For decades, the Single Bullet Theory has remained a key component of the official JFK assassination narrative. It has been a subject of fierce debate and skepticism. Now, with the release of Paul Landis's long-anticipated book, The Final Witness, there's hope that this enduring falsehood will finally be put to rest.

Today, we will explore the significance of Landis's revelations and how they might challenge the Single Bullet Theory.

Who is Paul Landis?

Former Secret Service agent Paul Landis has largely remained silent for six decades about the events that unfolded on the day of the JFK assassination.

Landis was one of two agents assigned to protect First Lady Jacqueline Kennedy during the ill-fated motorcade. His book sheds new light on the Kennedy assassination and possibly will rewrite history.

The fact that Landis, who was so close to the President and the First Lady, is finally sharing his hidden insights is both remarkable and intriguing.

Moments Leading to History

Although privy to the intimate moments of the Kennedy family, Landis maintains a simple and factual retelling. He refrains from indulging in reflection or embellishment, which leaves readers curious about the man behind the badge. Yet, it is these unadorned details that bring us to that fateful day in Dallas.

Landis's account of the events surrounding November 22, 1963, is chilling in its starkness. Positioned on the right rear running board of the presidential limousine, he witnesses the horrifying assassination of President Kennedy. His recollections lack dramatic flourishes, echoing the chaos and trauma of the day. However, his revelation is far from ordinary.

A Significant Discovery

In a narrative that speaks volumes through its silences, Landis's account subtly introduces a crucial piece of evidence into the historical record. An intact copper-jacketed bullet discovered on the limousine seatcarries profound implications.

If indeed the bullet came from President Kennedy and not Texas Governor John Connally, who was also wounded, it challenges the conclusions of the official Warren Commission that seem to support the Single Bullet Theory.

An Unspoken Challenge

Paul Landis doesn't thrust this evidence into the limelight or make sensational accusations. He refrains from speculating about a second gunman's identity or the intricate details of a conspiracy. Instead, he leaves this revelation to simmer in the background, awaiting those who care enough to piece together the puzzle.

Stay tuned for a full-length review of Landis’s The Final Witness. In the meantime, check out our Book Reviews to know what to read and what not to touch with a ten-foot pole regarding the political assassinations of the 1960s, especially the JFK assassination.

Get in touch to share what you thought about the new release.

It’s no secret that Mark Shaw, a lawyer and controversial author known for his ‘work’ on the Kennedy assassinations, has added to the lore surrounding the Kennedy brothers with his book, Collateral Damage.

In this blog post, we'll explore some of the most outrageous claims about Robert F. Kennedy, as discussed in our article.

The Enigmatic Security Log: A Dubious Clue

One of the most striking claims in Shaw's presentation centers on a supposed clue that he discovered. He contends that this clue, a security log or ledger from 20th CenturyFox, provides evidence that Bobby Kennedy was in Los Angeles on the day Marilyn Monroe died, suggesting his potential involvement in her death.

However, Shaw's presentation deviates from the details presented in his book, Collateral Damage. In his book, Shaw acknowledges Bobby Kennedy's seemingly airtight alibi, which placed him in the San Francisco Bay Area on the day of Monroe's death. Shaw even references an Associated Press story that supports this alibi. Despite the substantial evidence supporting his alibi, Shaw casts doubt on it and puts his faith in the enigmatic security log.

The Mystery of Frank Neill

One of the most puzzling aspects of Shaw's narrative is the character of Frank Neill, who supposedly witnessed Robert F. Kennedy's helicopter arrival. Shaw does not provide a clear background or establish Frank Neill's credibility as a source. Who was Frank Neill? Was he a former journalist, a Fox employee, or a police reporter?

Accounts regarding Frank Neill's observations vary across different authors and publications, leading to inconsistencies. The contradictory details regarding the helicopter landing site, arrival time, and Neill's reaction to Kennedy's presence further question the accuracy of these accounts.

Inconsistencies in Shaw's Claims

Shaw's assertion that Collateral Damage does not contain opinions or speculations is contradicted by the content of the book itself. The text is filled with Shaw's speculative scenarios, particularly his theory regarding how Marilyn Monroe may have been murdered.

He presents a graphic and unsubstantiated narrative that contradicts the well-established facts of Monroe's autopsy, which unequivocally points to a potential drug overdose as the cause of her death.

Read More in Mark Shaw Insults Allen, Texas: Part 1

Mark Shaw's book contains a series of provocative claims and theories concerning the Kennedy brothers, particularly Robert Kennedy's alleged involvement in Marilyn Monroe's death. It is, as you may have guessed, questionable at best.

Read the first part of our review to discover his factoids about the JFK assassination. Check out our articles through which we aim to share the proven facts about the incident.

Contact us for further assistance.

