A FEW GOOD MEN

Over the last several years, just before the anniversary of the Kennedy
assassination, I have been the recipient of several telephone calls. They
arrive primarily from newspaper editors or television reporters asking my
opinion of the latest book or contemporary assassination theory.

Nineteen ninety-five, I decided, was to be different for by November
twenty-first I had heard nothing. Then late in the afternoon of November
twenty-second I received an inquiry from a local television reporter.
"Would I care to appear and comment on the latest theory." he asked.
"Sure, if I knew what it was." I responded. It turned out the latest
theory was no theory at all but the assertion that a local assassination
witness, Patsy Paschall, was trying to sell the film she had taken of the
motorcade on that fateful day.

The following evening I received a call from another television reporter.
"What do you know about the doctor from Nashville who says x-rays show
Kennedy was shot from two directions?" "Quite a bit." was my response. 

On December eleventh while at work, the phone rang. The Los Angeles Times
wanted information about Oswald's co-conspirator and fellow sixth floor
assassin, Loy Factor. "Can you help me!" the writer asked, mentioning that
this theory was brand spanking new. My reply, "I'll be glad to help but
that story is about two years old." 

The Assassination As A Homicide

I'll consider these episodes in due course, but first let me explain why I
think I end up in these situations. I believe the local media considers me
a conservative pro-conspiracy researcher who concludes the Kennedy
assassination should be looked upon as a continuing homicide
investigation. They are looking for someone who will lead them through the
morass of information and, if necessary, supply documentation as opposed
to theory or conjecture. As far as I'm concerned, If it won't stand up in
a court of law, it belongs to the buffs not the researchers. 

When asked why I am pro-conspiracy I reply that I know of at least two
active assassination plots in motion, one in Chicago and the other in
Miami, at the time of the assassination.  Unfortunately, as of this date,
there is no conclusive proof of Oswald's link to either or any other for
that matter. 

The Oliver Stone Effect

The release of Oliver Stone's JFK acted as a positive as well as negative
catalyst that renewed interest in the case. On the positive side, the
movie coupled with the events at Waco and Ruby Ridge, alerted some members
of the government to the excesses of the FBI, it favored approach to
information some of us expected would never see the light of day during
our lifetime and allowed some writers, using that knowledge, to revisit
and in some cases set the historical record straight. 

On the negative side it spawned a host of new self proclaimed experts,
advancing theories based on little study and, for the most part, wholly
lacking in documentation. As a promotion for his movie, Oliver Stone
distributed "Free The Files" buttons. I remember one "researcher" parading
around Dallas with several such buttons affixed to the lapels of his coat.
Well some of those files have been open for several years now but I have
yet to see the product of this "researchers" work. So what happened? Three
things come to mind 1] The researcher was no researcher at all 2] after
the hoopla died down, the prospect of traveling to Washington to view
reams and reams of paper possibly with little result cooled our "Free The
Files" fanatic or 3] if the researcher did make the effort and came up
empty - Well how does one present a lecture on the assassination based on
nothing? 

Is The Media Really Anti The Pro-Conspiracy Movement

By far the most troubling problem is the propensity for some to reach a
conclusion FIRST and then look for "evidence" that supports only that
preconceived finale. Not only are "facts" twisted but even common sense is
often swept aside to make way for the new, best, greatest, decisive
theory. Reputable reporters and copy editors are paid good money to pick
the pith from the lunacy. The nonsense usually ends up in the tabloids. 

I know many were upset when the anti-conspiratorial minded Gerald Posner
closed the case but what about the several pro-conspiracy spokesmen who
also closed the case by naming the likes of Roscoe White, Lucien Sarti,
Sauveur Pironti, Roger Bocognoni, William Greer, George Hickey, Richard
Cain, J.D. Tippit, Franklin Folley, Charles Rogers, Dave Yaras, Lenny
Patrick, Richard Gaines, and Jim Files.

