1 Jordan, Jim Reeves, 629.
2 Larry Jordan, email to author, 14 January, 2012.
3 Ibid. 630.
4 Jordan, Jim Reeves: His Untold Story
for this may involve some security issues. The FBI came and visited the wife of Reeves’ piano player/road manager, who also died in the crash.1
Bobbi Manuel added to the intrigue when she revealed that soon after her husband’s death, “Two FBI agents came to question me. . . . This was all a shock to me!” They wanted to know about Dean and whether or not he had any connections to organized crime “because Dean had been seen on the same elevator with some of Jimmy Hoffa’s men. I told them I didn’t believe Dean knew them.” In response to inquiries from this author, the FBI searched their files for anything pertinent to Jim or Dean. While nothing turned up on Manuel, they indicated that files on Reeves had been recently destroyed for undisclosed reasons, on the order of a judge in Washington, D.C.2
From Larry Jordan's book, Jim Reeves: His Untold Story
Crash site: The Medical Examiner had papers in his hand as he examined the scene. It was officially denied that he took any notes and his notes disappeared, just as Jim’s briefcase did.
• Even though an FOIA request was issued, every scrap of information—from the FAA accident report to report of the medical examiner in the case—have vanished.
Over and over I have had people in official capacities—ranging from current members of the FAA, to the NTSB, to Nashville area law enforcement, and even the man credited with finding the wreckage—tell me they felt there was a lid placed on the crash investigation due to an intelligence link.3
A CIA source directly informed author Larry Jordan that, for his own safety, he should maintain a high level of visibility if he continued researching the very sensitive matter of Jim Reeves’ death. That source reminded him that it was a “a very volatile time in history.” That CIA source also confirmed to Jordan that Jim Reeves had indeed served the U.S. Military and others
1 Ibid, 636-637
2 Jordan, Jim Reeves, 637.
3 Larry Jordan, email to author, December 19, 2012.
as a high-level courier, that he’d had a briefcase and that the searchers knew about the briefcase. That briefcase, another source informed Jordan, contained “something no one is supposed to see.”1
• One investigator hinted at the possibility of sabotage—due to the fact that one of the small plane’s wings was seen coming off.
• Reeves’ biographer has reported that he was pointedly warned not to get too inquisitive about the matter in the process of investigating the case for his book.
Author Larry Jordan received a phone call that made him shake his head in disbelief:
It is just astonishing to me that I received an unsolicited phone call from a man who works for metro Nashville law enforcement, who put his “friend”—who supposedly had worked in U.S. intelligence—who warned me not to probe too deeply into the Reeves crash.2
Ann McDuffee worked at the airport/general store at the tiny Batesville, Arkansas, airport, from which Jim Reeves’ plane took off on its fatal voyage. Ms. McDuffee died just days after the crash of Reeves’ plane from a suspicious car accident. Her family believed she was run off the road. If anyone could have witnessed any tampering of Jim’s plane it was her, because she had overseen the comings and goings at the small airport that day. When authorities learned that the Reeves plane was missing, it was Ann McDuffee who took the call from the FAA the night of the day the Reeves plane disappeared, asking her to go out and check the N numbers of all the planes to make sure the Reeves plane wasn’t still sitting there on the ground. She had direct links to that plane/airport and knew the significance of her family providing services for such a big star. Ann would have been in a position to have observed anyone around Reeves’ plane had it been sabotaged before his fateful flight home. The victim’s family insists there was evidence that she was run off the road because debris from another car was found at the scene.3
A veteran Nashville detective who had been close to U.S. Army Special Forces also explained that the Reeves case had “an intelligence overlay.”4
Conclusion
Possible Sabotage, currently unclear if linked to JFK assassination
1 Larry Jordan, email to author, 14 January, 2012.
2 Larry Jordan, email to author, December 19, 2012.
3 Larry Jordan, email to author, 14 January, 2012 and Sara Jordan, email to author, 14 January, 2012.
4 Larry Jordan, email to author, 14 January, 2012.
Victim
Robert F. Kennedy, Senator from New York, who had just won the Democratic Primary in California, and was thought to be well on his way to being elected the next President of the United States.
Cause of Death
Gunshots at point-blank range; from one-to-three inches behind the victim’s right ear.
Official Verdict
Murdered by Sirhan Bishara Sirhan, a “lone nut”; no co-conspirators involved.
Actual Circumstances
The accused literally could not have killed the Senator, for reasons delineated below.
Inconsistencies
1. Ballistics-testing by veteran ballistics expert, William W. Harper, determined that the bullets that hit Senator Kennedy did not come from Sirhan’s gun.
2. Sirhan was not at any point close enough to Senator Kennedy to have fired the kill shot. Coroner determined that the shot was fired from within one to three inches away from left ear. About the only thing that everybody in that room agreed with was that Sirhan was never that close.
3. Bullet trajectories indicate that primary shooter was at close range, behind target, and to his right. Sirhan was in front of Senator Kennedy and to his left, walking towards him. So it is not possible for bullets fired from his gun to have entered Senator Kennedy from behind and then traversed back-to-front.
