Replies

Hi Rocco:

May I respectfully disagree with your characterization of Case Closed?

"Notice how he knocks one conspiracy writer down after another, but couldn't touch Sylvia Meagher's works or Josiah Thompson's Six Seconds in Dallas."

Huh?....Are we talking about the same book here? There are numerous references in Case Closed to Sylvia Meagher's and Josiah Thompson’s books, effectively refuting much of their claims, to the point where I would doubt the validity of any of their conclusions. I’ve just reread all of these references and your characterization that that he “couldn’t touch” either of these two is certainly inaccurate and misleading. You may refute what he says if you choose, but I think his rebuttals against them are very persuasive. In fact he has a entire chapter in Appendix B refuting Meagher’s “mysterious deaths” assertion and her bogus statement that the “witnesses appear to be dying like flies” as if there was some kind of mysterious connection to it all.

"But the ultimate flaw for Posner's book, looking at it from an Oswald-did-it-alone theory, is that it spends 99/100ths of the time discussing Oswald's profile as an assassin, but only spends two pages (with illustrations) on the single-bullet theory."

Wrong again! I count over 30 pages devoted to the single bullet theory! Were you reading some kind of condensed version or something? There ARE two pages of illustrations of the theory, but well over 30 pages hashing out the various aspects and pros and cons of the theory – all in extreme detail.

" …and two pages on Oswald's escape from the sixth floor…"

I hate to sound like a broken record, but this is inaccurate again. There are at least six pages of the text devoted to Oswald’s escape from the TSBD, with an incredibly detailed line sketch of the interior of the building juxtaposed with the exact time frame of Oswald in the building. It shows where he was in the building at every minute, the route he took from the sniper’s nest through the building, and stops he made along the way. Your description grossly mischaracterizes Posner’s treatment of this subject.

"These nuts-and-bolts of the assassination are glossed over unconvincingly, which is terribly damaging to his cause."

You can’t be serious. One of us has read a different book!

"It's at this point when Posner's reasoning turns into a tantrum. The tone of the concluding chapter is so defensive that you sense that Posner himself knows he didn't convince the skeptics."

That’s your opinion, certainly not mine! I’ve read the book three times and I totally disagree with this assertion. I think the tone throughout the entire book is even-handed, even-tempered, and written with confidence of someone who seeks only the truth. He never overstates things and is careful of the conclusions he draws from the evidence. As he demonstrates over and over, the same cannot be said for the other side, which is not above "selectively" picking and choosing from evidence, often omitting evidence that doesn't support its case. In addition, it's not unusual for them to draw outrageous conclusions from the evidence that they do report.

I hate to say it, but your criticisms are typical of those that I’ve read about Case Closed over the years and demonstrates again that Mr. Posner is much more careful with the facts of the case than either the authors of the conspiracy books or the people who criticize him.

Case Closed is absolutely convincing. I, too, was a former conspiracy buff. I also used to be a Santa Claus and Easter Bunny buff.

ANY criminal case has its odd events, you can play this crap with the OJ case too (why DIDN'T that glove fit properly???? Didn't the lead cop once cryptically say something derogatory about black people? Hmmmm...), but the amount of hard evidence damning Oswald is SO overwhelming its ridiculous.

The amount of hard evidence proving a second shooter is ...completely non-existent. No weapon, no fingerprints, no photos, no shells, no bullet fragments anywhere behind the limo, etc.