker 2: At the car lot said that they saw the gunman
Speaker 2: discard shells plural on Jefferson Boulevard and the date and uh.
Speaker 3: One of the.
Speaker 2: David's sister's father in law, he said, oh, I kept
Speaker 2: one shell as a souvenir. So it's just this, there's
Speaker 2: just too many bullets and too many shells. I mean, hey,
Speaker 2: that's the JFK case for you. That's all I can say.
Speaker 1: Well, in addition to that, there's some question that it's
Speaker 1: to somebody marking the shells, right, because there was supposed
Speaker 1: to be in order to maintain the chain of evidence.
Speaker 1: There's an issue with an officer marking a shell as well, right.
Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, yeah, Well it actually gets worse than that.
Speaker 2: All the all the other there were other officers who
Speaker 2: signed those shells, and their initials are not on are
Speaker 2: not on there now there is a GD. No, there's
Speaker 2: a cursive capital G. I'm trying to remember there's a
Speaker 2: cursive capital G in one of the shells, supposedly for
Speaker 2: Captain George Dody. Right, But the problem and so so
Speaker 2: people are like, ooh, you know, ooh, that's that proves this,
Speaker 2: And I'm like, well, the problem is that we don't
Speaker 2: know when he allegedly.
Speaker 3: Marked the shell.
Speaker 2: And plus there's no mention of him marking it anywhere
Speaker 2: at any time until seven months after the event, after
Speaker 2: the controversy with Poe's initials not being there and Officer
Speaker 2: Barnes having trouble iding the shells that are there. Now, yeah,
Speaker 2: this is just here saying oh yeah, so who knows
Speaker 2: Dody may have marked it later, but we just don't know.
Speaker 2: It's just hearsay, and the witnesses who found those shells
Speaker 2: can't identify it. So, like I said, this whole thing
Speaker 2: is just a a miss.
Speaker 1: Yeah. Well see, but I kind of wanted to show
Speaker 1: people that that's exactly what the problem is. It's not
Speaker 1: it's not simple. So that's why I'm going to be
Speaker 1: amazed to see how it is you pair this down
Speaker 1: and show us. Look, here's here's your agreeable facts. Because
Speaker 1: this is not the only instance in the tippet circumstances
Speaker 1: where you have confusing, contradictory, missing stuff, additional things that
Speaker 1: are coming up, and it just doesn't make sense to me.
Speaker 1: It's like we're missing something like a whole other shooter, okay,
Speaker 1: which only what one witness said. There were two, right,
Speaker 1: there were two shooters. Yeah, but that's only one witness and.
Speaker 2: We don't Yeah, and one last thing on the shells.
Speaker 2: You know, after all this mess that I just explained
Speaker 2: on the ballistics in nineteen ninety two, in ninety six,
Speaker 2: the lead detective, Jim Novek, he came in and he
Speaker 2: was like, actually, you know what, no one signed the
Speaker 2: shells at all, so with an issue, we can just
Speaker 2: move on.
Speaker 3: And I'm like, whoa wait a minute.
Speaker 2: If no one marked the shells, if you're if what
Speaker 2: you say is true that no one marked the shells,
Speaker 2: there are initials in there today, then that means so
Speaker 2: it's like he's he.
Speaker 3: He double made it confusing.
Speaker 2: So it's like they're trying to get out of there,
Speaker 2: out of the whole, trying to settle it down. It's
Speaker 2: like they just keep digging but anyway.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and the reason for doing this, by the way,
Speaker 1: this marking of the shells is to show a chain
Speaker 1: of custody. If a cop picks up the shell, he
Speaker 1: marks it. Therefore it was in his hand. Right. So
Speaker 1: for years people argue about this and you're right. Lavelle
Speaker 1: comes out about thirty years later and says, yeah, well,
Speaker 1: actually nobody mark it. Well, then what the hill are
Speaker 1: the markings that we have on the shells for, because
Speaker 1: there are some markings on some shows, right.
Speaker 2: So you know, so in his attempt to try and
Speaker 2: just say actually it doesn't really matter, no one marked them,
Speaker 2: he just made it worse.
Speaker 3: Right, So again this never ends.
