CTKA's review of Survivor's Guilt

[Jim DiEugenio]

Yes I would have. Since Skyhorse would not have been obliged to defend me.

But in my view, Bugliosi had no case, and neither did Hanks.

The 3 tiered libel test is very difficult to prove for a celebrity:

1. They have to prove the info was false

2. That the writer knew if was false

3. That this was done with reckless disregard for the truth and with malicious intent.

That test could not have been proven about anything I wrote about Hanks or Vince. Everything I wrote about both men was annotated to a credible source.

[Albert Doyle]

1. They have to prove the info was false

2. That the writer knew if was false

3. That this was done with reckless disregard for the truth and with malicious intent.

It sort of stands things on their head when you apply that to the government and its version of the assassination.

[Dawn Meredith]

http://www.ctka.net/2014_reviews/survivors_guilt.html

I thought this was one of the better books released on the 50th. It tapers off in the second half, but its still worth reading.

If you look at all the anomalies he lists, its very hard I think to dismiss it all as either mistakes, or even negligence.

VInce implies that Lawson and Sorrels are quite suspicious. I just wished he had added what those guys did with the Warren Commission to make his case even stronger e.g.advising Bledsoe and Brennan.

Per usual just read a review by Jim D and you often don't have to read the book. In fact this one is way shorter than most. The last sentence of this paragraph below jumped out at me:

"As the author then notes, what makes all this malfeasance even more suspicious is that there seems to be an institutional memory about it. For as Palamara notes in the book, in January of 1995, the Secret Service destroyed some records, including presidential protection survey reports for some of Kennedy's visits in the fall of 1963. (p. 161) This was after the formation of the Assassination Records Review Board. Further, it was discovered that agent James Mostrovito did destroy documents, but he also got rid of a vial containing a portion of Kennedy's brain. He then went on to a career in the CIA.

I mean those involved in the JFK assassination who "then went on to a career in the CIA" could be a book in itself.

I like this title and wanted to hear about said "guilt".

Dawn

[LR Trotter]

Yes I would have. Since Skyhorse would not have been obliged to defend me.

But in my view, Bugliosi had no case, and neither did Hanks.

The 3 tiered libel test is very difficult to prove for a celebrity:

1. They have to prove the info was false

2. That the writer knew if was false

3. That this was done with reckless disregard for the truth and with malicious intent.

That test could not have been proven about anything I wrote about Hanks or Vince. Everything I wrote about both men was annotated to a credible source.

I have to wonder, as I wander, if the same tiered libel test applies to politicians? Oh, never mind, I just reread # 2. Good escape venue.
::

[Lauren Johnson]

Oh, never mind, I just reread # 2. Good escape venue.
::

And then, if you are worth hundreds of millions or billions, all you need are lawyers to keep filing briefs, etc., to wear down some little publisher.

[Albert Doyle]

Apparently the same standard doesn't apply to media, government, or commissions...

[LR Trotter]

Apparently the same standard doesn't apply to media, government, or commissions...

Not even News Crap(sp?)?

:hock::