Customer Reviews

Reclaiming History: The Assassination of President John F. Kennedy

5 star:		(111)
4 star:		(19)
3 star:		(16)
2 star:		(10)
1 star:		(58)

 

 

81 days is what it took me to read this over-sized, tightly-spaced, mini-fonted, 1512-page, concrete slab of a book, though this duration was unevenly distributed. Bugliosi starts his book with an extremely suspenseful countdown to the death of JFK. Minute by minute, he presents a pulse-pounding, real-time narrative that easily overshadows the reader's foreknowledge of the tragic conclusion. Were the book to stop here, it's a homerun, 5-star effort. But, it doesn't. Not by a long shot.

Next, is a thorough and highly readable biography of Oswald that perfectly complements the prior assassination narrative. Indeed, at the conclusion of this section, I was fairly certain I had stumbled upon a real gem. However, Bugliosi's ultimate intent is to completely destroy a preponderance of conspiracy theories from the nuttiest to the least implausible, and soon the laity must hunker down for a long, and often tedious, sermon.

Further aggravating the slog is Bugliosi's habit of flippantly and frequently taunting the conspiracy theorists or "buffs" as he likes to call them. He possesses less humor than he thinks and despite his feelings for some of the more outlandish theorists, his playground antics detract from what he, himself, believes a serious piece of scholarship.

Things pick up momentarily when Bugliosi rightfully dismantles Oliver Stone's horribly inaccurate and intentionally misleading film, JFK. The more serious pro-conspiracy scholars, themselves, labeled JFK, the movie, a fantasy and Stone assuredly deserves everything Bugliosi hurls at him.

Bottom-line, however, is there is nothing the author can ultimately do to save what steadily becomes a lead weight in the reader's hands. Those who have developed a personal stake in either the anti- or pro- position might feel differently, but if you're just a person who happens upon an impressively thick, initially inviting account of the JFK assassination, it becomes something of a chore. 5 stars for the first half and 1 for second leads me to settle on 3. It could have been so much better, but the captain himself seemed intent on scuttling the ship.

This enormous assessment of the Kennedy assassination is impressively researched and seems quite thorough. But the author's background as a prosecutor and his probably well-founded disdain for most conspiracy theorists makes me feel I'm not getting an even-handed assessment of the evidence.



I have the impression Bugliosi is correct in his assertion that Oswald did it and acted alone, but his repeated characterization of those who view the evidence differently as silly or deluded undercuts his objective of providing a balanced picture of the evidence.



I finally gave up on a straight through reading at page 444, where Bugliosi laments the likelihood of future conspiracy theory proponents "who will breast-feed the conspiracy loonies for generations to come with their special lactations of bilge, blather, and bunk." Yuck.

Vincent Bugliosi's "Reclaiming History" is an excellent book, and well worth the long read. It is a good overview of all of the events of November 22, 1963, here in Dallas, and a good overview of many of the problems with the Warren Commission and other theories.

However, the reader should keep in mind that Mr. Bugliosi is a Prosecutor, and not a researcher or investigator. His tendency is to build a case to prosecute the defendant, and explain away, or debunk any information that counters his case.

Unfortunately, like a Prosecutor, this includes discrediting any witness that puts forth any information that points elsewhere. Vincent often addresses the background of the witness, instead of answering or explaining the information the witness presents.

Vincent spends the first half of the book rehashing the 1986 trial of Oswald, where he was the Prosecutor against Gerry Spence. He uses 53 points of evidence to prove that Oswald was guilty of shooting the President from behind. He then goes on to review the many problems with the evidence, but bases the evaluation of these problems on the premise that he has already proven Oswald guilty. Since he has already proven Oswald guilty, the problems can be disregarded.

Mr Buliosi does admit (page 18 of the Introduction) that almost all of the evidence in the case has some "problem" with it. He says that each problem can be explained, in itself; however, he never states when the sheer number of problems reaches the point where it becomes doubt.