How many recognized the pro-conspiracy research creditability problem that
ensued when in October of 1988 the British Parliament attacked Central
Television and Nigel Turner for airing the so-called documentary The Men
Who Killed Kennedy. The Thursday, October 27, 1988 London Daily Mail
asserted, "They (Members of Parliament) also called for the removal of
Central's ITV franchise and tough new laws, including a Government
Ombudsman, to impose penalties on inaccurate broadcasters." It is
ludicrous to blame the "establishment" media while we perpetually shoot
ourselves in our collective feet. 

I'm Just A Patsy

On the evening of November 22, 1995, Patsy Paschall did indeed appear on
local television. She surfaced with now retired FBI special agent in
charge (Dallas) Oliver "Buck" Revell on Dallas' local FOX affiliate KDFW,
channel 4. Reville was allowed to observe what Patsy felt was the most
important part of her home movie, some flashes of light behind the picket
fence. Revell considered them interesting and in need of additional study.
Unfortunately, as the somewhat apologetic reporter observed, there was
little likelihood of such study occurring. Patsy, you see, was interested
in selling the film and would have to consult her attorney.

Lost in all this was Patsy's admission of the position of Kennedy's
limousine when the flashes of light occurred. The episode took place after
Kennedy's vehicle had gone under the triple underpass. Careful checking by
film experts later revealed those flashes may have taken place fifty
seconds after the last shot was fired! 

Everything Old Is New Again

The call concerning the doctor from Nashville was in reference to Doctor
Randy Robertson, MD of the Southern Hills Medical Center Radiology
Department located in Nashville, Tennessee. Robertson opined in his The
Late Arriving Fragment: Reality Bites (The Fourth Decade, Vol. 2, Number
5) that "the autopsy doctors committed perjury before the W(arren)
C(ommission)" and "intentionally misidentified" autopsy photo #44 all in
an effort to hide a frontal shot. 

The reporter who called me on this story was of the belief this was fresh
information. The station was prepared to interview the doctor on his "new"
theory. I simply proposed that many, many Kennedy assassination scholars
and authors have been discussing and researching this scheme for over
twenty-five years. Trying to keep it simple I reminded him the House
Select Committee on Assassinations concluded there were at least two
shooters, with one positioned somewhere along the picket fence. 

At some point he decided it best if he call the FOX affiliate in
Nashville. Several hours later a message on my answering machine intoned,
"You were right Dave, they interviewed this guy last year. We're dropping
it." 

The Loy Factor, Factor

In my view, another case in point is the Loy Factor story. In a press
release dated November, 1994 a California researcher makes the following
claim: 

Factor, a now deceased (a mysterious death perhaps) Chickasaw Indian,
confessed before he died that he was involved in the assassination.
Shortly before the fatal gunplay, Mr. Factor also observed Oswald and
another co-conspirator, one Malcolm Wallace, on the sixth floor " . . .
sitting near a table saw, adjusting rifle scopes." 

"Three days before the killing, Factor was driven to a small house in
Dallas. There he reviewed plans, maps and routes with the others involved.
Ruth Ann, a pretty, young Hispanic woman, drove him to the book depository
building shortly before the motorcade was to arrive. The pair climbed to
the sixth floor, where Oswald and Wallace already were. Ruth Ann carried a
walkie-talkie with which she communicated with other unknown individuals.
Oswald, Wallace and Factor each had rifles. At the approach of the
motorcade rounding Elm street , Ruth Ann counted down the signal - "One .
. . two . . . three" - while at the same time waving her hand downward on
each number. On the down stroke of three the gunman fired a single shot
each, then fled quickly down the stairs - Ruth Ann and Factor to their
parked car, Oswald and Wallace in different directions. Loy was driven to
the bus depot, a few blocks away where his was to catch a bus back home.
But in a short while Ruth Ann and Wallace both returned to the depot to
pick up Factor and drive him out of town. (Probably because Oswald had
been captured.)"