Speaker 2: But in his own words, he old Joseph McBride on tape, quote,
Speaker 2: well we had a quote little problem with the ballistics.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, you think that's a little problem.
Speaker 3: Yeah, this is a ballistics case.
Speaker 2: This is I mean, you can talk about witnesses up
Speaker 2: but like I said, it's a mess. No two witnesses
Speaker 2: tell the same story. This is a ballistics case. I'll
Speaker 2: say that up front. This is a ballistics case.
Speaker 1: Okay, Well, I can't wait to see how it is
Speaker 1: you lay that out, because again I'm rather confused all
Speaker 1: the way through this. I'm sure listeners are going, what
Speaker 1: in the hell, how do you sort this out?
Speaker 2: That's just a little sample. Yeah, that's just a little sample.
Speaker 2: Because I thought this thing would end, because you know JFK,
Speaker 2: it never ends. I'm starting to realize this tip of
Speaker 2: thing doesn't end either, even though it was as a
Speaker 2: smaller crime in a small in a smaller street and
Speaker 2: with much less eye witnesses and much less files than this.
Speaker 2: It's I've come to the realization it's just like Kennedy.
Speaker 2: It's it's it's not ending. I keep there's always more
Speaker 2: stones to be unturned.
Speaker 1: I'll tell you one thing I've observed with the JFK case,
Speaker 1: which is remarkable. And there's a whole industry devoted to,
Speaker 1: you know, murder porn and whatnot, where people you know
Speaker 1: show you on the forensic shows. Well, then suddenly this
Speaker 1: piece of evidence came out and blah blah blah. Over time,
Speaker 1: even when cases go cold, over time, almost every murder case,
Speaker 1: right you remove suspects. Suspects become removed one way or
Speaker 1: another because new things are learned and after a while,
Speaker 1: a new technology emerges or whatever else. The suspect pool shrinks,
Speaker 1: and the theoretical pool shrinks over time one way or another,
Speaker 1: even if the case goes cold, and there's whole Like
Speaker 1: I said, TV shows, TV series devoted to showing you
Speaker 1: that over time they figured this out because the new
Speaker 1: science of this and this new thing came out, and
Speaker 1: now we had DNA evidence and so on and so forth.
Speaker 1: The only murder case that I know of where this
Speaker 1: doesn't occur is all the stuff connected to Kennedy that
Speaker 1: in this case, all we see is an ever expansive
Speaker 1: pool of evidence, an ever expansive pool of suspects, an
Speaker 1: ever expansive pool of theoretical possibilities, and like you said,
Speaker 1: it just seems like it never ends. Matt, I mean,
Speaker 1: what do you think of that?
Speaker 2: I agree, I absolutely agree. At this late date, all
Speaker 2: we can do is eliminate this theory, that theory, and
Speaker 2: this suspect and this suspect and just just follow the
Speaker 2: evidence wherever it leads, wherever that may be.
Speaker 1: You listen, I'm with you on that. And I still
Speaker 1: hold out hope that there is a possibility of getting
Speaker 1: down to the bottom of this, because some people have
Speaker 1: said to me over the years, look, all these years,
Speaker 1: all this work people have investigated, doesn't it seem to you, Chuck,
Speaker 1: like nobody's ever going to get to the bottom of this.
Speaker 1: And then they add on something like, you know, well,
Speaker 1: maybe that's the way it's meant to be, or maybe
Speaker 1: that's because there is nothing to get to the bottom
Speaker 1: of hope, maybe it was just Oswald after all, you know,
Speaker 1: And I, you know, I shake my head at it
Speaker 1: and I say, no, it cannot be. There is no
Speaker 1: way for anybody to draw you know, even a half
Speaker 1: of a correct scenario here where you can prove the
Speaker 1: official explanations. You just can't do it. So we're missing something. Yes, indeed,
Speaker 1: does it mean that you know there's going to be
Speaker 1: a smoking gun document that's going to come out? I mean,
Speaker 1: do I honestly believe that we're going to see a
Speaker 1: CIA document tumble out that says, look, we're the ones
Speaker 1: who did it, and here's how it was done.
Speaker 2: No, uh, what, I personally think that there was a
Speaker 2: smoking gun document released in nineteen ninety three that was
Speaker 2: that was the deposition of the of JFK's embalmer Tom Robinson.
