Hit List: An In-Depth Investigation Into the Mysterious Deaths of Witnesses to the JFK Assassination

by Richard Belzer

  1 Assassination researcher and author, Mae Brussell

  2 Malcom Abrams, “30 Watergate Witnesses Have Met Violent Deaths,” 12 July 1976, Midnight Magazine: http://www.maebrussell.com/Mae%20Brussell%20Articles/Watergate%20Deaths.html

  3 Russell, The Man Who Knew Too Much, 182.

  4 Ibid.

  Victim

  Cancer Researcher, Dr. Mary Sherman

  Cause of Death

  Multiple stab wounds penetrating the heart, liver, stomach, labia minora, left arm and right leg. Extreme burns of right side of body with complete destruction of right upper extremity and right side of thorax and abdomen, exposing vital organs.517

  Official Verdict

  Unsolved murder

  Actual Circumstances

  Dr. Sherman was deeply involved in covert research, developing a “super-cancer” as a biological weapon.

  Dr. Sherman also knew both Lee Harvey Oswald and David Ferrie, both of whom were involved in the same research project.518

  Inconsistencies

  In addition to multiple stab wounds, virtually the entire right side of her upper body was absent, her apartment was set on fire after she was killed, and her death occurred on the same day that the Warren Commission came to New Orleans to obtain testimony on the assassination of President Kennedy.519

  The victim’s arm was literally disintegrated. The damage that her body sustained—with absolute certainty—cannot be explained by the official version of events, which maintained that she was murdered in her home and then set afire.520

  Various evidentiary consistencies were also apparent, which are examined in detail in the following text.

  517 Edward T. Haslam, Dr. Mary’s Monkey: How the unsolved murder of a doctor, a secret laboratory in New Orleans and cancer-causing monkey viruses are linked to Lee Harvey Oswald, the JFK assassination and emerging global epidemics (TrineDay: 2007).

  32

  Dr. Mary Sherman,

  July 21, 1964

  Dr. Mary S. Sherman was a gifted physician who was selected for a special cancer research project in New Orleans by Dr. Alton Ochsner, a prominent New Orleans physician; in fact, one of the nation’s leaders in guiding the country’s largest medical research projects.

  Dr. Mary Sherman was one of America’s leading cancer experts and had all the credentials to prove it. The newspaper articles about her death refer to her as “an internationally-known bone specialist.” She was an Associate Professor at a prominent medical school engaged in monkey virus research, director of a cancer laboratory at an internationally famous medical clinic, and Chairman of the Pathology Committee of one of the most elite medical societies in America. The medical articles she wrote were quoted for half a century.1

  Her murder was front-page headlines in New Orleans. At first, the burglary angle was notably highlighted, being referenced approximately twenty times in just the first day of coverage by the two major New Orleans newspapers.

  The murder of a famous female physician, especially with the apparent sexual angle of the killing, was the talk of the town:

  1 Haslam, Dr. Mary’s Monkey, 63-64.

  518 Judyth Vary Baker Me & Lee: How I Came to Know, Love and Lose Lee Harvey Oswald, (TrineDay: 2011), Haslam, Dr. Mary’s Monkey

  519 Haslam, Dr. Mary’s Monkey

  520 Haslam, Dr. Mary’s Monkey

  Slashed with a knife, dismembered, and set on fire. It looked like a sexual killing, you know.1

  The following was representative coverage in the New Orleans States-Item:

  Homicide detectives said the front door to her apartment had been forced open, her wallet was empty, and her 1961 automobile was missing . . . Sam Moran, Special Investigator for the Orleans Parish Coroner’s office, said the front door had been forced open and an unsuccessful

  attempt had been made to open a jewelry box.2

  Well, that seemed pretty clear, didn’t it? The cops were sure that it was a burglary job. Right?

  Wrong!

  1 Haslam, Dr. Mary’s Monkey, 49.

  2 Haslam, Dr. Mary’s Monkey, 121.

  Reconstruction of a Self-Contradictory Crime Scene

  Deceased: Dr. Mary Sherman

  July 21, 1964, New Orleans, Louisiana

  The death scene at the home of prominent New Orleans physician, Mary Sherman, presented numerous apparent anomalies to investigators.

  • No signs of forced entry;

  • Burglar alarm in “off” position;

  • Victim found in her home, but victim’s car missing;

  • A pair of “blood-soaked gloves” were found in the laundry hamper;

  • Victim was found “upside down” in bed, i.e., feet at headboard, head at foot of bed;

  • Clothing had been placed atop the victim and the clothing, as well as the mattress, were smoldering, but not ablaze;

  • Two different sets of burns were present on victim’s body: one set was pre-death and extreme in nature, one set was post-mortem and moderate in nature, neither set fatal (see text for description);

  • Two different sets of knife cuts were present on victim’s body: one set was pre-death, one set was post-mortem (refer to the accompanying text for description and discussion);

  • Actual cause of death (COD): Heart pierced by knife that passed through the intercostal space near the sternum (breast bone), between the sixth and seventh ribs, directly over the heart;

  Everyone in town was interested in the case and following details about her murder.

