Customer Reviews

The People V. Lee Harvey Oswald

5 star:		(6)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

This book was compellig. I once had Dr. Brown as a teacher in a American Histoy Class I attended and I was stunned on his great knowledge on the Kenedy Murders. It shows in this book in what I like to call, a "what if" situation.

Assumptions are made and some slight liberties are taken. However, Walt Brown examines the evidence and allows the reader to see how it was not only impossible to have convited Oswald, but also how it would have been impossible for virtually anyone to have committed the crime with that weapon. READ IT.

Unlike the other JFK conspiracy books, The People v. Lee Harvey Oswald keeps the readers interest by not stating, then repeating, then in some instances repeating again, facts and opinions about the murder of the President. Mr. Brown has spun a fictional tale that is both interesting, entertaining and suspenseful while at the same time telling the conspiracy story that other authors get bogged down telling. The too-good-to-be-true public defender is the only downfall in an otherwise superb story. I've read many other conspiracy books but this is the only one hard to put down.

The author, Walt Brown whose credentials include Special Agent for the Justice Department and a Ph.D in American History from Notre Dame has formulated an enthralling what-if scenario by having Lee Harvey Oswald surviving the attack by Jack Ruby and go on trial for the JFK assination in January 1965. What Brown does with the facts collected from many sources but primarily the Warren Report may convince you or confuse you. Whatever your point-of-view may be prior to reading this compelling novel, those views will undoubtedly have to be rehashed in your mind afterward.

What would have happened had Lee Harvey Oswald lived to face the charge of assassinating President Kennedy? How many times has that been asked? Well, in Walt Brown's book, you'll get a look of what MIGHT have happened...of course Walt ASSUMES that Oswald would have gotten a "fair trial"...of that, I'm not sure.

It is a fascinating look at how so much of the alleged "open and shut" case could have been seriously undermined by the laws of evidence and competent cross-examination by someone whose job was to protect Oswald's rights...it also shows how fortunate the federal government...and the state of Texas...were that Oswald didn't live.

Walt Brown's "The People v. Lee Harvey Oswald" works quite well on two levels: first, as an examination into the John F. Kennedy assassination and, second, as a courtroom drama. The temptation to play "What If..." with history is too irresistible, and the JFK assassination is the most compelling, mostly because of the murder of the prime suspect Lee Harvey Oswald before he stood trial. Walt Brown decides to play "What If..." but had one serious obstacle: what would Lee Harvey Oswald say about the case and about the attack against him. Quite wisely, Brown has Oswald's lawyer, Edward Barnes, have an informal gag order placed on his client. From there, the book can really take off.

Not much new evidence into the possible conspiracy is presented here. Instead, Mr. Brown marshalls it into a courtroom setting. The unsettling conclusion is that Oswald would have walked. The chain of evidence against had been mishandled. There was no stenographer taking notes during his initial questioning. There are a lot of other technicalities that might have freed Oswald. But I had to ask myself: "In these times, criminals are let off on the slightest loopholes and technicalities. Would Oswald really have walked in Texas in 1964?" Probably not.

On the courtroom drama level, this book works better. The courtroom bickering is believable enough. What wasn't, however, was the good guy (Edward Barnes) vs. the bad guy (D.A. Matthews) renderings. They were two dimensional to say the least. However, as for historical fiction, "The People V. Lee Harvey Oswald' will please most readers of this genre.

In This Brilliant Fantastic Scholarly written Book LHO is on trial for the Alleged murders of JFK and officer Tippit. Mrs. Brown using the WC own files proves that the evidence used to convict Oswald in the eyes of the world were purely circumstantial, and with a competent defense attorney he would have been acquited had he gone to trial!!!I have known all along that Oswald had nothing to do with this murders. but after reading this book I am more convinced than ever!!HIGHLY RECOMMENDED!!!

.....That question being:

>> Was the "Patsy" plot I currently accept as the "truth" in the JFK case really a GOOD "plot" and a WISE assassination plan (from a PRE-ARRANGED point-of-view)? <<

Many (if not most) of the people who fall under the heading of "JFK Conspiracy Theorists" ("CTers") seem to have a vast amount of faith in the idea (theory) that Lee Harvey Oswald -- the man arrested for the November 22, 1963, murders of President John Kennedy and Dallas city policeman J.D. Tippit -- was nothing more than a "Patsy", the "fall guy", for both President Kennedy's and Officer Tippit's slayings. Oswald, himself, was gunned down and fatally wounded two days later, preventing him from ever being able to face, in a court of law, the vile charges that confronted him.

But no "CTer" seems to realize (and never has it seems) how utterly stupid, needlessly reckless, and insane the type of "Patsy" plot that many/most CTers actually believe took place in 1963 would have been from a Pre-November 22 standpoint. And it would appear that Mr. Walt Brown, the author of this pro-conspiracy publication ("The People V. Lee Harvey Oswald") is no different in this "Patsy"-believing regard.

Following is the "Plot" that most CTers seem to swallow whole, without bothering to ask the needed question of "How In All The World Could This Possibly Have Been Pulled Off?" ... Or, perhaps the even more-logical question of: "WHY Would ANY Professional Assassins, Who Wanted To Frame A SINGLE Patsy, Pre-Arrange A Crackpot, Bound-To-Fail Plot Like This In The First Place?".........

The Widely-Believed-As-Fact "Patsy Plot":

Let's "frame" Lee Harvey Oswald for the killing of BOTH John F. Kennedy and J.D. Tippit -- and we'll do it with a PRE-ARRANGED plan of using MULTIPLE SHOOTERS, both front and rear, in Dallas' Dealey Plaza -- meaning, of course, that we (the skillful and masterful architects of this cockeyed and undoubtedly-problematic plot) will almost certainly need to alter tons of evidence after the shooting, so as to eliminate all these bullets that are drilling JFK from the various non-"Sniper's Nest" locations (where our one Patsy, Oswald, is supposed to be located during the ambush). How stupid is this plan?! (Answer: pretty darn stupid indeed.)