Speaker 3: Because you know, for thirty.
Speaker 2: Years, even to this day, people say Oh, well, look,
Speaker 2: if JFK was shot from the grass, you know, where's
Speaker 2: the bullet?
Speaker 3: Where's the grass and no bullet? Where is it?
Speaker 2: You can't show me the bullet. Well, where's the bullet?
Speaker 2: And Well in nineteen ninety three, thanks to Oliver Stone's movie,
Speaker 2: all these documents started getting declassified and hold the testimony of.
Speaker 3: His embalmer Tom Robinson.
Speaker 2: Robinson said that during the autopsy there were ten fifteen
Speaker 2: metal fragments removed from Kennedy's head. Those are not in
Speaker 2: evidence today, so why weren't they admitted into evidence? All
Speaker 2: that's admitted into now are two very small micro fragments
Speaker 2: about the size of a broken tip of a broken pencil.
Speaker 3: So there's your grassy no bullet.
Speaker 1: Well, either that or the grassy no bullet did indeed
Speaker 1: miss because there is evidence of a bullet landing on
Speaker 1: the other side of Elm Street that was witnessed by
Speaker 1: some people. And I feel as though, yeah, the grassy
Speaker 1: grassy nole shooter could have existed but also missed, and
Speaker 1: still we have other things happening here. In fact, I'm
Speaker 1: one of these people who thinks he was struck from
Speaker 1: the front. Uh, you know, very much a tip of
Speaker 1: the hat to Sherry Feaster's work on that, uh, quite frankly.
Speaker 1: But but anyway, again, we can go in a lot
Speaker 1: of different directions here and now we just walked right
Speaker 1: away from Tippet and went straight to Kennedy. But but
Speaker 1: you're gonna do your presentation on Tippet and what do
Speaker 1: you what are you calling it? By the way, what
Speaker 1: do you have a title for this?
Speaker 2: Yes, sir, it is called the minimum the Minimal Facts
Speaker 2: Approach to the Tippit.
Speaker 1: Murder, The Minimal Facts Approach to the Tippet Murder, Yes, sir.
Speaker 1: And I would advise that you guys take a look
Speaker 1: at the articles that that Matt has written at Kennedy's
Speaker 1: and King. Uh, there will be a link to his
Speaker 1: profile over there and interesting interesting website. That's the old
Speaker 1: Sitco website for you people who have been around for
Speaker 1: a while, and it continues on as Kennedy's and King.
Speaker 1: Any articles over there that you especially think people should
Speaker 1: look at, Matt of yours of mine?
Speaker 2: You know what, check out the the fact check I
Speaker 2: did on the National Geographic Channel that was you know,
Speaker 2: every and of every major anniversary. The mainstream meeter always
Speaker 2: puts out this, you know, major documentary that's pushed.
Speaker 3: So this is the latest one, so check that out.
Speaker 1: Was it was it for the sixtieth anniversary or was
Speaker 1: it for the fiftieth? Which one it was.
Speaker 3: For the sixtieth anniversary? My national geographic?
Speaker 1: Oh yeah, you know, there were some interesting things that
Speaker 1: came out during this past year and that year indeed,
Speaker 1: a lot of stuff on streaming platforms. You know, I
Speaker 1: got the one on Paramount, you know with the doctors again.
Speaker 2: Yeah that was filmed. Oh gosh, that was filmed like
Speaker 2: ten eleven years ago, so that was yeah.
Speaker 1: Yeah, it was filmed around the fiftieth, but here we go.
Speaker 1: They released it around the sixtieth. But it seemed like
Speaker 1: every streaming platform had themselves some Kennedy stuff, right, you know, Paramount,
Speaker 1: like I said, which was CBS or whatever before. I
Speaker 1: think Netflix is the only one that didn't run something new.
Speaker 3: Yeah, that's yeah, that's the thing.
Speaker 2: It seems like the mainstream media put so much emphasis
Speaker 2: on the assassination for the fiftieth anniversary, but now they
Speaker 2: just don't care.
Speaker 3: It's sort of like a swan song.
Speaker 2: Okay, here's here's our effort.