  It would not be until the next day, after a horrified city had literally millions of word-of-mouth discussions about the sensational murder/burglary, before the newspapers stated that the front door had not been forced open and her burglar alarm had been turned off. The press now reported that the homicide department, impressed by these facts, and the facts that “the intruder” knew which car belonged to Dr. Sherman and that a box full of jewelry which could have easily been carried off was left behind, ruled out burglary as a motive.1

  The whole city followed the case with rapt attention. There were no signs of forced entry at Mary’s apartment:

  1 Ibid, emphasis in original.

  • Neighbors heard absolutely nothing even though the walls were very thin and, for example, neighbors could usually tell when Dr. Sherman was home because they could ordinarily hear her footsteps quite easily;

  • Smoke from the smoldering fire finally awakened a neighbor and emergency units were then called to the scene at 4:13 a.m.;

  • Fire damage to the apartment and structure was very limited. “There was no structural damage to the wood-framed building.”1 In fact, the curtains in the bedroom—the same room in which the victim was found dead—had not even caught on fire;

  • “Fire damage” to victim was extensive and far surpassed what could—by any stretch of the imagination—be logically expected from the fire damage in the apartment;

  • No motive: Police could not discern any viable motive (burglary was ruled out), although homicide investigators implied a sexual motive, based on cuts to the genitals;

  • As a result of the sexual slant in the homicide report, the newspaper reports then highlighted that aspect and people became convinced that it was a lesbian killing by a sexual psychopath, and one whom was known to the victim. That was an interesting theory—but one that was entirely wrong.

  Material derived primarily from: Edward T. Haslam, Dr. Mary’s Monkey: How the unsolved murder of a doctor, a secret laboratory in New Orleans and cancer-causing monkey viruses are linked to Lee Harvey Oswald, the JFK assassination and emerging global epidemics, 2007.

  1 Ibid, 227

  From Elmener Peterson, Mary’s housekeeper, police learned that the burglar alarm was in the “off” position, that Dr. Sherman was “expecting visitors from out of town,” and that she had laid out a polka dot dress, which they found lying on a chair in the bedroom. As to the issue of whether the intruder had forced the door open, the report says:

  “T
he officers could find no signs of the door leading to the apartment

  patio or sliding glass door having been forced open.”1

  The Homicide Report also read that:

  It appeared that no scuffle took place inside of said bedroom, and nothing appeared to be disarranged in the bedroom or throughout the apartment.2

  Especially around Tulane Medical School, Dr. Sherman was well-known and well-respected, and professional people found the circumstances surrounding her death extremely suspicious:

  But the grapevine said that whoever killed her knew what they were doing with a knife . . . maybe they even had a high level of medical knowledge, just judging by the way the cuts were done.3

  However, the press coverage and the police reporting did not mesh well and people who were following the case sensed that something was awry:

  Something didn’t make sense. The explanations of Mary Sherman’s murder didn’t add up. The press coverage focused on an “intruder,” yet there was no forced entry. The police investigation failed to determine any identifiable motive, but the homicide report strained to imply a sexual one. And why did they not want to say where the victim worked?4

  The fact that no noises had been heard by the neighbors was another dramatically inconsistent aspect of the crime scene. The old building was of such type of construction that the neighbors were very used to hearing the footsteps of Dr. Sherman returning from work and, as a result, would usually be very aware of when she was home:

  The crime scene was also bizarre. How could anyone inflict such massive destruction on another person in the still of the night in a flimsy apartment complex filled with other people, and not have anyone even hear anything?5

  1 Ibid, 127.

  2 New Orleans Police Department, “Homicide Report-Mary S. Sherman,” October 29, 1964.

  3 Haslam, Dr. Mary’s Monkey, 49.

  4 Ibid, 227.

  5 Ibid, 227, emphasis in original.

  No one has spent more time researching the matter of Dr. Sherman’s death than author Ed Haslam, who has literally devoted many years of his life trying to determine what actually happened. The first point of mystifying evidence which begged to be addressed, in Haslam’s view, was the standpoint of fire damage.

  There was obviously no way that a fire of the type in Dr. Sherman’s apartment could have caused the extreme damage apparent in Dr. Sherman’s body. In fact, clothing that was found atop the victim had not even burned.

  The following is straight from the homicide report:

  The body was nude; however, there was clothing which had apparently been placed on top of the body, mostly covering the body from just above to the pubic area to the neck. Some of the mentioned clothes had been burned completely, while others were still intact, but scorched.1

  So, being the solid researcher he is, Haslam did some intelligent checking of the matter, approaching it scientifically, from the standpoint of temperature.