This researcher proclaims "How can we be sure that Factor was telling the
truth? Details" Since the truth is in the details, let's examine and
question some. 

Question # 1 - Here we have three shooters spaced at known (each is at an
open window) intervals on the sixth floor. At least two have been
adjusting their rifle scopes. Take time to look at the photographs of the
sixth floor shortly after the assassination. See the rows of pallets full
of book boxes. Carefully observe the "sniper's nest." Now determine where
Ruth Ann had to be located to be seen waiving her arms in the effort to
coordinate the shooting? Somewhere near the ceiling I suspect. 

Question # 2 - How could three shooters lining up Kennedy in their rifle
scopes observe Ruth Ann waving her arms? No matter which eye the rifleman
used to site the target, how far would the other eye need to be rotated to
observe Ruth Ann? 

Question # 3 - Since all three fired upon Ruth Ann's third down stroke,
why doesn't any ear witness describe three simultaneous shots or one loud
concurrent blast? 

Question # 4 - How did the rifle carrying duo of Factor and Wallace enter
the Depository? How did Factor and Wallace, transporting weapons, as well
as, Ruth Ann exit the building unobserved? 

Question # 5 - Ruth Ann and Factor leave together by car while Oswald and
Wallace leave "in different directions." How does Wallace get to Ruth
Ann's vehicle for the trip to pick up Factor at the bus depot?  Why does
Wallace return to Ruth Ann's vehicle but Oswald doesn't? 

Question # 6 - "But in a short while Ruth Ann and Wallace both returned to
the depot to pick up Factor and drive him out of town. (Probably because
Oswald had been captured.)"  Unless I'm mistaken the assassination
occurred at 12:30 PM and Oswald's capture around 1:50 PM. Notice of
Oswald's apprehension was not broadcast until "within an hour of Oswald's
arrest." (15H55) Are we to assume Ruth Ann and Wallace cruised around
downtown for almost two hours before returning to the bus depot? Would you
consider two hours a "short while?" 

Question # 7 - As additional corroboration of Factor's truthfulness we are
reminded of the table saw the gunman observed. To make the point we are
introduced to former Depository employee, Harold Norman (now deceased).
Norman correctly indicates the floor was rotten in some spots and plywood
was being put down as a replacement. Norman then sifts through the mists
of thirty years to say he remembers that "there was a table saw, near the
eastern end of the sixth floor." Now there is absolute confirmation for
you. Has anybody seen any photograph showing a table saw on the sixth
floor?

Question #7 - If Factor is telling the truth then what can one say about
others who have named different individuals as being on the sixth floor?
Are they lying? Are they those shadowy disinformation specialists we hear
so much about? Maybe Henry Hurt should again interview Robert Easterling
who placed Manuel Rivera on the sixth floor. (See page 356 of Hurt's
Reasonable Doubt) What about Ricky White's "Lebanon" or Prensa Latina's
Lenny Patrick? Could there be six shooters and Ruth Ann roaming around up
there? 

What if the Warren Commission used similar investigation, evidence and
proof to conclude Oswald was not only a co-conspirator but a shooter. Do
you think Marina Oswald or her two daughters would quietly slip into the
shadows. I can hear Marina now, "Thank heavens for Loy Factor . Here I
thought Lee was a victim of the scurrilous government. Boy was I wrong."

It has been often stated by pro-conspiracy advocates like myself that
somewhere between seventy to eighty percent of the American public doesn't
believe in the conclusions of the Warren Commission. That may be true but
here's the real question: 

With all of the conflicting theories, poor or nonexistent research, phony
death threat fables, fake mysterious death stories, contradictory book
conclusions and lawsuits, just what percentage of the American public
believes us? 


Dave Perry
4601 Ainsworth Circle
Grapevine, Texas  76051
December 16, 1995


(Copyright 1995 by David B. Perry)








5