4. Sirhan held his gun parallel to Senator Kennedy; therefore, the trajectories traversing upwards are also totally contradictory to his actual position.
5. Sirhan’s gun held only eight bullets but fourteen bullets were fired, necessitating at least two shooters. At least fourteen shots were identified.
6. Psychiatrists determined that Sirhan was the most easily hypnotizable subject they’d ever seen; his notebooks contained repetitious entries such as “RFK must die,” that were determined to have been written as post-hypnotic suggestion; conditions indicate that he was in a trance state during the murder.
7. Investigators from the Los Angeles Police Department acknowledged that they were completely unable to document any of Sirhan’s actions during a six-week period prior to the assassination which they labeled his “White Fog” period. They also acknowledged that such a complete disappearance was extremely unusual.
8. Therefore, Sirhan Bishara Sirhan has been imprisoned since 1968 for a crime he did not commit because he was convicted of “Murder in the First Degree,” and did not meet the requirements of that charge; he did not possess conscious intent at the moment of the crime; therefore, the act was not premeditated, nor did he possess malice aforethought. The evidence proves conclusively that the defendant was never at any point close enough to the victim to have fired the fatal shot. It has also been proven that the trajectories of the shots that hit Senator Kennedy
could not have come from the defendant’s gun. Those
facts mandate a verdict of “Not Guilty” when a person is accused of “Murder in the First Degree.” Therefore he should be a free man and, technically, never should have been convicted on that charge in the first place (see Dead Wrong for a more thorough examination of the above and other evidence).750
50
Senator Robert F.
Kennedy,
June 6, 1968
We still do not know with absolute certainty who murdered Senator Robert Kennedy—but we do now know with absolute certainty who did not. The accused killer, Sirhan Bishara Sirhan, was never close enough to hav
e fired the kill shot, was never at the correct angle to have fired the kill shot, and as that other evidence very clearly illustrates upon proper examination, he indeed did not fire the kill shot.
Probably no one in the world knew more—and had intentionally learned more—about the assassination of President Kennedy than did his brother, Robert.
Additionally, the fact that it was rumored that one of the primary reasons Robert Kennedy sought the Presidency was to re-open (some might say “begin” would be a better choice of words) serious investigation into the true circumstances of his brother’s death, certainly makes him strongly linked to that assassination as far as a witness.
He was linked in other ways, too. It was apparently from the anti-Castro operation in Florida that the plan to kill President Kennedy was hatched. Robert Kennedy oversaw that program. That’s why Robert Kennedy registered immediate recognition of the name “Lee Harvey Oswald”—because he knew Oswald was part of the anti-Castro operation.1
Alexander Haig didn’t turn out to be a Kennedy ally—he became Secretary of State under the very conservative Reagan Administration—but in the early 1960s, Haig was a military assistant in the Army and was in charge of assimilating Cuban exile veterans from the failed Bay of Pigs invasion into the United States. That program was at the personal direction of President Kennedy, since he felt a genuine responsibility to the Cuban exiles and, as a result, Haig was privy to very sensitive intelligence regarding Cuba.
In his memoirs he states that:
Under the personal leadership of Robert Kennedy, at least eight efforts were made to eliminate Castro himself, the earliest involving Mafia figures recruited by the CIA soon after the inauguration. These attempts continued until the day President Kennedy was himself assassinated in Dallas. The secret of this deadly enterprise was so closely held that not even John A. McCone, Director of Central Intelligence from 1962–1965, knew that some of his men were involved until he read about it in a newspaper story.”2
That anti-Castro intelligence operation was an odd mixture of conservative CIA agents, mafia members, anti-Castro Cubans, and other names that keep popping up continually
1 Lamar Waldron & Thom Hartmann, Ultimate Sacrifice (New York: Carroll & Graf, 2005).
2 Alexander Haig, Inner Circles: How America Changed the World: A Memoir (Warner Books: 1992), 112.
750 Belzer & Wayne, Dead Wrong.
in the investigation of the assassination: Jack Ruby, Lee Harvey Oswald, David Ferrie, and Guy Banister.
That’s why Robert Kennedy immediately called the Director of the CIA after learning of his brother’s death, and blurted into the phone:
“Did the CIA kill my brother?”1
And that’s why another of his first reactions to the assassination was to call a contact at the anti-Castro Florida camp and shout into the telephone:
“One of your guys did it!”2
Alexander Haig summarized the end result as follows:
In any case, the key fact that a secret group headed by the President’s brother had been plotting to kill Castro was kept from the Warren Commission and from the American people. That was the seed of the real cover-up . . .3
Haig was apparently right about the point above, although he was also a stated believer in the obvious “smokescreen” sent up by President Johnson that Castro had been behind the JFK assassination in retaliation.4 As Robert Kennedy himself concluded, the real blame for his brother’s murder was quite a bit closer to home. Many have inferred that Robert Kennedy was actually referring to President Johnson when he sent an emissary to Moscow with a message that included the following blockbuster information:
We know that it was a high-level domestic political conspiracy.5
So Robert F. Kennedy certainly knew a lot about the JFK assassination. Whether that was a factor in his murder is not clear. But this much is very clear:
He too was silenced.