Speaker 3: Goodbye.
Speaker 1: You know, they did want to tell us that, you know,
Speaker 1: as far as because they were briefed by the CIA,
Speaker 1: they did want to let us know that these documents
Speaker 1: that were tumbling out finally, you know, pretty much they
Speaker 1: released all that needs to be released, and there's nothing
Speaker 1: to see here, folks, except a couple of crappy things
Speaker 1: they brought out, you know, which I really found very
Speaker 1: funny when CNN was working on it, you know and
Speaker 1: coming out and saying, oh, look, here's this thing that
Speaker 1: says there's an account for a shooter from the front,
Speaker 1: and they were pushing stuff on there that was ridiculous
Speaker 1: as opposed to looking at you know, some of the
Speaker 1: serious stuff that was later on developed out of some
Speaker 1: of those documents, you know, like this weird account of
Speaker 1: somebody told somebody, you know, a source over here said
Speaker 1: that there was a shot from the front, and it
Speaker 1: was like the document just sort of ends and doesn't
Speaker 1: even it's got no it's got no providence to it.
Speaker 1: You have no way of knowing who the source was
Speaker 1: or what the hell it is. It's just an acdotal notation,
Speaker 1: you know. And uh, they called people out seriously to
Speaker 1: discuss that, didn't they you know, But but never tell
Speaker 1: us about all the other stuff that's been unearthed. And also, yeah,
Speaker 1: even though there's still all this stuff, and the Biden
Speaker 1: administration is being sued right now because in twenty seventeen,
Speaker 1: the Trump administration didn't do it, and then then you know,
Speaker 1: Biden gets in there and he doesn't do it.
Speaker 3: Yeah, what happened?
Speaker 2: Missed to Yeah, what miss happened, mister deal Bricker, Mister
Speaker 2: art of the deal is like, Oh, I'm gonna release
Speaker 2: those files. It's gonna be great, big beautif of files
Speaker 2: one meeting with the CIA. Oh yeah, actually we're not
Speaker 2: going to be releasing them. What happened mister the deal? Sorry,
Speaker 2: come on, it's a bit. It was a big letdown.
Speaker 1: So well, what did happen? Well, you know what they're
Speaker 1: saying now, is that now when he gets in this time,
Speaker 1: he's gonna release the stuff. Yeah, because he's got RFK
Speaker 1: Junior with him and he's gonna make him do it. Okay, Yeah,
Speaker 1: i'd look, I'm not holding my breath, okay, And I.
Speaker 2: Think probably it's pretty cruel what he did to get
Speaker 2: rfk's endorsement. He's like, Bobby, if you endorse me, I
Speaker 2: release your dead uncle's big beautiful files.
Speaker 3: I'll do it for you, and you know he's.
Speaker 2: Not going to do it, So that's that's cruel for
Speaker 2: him to play on his on his on his emotions
Speaker 2: to do that.
Speaker 3: That's my personal opinion.
Speaker 1: But you know, well, what would be also interesting would
Speaker 1: be to release, you know, some other stuff. I bet
Speaker 1: you the president could probably get some stuff released about
Speaker 1: his father's deaths, even not just his uncle's death. But
Speaker 1: I guess we'll just have to stay tuned and see
Speaker 1: how that goes. What can I say, Yeah, the l
Speaker 1: a p D.
Speaker 3: I don't think so on on his father's death. The
Speaker 3: l a p D.
Speaker 2: I mean, is the most corrupt police force in that's
Speaker 2: a whole other Yeah, I forget that.
Speaker 3: I forgot that when I was like twelve years old.
Speaker 2: I was like, they covered this is Bobby's anyway, But yeah.
Speaker 1: No, I get it, and believe me, it's even Vince
Speaker 1: Boobliosi once said that it was like, you know, obvious
Speaker 1: that there was a conspiracy there. But you know, and
Speaker 1: wherever he's at, I hope it's good and warm, but
Speaker 1: you know, look, it is what it is, and we're
Speaker 1: faced with these things now. But man, oh man, I
Speaker 1: don't know. I'm just not holding my breath over these files.
