12-04-2010, 12:28 AM
JIM AND JUDYTH RESPOND TO JACK WHITE
NOTE: Just for the record, Jack White has long been and will remain one of my favorite
personalities in JFK research. Until our divergence over Judyth, he and I have been on
the same side of virtually every battle fought about what happened to JFK. I am sorry
it has come to this, but my commitment to truth overrides loyalty to my friends when I
am convinced that they have lost their way. I respect Jack's right to his opinion about
Judyth and all other issues JFK. What I do not respect is his closed-mindedness and his
obvious unwillingness to consider the evidence. He has not read the books, listened to
the interviews, or even read the posts that Judyth and I have been making. And I find
it quite bizarre that he would think my ongoing pursuit of truth involving Judyth should
undermine (what he takes to be) my accomplishments in the past. Life is too complex
for such simplistic thinking to be reflective of the realities of the situation. Each of us
is free to agree with some of another student's research and reject other parts of it, as
I shall illustrate in relation to the work of another old friend, whose relationship has now
ruptured, David Lifton. For now, however, let me conclude by offering Judyth's replies.
JUDYTH ANSWERS JACK'S QUESTIONS:
Dear Jack:
You have asked some good questions about the book Livingstone published. I wrote the book. It was edited
by Livingstone, who can be difficult to work with.
The orginal 'real' book (written for an honest publisher) -- Deadly Alliance -- had been co-authored by
Dr. Howard Platzman using many emails I wrote to him. We wnet back and forth, but there were errors and
too much was missing. It's not easy to write book by emails! I was living in Holland, and while going over
that book, it was stolen, along with my computer and almost everything I owned. The thieves later would
have an encounter with Wim Dankbaar, who actually shoved his fist through a window on their door so we
could open it and get some of my things from them. Dankbaar, despite his cut and bleeding fist, was not
afraid of them, unlike the neighbors who watched, like cowed dogs.
Harrison Livingstone, having seen portions my rewritten version, which was underway since Deadly Alliance
had been stolen, heard how the thieves were blackmailing me, threatening to publish the stolen book -- with
revisions as they pleased -- on the Internet, unless I handed over my screenplay to them. They said they had
some connections, through the Mafia, with Hollywood. And no, I am not making this up.
Livingstone quickly pulled together some people to pay for the book to be published under his own logo. He
had done investigating of my story, since he and Shackelford were friends, and he had already mentioned my
testimony in one of his recent books. Odd that on McAdams' newsgroup, John Leyden wrote that I self-published
the book Livingstone published -- saying that I got it printed at Kinko's! Leyden and his friends post such outright
misinfo about me from time to time, and lurkers might believe it. They don't care.
I am going into this detail, Jack, because I respect you and want you to have a full account.
The book was imporant. Livingstone did not want the stolen version to be quoted by anyone, though to this day,
McAdams & Co. do quote from the stolen Deadly Allaince. Shame on them!
Regarding Eaglesham:
I believed Eaglesham was doing a very good job until I became friends with Dangerous Dan Marvin. I had been
sent a photo of the Pitzer murder which has never been published. I had no idea what it was about, though.
This was in 2000.
I get sent the most amazing things. This photo was stolen along with my computer and my book by the Dutch
thieves, in 2004, but I told Allan Eaglesham about the photo, which was different from what he showed me.
Though Dan Marvin is elderly, and might have had a few details wrong, there is no doubt whatsoever that evidence
concerning Pitzer's autopsy has been misinterpreted. There is more reason to believe that he might have been
murdered than can be ascertained from Eaglesham's writings, although I respect Eaglesham's research abilities
and need to see more.
I have some small issues with his assessment of the photos, and because of my medical experience, I came to the
conclusion that the possibility of foul play existed, largely due to blood patterns and a misinterpretation of autopsy
details, which I believe need reexamination.
Having known Dan a long time, and seeing that he was exonerated when Trine Day and Dan were sued by former
Green Berets who acually lied on the stand -- a final review of tape recordings they made years earlier proved they
were lying -- set in my mind prety strongly that Dan Marvin told the truth. As a committed Christian, I believe he is
incapable of perpetrating a falsehood. Anyuone who knows Dan well must ake what he says seriously, even if time
may have dimmed some details in his memory.
I consider Eaglesham a good researcher, but I also see some misinerpreed aspects regarding the Pitzer autopsy
that jive with the photo I was sent. If I had known what I know now, I would have sent that photo far and wide.
But I didn't. I had phone calls from Sirhan Sirhan's lawyer, Mr. Teeter, just before he died under what I consider
suspicious circumstances.
I have no friendship or animosity regarding Allan Eaglesham.