It is not surprising that Vince takes this tact, as he has always been a Prosecutor. It is not the Prosecutor's job to look for the "truth", as that should have been done by the Investigators. It is also not his job to evaluate legitimate problems that create doubt, as that would be the function of the Defense Attorney. It is the Prosecutor's job to present a case that would convict the defendant, and to explain away, or discredit witnesses, that present other evidence.

Mr Bugliosi also lumps all of us who have any doubts about the Warren Commission into the group of "Conspiracy Buffs", and states that we are all "kookier than a 3 dollar bill". He thusly tries to discredit any legitimate concerns and questions we may have, by using the most extreme examples.

He further uses the explanation that the public has heard that there was a Conspiracy for so long, that they simply now believe it. He also uses the old concept that "a great man needs to be killed by a great evil", and that is why many believe that a Lone Nut could not do it. He never addresses (or even admits) to those of us who wish we could believe that Lee Harvey Oswald was a lone shooter, but are still troubled with the mass of points that point elsewhere, or to other shooters.

Again, the book is a good read (quantity and quality), but the reader should be aware of the bias of the writer to Prosecute a case rather than look for truth.

Jerry Dealey - Dallas historian, Dealey Plaza namesake family

Does this book blow away JFK conspiracy theories as advertised, and put a nail on their coffin? Is this book the answer for the overwhelming majority who question the facts of the case nearly 50 years later, does this book tie up loose ends and finally end the debate? Absolutely not, and don't let anyone tell you it does without your own research. I recommend this book for dedicated researchers who want to include this with the "Warren Commission Report" and "Case Closed" as the leading pro-Oswald did it alone resources.
However, "Reclaiming History" by Vincent Bugliosi (VB) is essentially a beefed-up lawyers brief that contains no original research, and just props up the same official line by rehashing old evidence and dismissing all alternative theories. Keep in mind that VB, while a great lawyer and sound debater, is not familiar with scientific evidence, and his book is over a 21 year project that suffers from a lack of clarity, and extensive length, 1,300 pages of small type plus hundreds of pages of endnotes.
The book is not exactly a hit job, since VB even slams fellow lawyer Gerald Posner for his treatment of the Rose Cheramie incident, the Slvia Odo problem, and his handling of the Bethesda patholigists. In astonishing fairness and balance, VB calls it "strange" that the HSCA would state there was no witnesses at Bethesda who say gaping right rear head wound, when in fact there were dozens. And VB calls the Rose Cheramie and Slyvia Odo incidents "troubling." But VB commits the same sins he laments others. He omits contrary information, misleads readers, and attacks the opposition. Plus the tone of the writing is tiresome, very condescending and arrogant.
1) VB mentions that Malcolm Kirduff announced the president's death at Parkland Hospital. He leaves out the fact that he did while pointing to the right temple as a bullet wound, and tells a reporter that the bullet entered the right temple.
2) VB leaves out the testimony of the Parkland nurses, who ALL said the JFK had a gaping wound in the right rear of the head and that the throat wound was a CLEAR entrance wound.
3) VB tends to include witness testimony located in the WC and HSCA, but leaves out testimony made with private investigators. For example Kenny O'Donnel and Dave Powers. And Bulgiosi fails to mention the ARRB depositions from credible witnesses like Sandra K. Spencer. This is not acceptable.
4) VB's whole case is built on his strongly stated assumption that the state would not cover-up crimes, nor evidence of a crime, and that official reports cannot be censored. Nor would state powers help plant evidence. IF you belief VB and trust power that much, then this book if for you. But if you look at the world today, you should know better and this book rings hollow, because an EDUCATED person would know that national leaders can be removed by the CIA (Iran 1953, Iraq 2003), crimes and evidence can be planted or made up (Iraq WMD, Florida boot camp case, Pat Tillman).
Link for Proof that VB LIED:
http://www.maryferrell.org/wiki/index.php/Essay_-_A_Crime_Scene_Between_Two_Hard_Covers

It is divided into sections, the first part is Four Days in November a timeline of events, the middle section goes over the life of Oswald, then a response to the various conspiracy theories, then the investigations, a comparison of the incredible coincidences between Abe Lincoln and JK, the conclusion is a collection of quotes on JFK's legacy and an interview with Marina Oswald that just seems out of place. VB refused to include the autopsy photos, and endnotes are on a CD.

