Misinformation Related To The Kennedy Assassination

What I feel is the biggest problem with any valid discussion/investigation of the Kennedy assassination, is the amount of misinformation out there. If everyone who has been named as an assassin was actually at Dealey Plaza firing a gun, it probably would have looked like Omaha Beach at Normandy on D-Day. A few years ago I saw a documentary on the assassination, where a scholar said, that the Kennedy assassination is a like a 1,000 piece puzzle with 10,000 pieces. In layman's terms, that means for every valid bit of information out there, there are nine bits of invalid information along with it. On this page are some cases that I believe fall into the category of misinformation. These are people who I believe are either dillusional, or are just using the Kennedy assassination as a means to get their fifteen minutes of fame. I feel they have been given way more attention then they've deserved.

1.) Ed Hoffman- Hoffman is a deaf mute man who claims to have been in the Dealey Plaza area at the time of the assassination. He claims to have seen a man behind the grassy knoll shoot the president, then move towards the triple underpass, and toss the gun to a man knelt down behind a track switchbox. This man then supposedly took the gun apart, put it in a small carrying box, and both men strolled away in opposite directions. Now, I've been to Dealey Plaza, walked behind the stockade fence, and walked over to the triple underpass where S.M. Holland and several other watched the motorcade and witnessed the assassination. The distance between the bridge and the area of the stockade fence where a would be assassin would be located, is not the far, and the fact that an assassin would move towards the direction of the underpass, and toss a gun to an accomplice, who in turn took the gun apart right in that area, suspends my belief. Hoffman said he tried to communicate with a police officer immediately after the shooting but being a deaf mute, he was unsuccessful, and then decided not to come forward until 20-25 years later. I have to fall into the category of not believing his story.

2.) Beverly Oliver- Oliver has been called a conspirator's wet dream. To me, she's more of a nightmare. She got the label because she claimed to have been in Dealey Plaza filming the assassination, and also claims that Lee Oswald and Jack Ruby knew each other. Oliver claims to be the so called "Babuska Lady", a woman standing opposite the knoll area, filming the motorcade at the time of the assassination. The woman was called the "Babushka Lady" because of a scarf she wore on her head that day. Oliver claims that after filming the assassination, an FBI agent, Regis Kennedy, confiscated her camera, and it was never returned. Oliver was in her early 20's at the time, and was an exotic dancer who worked for Jack Ruby. From pictures at the time assassination, the woman appears to most people to be in her 40's, and the clothes she is wearing doesn't seem to me the clothes that a woman in her early 20's would wear, especially a woman who is an exotic dancer. Below is a picture at the time of the assassination. The "Babushka Lady" is at the bottom right. Does that look like a woman in her early 20's?

3.) Gordon Arnold- We were introduced to Arnold in one of the segments of the documentary, "The Men Who Killed Kennedy." He also claims to have been in Dealey Plaza that day, and filmed the assassination. Arnold said he planned to film the assassination from behind the stockade fence on the grassy knoll, but was told to leave the area by a police officer. He decided to film the motorcade on the knoll, a few feet in front of the fence. (Why he wouldn't film here rather than on the other side of the fence, further away, to begin with I don't know). He stated he thought a shot came right by his ear from behind him and struck the president in the head, and at that point, he fell to the ground to get out of the line of fire. He then said, that same police officer came up to him, was crying, kicked him, and demanded his camera and/or film, which Arnold relinquished. All I can say is, what is that all about? I can buy Arnold's story up until the time the policeman comes over and kicks him. First of all, if the policeman was involved in the assassination, why would he be crying? Secondly, if he wasn't involved, why demand the camera and/or film? Thirdly, immediately after the shooting, a mass of people ran towards the knoll area. Now, if you just shot someone (which we're led to believe, or why else take the camera/film) and a mass of people are moving towards your location in pursuit of an assassin, would you worry about someone having filmed the assassination.

Back to home page