While, at the same time, we will not even be keeping a wary eye on our resident "Patsy" named Oswald (who's apparently left free to roam the Texas School Book Depository at will, to be seen by God knows how many non-conspirators, which will provide Oswald, our ONE & ONLY PATSY, with the alibi he'll require after 12:30 PM on November 22). More brilliant planning by our Assassin Team of nitwits it would appear.

Also: We'll not even use Oswald's rifle to shoot JFK (a rifle which we have at our disposal on the 6th Floor of the TSBD Building). So, therefore, we're left with even more cloak-and-dagger manipulating to be done following the assassination, in the form of having to "Plant" gobs of bullets and bullet fragments all over the hospital and inside the Presidential limousine, in order to "tie" the shooting to Oswald and his "C2766 Mannlicher-Carcano" rifle. (Additional brilliant work by these "pros", wasn't it?)

Next ----

We'll let our one and only Patsy escape the shooting scene immediately after the assassination (when we could just as easily have killed him right after he exited the Depository or, better yet, "stage" his suicide right in the sniper's window). But no...we'd MUCH rather make the post-12:30 PM operation infinitely more complicated by allowing Oswald out of our sight yet again.

Then .... We'll "frame" Oswald for yet a second murder he never committed on 11/22/1963, by setting him up for J.D. Tippit's slaying on Tenth Street IN FRONT OF MORE THAN A DOZEN WITNESSES! (Many CTers actually believe this absurd balderdash, incredibly enough.) ... A fabulously-bright idea, yet again, huh? Nobody will catch on to this little diversion of killers on 10th St., now will they? Of course not -- because this particular "Dream Team" of "Plotters/Assassins/Bigshots" consists of individuals who will evidently never be caught or have their scheme uncovered. Couldn't EVER happen; even though multiple WITNESSES are at the second murder scene WATCHING OSWALD (oops, make that the "Imposter Oswald") kill Officer J.D. Tippit.

We'll get yet another "Oswald Look-alike" to gun down Tippit, then we'll (somehow) get THIRTEEN DIFFERENT WITNESSES to ALL lie under oath when they I.D. Oswald as the ONLY killer of Tippit, and/or as the ONLY man they each saw flee the murder scene at 10th Street and Patton Avenue. ... These plotters were amazing at persuasion I guess, getting thirteen different citizens to deliberately frame Oswald -- thirteen people who have no reason to want to frame an innocent man for murder (a man that they've never seen before in their lives). But I guess, per CTer accounts, that's exactly what the conspirators/plotters managed to pull off, WITHOUT A SINGLE DISSENTING WITNESS TO MAKE THIS BRILLIANT PLAN BACKFIRE. Truly remarkable.

Then .... Somehow (who knows how, this is another of those "miracles" that is just accepted as a truism and utter fact by the hordes of CTers who buy into such inanities, for some reason) the plotters were able to "plant" the Tippit murder gun ON OSWALD HIMSELF in the theater before police arrived.

Even if only ONE bullet shell was tied to Oswald's .38 revolver (and of course there were actually FOUR tied to it near the Tippit murder scene), that would have been enough to tie Oswald to the murder of Tippit.

How the plotters managed to get the real Oswald to attempt to kill a second policeman within the theater using the SAME gun that killed Tippit half-an-hour earlier might be the most remarkable sleight-of-hand feat yet by these crackerjack, never-heard-of-the-word-impossible "plotters".

I'm just wondering how many Oswald look-alikes were being employed in November of 1963 down at "Assassins For All Occasions, Inc."?

But the big question for CTers to ask themselves is a question I have never heard satisfactorily and believably answered -- and that is:

WHY IN THE WORLD WOULD ANY PROFESSIONAL PLOTTERS CONCOCT A MULTI-SHOOTER "PATSY" PLOT TO RUB OUT THE PRESIDENT, AND THEN EXPECT ALL THE PIECES OF EVIDENCE IN THE ENTIRE CASE TO FALL BACK ON LEE OSWALD'S LONELY LITTLE SHOULDERS?*

* = Especially when an alternate plan of employing just a single rear gunman in the TSBD, who was highly skilled at "pro hits", would have easily gotten the job done just as well.

Anyone who contemplates (for more than just a minute or two) the potential complications and repercussions of such an inane multi-directional, multi-gunmen "Single Patsy" plan can easily detect the absurdities and implausibilities that reside within any such "plot" of this nature.

The following query is worthy of repeating until the cows come home:

Does ANY CTer truly believe that a MULTI-shooter "Frame The Patsy Named Oswald" plan was really a wise and GOOD plan (from a Pre-11/22/63 standpoint)?

It's very difficult for me to imagine anyone actually answering "Yes" to the above inquiry. Because only an utter fool would pre-organize a professional assassination in such a reckless and outright foolhardy manner.

And that, in my "Lone Assassin" view, is one of the main reasons to know for a fact that no Patsy plot of that nature (which is widely accepted as fact, incredibly, by a large percentage of conspiracy theorists) ever occurred in the first place -- nor would it ever even have been considered for even one second prior to the day of President Kennedy's assassination on November 22nd, 1963.

I note with amusement that one reviewer states that this book took "slight liberties". I don't think the liberties could have gotten any bigger. Brown does not write as an unbiased author stating facts, he clearly has an agenda and it is conspiracy. The book makes fun reading, but for facts, forget it. For a good book see Posners Case Closed.