Speaker 1: I know that a lot of people are, and really
Speaker 1: I wish to be wrong. But in twenty seventeen, I
Speaker 1: told people that even though we had waited twenty five
Speaker 1: years and we were waiting all that time, you know,
Speaker 1: don't be surprised if it doesn't all come out. And
Speaker 1: guess what, it didn't.
Speaker 2: So you know, yeah, the main thing a lot of
Speaker 2: us want, including Jeff Morley, is the fifty files that
Speaker 2: are still classified on classified on George jo Needi's I mean,
Speaker 2: that's you know.
Speaker 3: That's a big th that's still classified.
Speaker 1: So yeah, but Brett, Brett Kavanaugh put that to sleep
Speaker 1: for everybody, so you know that, right, it was Kavanaugh
Speaker 1: that ruled on that and killed it. Yeah, that's anyway. Look,
Speaker 1: I don't want to get into modern politics with you, Matt,
Speaker 1: because God help us all. And besides, I'm exhausted from
Speaker 1: that and I'm almost exhausted from trying to look at
Speaker 1: this tipic case. But anything you want to throw in
Speaker 1: before we're done, because I've been at you out for
Speaker 1: an hour and I hope people are gonna, you know,
Speaker 1: get more interested, and even if you just want to
Speaker 1: tune in to see Matt's presentation. It's gonna be interesting.
Speaker 1: I mean, Bob Groden will be there. I'll be the MC.
Speaker 1: There's a virtual presentation from Larry Hancock. There's a huge
Speaker 1: list of people that are going to be presenting. Alex Harris.
Speaker 1: I'm looking forward to again that young man. That's the
Speaker 1: youngest person I've ever seen at a conference last year.
Speaker 1: Sorry Matto, what you were saying something.
Speaker 3: I was agreeing with you?
Speaker 2: Yep, Yep, he's a good Yeah, he's a good young lad.
Speaker 1: So yeah, I really like Alex and I actually hope
Speaker 1: I get to hang out with him a little bit
Speaker 1: this time. I think he's going to be with us
Speaker 1: the whole weekend this year, and looking forward to his
Speaker 1: presentation and all of it, to be honest with you.
Speaker 1: So yeah, the Lancer Conference will take place between the
Speaker 1: twenty second and the twenty fourth of November, literally landing
Speaker 1: on the correct anniversary dates. So in the morning I'll
Speaker 1: be going down to Daly Plaza before we start the
Speaker 1: conference a little bit afternoon when Mike Swanson kicks it off,
Speaker 1: And anybody listens to my show knows Mike and knows
Speaker 1: that he'll be setting the table perfectly for the rest
Speaker 1: of the conference. But do you know what day you're
Speaker 1: going to be speaking on, Matt?
Speaker 2: I was originally going to be speaking on Sunday, but
Speaker 2: as of now I'm speaking on a.
Speaker 3: Friday morning instead of Sunday.
Speaker 1: So right, okay, so we're actually shuffling things a little bit. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I know that that's happening right now, but I'm looking
Speaker 1: forward to it and definitely looking forward to seeing what
Speaker 1: you're gonna do. And I urge you guys to take
Speaker 1: a look at Matt's work and that masterclass with Pat Spear.
Speaker 1: That's got to be real good. I haven't looked at
Speaker 1: it yet, but just knowing Pat and his work, I
Speaker 1: can recommend it. So just that simple. Anyway, Matt, I
Speaker 1: want to thank you for doing this with me.
Speaker 3: Hey, thank you very much.
Speaker 2: And for those listening, you can get your tickets at
Speaker 2: Assassination Conference dot COM's slash tickets.
Speaker 1: So here you go Assassination Conference dot com and that
Speaker 1: link will be in the show notes as well. So
Speaker 1: remember this, guys, no matter who you are, where you are,
Speaker 1: when you are, I am merely o'celly. All of you are.
Speaker 2: Go ahead, call it just sit in the truth about
Speaker 2: the day Ay assassination.
Speaker 1: Right, Well, what do you want to know Ludy Baker's
Speaker 1: wild claim Oswald girlfriends you knew Ruby and Barry dancer weapons? Really,
Speaker 1: I imagine I could claim I have four wheels. It
Speaker 1: doesn't make me a wagon. But okay, Oswald was on
Speaker 1: the building and I'm trying to prevent the murder of
Speaker 1: John Kennedy.
