Gerald Posner
I have tremendous admiration and respect for Gerald Posner, the attorney, investigative reporter and author of such books as Case Closed: Lee Harvey Oswald and the Assassination of JFK, Mengele: The Complete Story, and Killing the Dream: James Earl Ray and the Assassination of Martin Luther King, Jr. Apparently, not everyone agrees with me.
The other day, Posner posted an interesting Twitter comment on his Facebook page:
@geraldposner Posner, u are a disgrace and a stooge. Only a complete moron would think oswald killd [sic] JFK. U treasonous filth. Paid SHILL.
Well. This insightful message wouldn’t be so interesting to me if Posner didn’t also mention, “I get about one a day in this tone, in the ‘you scurrilous dog’ vein. An inevitable byproduct of investigative journalism.”
Case Closed is a compelling and convincing presentation of evidence that Lee Harvey Oswald was responsible and acted alone in the John F. Kennedy murder. Others have followed with similarly commendable accounts, including Vincent Bugliosi’s exhaustive Reclaiming History: The Assassination of President John F. Kennedy. But that hasn’t stopped numerous people from making all sorts of claims, such as that Posner secretly works for the CIA and so is involved in their coverup, that as a former associate of the prestigious law firm Cravath, Swain and Moore, he is out to protect the establishment, and that the CIA injected cancer cells into Jack Ruby to shut him up.
Since these notions are ridiculous on their face, it seems somewhat overkill to point out that there is not one shred of evidence to support any of them, but so be it.
Evidence – or lack thereof – is the name of the game. It always is and always should be.
Let me confess that I am addicted to the cable television hit Pawn Stars. I can’t wait to see what weird things people are going to bring in to the Las Vegas shop and what they want for them. And I recall two specific episodes that demonstrate my point.
In one, a man brought in a cavalry hat he said John Wayne had worn in Rio Grande. When he purchased the hat, it came with a certificate of authenticity from the Hollywood costume company that supplied it, attesting to its provenance. Rick, the proprietor of the pawn shop, happened to know John Wayne’s son Ethan, who called the owner of the costumer and emailed him an image of the certificate. The owner said that it was his signature, but that it appeared to be lifted from a standard rental contract; they did not even issue certificates of authenticity.
Now, if I were told that I had a bogus certificate of authenticity, I would conclude that the object in question was not authentic. Otherwise, why bother with the certificate at all? But the owner of the hat, while accepting that the certificate wasn’t real, still insisted that the hat was. Needless to say, Rick didn’t buy it.
In another episode, a man brought in a battered leather briefcase bearing the gold stamping, “C.A. LINDBERGH.” He said where he had acquired it and wanted a heap of money for the personal briefcase of the famed aviator. Since I have researched Lindbergh and his baby son’s kidnapping for both a book and a PBS documentary, I knew right away that if it was authentic, the briefcase belonged to Charles Lindbergh, Sr., who went by C.A., while his famous son always used his first name. This was verified by the historical expert Rick brought in.
In spite of this, the would-be seller insisted, “Well, I still think it belonged to Charles Lindbergh the flyer.”
Fine. Think whatever you want. But let’s separate faith from fact. Not only is there no evidence to support your assertion, there is evidence to contradict it.
The reason I care so much about this kind of thing is that we see it so often in the realm of criminal justice. An entire world condemned John and Patricia Ramsey for murdering their young daughter JonBenet even though there was no evidence they did it and a mountain of evidence that they did not. Same with the West Memphis Three in Arkansas. Same with Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito in Perugia, Italy.
Just because you think something and it sounds “right” to you or confirms your already held beliefs or world view, doesn’t make it true. What about evidence?
The Ramseys did not kill their daughter. Damien Echols, Jason Baldwin and Jessie Misskelley, Jr. did not kill Chris Byers, Stevie Branch and Michael Moore. Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito did not kill Meredith Kercher. And Lee Harvey Oswald did kill John Kennedy, and he did it alone. And if you disagree, show me the evidence, which you can’t, because there is none. And it doesn’t matter whether you are a wild-eyed conspiracy theorist or the Boulder, Colorado, West Memphis, Arkansas; or Perugia, Italy Police Departments.
When a case is well publicized like the ones I just cited, serious expert investigators like John Douglas and Gerald Posner – people used to defending their positions and taking the heat – can do the research and weigh in. It’s the cases that we don’t hear about that worry me the most.
Hi all, and wishing all a happy new 2014 (I don’t believe I’ve posted since Jan. 1).
I think the problem is that the average person is never taught logic or evidence or trained to think logically and about the evidence. We get such education/ training in…law school, law enforcement, criminal justice, and in the ‘hard’ laboratory sciences and medical school too….but the others don’t. When I was in school (long ago) there were classes ‘Logic 1, Logic 2’ at 1st I found them silly but then as I learned, these classes taught me how to ‘think critically’, to look for the ‘facts’, look at the ‘evidence’. As I understand it in the current day, courses in ‘logic’ are not even hardly ever offered now. Even the ancient TV program ‘Dragnet’ had police detective ‘Jack Webb’ saying the famous….’just the FACTS mam, just the facts’ in every episode, as did Conan Doyle’s fictional ‘Sherlock Holmes’, but Dragnet is not on TV anymore, and I’ve always been shocked to know most people now hardly read the Sherlock Holmes stories!
