The logic behind Rex Bradford's belief in
cover-up and conspiracy
(Draft, 28 March 2000)
Rex Bradford made it clear in his presentation to our class that he believes in conspiracy and cover-up in the JFK assassination. The presentation revealed four reasons for this belief
1. Falsification of the medical data.
2. The deliberate disappearance of the Mexico City tapes of
Lee Harvey Oswald.
3. The Katzenbach memo to Bill Moyers that shows the
beginning of a cover-up.
4. The CIA memo on hiding the existence of telephone taps
from the Warren Commission, which also indicates a cover-up.
If each of these conclusions is true, then Mr. Bradford has rightly concluded that there was a cover-up and probably rightly that there was a major conspiracy. The crux of understanding his logic then becomes how he reached each of these conclusion from the available evidence.
Falsification of the medical data, with the head wounds as examples (the bulk of the presentation)
1. Exit wound. The reports of the location of the large exit wound by the Parkland doctors are incompatible with those from the Bethesda autopsy doctors.
a. All the medical personnel from Parkland Hospital
reported that the exit wound was low and in the rear of Kennedy's head
(occipital area), perhaps even centered there. He showed numerous drawings and
statements to this effect.
b. The autopsy physicians at Bethesda reported, and the
X-rays and photos agreed, that the exit wound was high and on the upper right
side of the head, centered in the back half but extending into the front half.
c. The HSCA upped the ante by claiming that all 26 witnesses
to the autopsy agreed with the autopsy report.
d. But actual statements and drawings from several of them
contradict this (Robinson, Kellerman, Sibert, Jenkins, O'Neill, Lipsey, and
Reed, for example).
e. Some witnesses from Parkland are changing their stories
back to the WC version. From pressure being applied?
f. Admiral Burkley, the president's personal physician, could
have resolved these differences but was not called to testify by the WC or the
HSCA. Why not?
g. Stringer disavowed "his own" photos of JFK's
brain, claiming that they were not the ones he took.
h. FBI agent Francis X. O'Neill, who was present at the
autopsy, called the official photos "doctored."
i. The HSCA could not match the autopsy photos to the camera
that allegedly took them.
j. Chains of custody for the medical evidence are nonexistent
or insufficient.
k. It is easy to falsify photos--you don't have to be a
rocket scientist.
2. Entrance wound. The reports of the location of the small entrance wound by the autopsy physicians are incompatible with the location deduced by the HSCA's medical panel.
a. The official version from the autopsy physicians places
the wound just above (and to the right of) the EOP.
b. The HSCA's version places it four inches higher.
c. Only the HSCA's version is consistent with a shot from the
Depository.
d. At least one of the autopsy physicians (Dr. Humes) changed
his story, changed it back, and then denied he ever changed it.
3. Conclusion. The above evidence means that the autopsy photos and X-rays were falsified as part of the cover-up of a conspiracy. The government is now trying to bring the witnesses into line.
The Katzenbach memo to Bill Moyers (25 November 1963)
This early memo to the young presidential assistant Moyers makes thee main points:
1. The public must be satisfied that Oswald was the sole
assassin and would have been convicted at trial.
2. Speculation about Oswald's motives should be cut off.
3. The matter thus far has been handled with neither dignity
nor conviction.
This is the beginning of the medical cover-up that later appeared as falsified photos and X-rays. In other words, the cover-up deduced from the medical evidence was found to first be voiced by Katzenbach. It has been discovered in two independent ways.
Bradford's basic logic
1. From contradictions, disavowals, lack of evidence for the camera, lack of
chains of custody, and ease of falsification he deduces falsification.
2. From falsification he deduces cover-up.
3. From cover-up he deduces conspiracy.
These steps compared with our rigorous procedure for critical reasoning
1. State the question or problem. What do JFK's head wounds reveal
about the assassination? Stated satisfactorily.
2. List all possible hypotheses. Not done.
3. List all relevant evidence. Not done. Only some evidence used.
4. Divide evidence into strong and weak. Not done. All evidence was weak.
5. List all hypotheses consistent with the strong evidence. Only one
hypothesis considered. Only weak evidence considered.
6. Take the simplest hypothesis consistent with the strong evidence as the
working hypothesis. Not done because only one hypothesis considered in
previous step. No consideration of whether it was the simplest possible
consistent with the weak evidence.
7. Test the working hypothesis. Not done.
In other words, Rex Bradford has avoided all the strong evidence, considered only one hypothesis from the weak evidence, and not tested it.