A Simple Act of Murder: November 22, 1963

When I first saw Mark Fuhrman's book I looked away, incredulous, a natural by-product, perhaps, of the "star-struck" cast of all involved with the O.J. Simpson case. I remained of the view that Lucien Parti probably gunned down Jack Kennedy, with complicity of CIA operatives, perhaps, in a cover-up. I never, ever "bought" the Lone Gunman theory of the case and the so-called "MAGIC BULLET" conjured out of thin-air by Arlen Specter because it simply ignored both natural laws and the clear, unequivocal testimony of among others John Connally and his wife--that he was hit by the 2nd shot, not the first. I picked up Fuhrman's book yesterday and read it in an afternoon. Nobody else has put together such a practical and entirely credible synthesis of the crime. It reads almost like a report, a clear service to the public insofar as the so-called conspiracy theorist books are so pedantic, winding, and long-winded, they leave you both confused and tired. In the midst of an array of books that seem to try and crack the case with complicated theories and technologies, connecting the most disparate dots, all without the precision of a homicide investigator who genuinely wants to find the TRUTH. Who killed JFK and why? Here's the deal: Simplicity has long been what was required and Mark Fuhrman delivers. He explains what really happened on that day in Dealy Plaza Once an investigation turns John Connally to the left and not the right, which is the evidence and testimony at the time of his being hit, with the 2nd and not the first shot, (shot arrived before the "report" and shock precluded hearing what he felt and understood as being "hit") you see how the round hit his chest, ran around the ribs and out, into his wrist and then into his thigh. Nothing MAGIC about it! The first shot was clearly through Jack Kennedy's back and perhaps nicking a thoracic vertabrae it exited his throat, yawing and hitting the stainless steel trim of the limo, bouncing back into the car as a fragment. Clearly, the third shot destroyed the President of the United States, there was absolutely no hope of surviving that horrible and demonically inspired shot. That round produced fragments that hit the windshield, together with blood spatters, and the corroboration of these events is clearly revealed by Mr. Fuhrman's skilled analysis. Another fragment hit the curb and wounded a bystander superficially in the face. Three shots that day all from the same gun, all from the 6th floor of the TSBD building. The ballestic and related evidence is compelling. It is clear that the people surrounding the murder and its aftermath were human, frail, even wicked, and once you dig up their lives you find things that brought them, somehow, in some way, into the fray, even if by innocent but related motives, as somehow related it seemed to the murder. And it has always bothered Americans that a simple crazed nut could successfully bring down a chief executive, a prince in our midst, what is ine

After all the Conspiracy Theories ,Commissions,Investigations,Books,Movies,Documentries,etc.,Mark Fuhrman ,taking the detective approach,analyses the facts and methods that are the principles used in solving crimes like this;comes to the conclusion that the evidence supports the case that 3 shots could have ,and were fired from the window of the TSBD.The 3 shots came from the same rifle,there was enough time to accomplish the shots.It was not that difficult, and Oswald had the ability.There is no evidence that anyone was with him near the window.There is no evidence of a shot from anywhere else.There is an over abundence of theories of connections,motives and so forth.However,all the hard evidence points to only 3 shots fired by one gun and one person;that being Oswald.No other conspiracy theory has ever resulted in any other conclusion of another gunman being involved.Fuhrman does not even try to deny that there may have been a conspiracy behind the shooting,but, be that as it may,it has never been proven,only suggested,and that Oswald had the ability and did do it.If there was anyone else in the window who fired the shots,other than Oswald,and evidence had been placed there connecting it to him;then there is a possibility that someone else did it and when Oswald was shot by Ruby,it was to silence him. I don't think this was ever proposed,and it would have to been proved. I have read a lot on the Assassination,and much as Mark suggests,if it wasn't Oswald ;then who ,and where is the evidence? There has not been the slightest proof for the case of another sniper ,or any other bullet from any other location...Just speculation and conspiracy theories.Theories are fine,but only the proof of a theory is what counts.

There are many controversies about JFK's assassination, but the main controversy is about whether or not Oswald was part of a conspiracy. An author who holds that Oswald acted alone can either argue against the myriad and contradictory arguments for a conspiracy, or he can simply make his case that the evidence does not persuade against and in fact justifies the conclusion that Oswald planned and carried out his plan to kill Kennedy without any involvement in any way from others. Mark Fuhrman holds that Oswald acted alone, and he makes his case that the evidence justifies that conclusion. This book does not contain detailed biographical information on Oswald or Kennedy. He contends that there were 3 shots fired. The first hit Kennedy alone, the second hit Connally alone, the third hit Kennedy alone. The "magic bullet" was from the second shot, and did not first hit Kennedy.

Mark Fuhrman's attempt at explaining the assassination is well done. His findings correlate with what the Kremlin stated -- that Lee Harvey Oswald was indeed the lone gunman, and that the fact that he was so simple minded led to a belief that there could have been something deeper. Such a simple minded man with a vendetta is dangerous -- because no one expects or prepares for the act. Remember John Hinkley, Jr. (the would be killer of President Reagan)? Remember Sirhan Sirhan? Remember Charles J. Guiteau? Such men have been the only ones able to kill (or attempt to kill) such important figures. Why? No one takes their threat seriously enough. The one thing that Fuhrman states is that the supposed "missed shot" of L.H. Oswald actually did hit someone -- Governor John Connolly. Hopefully, this book will put to death some of the silly theories about the assassination. Yes, there were alot of men that might have wanted Kennedy dead. But he was a semi lame duck facing a difficult reelection. His chances of reelection were remote, and his place in history was only cemented because of his death.