JFK Calc: A Spreadsheet Database of Mysterious Witness Deaths

JFK Calc: A Spreadsheet Database of Mysterious Witness Deaths

Richard Charnin
Aug.30, 2013
Updated: June 6, 2014

Click Reclaiming Science:The JFK Conspiracy to look inside the book.

JFK Blog Posts
JFK Calc Spreadsheet Database
Tables and Graphs

JFK Calc is an online spreadsheet database of witnesses, probability calculations, graphs and links to other data sources. It has all of the information required for a robust analysis: a) known witness universe, b) official cause of death, c) average unnatural mortality rates and d) relevant time period (1964-1978).

There were at least 122 suspicious deaths from 1964-78 among an estimated 1400 JFK material witnesses. At least 78 were officially ruled unnatural: 34 homicides, 24 accidents, 16 suicides, 4 unknown. Given the 1964-1978 national average unnatural mortality rate (0.000822), only 17 unnatural deaths would be expected. The probability of 78 unnatural deaths is E-31 (ZERO). It’s even lower (E-62) using the JFK-weighted rate. Assuming that some of the “accidents”, “suicides” and “heart attacks” were actually homicides, the probabilities would be even lower. But it’s a moot point since they are virtually ABSOLUTE ZERO given the official cause of death.

These graphs are mathematical proof of a conspiracy.

The reference Who’s Who in the JFK Assassination describes approximately 1400 individuals who were related in any way to the assassination; 95 are included in JFK Calc . But the 27 witnesses in JFK Calc that are not included in Who’s Who are very relevant.

It is important to note that the 1964-78 average homicide rate (1 in 12,000) was much lower than accidental deaths (1 in 1,700) and suicides (1 in 7,700). An analysis comparing unnatural JFK witness deaths to the expected number is not nearly as dramatic as comparing homicides. Nationally, homicides comprised 10% of unnatural deaths. But there were 34 ruled homicides (44%) among the 78 JFK unnatural deaths. If the analysis was restricted to homicides, the mathematical proof would be simpler and more powerful.

Unnatural JFK Deaths; National Average Rates (1964-78)
Homicide (34): 0.000084 (1 in 12,000)
Accident (24): 0.000594 (1 in 1,700)
Suicide (16): 0.000130 (1 in 7,700)
Unknown (4): 0.000010 (1 in 100,000)
Total (78): 0.000818 (1 in 1,200)

LONDON TIMES ACTUARY
At least 13 unnatural deaths among 454 witnesses
Normally, 7 unnatural deaths would be expected from 1964-78.
Using the 0.000209 weighted WC witness rate, the probability of at least 18 deaths is ZERO:
P = E-17 = 1- POISSON (13, 0.29, false)
P = 1 in 100,000 trillion

WARREN COMMISSION
At least 20 unnatural deaths among 552 witnesses
Normally, 7 unnatural deaths would be expected from 1964-78.
Using the 0.000257 weighted WC witness rate, the probability is ZERO:
P = 1.8E-18= POISSON (20, 1.14 false)
P = 1 in 500,000 trillion

1400 MATERIAL WITNESSES (Who's Who in the JFK Assassination)
1964-78: at least 78 ruled unnatural deaths
Normally, 17 would be expected.
Using the 0.000822 unweighted national rate, the probability is ZERO:
P = E-27 = POISSON (78, 17.27, false)
P = 1 in 100 trillion trillion
Using the JFK-weighted rate (0.000247), the probability is even lower:
P = E-62 = POISSON (78, 5.18, false)

1964-78: at least 34 ruled homicides
Normally, 2 would be expected.
Using the 0.000084 average national homicide rate, the probability is ZERO:
P = E-31 = POISSON (34, 1.77, false)
P = 1 in 6 million trillion trillion


Convenient deaths spiked in 1964 (Warren Commission) and 1977 (House Select Committee).

 

JFK Witnesses Called to Testify: Actual vs Expected Unnatural Deaths (1964-1978)

JFK Witnesses Called to Testify: Actual vs Expected Unnatural Deaths (1964-1978)

Richard Charnin
August 18, 2013

Click Reclaiming Science:The JFK Conspiracy to look inside the book.

JFK Blog Posts
JFK Calc Spreadsheet Database
Tables and Graphs

These graphs and tables are mathematical proof of a conspiracy.

