Customer Reviews

The Murder of JFK: Confession of an Assassin [VHS]

5 star:		(5)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

"Confession Of An Assassin" may be one of the most controversial films I have seen related with the JFK assassination. Not because it presents a new conspiracy theory, but because a man in here actually claims to be one of the assassins! I really can't say that I believe everything the prisoner in this video says, some of it seems a little too off kilter. Maybe he is telling the truth, who knows? Though I can't give it five stars, I still recommend you see it to make your own decision. Pay very close attention and keep some skepticism in mind because this guy could be a phony looking for a way out. I'm not saying he's a liar, if this is the truth, then it's settled: A conspiracy killed John F. Kennedy. If it's not, then we should just put it aside. I would give this guy some support considering time is running out and not much is left to build a big case. "Confession Of An Assassin" is for the viewer to make up his mind. I can't say it's a "great" piece, but I still recommend it.

Let me start by saying, I've been a serious student of the JFK assassination for the last 27 years; I've read and re-read all the major books and articles including the great anti-conspiracy work of Posner's, as well as the much vaunted Warren report; I've also seen all the major documentaries and most importantly,have THOUGHT many hundreds of hours about the case.

As for the video in question, let me say this: although I am the most skeptical and "doubting Thomas" kind of guy you'll ever meet, I find many compelling kernels of truth to James Files' (the subject of the video) interview---though I'm not quite ready to proclaim him as completely sincere yet.

Yes, there are a few discrepancies in Files' story. However, the man's recall of NON EVENTS would be extremely difficult to conjure up (if he were, indeed, lying). Simply put, a pathological individual who was simply making up a story wouldn't be concerned with minute, trivial details, but with the larger picture. Files' not only has amazing recall of such little details, but when viewed as a mosaic of the larger picture, they all seems to fit. But another important element emerges in File's remarkable story.

Interestingly, I had always assumed that the Secret Service impersonator (in the Grassy Knoll) was, as a confederate in a larger conspiracy plot, used to protect the frontal shooter. My explanation to myself of the impersonator's apparent brashness (when confronted by police) was simply that he must have had some real brass gonads, or simply stated, was so cocksure of his phony credentials' (and, perhaps, his relationship to a larger governmental or institutional conspiracy), that fear wasn't really an issue. But innately, I'd always questioned this assumption without really knowing why.

Enter in Files' revelations: not only do they shed new light on my assumptions (whether by truth or design), but they make me realize I had probably been viewing the whole Grassy knoll sequence in a skewered light. As Files' explains it, his presence in the knoll was only as a back-up---in case the assassination didn't go down the way it was supposed to. Thus, the impersonator was also a back up and was to only be used if really necessary. Now, it all made sense to me: If Oswald was to be "set up" as the rear shooter, then a frontal gunman would NOT be expected to shoot, but only be used in a back-up mode. And this would also explain the inordinate 'brashness' of the impersonator who only displayed his authentic-looking ID's when he really HAD TO. Not a story likely created by someone so egotistical as wanting to feign involvement.

How would Files have dreamed up this simple, yet remarkable observation if he were simply fictionalizing? Two explanations emerge: 1) either he IS, in fact, the frontal gunman and his actual participation provides true insight into what really happened; or 2) he is one of the most prolific liars AND students of the assassination (possessing an enormous database of info) to emerge in the last 3 decades. Problem is, Files simply doesn't come across as being THAT sophisticated or book smart (although he does appear very street savvy). Whether File's is, or isn't telling the truth, his unique descriptions of the Grassy Knoll sequence put pieces of the puzzle into place in a way I have never heard anyone *else* suggest. This seeming familiarity with the event has an odd ring of truth to it and suggests in some form, an INTIMATE knowledge about the assassination.

In conclusion: the only way File's story could be corroborated would be if a second interview took place, and dozens of minute details mentioned in the first interview were presented to him for spontaneous validation.

Whatever the outcome, this video is definitely a must see for any serious student of the JFK case. Decide for yourself.

This is a very compelling documentary. My opinion is that it is certainly worth a look. Decide for yourselves whether the man speaking to you, and looking you right in the eye sounds like he is full of it or not.