With no high school/ college classes in logic, or science, or CJUS training in ‘evidence’, no ‘Holmes’, no ‘Webb’ for most…is it any wonder that a majority is swayed instead by… preconceived notions….prejudice…unsupported ‘belief’ and then by their human nature cling to those wrongs even in the ‘proof’ of ‘fact’ and ‘evidence’?
I find this most troubling for the ‘Jury System’, and for young people (teens and early 20’s now) who will eventually take over.
Well said, Watson, and Happy New Year.
I agree. I read Cyril Wecht’s book where he strongly implies John Ramsay murder Jonbenet. He focuses on a chronic injury to the genital region detailed in the autopsy report,as adding weight to this theory. Chronic meaning an injury at least 48-72hours old, previous to the time of death. The Ramsays reportedly threw a party for 100 people 3 days prior to jonbenet’s death. Could someone at this party have abused her and later killed her? Cyril Wecht seems to discount the Lou Schmidt’s theory completely. However his version of events that John killed his daughter in a sex game gone wrong is ridiculous,given the DNA evidence.
Sorry, second thing. You keep saying that rehabilitation doesn’t work. Clearly, sometimes it does, but I would agree that the odds are against it working. However, the key is that rehabilitation is a long shot BASED ON THE CURRENT STATE OF KNOWLEDGE. I think that our understanding of how the brain works and how we can modify behavior is truly in its infancy and that in the future the prospects for successful rehabilitation will be much greater.
Thanks for your thoughtful and analytical comments, Joe. Just to clarify, we haven’t said that rehabilitation never works. It really depends on the type of crime. For example, “power reassurance” rapists can often be rehabilitated, whereas “anger excitation” and sadistic rapists (see our book OBSESSION) are almost impossible to rehabilitate. It all comes down to being willing or unwilling to take a chance with these guys back out into society, and in most cases, we’re not willing to take the chance.
Thanks again for your contribution.
A few things:
1. I firmly believe that Oswald acted alone and I was in high school when it happened, so it’s more like current events than history for me. I read everything I could for a number of years and then threw up my hands in despair as I was so confused. Oswald simply doesn’t fit the profile of the previous presidential assassins. There have been about 10 assassinations (or attempts) and other than the Puerto Rican nationalists, Oswald is the only one with a family. Oswald may not have been the best husband that came down the track, but Ruth Paine says that he loved his wife and children. The daughter of the woman who owned the boarding house that Oswald stayed in said that he was fatherly toward the two little boys that lived there. And Fritz says that Oswald wasn’t crazy or stupid. He says that Oswald was extremely disciplined, almost as if he had been trained. Also, of all the assassins, only Booth, the Puerto Ricans and Oswald left the scene. Lastly, only Oswald denied having committed the crime. That being said, the evidence for his guilt is pretty overwhelming. Will Fritz, who had twenty years experience interviewing murder suspects before interviewing Oswald, says he was guilty. Now Fritz may not be as accomplished as John Douglas, but I’m quite certain that Dr. Douglas recognizes the important contributions of Fritz and guys like him. I think it is always important to listen to people who were there at the time, like first responders. Fritz had the picture of Oswald with the rifle within twenty four hours of the arrest. It is clear that Oswald shot Tippit, which he denied despite all the witnesses. Oswald’s palm print was on the gun. In order to decide that Oswald didn’t do it, you have to posit a massive conspiracy. It would be impossible to keep that truly quiet, Nixon couldn’t keep Watergate quiet and he was the president. The case that is somewhat eerily similar to the Kennedy assassination is the shooting of Governor Goebel of Kentucky. In that case, Goebel was shot from the upper floor of a building while he was walking into the Old State Capitol. It is clear that there was some sort of conspiracy, but it involved, at most, four people and it occurred in 1900, after the election of 1899. While there were convictions, it appears that historians are not certain who fired the gun or exactly who was involved. That was over sixty years before Kennedy was killed and proof of the conspiracy was clear almost immediately. With Oswald, just to get past the photo of him with the rifle, you need the assistance of the whole Dallas police force, the photography lab and Marina Oswald. That is just too implausible.
Mr. Olshaker,
Ok. I finally have to comment on this site.
First of all, I can’t begin to tell you how much respect I have for John Douglas and the work he has done. I also have read many of his books, most of which you have helped him write…nice job.
I happen to agree with pretty much everything you or John have written or said — and I’ve been interested in criminal profiling, behavioral science, investigative analysis since I was about 15 years old.