It is apparent that there is physical evidence against Oswald. But VB keeps driving that point home again and again, dismissing contrary evidence or opinion simply because of that and thus he KNOWS Oswald is guilty. But this is no ordinary murder, it a presidential assassination and VB does not factor in the potential for planted evidence to frame Oswald in a political assassination. Altough in VB's credit, he comes to the personal conclusion that President Kennedy would not have expanded the war in Vietnam.
Why is it that all the leading investigations in the assassination of John F. Kennedy, the WC, HSCA, and work of Gerald Posner, were done by lawyers? Lawyers can argue a case either way, and are not always drawn to facts and truth (as in the OJ case, the Bush v. Gore decision, and many other cases prove). Bulgliosi should know better. Arlen "Magic Bullet" Specter anyone?
There remains strong evidence for conspiracy in the public and private investigations of the assassination, and thus this case remains OPEN.

I bought this book when it first came out and often refer back to it as it is an amazing and conclusive piece of work that brings a very healthy dose of reality and sanity to the subject matter.

For Christmas, my daughters got me the Book on CD version of Vincent's masterpiece.

It is absolutely wonderful and imo essential to get a hold of the CD as well. It is a bit more condensed than the book (and footnotes are not read, which would be expected). But the 15 CD companion to this valuable piece of history is very entertaining and also makes for a great substitute to music or the radio when driving.

I tended to skip around in the book when I initially read it, eventually reading the book in it's entirety. But I have found myself opting to go in order with the CD and that has been an excellent experience. It brings back much of what I have forgotten when I originally read the book.

The narration is very well done, read by charecter actor Edward Herrmann.

If you have not read the book or don't think you could ever get through the monster tome that Bugliosi put together, I highly recommend getting the CD. And for those of you who have read the book, likewise I recommend getting the CD as well.

With all the nonsensical fiction that has been written on the subject matter (and I am not talkling about Stephen King's new book), this is ESSENTIAL reading. Or on the case of the CD....Listening.

Hawk

I have NOT read "Reclaiming History" in its entirety. There. Now I can be accused of a inproper review or something. But I HAVE spent the last 3 days combing through this 1600+ page tome on the Kennedy assassination, and it is by far the most complete and thorough account of that terrible day ever committed to print.

Back at the turn of the century (meaning 2000, it's just cool to say it that way), I was working at a public library, and this book (back then it was called "Final Verdict") was the number ONE requested item. However, it kept getting delayed, over and over, until it was finally taken off the records for requests in mid 2004. Well, now we know why it took so long to come out. Spanning 20 years of work and research, this massive book could easily be mistaken for yet another rambling, kooky conspiracy theory-filled diatribe. Yet, it isn't.

In the afterward to the paperback version of "Helter Skelter", Bugliosi made it known for the first time that he was writing a book on the Kennedy assassination, and that he believed that Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone. That afterword was written in 1995, and many true crime fans were waiting, with bated breath, for 12 years for this one. In between, Bugliosi wrote "Outrage: The Five reasons why O.J. Simpson got Away with Murder", which I think was, at the time, his best work, only because it cast such a different perspective on that wretched case. This book, however, is his masterpiece.

