In part 2 of his three-part review, David Mantik continues his discussion of ballistics, Thomas's version of the single-bullet theory, neutron activation analysis, the Tippit murder, and begins his lengthy review of the dicatabelt evidence.
Thomas shows how people like Luis Alverez, John Lattimer and Larry Sturdivan all constructed dubious theories “for the purpose of explaining away the obvious reason for the head snap, and all suffer, not only from implausibility, but from a failure to fit the evidence.” This is the true strength of the book and the reason why I believe it will be such a valuable contribution to the literature, writes Martin Hay.
David Mantik replies to criticisms made by Pad Speer of his conclusions concerning the 6.5 mm bright object and the "white patch".
The amount of bunching of the suit coat in the Jefferies film is not significant enough to raise the entrance wounds to the base of the neck. It is an experiment that can easily be done, writes Chuck Marler.
Just how extensively this new Jefferies film will be used to promote jacket-bunching to explain the jacket/body discrepancy remains to be seen, writes John Kelin.
Jim DiEugenio provides a brief history of the film's ownership on the occasion of its release to the public domain on video tape.
The disappearance of this item which originally appeared on the (first) Dallas police list of Oswald's belongings points to collusion between the Paines and the FBI, argues Carol Hewett.
Superficially based on errors and incompetence within the Los Angeles Police Department, in actuality, [Scott Enyart v. City of Los Angeles] bore as little relation to accident and error as Robert Kennedy's murder was owed to the act of an "angry and disoriented Palestinian," writes David Manning.
“The ‘not altogether complimentary letter’ may prove to outline the reasons that the HSCA failed so miserably in their investigation of the John F. Kennedy assassination,” writes Kathleen Cunningham.