I think he's a good researcher. His work on the Jimmy Files casing is excellent. I found a problem with the form
used to 'prove' when the casing was manufactured, though. It needs closer iexamination for several reasons. Other
such forms do not clesely resemble it in several key areas. I think it was supposedly found in the trash, and some
other odd logistics problems from Remington suggests some tampering going on that I find of concern. All in all,
until re-examined, including a good look at the paper with a high resolution scan -- which wasn't done, I believe --
until we have more information, Eaglesham's findings seem correct and apropos.
I believe Files heard enough about the assassination that he has important information. He has indisputable mafia
ties with some of the very bad boys. Furthermore, I saw some untrue 'facts' posted about Files from a military man,
claiming a certain task force, whatever, did not exist, when in fact I knew it did because of my own family's military
history. That gave me pause.. The facts offered by the military guy were patently false.
I have argued with Wim Dankbaar about Files, with vigor.
One fact that Wim told me, is that no description of the bullet casing having been indented had ever been in the
newspapers or anywhere else when Files was asked about it. That man described a bullet casing accurately,
according to what I have been told.
But we have the problem of the 'hyphen' on the evidence....Fikles currently and for the rest of his life, it seems,
languishes inside Joliet prison, a nototorious place where he had no access to such newspaper articles anyway.
They do not even allow him to be brought fresh fruit, and he has cancer which is going untreated, last I heard.
I do consider Allan Eaglesham a good investigator and wish him well.
Because I have defended Dan Marvin, when his integrity was being atacked, Allan may not wish the same good
wishes on me, but I found him a quite intelligent man.
Having said that, I do not know why he is so itnerested in Dan Marvin and Jimmy Files. How did he get involved
in the Pitzer case? The Jimmy Files matter? I have tried to figure out why he has expended so much energy on
them: others here may know that answer. He has some good scientific training behind him...it's obvious. Maybe
others can tell me more about him?
JVB
[quote name='Jack White' post='189445' date='Apr 11 2010, 02:50 PM']This is very regrettable.
That frauds like Files, Holt and Baker can splinter JFK researchers is likely part of
a deliberate misinformation campaign...carefully managed by the propaganda
masters. It is conceived to linger on and on, endlessly. Ten years now and her
"book is still not published."
I suggest that a route to finding the truth about JVB is to interview the man who
was married to her, who tells an entirely different story about what happened in
1963.
Jim has chosen to endanger all of his previous fine research and friendships
in order to embrace this one strange woman. Like some others before him, he
has dug himself a very deep hole that it will be hard to climb out of, when the
truth emerges...if ever.
Sadly,
Jack[/quote]
NOTE: Just for the record, Jack White has long been and will remain one of my favorite
personalities in JFK research. Until our divergence over Judyth, he and I have been on
the same side of virtually every battle fought about what happened to JFK. I am sorry
it has come to this, but my commitment to truth overrides loyalty to my friends when I
am convinced that they have lost their way. I respect Jack's right to his opinion about
Judyth and all other issues JFK. What I do not respect is his closed-mindedness and his
obvious unwillingness to consider the evidence. He has not read the books, listened to
the interviews, or even read the posts that Judyth and I have been making. And I find
it quite bizarre that he would think my ongoing pursuit of truth involving Judyth should
undermine (what he takes to be) my accomplishments in the past. Life is too complex
for such simplistic thinking to be reflective of the realities of the situation. Each of us
is free to agree with some of another student's research and reject other parts of it, as
I shall illustrate in relation to the work of another old friend, whose relationship has now
ruptured, David Lifton. For now, however, let me conclude by offering Judyth's replies.
JUDYTH ANSWERS JACK'S QUESTIONS:
Dear Jack:
You have asked some good questions about the book Livingstone published. I wrote the book. It was edited
by Livingstone, who can be difficult to work with.
The orginal 'real' book (written for an honest publisher) -- Deadly Alliance -- had been co-authored by
Dr. Howard Platzman using many emails I wrote to him. We wnet back and forth, but there were errors and
too much was missing. It's not easy to write book by emails! I was living in Holland, and while going over
that book, it was stolen, along with my computer and almost everything I owned. The thieves later would
have an encounter with Wim Dankbaar, who actually shoved his fist through a window on their door so we
could open it and get some of my things from them. Dankbaar, despite his cut and bleeding fist, was not
afraid of them, unlike the neighbors who watched, like cowed dogs.
Harrison Livingstone, having seen portions my rewritten version, which was underway since Deadly Alliance
had been stolen, heard how the thieves were blackmailing me, threatening to publish the stolen book -- with
revisions as they pleased -- on the Internet, unless I handed over my screenplay to them. They said they had
some connections, through the Mafia, with Hollywood. And no, I am not making this up.
Livingstone quickly pulled together some people to pay for the book to be published under his own logo. He
had done investigating of my story, since he and Shackelford were friends, and he had already mentioned my
testimony in one of his recent books. Odd that on McAdams' newsgroup, John Leyden wrote that I self-published
the book Livingstone published -- saying that I got it printed at Kinko's! Leyden and his friends post such outright
misinfo about me from time to time, and lurkers might believe it. They don't care.