Speaker 2: Come on now, has a real effort on the day
Speaker 2: of pay assassination.
Speaker 1: Booking to Reclaimed go to Amazon dot com entered Judith
Speaker 1: Baker in her own words. You'll get the results for
Speaker 1: a digital copy of a book where Walt Brown utilizes
Speaker 1: her own words and the known evidence in the case
Speaker 1: to get at well a different perspective. Let's say you
Speaker 1: can get Judith Barry Baker in her own words from
Speaker 1: the author himself, signed if you request it by contacting
Speaker 1: doctor Brown at kias jfk at aol dot com. It's
Speaker 1: a fun book and it actually dissects the many, many
Speaker 1: fantastic claims Judith Barry Baker in her own words.
Speaker 2: Thank you information.
Speaker 5: This is James Corbn at Quorter Report dot com and
Speaker 5: you're listening to the o'celly affected o'helly dot com.
Speaker 6: The War State by Michael Swanson explains the great national
Speaker 6: transformation that took place and put the Kennedy presidency in
Speaker 6: the context of the times and reveals never before published
Speaker 6: information about the Cuban missile crisis. President Kennedy would not
Speaker 6: have been assassinated if he had been president two hundred
Speaker 6: years ago. His assassination took place in the context of
Speaker 6: the Cold War and the rise of the national security state.
Speaker 6: Before World War II, the United States was a continental republic.
Speaker 6: In the decade that followed, it became an imperial superpower.
Speaker 6: Generals such as Curtis LeMay not only wanted to invade Cuba,
Speaker 6: but knew that there were short range missiles on the
Speaker 6: island arn't with nuclear warheads that they could not destroy
Speaker 6: because they were on mobile launchers. Their invasion could have
Speaker 6: led to a Third World War, and they wanted to
Speaker 6: go to war anyway. The War State by Michael Swanson
Speaker 6: reveals why and will show you what President Kennedy was
Speaker 6: up against. For more information, The Warstate dot com.
Speaker 7: Oh Chili dot Com in Denial. The Secret Wars with
Speaker 7: Air Strikes and Tanks by Larry Hancock. Secret wars became
Speaker 7: a staple of US covert operations and are still happening today.
Speaker 7: Larry Hancock's book In Denial rips the cover off many
Speaker 7: of them, using new files. It exposes things about the
Speaker 7: Bay and Pigs that no one has ever written about before.
Speaker 7: It shows why it really failed and why the United
Speaker 7: States did not earn from it. It also shows why
Speaker 7: other countries today are doing secret operations with more success.
Speaker 7: This is the book that puts what some want to
Speaker 7: deny into the light. In Denial, secret wars with air
Speaker 7: strikes and tanks Larryhncock. For more information go to Larry
Speaker 7: hyphen Handcock dot com. Pick up your copy of In
Speaker 7: Denial at Amazon dot com.
Speaker 1: In digital or physical.
Speaker 7: Revelation through conversation.
Speaker 8: Con you've expressed like callers schools, Is there anyone else
Speaker 8: who happens to get on the air who's only dot com?
Speaker 8: Do not necessarily reflect views of Jelly dot com or
Speaker 8: jump Olly, and we are not responsible for any stupidity
Speaker 8: which might have students than you.
Speaker 7: Do You like history, real history that you were never
Speaker 7: taught in schools? Why the Vietnam War, nuclear bombs and
Speaker 7: nation building in Southeast Asia by author Mike Swanson, with
Speaker 7: new documentation never seen before that'll open your eyes to
Speaker 7: events that led up to this Why the Vietnam War,
Speaker 7: Nuclear Bombs and nation building in Southeast Asia nineteen forty
Speaker 7: five through nineteen sixty one. Get your copy today at
Speaker 7: Amazon dot com. Why the Vietnam War by author Mike.
Speaker 9: Swanson, Yo Yo Thiss, Doug Campbell, host of the Dallas
Speaker 9: Action Podcast presented by Wall Street Window. And you are
Speaker 9: listening to the o'cell effect revelation through Conversation.
Speaker 5: Dot Com Radio.
Speaker 1: You talked to see Sport cancer science students Sime