I agree with everything you said in this article with regard to the Ramseys, the Amanda Knox case and the West Memphis three case. HOWEVER….. I’ve always believed that Oswald did not act alone in the assassination of John F. Kennedy…in fact, I don’t think he was involved at all! I think he was exactly what he said he was….’a patsy’. My reason for believing this stems from a number of sources, however I’ve let my own eyes be the judge of it….in the Sabruder film — mispelled I know — I apologise…my computer won’t type that letter….it just seems to me that Kennedy was being tossed all around the limo! I mean, first he puts he hands to his throat….obviously shot in the throat…from the front! Then, his head is literally blown apart…and it just always seemed to me that that particular shot came from the right FRONT…not from behind! It always seemed to me that the shots were coming from a few different directions…indicating multiple assassins. Also, doesn’t it seem like a professional ‘hit’ to you? Certainly not done by someone who was at best a mediocre shot!
On top of this, I’ve asked many people who were alive at the time — I was born in 1971, so I obviously have no recollection of the aura/vibe of that time period — ‘didn’t the American people ever question this’? ‘What did you think at the time’? And most of the people who I’ve spoken to, and are significantly older that I am, have said ‘of course we thought the government was involved, or the CIA was involved…etc…, but we just wanted to go on with our lives’. So I’m not alone here. It seems many people — and I’m speaking of highly intelligent people — felt the same way at that time!
Also, have you ever seen this letter? It was addressed to Jim Garrison, and I found it fascinating!
http://www.prouty.org/letter.html
Just…so many things that point to it NOT being Oswald. Believe me, I’m well educated…and not at all prone to believing in conspiracy theories. It just seems to me in this particular case, a conspiracy theory it is!
As an aside, you’ve mentioned Vincent Bugliosi’s book a number of times now, in different articles, and even though I have yet to read this particular book — regarding the Kennedy assassination — I’ve read everything else he’s written and always find myself in complete agreement with him. As much as I respect Mr. Douglas for what he did for criminal profiling; I respect Mr. Bugliosi for what he’s done for the law…in my opinion, he’s perhaps the finest trial attorney this country’s ever produced! And he agrees with your assessment of the Kennedy assassination! It’s killing me! And it’s really making me question what I believe — because if two of the men I respect most in the country; who are perhaps the best at what they do…are saying it was Oswald…a part of me HAS to believe it was!
It’s just that my inner gut tells me otherwise.
Anyway, just had to have my say…sorry for disagreeing…I’m sure you are right. And many thanks to you and Mr. Douglas for this wonderful website, as well as the terrific writing of his many books. Well done!
— Jennifer
Hi Jennifer, and welcome aboard. Thanks for all the compliments. As far as the JFK assassination, I was around at the time – young, but old enough to remember where I was and what I was doing, and I was part of the generation that grew up believing in a massive conspiracy. It was only when I began delving into the case and actually examining the evidence that I came to the conclusion that Oswald was responsible and acted alone. We could fill up an entire book with that evidence, as Posner and Bugliosi have done, but suffice it to say that all of the creditable evidence – medical, ballistic, etc. — points in one direction. If you visit the Dallas site you will realize that these were pretty easy shots from the School Book Depository and Oswald was a good shot – an “average” Marine shot, which is pretty damn good. You are correct that a lot of intelligent people believed in a conspiracy, but there are many aspects to a conspiracy and the evidence just doesn’t support it. Certainly respect your “inner gut,” but also demand that it give you evidence. And by all means, keep questioning! It’s good for you and it’s good for society.
Fantastic Article!
“Just the Facts M’aam..Just the Facts!
Just the Evidence and Only the EVIDENCE Please!
Let Professionals with Experience and Skills of their Expertise be the EXPERTS! Experts know the Evidence… it is their Job, Their Expertise, far beyond what individuals can interpret! Experts are Experts for a reason, with a reason, and Evidence they interpret..they do beyond a normal persons understanding.
When someone tells me something about my life; as if they know my life better than I know my own life, and speak as if they were present with their description of whatever..yet never part of that circumstance..its Prove it..show me factual…..and what’s in it for you!
Evidence Based..Evidence based! John Douglas And Mark Olshaker – The Elite…they are the Experts they Know Evidence…
Thank You for Articles like this one, cause and effect, samples-just because you think something! DEMAND EVIDENCE AND THINK CRTICALLY! GOD BLESS MARK OLSHAKER & JOHN DOUGLAS…
TRUTH IS TRUTH!
Thank you, Chris Anne, for stating what I think should be articles of faith. If a doctor runs tests and looks at the evidence and tells you what you have, you can go for a second expert opinion, but you’d be foolish just to say, “Well, I still believe it’s something else.” And I don’t see why the same logic does not apply to other situations. I’m not saying you have to be an expert to have an opinion, but it sure seems better to have one based on EVIDENCE!
I completely agree..so well stated!
Yes-you don’t need to be an expert to have an opinion…and opinions are necessary to base evidence on! “I think”..does not show evidence..it is skepticism. Tests and results, that’s solid..to disagree on the results..a 2nd opinion does not mean the tests and results will change; but a second opinion may prove the “I think” does not even equate!