I am going into this detail, Jack, because I respect you and want you to have a full account.
The book was imporant. Livingstone did not want the stolen version to be quoted by anyone, though to this day,
McAdams & Co. do quote from the stolen Deadly Allaince. Shame on them!
Regarding Eaglesham:
I believed Eaglesham was doing a very good job until I became friends with Dangerous Dan Marvin. I had been
sent a photo of the Pitzer murder which has never been published. I had no idea what it was about, though.
This was in 2000.
I get sent the most amazing things. This photo was stolen along with my computer and my book by the Dutch
thieves, in 2004, but I told Allan Eaglesham about the photo, which was different from what he showed me.
Though Dan Marvin is elderly, and might have had a few details wrong, there is no doubt whatsoever that evidence
concerning Pitzer's autopsy has been misinterpreted. There is more reason to believe that he might have been
murdered than can be ascertained from Eaglesham's writings, although I respect Eaglesham's research abilities
and need to see more.
I have some small issues with his assessment of the photos, and because of my medical experience, I came to the
conclusion that the possibility of foul play existed, largely due to blood patterns and a misinterpretation of autopsy
details, which I believe need reexamination.
Having known Dan a long time, and seeing that he was exonerated when Trine Day and Dan were sued by former
Green Berets who acually lied on the stand -- a final review of tape recordings they made years earlier proved they
were lying -- set in my mind prety strongly that Dan Marvin told the truth. As a committed Christian, I believe he is
incapable of perpetrating a falsehood. Anyuone who knows Dan well must ake what he says seriously, even if time
may have dimmed some details in his memory.
I consider Eaglesham a good researcher, but I also see some misinerpreed aspects regarding the Pitzer autopsy
that jive with the photo I was sent. If I had known what I know now, I would have sent that photo far and wide.
But I didn't. I had phone calls from Sirhan Sirhan's lawyer, Mr. Teeter, just before he died under what I consider
suspicious circumstances.
I have no friendship or animosity regarding Allan Eaglesham.
I think he's a good researcher. His work on the Jimmy Files casing is excellent. I found a problem with the form
used to 'prove' when the casing was manufactured, though. It needs closer iexamination for several reasons. Other
such forms do not clesely resemble it in several key areas. I think it was supposedly found in the trash, and some
other odd logistics problems from Remington suggests some tampering going on that I find of concern. All in all,
until re-examined, including a good look at the paper with a high resolution scan -- which wasn't done, I believe --
until we have more information, Eaglesham's findings seem correct and apropos.
I believe Files heard enough about the assassination that he has important information. He has indisputable mafia
ties with some of the very bad boys. Furthermore, I saw some untrue 'facts' posted about Files from a military man,
claiming a certain task force, whatever, did not exist, when in fact I knew it did because of my own family's military
history. That gave me pause.. The facts offered by the military guy were patently false.
I have argued with Wim Dankbaar about Files, with vigor.
One fact that Wim told me, is that no description of the bullet casing having been indented had ever been in the
newspapers or anywhere else when Files was asked about it. That man described a bullet casing accurately,
according to what I have been told.
But we have the problem of the 'hyphen' on the evidence....Fikles currently and for the rest of his life, it seems,
languishes inside Joliet prison, a nototorious place where he had no access to such newspaper articles anyway.
They do not even allow him to be brought fresh fruit, and he has cancer which is going untreated, last I heard.
I do consider Allan Eaglesham a good investigator and wish him well.
Because I have defended Dan Marvin, when his integrity was being atacked, Allan may not wish the same good
wishes on me, but I found him a quite intelligent man.
Having said that, I do not know why he is so itnerested in Dan Marvin and Jimmy Files. How did he get involved
in the Pitzer case? The Jimmy Files matter? I have tried to figure out why he has expended so much energy on
them: others here may know that answer. He has some good scientific training behind him...it's obvious. Maybe
others can tell me more about him?
JVB
[quote name='Jack White' post='189445' date='Apr 11 2010, 02:50 PM']This is very regrettable.
That frauds like Files, Holt and Baker can splinter JFK researchers is likely part of
a deliberate misinformation campaign...carefully managed by the propaganda
masters. It is conceived to linger on and on, endlessly. Ten years now and her
"book is still not published."
I suggest that a route to finding the truth about JVB is to interview the man who
was married to her, who tells an entirely different story about what happened in
1963.
Jim has chosen to endanger all of his previous fine research and friendships
in order to embrace this one strange woman. Like some others before him, he
has dug himself a very deep hole that it will be hard to climb out of, when the
truth emerges...if ever.
Sadly,
Jack[/quote]