Replies

Considering his book had just been republished in October of 2001, his death could be considered suspicious.

What kind of logic is that? The book has been out for a long time. Even if there was something new in the republished version, it is still out. Him being dead changes nothing.

The reality is that Dr. Crenshaw is just one more in a line of people who have tried to make something off their connection to this case, real or imagined. He lied in his book. He did not see what he wrote. He was not one of the doctors that treated Kennedy. The doctors that were there do not back him up.

Re: Crenshaw. I read his book back around 1992, so agree 100% that the rerelease of his book should not be construed as meaning anything one way or the other. More likely than not, he got old and he died. Nothing sinister there, it seems to me.

Also people should know about Crenshaw was that he was a THIRD YEAR RESIDENT on Nov. 22, 1963. A little farther along than a medical student to be sure, but not a major player. The major players were people like McClelland, Clark, Perry, Carrico, Jones and also Shires. From what I remember of Crenshaw's book was that he was sort of along for the ride that day. To say he was "one of JFK's doctors" is really a bit of a stretch.

"Considering his book had just been republished in October of 2001, his death could be considered suspicious. "

"What kind of logic is that? The book has been out for a long time. Even if there was something new in the republished version, it is still out. Him being dead changes nothing. "

The republished book attracts attention - it is number one on the Amazon list of Crenshaw books, while the old version is number 45. Is this enough reason to kill Crenshaw? Maybe, maybe not.

"The reality is that Dr. Crenshaw is just one more in a line of people who have tried to make something off their connection to this case, real or imagined. He lied in his book. He did not see what he wrote. He was not one of the doctors that treated Kennedy. The doctors that were there do not back him up. "

From the Amazon review - " In the aftermath, the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) called Crenshaw’s book "a fabrication." But JAMA’s claim did not hold up in court and Crenshaw subsequently prevailed in a defamation suit against JAMA. "