Aside from the content: As far as I am concerned, people who are confessing to a heavy duty crime usually look just like him in many ways. Some of the mannerisms and physical reactions arent something people easily & conciously manifest.

Aside from the fact that this guy knew PLENTY of details that average people just don't have any clue of, he knew many names, and plenty of details about the people. He knew a hell of a lot about the EXACT lay out of Dealy Plaza, entrances and exits, the train yeard, the exact identities of the hobos.............

End analysis: Fully knowing I will be torn up from one end to the other by the skeptics, Im sorry, I found it compelling. It might not be the be all, end all of truth, but there is something there.

I say it was worth every penny.

I have read several books on the assassination over the years. The best was a book by a surgeon at Parkland hospital who discribed the entry wound to Kennedy's throat-the first thing he grabs-at Parland they enlarged the wound and used it to create a tracheotomy.He further describes the call from the inexperienced MD's doing the autopsy who did not know what had happened to Kennedy's throat. Also more importantly he decribes the head wound exit as obviously having a back of the head exit-I believe if you wee working on the president-actually there was not much they could do-you would certainly remember the wound details. I believe the MD was Dr. Crenshaw. The nest best book was called Best Evidence-basically the brain might have given clues-but guess what, the National Archives lost the brain. I agree that Files seems to either have a vivid imagination or the details are factual. Hopefully more interviews will be forth-coming-this interview is credible-anyone who thinks Oswald got lucky is naive. I remeber one TV demonstration years ago where Military sharp-shooters could not duplicate Oswald's alledged feat. More confirmation is obviously needed. Hopefully someone will research Files.

I am probably not an impartial reviewer, since I know much more about this story than the average person.

Therefore I know James Files has done the american public, freedom and democracy, a big favor by telling the truth. Whether it will ever reach the masses, is an entirely different question. The forces that have succesfully covered it up for 40 years are not sitting idle and can only be exposed by YOU, the people.

This movie is the best JFK assassination film I have seen. I have seen about 15 different videos and this one is by far the most believable. He is so detailed on every single item and he has the guy who interviewed him back up what he says because everything was checked up on. Get this video.

This is a video of James E. Files, who claims that he shot JFK. After seeing this, I'm convinced. He tells one little fib during the interview -- namely, the amount of $$$ that he was paid -- but aside from that he's very credible.

The only thing I didn't like is that there's an obnoxious banner across the screen during the whole interview, advertising the maker of the video, so nobody else can copy this video and sell it as their own. But any serious student of the JFK assassination should see this video.

Never heard of him until this video came out. This is a pretty silly video. If you believe this video, you will believe anything written in the Weekly World Report or any of those tabloids. Avoid.
Vince Palamara

I really was startled when I watched this - it is so utterly amazing! The raw footage and graphic detail will simply blow you away. The man, in my opinion knew too many details not to be telling the truth. This is a MUST SEE FOR EVERYONE! Watch and you will be be left sitting in a cold sweat.

This is my opinion. All cons know that to tell a convincing lie, you tell the whole truth, except you change one fact that makes it a lie. This man's account fits together with all the most credible information from eyewitnesses and leaked from inside intelligence sources, except for one thing. Files didn't fire a shot. He was Chuck Nicoletti's driver, who was a genuine mob hit man. Files' job was to watch Nicoletti's back. In this story, he puts another mob hit man, John Roselli, in that role and himself in the role of shooter. That's the lie. John Roselli actually fired the fatal shot. Files was with Nicoletti as he always was. The hitters in the Book Depository were probably the two Cubans from Alpha66 that Oswald was with in Mexico. The operation came down from the Cabell brothers through Atlee. Oswald coordinated the shooters and to his surprise, took the fall. Ruby did what he had to do.

Why would he lie? It was a renegade operation. Everybody else is dead. Except Files got a new identity, maybe because he provided the details to the powers that be, who wanted to know. But now he's afraid, because of the publicity from the JFK movie. By putting himself in a starring role, he hopes to get himself too far out in public eye to be wacked.