  Again, from the homicide report:

  According to the criminologist, the mentioned clothes were composed of synthetic material which would have to reach a temperature of about 500 F before it would ignite into a flame; however, prior to this, there would be a smoldering effect.2

  It seemed fair to interpret the above excerpt from the homicide report as meaning that the fire—at least at the location of the clothing that had been placed atop the victim’s body—had not reached a temperature of 500 F, as evidenced by the fact that it had smoldered, but had not ignited into flames.

  Now, there were some actual numbers to work with. So Haslam did some checking, and here’s what he learned:

  • Even the professional incineration of human bodies in the process of cremation, most emphatically, does not result in the amount of destruction to the human body that was present in Dr. Sherman.

  • An average cremation of human remains takes about two hours at a temperature of about 1,600 F; some as high as 2,000 F for a period of three hours—at the end of which, “you still have bones, or at least pieces of bones like joints, skull fragments, and knuckles.”3

  • The next step in the cremation process is to take those bone pieces and grind them up, and the final product is then bone dust.

  • Hence, quite contrary to popular perception, the dust in the human “ashes” that is given to the families of the deceased is not actually the “ashes” of their cremated body—it is ground up bone dust.

  • But the point to take away from all of the above is this:

  1 Ibid, 229.

  2 Ibid, 229.

  3 Ibid, 230.

  Bones do not burn

  Mr. Haslam’s decades of study of this case have led to some amazing discoveries:

  Even the bodies of fighter pilots who crash and burn do not experience a level of fire and destruction capable of incinerating the bones. There is always bone left. Listen to the observations of someone who has been at those crash sites:

  Jet fuel burns at thousands of degrees, but there were still bones left. I also saw people who had been covered with napalm and the like. But there were still bones left.1

  1 Haslam, 231.

  Analysis of Medical Evidence

  Death of Dr. Mary S. Sherman

  The medical facts of this case lead to some—very necessarily—

  dramatic conclusions.

  1. There was intense charring of victim’s body; charring is carbonization (like burning a steak) resulting from extremely high temperature burns:

  She was carbonized from the right side of her head down to her right hip.1

  2. Yet, the damage was markedly localized and areas very near the extreme burns were virtually unharmed. For example, there were “intense high-heat burns on the scalp, immediately adjacent to the unburned hair.”2

  3. The damage was so intense that the right arm was completely missing, bone and all: “all that remained was a short piece of charred bone extending out from the shoulder.”3

  4. The “extensive destruction” was present through the “right half of her rib cage”; exposing the lung and other vital organs. “Exposure of the lung means massive destruction of both the rib cage and the chest wall.” Bones in that region were, again, completely destroyed.4

  5. There were two sets of burns sustained in victim’s body: pre- and post-mortem.

  1 Haslam, Dr. Mary’s Monkey, 234.

  2 Ibid.

  3 Ibid.

  4 Ibid, 235.

  The first set of burns was from an extremely hot and very focused heat source, and occurred somewhere other than her apartment. The total destruction of her arm is evidence of a very powerful device capable of producing thousands of degrees of heat.1

  Other burns on the victim were of a markedly more moderate nature and occurred as a result of the small fire in the apartment.

  1. There were two sets of stab wounds: pre- and post-mortem. Dr. Sherman was stabbed “dead center in the middle of her heart”2—that was the wound that killed her:

  Upon removal of the breast bone, there was found more than one quart of variously-clotted blood near the heart, evidence that she was still alive when she was stabbed in the heart.3

  Other knife wounds were made after she was dead, evidenced by the absence of hemorrhaging:

  The absence of hemorrhage around the liver wound means that the wound did not bleed, indicating that this wound to the liver was inflicted after death, during the second set of stab wounds.4

  The death wound piercing the heart very precisely was apparently the “basis for the rumor that whoever killed Mary Sherman knew what he or she was doing, and may have had medical training.”5

  Additional knife wounds were determined to also be post-mortem. In fact, the knife wounds to the genitals were determined to be made not only post-mortem, but also through the clothing that had been placed atop the body. That nullifies the sexual aspect of the crime because the killer and/or crime scene stager was probably not even aware that the wounds had pierced the genitals.6

  Conclu
sions Based On Medical Evidence:

  • It is literally impossible that the severest aspects of the damage to Dr. Sherman’s body were the result of the fire that occurred in her apartment.

  1 Ibid, 237.

  2 Ibid, 235-236.

  3 Ibid, 236, emphasis in original.

  4 Ibid, 236.

  5 Ibid, 236.

  6 Ibid, 237.

  Therefore it seemed that the only possible logical solution to the crime would be to determine if Dr. Sherman had access to some type of highly advanced research equipment, such as a super-laser or a linear particle beam accelerator. Mr. Haslam’s research established that not only did Dr. Sherman have access to a linear particle accelerator, but there was even concrete evidence of one having been used in her research. He determined and verified those points, in quite some detail.1

  In summation of the above evidentiary points—and to a very high degree of probability—Dr. Mary Sherman apparently died in a laboratory accident of some type. However, the fact that she was intricately involved in matters of national security necessitated the masking of that accident. Therefore, it was staged to appear to be a murder that took place in her home.