In 2021, Mark Shaw visited the library in Allen, Texas, to promote his book. Although this event took place two years ago, the content of his talk has gained millions of views on YouTube. Unfortunately, Shaw's presentation raises more questions than it answers regarding the John F. Kennedy assassination, as it is marred by inconsistencies and a lack of rigorous evidence, which is surprising given his legal background.

Tap here for the long review, or keep reading for a preview of the same.

The Mafia Conspiracy

One of the most striking aspects of Shaw's presentation was his unwavering conviction that the mafia was responsible for President Kennedy's assassination. What makes this stance peculiar is Shaw's apparent ignorance of the wealth of new evidence that challenges this theory.

For example, declassified documents from the Assassination Records Review Board findings revealed that Lee Harvey Oswald's uncle, ‘Dutz’ Murret, was not working for Carlos Marcello in 1963, thereby dispelling a key link to the mafia. This new information significantly weakens the mafia conspiracy theory, yet Shaw remains undeterred, likely to this day.

The Ed Becker Anecdote

Mark Shaw relied on the infamous Ed Becker anecdote, where Marcello allegedly suggested that he would remove the "stone" from his shoe—referring to Robert F. Kennedy—by getting rid of his brother, the President.

However, recent disputes and questionable witness accounts have cast doubt on the credibility of this story. The House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) used aspects of this anecdote to support the Mob-oriented case. Even so, the foundation of that case was never particularly strong, and it has since been debunked by the FBI and other sources.

The Joe Kennedy Double-Cross

Shaw also subscribes to the theory that Joe Kennedy double-crossed his Chicago backers regarding his son Robert Kennedy's stance on organized crime. Supposedly, in return for such a double-cross, the Chicago Mob was expected to support John F. Kennedy in the 1960 election.

However, statistical analysis has shown that the mob-controlled wards in Chicago did not vote as expected, rendering this theory dubious at best. This theory also fails to account for the fact that Senior Kennedy's influence in Chicago was less substantial than previously believed.

Mark Shaw Does Not Stop There

In his 2021 presentation, Shaw made more insubstantial remarks regarding Joe Kennedy and Dorothy Kilgallen by referencing disreputable and debunked resources. Instead of subjecting yourself to the transcript, you’re better off reading Jim DiEugenio’s dressing down on Kennedys and King.

Our platform has dedicated three decades to finding the truth behind the political assassinations of the 1960s. You can, too. Check out our articles to see beyond the misinformation and propaganda surrounding the JFK assassination.

Reach out for inquiries and feedback.

The assassination of John F. Kennedy remains one of the most significant and controversial events in American history. While Lee Harvey Oswald was quickly—wrongfully—identified as the lone gunman, a motive, or lack thereof, continues to elude us to this day.

Johnny Cairns does a decent job of asking all the right questions regarding Oswald’s motive and modus operandi in his article.

1. What Could Have Driven Lee Harvey Oswald?

The question of Lee Harvey Oswald's motive for allegedly assassinating the President has remained a puzzle for over six decades.

The Warren Commission acknowledged the difficulty in definitively determining Oswald's motives. They entertained various theories, such as:

• The notion that Oswald had a deep-seated resentment of authority.
• An inability to form meaningful relationships.
• A desire to secure a place in history.

However, these theories lack substantial evidence to firmly establish a motive.

1. Why Did Oswald Choose Elm Over Houston for the Assassination?

Why did Oswald opt to take the shot at President Kennedy on Elm Street, a location with a more challenging and obstructed view, instead of maximizing his chances by targeting the President as he approached the Texas School Book Depository from Houston Street, which offered an unobstructed view?

The shot from Houston Street appears to be ideal for a lone assassin. This puzzling decision continues to baffle investigators and theorists, adding another layer of complexity to the Kennedy assassination narrative.

1. Why Use Only Four Bullets?

One of the most intriguing aspects of Lee Harvey Oswald's alleged crime is his ‘choice’ to attempt the assassination with just four bullets. This decision is particularly puzzling when we consider that the Carcano rifle he used had an ammunition clip capable of holding up to six bullets. With one already in the chamber, it could have provided seven shots in total.

The question that naturally arises is, how did Oswald decide that such a limited amount of ammunition would be sufficient for a successful assassination and his subsequent 'escape?’ This particular aspect of Oswald's plan adds another layer of complexity and doubt to the overall narrative of the Kennedy assassination.

More Where That Came From on Kennedys and King

Questions surrounding Oswald’s motive remain at the heart of the Kennedy assassination mystery. While some believe Oswald acted alone or at all due to personal or political motivations, the shadow of conspiracy still lingers.

On the bright side, we’ve never been closer to finding the truth behind JFK assassination and discovering who had a stake in framing Oswald. Support our initiative for the full disclosure of the JFK documents, and check back in for more insights.

Get in touch for queries and concerns.