As always, memorable events and personalities bring forward all sorts of “I was there” claims.James Files' account of the events in Dallas is fascinating. For a lower-level mobster, he saw what was going on at ground level, but unsure what was happening at higher echelons of the Chicago mafia.
And the telling sign was that the FBI and New York Times went far too out of their way to discredit Files after his interview. If he was a screwball, they would have ignored him.
Here is his 1994 interview:
https://drtruth.fortunecity.ws/confession2.htm
Files claims to have known too many people and is too chatty for someone with supposed organized crime affiliations. The idea of David Atlee Phillips as Files' controller is implausible. His failure to refer to Phillips' cover name of Maurice Bishop is suspect.
Files' claim to have known Lee Harvey Oswald is not credible. Mercury filled .22 rounds are absurd, something a novelist would come up with.
Overall, Files' account of the assassination is muddled and lacks indicia of compartmentalization and other routine security measures. The lack of linear narrative and corroborating details adds to my impression that Files stitched it with bits from books, prison chatter, and a lot of invention.
What would Files get out of it all? Conning an eager researcher into a few bucks or a deposit into his prison commissary account would do.