This post will graphically prove a JFK conspiracy based on a probability analysis of the deaths of witnesses who testified or were sought to testify in four investigations from 1964-1978. It compares the statistically expected number of unnatural deaths (based on published mortality rates) to the actual number. The data and probabilities are displayed in JFK Calc: A Spreadsheet/Database of Mysterious Witness Deaths.

There were at least 62 suspicious deaths among approximately 1100 witnesses who were called to testify at the 1964 Warren Commission, 1969 Garrison/Shaw trial, 1975 Church Senate and 1977 HSCA investigation. At least 38 were unnatural (27 homicides). Only 14 unnatural deaths would have been expected statistically. Using the 0.000206 weighted unnatural death rate, the probability is 1 in 1 trillion trillion.

There were at least 29 suspicious deaths among the 552 witnesses who testified at the Warren Commission. At least 20 died unnaturally. Only 7 unnatural deaths would have been expected statistically. The probability of at least 20 unnatural deaths is 1.78E-18 or 1 in 500,000 trillion.

Convenient deaths spiked in 1964 (Warren Commission) and 1977 (House Select Committee).

 

JFK Witness Death Probability Calculations: Data and Methodology

JFK Witness Death Probability Calculations: Data and Methodology

Richard Charnin
August 30, 2013
Updated:Jan.11,2015

Click Reclaiming Science:The JFK Conspiracy to look inside the book.

Richard Charnin JFK Blog Posts
JFK Calc Spreadsheet Database

This post will illustrate the methodology used to calculate the probabilities of the unnatural deaths of JFK witnesses. JFK Calc: A Spreadsheet/Database of Mysterious Witness Deaths contains 122 JFK-related suspicious deaths, probability calculations, graphs and links to other data sources.

When the film Executive Action was released in 1973, it ignited a controversy. It noted that an actuary engaged by the London Times calculated 100,000 trillion to one odds that 18 material witnesses would be dead within three years of the assassination (8 homicides, 2 suicides, 3 accidents, 3 heart attacks and 2 from natural causes). In 1979. a statistician testified at the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) and claimed that since the witness universe was unknowable, the calculation was invalid, effectively stating that the problem as unsolvable. At that point, the controversy apparently ended. No one has come forth since to analyze the problem while political pundits, bloggers and others have quoted the HSCA result as gospel. But a fairly straightforward mathematical analysis confirms the actuary’s calculation – and proof of a conspiracy.

As noted in previous posts, the universe of witnesses is known. Approximately 1100 were called to testify at the Warren Commission, Garrison/Shaw trial, Church Senate and HSCA investigations. Of the 1100, 67 are included in JFK Calc. Of the 552 witnesses were interviewed by the Warren Commission, at least 30 died suspiciously (20 unnaturally) from 1964-1978.

Warren Commission defenders who try to refute witness connections to the assassination can no longer make that claim: the witnesses were relevant enough to be called to testify in at least one of the four investigations. But even the connection is a non-issue. What matters is that among a known universe of witnesses, a statistically impossible number died from unnatural causes. That is a mathematical certainty. The mortality data constitutes the factual evidence in plain sight. The probability calculations of the these unnatural deaths are 1 in trillions. This should put an end to the debate. Anyone who follows the analysis and still defends the Warren Commission report is either a fool or a fraud. Those who cannot follow it have no basis for even attempting to refute it.

The JFC Calc database includes 122 witnesses who died mysteriously in the 15 years following the JFK assassination (there have likely been many others). The witnesses are primarily from Jim Marrs’ Crossfire list.

At least 78 deaths were officially ruled unnatural (34 homicides, 24 accidents, 16 suicides and 4 from unknown causes). Based on unnatural death statistics, approximately 17 would normally be expected. But the suicides, accidental and “natural” deaths were highly suspicious; there were probably more than 78 unnatural deaths. At least some of the “natural” deaths may have been induced heart attacks or poisonings. If they were in fact homicides, the weighted unnatural mortality rate and associated probabilities would be lower (the homicide rate is much lower than accidents and suicides). But it’s a moot point; the probabilities are essentially zero for the official causes of death.

According to the reference Who’s Who in the JFK Assassination, there were approximately 1400 individuals related to the assassination. Of this group, 97 are included in JFK Calc. The other 25 who are not in Who’s Who are very relevant.

Convenient deaths spiked in 1964 (Warren Commission) and 1977 (House Select Committee).

These graphs are mathematical proof of a conspiracy.