Bugliosi not only spends the 1600 pages effictively making the case for Oswald's guilt, he debunks virtually every single conspiracy theory that has popped up in the last 44 years, such as "Badge Man", "Gordon Arnold", "The Men Who Killed Kennedy", Oliver Stone's "JFK", and my personal favorite, Dr. Charles Crenshaw, who made the rounds on "Hard Copy" and "A Current Affair" in the mid 90's over his book, "JFK: Conspiracy of Silence", where he, a Parkland Hospital doctor who WAS in the E.R. trying to save JFK's life, SWORE that the President was shot from the FRONT, contrary to other doctors on the scene that day. The famous "Single/Magic Bullet Theory" is proved to have been POSSIBLE, and perhaps even FACT, depending on what you believe. You can toss that whole Oliver Stone "Bullet stopping in mid-air, zigzagging" theory out the window. See the DVD of "The Kennedy Assassination: Beyond Conspiracy" for a computer rendering of how it really happened.

Much time is devoted to Oswald, his defection to Russia, his Pro-Castro views, and, most importantly, how he could have caused ALL of the damage to Kennedy and John Connolly that day. Much time is also devoted to Jack Ruby, and all the theories that made him a mafia hitman, designed to take out Oswald before he could talk.

Almost all of this has been covered in other JFK Assassination books before, but never in a more thorough and effective manner. I'm already seeing idiots posting "reviews" here, consisting merely of rambling conspiracy arguements. "He didn't examine the EVIDENCE! Kennedy's bullet wound was 3.4453232344353 millimeters in diameter, meaning the shot had to have come from MARS!"....I know, that's SOMEWHAT of a stretch, but it doesn't belong here.

Bugliosi spent TWENTY years devoting himself to this case, and the detail of this resulting book shows his effort, and it is fantastic. It IS incredibly bloated, and will now serve as Exhibit A for all conspiracy nuts, who will attempt to debunk everything that Bugliosi himself has debunked in this book for many years to come.

This is NOT the book to start your path on this topic. You WILL be overwhelmed quickly. This book IS required reading AND worth owning, but also, please check out Gerald Posner's "Case Closed", Mark Furhman's "A Simple Act of Murder" (one of the weaker JFK books, but still well written), ABC News' "The Kennedy Assassination: Beyond Conspiracy" DVD, and, for the conspiracy side, "The Men Who Killed Kennedy", "Crossfire", and of course, "JFK".

For the record, I am still on the fence about who/whom participated in that horrible day. I must say, however, that the arguements put forth in this book make a LOT more sense than hearing that Kennedy was shot by a French mafia hitman wearing a police uniform, or from a manhole cover. I still feel in my heart that there was some sort of conspiracy, but, as Bugliosi points out, it might just be the yearning to believe that our President was killed by something more than a lone nut with a rifle.

5 stars, fascinating. Not for conspiracy believers, although I think we'll see a lot of their opinions here, so be sure to READ those one star reviews.

Well, you don't need another analysis of this tome. Let me just say that I was put off with the length of the book. However, when I bought it on a closeout and finally began to read it, I was fascinated with the myriad of details, particularly about all the various characters -- from Lyndon Johnson, Jack Ruby and Capt. Fritz to the Oswald's and their unusual circle of acquaintances. While the purpose of the book is to debunk the conspiracy theories (which it does well, I believe) I think many readers will be pleasantly engrossed with the many background portraits which make what I thought would be a rather dry read into a long, but unexpectedly interesting historical reference work. And the accompanying CD of endnotes (which, if printed would be as long as the book) contains even more minutia which proves to be fascinating if you can find the time to scan through it on your computer screen without massive eyestrain!

If I could I'd rate it as about a 4.7, because despite its excellent research and writing it doesn't come to the correct final conclusion. But it does dispel many erroneous ideas about the JFK assassination. Despite its massive size there is virtually no fluff in this book. Even the Endnotes on the CD that comes with the book contains worthwhile material in it. I learned a great deal that I didn't know before about many issues in the JFK case.

