[ Home | Search | Next | Previous | Up ]
From: Pat Valentino
Date: 9/4/00
Time: 12:01:09 PM
Hi Charlie,
I believe that Joe will go where ever the evidence takes him. Of course one starts out with a hypothesis and begins to gather evidence to prove it. Along the way you may discover that you were right about "A" and "B" but wrong about "C" and "D". In a truly scientific approach, you would then alter your hypothesis to fit the facts (not the opposite) and see where that takes you. That's been David Lifton's approach with JFK as his background before the assassination was engineering physics.
Your comparisons to Oswald are well taken to the extent that there are some interesting similarities. I think you will agree that two of the biggest mistakes of the plotters in JFK were the taking of Oswald alive (resulting in him actually being killed in the police station!), and the wounding of John Connally (resulting in the OR 1 and OR 2 problems and adding to the general chaos at Parkland). It is interesting to note that Wasz used to tell me that he thought Simpson was in on the plot, but he never said that in his "official" story. It was merely an opinion. If that notion had truly been part of the RK plot allegation, he could have blown the case wide open and probably done little if any prison time--instead, he only implicates RK and takes 20 years! Maybe that speaks to Wasz's integrity.
Don and myself are of the opinion that Simpson (even if he were "evil") would not be a part of any plot that included the stealing of his girlfriend's car.
Your Shapiro observation is compelling! I think you would agree that his best work on this case other than his cross of the two coroners and Vannatter was in the early hours when he put the forensic team together (and now you add the notion that he may have saved Simpson's life as well--fascinating deduction!)
I'll start looking thru videos as soon as I finish these current recording sessions--I may have some stills that will help you as well.
Regards,
Pat Valentino