Conclusions Based on Evidentiary Indications
The man convicted of the crime could not possibly have committed it. Furthermore, he was obviously programmed, as experts have determined.
Chief Psychiatrist Bernard Diamond:
“Let me specifically state that it was immediately apparent that Sirhan had been programmed.”
Conclusion
Murdered by a conspiracy that set up the accused killer, Sirhan Bishara Sirhan. Currently unclear whether or not directly linked to the JFK assassination.
1 Waldron & Hartmann, Ultimate Sacrifice
2 Ibid.
3 Haig, Inner Circles, 115.
4 Haig, Inner Circles, 112-116.
5 David Talbot, Brothers: The Hidden History of the Kennedy Years (Free Press: 2007).
Conclusion
We learned a great deal from our work on this project and we sincerely hope that you have as well. We investigated “only” fifty cases for this study out of hundreds, and our findings were fair and unbiased; we found that some cases clearly were national security assassinations, that many cases were not, and in some cases, the waters are still too cloudy to tell.
It was treacherous ground, as might be expected. Even veteran investigators in the JFK research community have been reticent and leery about the claims of too many convenient or coincidental deaths. It’s a sobering topic. It had taken on the texture of an “urban legend” at this point, and one that was approached with much caution. As historian Walt Brown put it:
With but a few exceptions, I’m not a strong subscriber to the “300 dead witnesses” story. There was never any guarantee of immortality because someone was in proximity to a JFK event.1
Well, we researched the specifics of the cases, and here’s what we learned. We don’t need to be afraid of vague claims and sweeping statements, as we can investigate them instead . . . and we did for this book. We learned that many of the deaths were, indeed, too convenient. They were murders; many of which were the direct result of the victim’s linkage to the JFK assassination.
Likewise, we don’t need to be frightened by large numbers; we can simply ensure that they are calculated correctly. We did that for this book also, and the numbers clearly indicate that all of those witness deaths, indeed, were too coincidental; the math literally proves it. One needn’t wonder whether it’s thirty deaths that reaches the threshold of “too coincidental” mathematically, or whether it’s three hundred unnatural deaths that does so. One simply needs to verify the correct math. There were over seventy unnatural deaths out of approximately 1,400 witnesses during a fourteen-year period. Note that:
The correct odds of that occurring are 1-in-715 million trillion trillion.
That’s not our opinion; that’s the mathematical reality. That, in itself, conveys the obvious need for taking a closer look at the specifics of these deaths. In Dead
1 Walt Brown, Ph.D., 26 Oct 2012, email to author.
Wrong, we substantiated that Lyndon Johnson, 36th President of the United States, was one of the most corrupt “leaders” (using the term very loosely) in contemporary history, which—as one might imagine—is really saying quite a “mouthful” these days, folks!1 In fact, he wasn’t just corrupt; he was even corrupt in the classic Shakespearean sense—plotting the overthrow of his predecessor, John F. Kennedy, a man whom he despised in every way imaginable. To posit that political motivations are a primary influence in crimes of a power-shifting nature is a dramatic understatement. For example, it was recently determined that—contrary to the “official” historical version for the past several thousand years—King Ramses III, the “Last Great Pharaoh” of ancient Egypt, was actually murdered in a conspiracy to seize power, in a succession plot involving his own son.2 So this has been going on for a long time, people. And when it came to plotting for power and dirty dealing that even involved the murders of his political enemies under very incriminating circumstances, JFK’s own Vice President was the leader of that wolf pack.3 In fact, let’s put it this way—when you look up the word “corrupt” in a dictionary, there should be
a picture of Lyndon Baines Johnson smirking back at you and accompanying the definition.
At the other end of the spectrum, when one looks up the word “integrity” in the dictionary, there should be a photo of Lieutenant Colonel “Dangerous Dan” Marvin, U.S. Army Special Forces, accompanying that definition. Lieutenant Colonel Marvin has testified at length for the historical record that, while an assassin with Special Forces, the CIA requested of him to assassinate Lieutenant Commander William Pitzer to preclude his release of items considered being a threat to national security. Lieutenant Colonel Marvin, who passed away in 2012, dedicated the final decade of his life to trying to set the record straight on cases like Lieutenant Commander Pitzer. You can still watch him speak online, in clips that capture his compassion, humanity, and integrity. Lieutenant Colonel Marvin was also featured in Part Six, the most-often censored episode of the The Men Who Killed Kennedy.4 In a blatant example of apparent censorship, the compelling documentary was purchased by the Arts & Entertainment Network for its History Channel, aired once and was then shelved for good after the company caved in to political pressure.5 However, it is currently accessible online and is a real eye-opener too. Lieutenant Colonel Marvin vividly details the assassination procedures which were in place for U.S. intelligence during the early 1960s, as well as the specifics regarding the national security assassination of Lieutenant Commander Pitzer.6
Hit List: An In-Depth Investigation Into the Mysterious Deaths of Witnesses to the JFK Assassination Page 34