The writer's objectivity is proven by his conclusion, after a detailed discussion of several pages, regarding the famous Odio incident. He concludes that the Odio incident probably did occur as alleged and that it had the aroma of conspiracy. I agree, and think that the author's error is in not putting more pieces of the anti-Castro Cuban theory together. I think that is the key to understanding the JFK case. Bugliosi thinks that the anti-Castro Cuban angle is the most worthy of consideration among the conspiracy theories, but his only error, in my view, is in not going beyond that to a more thorough examination of those pieces of the puzzle.

Even for those who believe there was a conspiracy, as I do, this book is extremely valuable in laying out many facts. There was much here that I had not seen before despite the many books and such that I've read regarding the JFK case. Any serious researcher into the JFK case will want to seriously study this book, as I am doing.

I have long been puzzled by the notion that JFK was killed by someone other than Lee Harvey Oswald. My early uninformed reading and research on this matter naturally led me to believe that a conspiracy was possible (if it wasn't than why so much dispute?). As I read further, it became clear to me that these theories were incomplete and pejorative...how could anyone who approached this crime thoughtfully and with a modicum of common sense conclude that someone other than Oswald killed JFK? It wasn't until Vince Bugliosi penned this marvelous paragon to the crime that my feelings were affirmed.

To say that this work is comprehensive is short changing it...over 1500 pages of text and 800 pages of endnotes filled with detailed research and clear logic should certainly be enough to convince even the most strident THOUGHTFUL conspiracy theorist that there IS an answer to this crime: Oswald acted alone both in the murder of JFK and J.D. Tippet and all the other theories have at best circumstantial attributes and pure nonsense at worse. I'd challenge anyone who is reasonably open minded to come away from this work without at least some doubt concerning a conspiracy and some motivation to find evidence to the contrary. I don't think it's possible.

In reading this book one is constantly hammered with clear thought and evidence of Oswald's crime. The first section "Four Days in November" recounts the assassination in narrative form similar in pace and detail to his account of the Manson murders in "Helter Skelter". Chapter upon chapter and fact upon fact follow in sections devoted to the autopsy, the Zapruder film, Oswald's actions/character and the conspiracy possibility. Bugliosi's mastering of the Warren Commission report and supporting evidence used in that report clearly debunk the detractors of that document. All this clearly points to Oswald as the trigger man and plainly refutes any opinion to the contrary. Again, it didn't take me long to realize that this evidence made perfect sense to the thinking person.

Admittedly it is a struggle to get through this monolith...most reviewers report months and sometimes years of reading to finish (I finished in 8 months), but if one is truly after the facts and the natural conclusion of those facts than it's worth the journey. Read it and decide for yourself.

I'm a little over halfway through this book, and my impression is that this is two separate books: 1) A solid chronological history of the Assassination and 2) what I like to call Bugliosi's badgering prosecution.
When Bugliosi's in Book 1 mode, he's great. An excellent storyteller whose predilection for detail provides probably the best narrative for the entire assassination I've ever read. Fortunately, he starts off in this mode, so if you only read the beginning, you're in the clear. The initial history of the four days in Dallas is as good a narrative as you're going to read.
It's book 2 mode which is problematic, when Bugliosi is so adamant on his points that he stresses things by sneering at the alternatives. He creates his own straw dogs by saying that the alternatives are so fantastic and illogical that only his viewpoint could possibly be the truth. He is constantly harping on this. What is troubling is that the Warren Commission explanations (which is Bugliosi's belief, as well) are pretty fantastic and illogical themselves. Also, he lays out a case for each facet of the assassination, and, convinced of the rightness of his conclusions, uses these conclusions to bolster other conclusions, not really aware that he's building a house of cards.
Conclusion: In spite of the you-can't-possibly-be-right-if-you-disagree tone, it's well written, very readable (particularly when he sticks to the facts). If you're a conspiracy buff, you'll want to read it just to see what arguments you have to overcome to make your case, as they are well presented, despite Bugliosi's hectoring. If you want something that's going to give you the full story on the assassination in one volume, then this is probably your book. The book, due to its weight, is also excellent for flattening curled photos and papers.