To calculate probabilities, we need just a few data inputs:
a) N, the number of material witnesses
b) n, the number of unnatural deaths by type (homicide, suicide, accident)
c) R, the weighted average unnatural mortality rate
d) T, the time period

There are a number of ways to calculate the probabilities.
1. Choose the universe of witnesses: WC (552); four investigations (1100); HSCA, Who’s Who (1400 est.)
2. Choose the appropriate mortality rate to apply (total unnatural, homicide, weighted)
3. Determine the time period: 1, 3, 15 years

The simplest approach is to use the total unnatural rate. Nationally, suicides and accidental deaths are 10 times more likely than homicides. But among the JFK-witnesses, at least 34 of the 78 officially ruled unnatural deaths were homicides. The average weighted mortality rate is a function of the number and causes of unnatural deaths, not just the total number. The weighted rate is
R= 0.000247=(0.000084*34 + 0.000594*24 + 0.000130*16 + 0.00001*3)/ 78

The next step is to calculate the probabilities using the POISSON spreadsheet function, a simple tool which requires just the observed (n) and expected (E) number of unnatural deaths. E is the product of the total number (N) of witnesses in a group, the mortality rate (R) and time period (T) in years.

In the spreadsheet we calculate the exact probability P of n deaths among N witnesses in T years as
P = POISSON (n, E, false). Probability of at least n deaths is P = 1 – POISSON (n-1, E, true).

 

Unweighted and Weighted Mortality Rates

JFK Calc has all the information required for a robust analysis: a) known witness universe, b) official cause of death, c) average unnatural mortality rates and d) the relevant time period (1964-1978). The weighted unnatural rate is the sum-product of the individual unnatural rates and corresponding deaths.

Nationally, accidents comprised 66% of unnatural deaths compared to 11% for homicides. But 44% (34 of 78) JFK witness unnatural deaths were homicides. Therefore we need to weight the JFK-witness rates by cause of death. If the analysis was restricted to homicides the mathematical proof would be simpler and even more powerful.

To Tom Hanks, Vince Bugliosi, Stephen King, Rachel Maddow et al: The case for conspiracy is closed. You are beating a dead horse. You continue to shill for the Warren Commission which Jim Garrison called a fairy tale and Richard Nixon said was one of the greatest hoaxes ever perpetrated on the public. If after reading this mathematical proof, along with the mountain of physical evidence which proves a conspiracy, you still persist in telling the people lies, then you are complicit in aiding and perpetuating the crime of the century and can go back to sleep. That is, if you still can sleep at night.

 

The JFK Assassination Quiz

The JFK Assassination Quiz

Richard Charnin
August 14,2013
Updated: March 10,2015

Click Reclaiming Science:The JFK Conspiracy to look inside the book.
JFK Blog Posts
JFK Calc Spreadsheet Database
Math/Graphics proof of a conspiracy.

1. The rifle identified by four Dallas police officers on the 6th floor of the Texas School Book Depository was a
a) Mannlicher-Carcano, b) 7.65 Mauser, c) Kalishnikov AK-47

2. Lee Harvey Oswald’s salary as an FBI informant was
a) $100/week, b) $200/month, c) he was not an informant

3. To believe the magic bullet theory, one must believe that
1) just 3 shots were fired, 2) one missed the motorcade, 3) one hit JFK in the back of the head, 4) a third entered his back 5 inches below his collar, 5) changed direction up, 6) exited his throat, 7) struck Gov. Connally (causing seven wounds), 8) emerged in pristine condition at Parkland Hospital on Connally’s stretcher.
This is a) impossible, b) implausible but possible, c) plausible

4. Autopsy photos showed a small entrance wound in the back of JFK’s head, but Parkland doctors observed a gaping exit wound. The doctors were
a) mistaken, b) telling the truth, c) inexperienced

5. Dr. Humes, in charge of the autopsy, burned his original notes.
This is a) understandable, b) suspicious, c) of no importance.

6. Humes probed JFK’s back wound. The bullet did not exit. This indicated a fourth bullet, invalidating the Single Bullet Theory. But it was ignored by the Warren Commission. This is
a) a cover-up, b) very suspicious, c) of no importance.

7. Dallas doctors found a bullet in Gov. Connally’s leg. It was ignored by the Warren Commission. This is
a) a cover-up, b) very suspicious, c) of no importance.

8. Warren Commission defender John McAdams insists JFK was assassinated by Oswald, a lone nut communist sympathizer who had a grudge. McAdams claims that conspiracy “buffs” are wrong to claim that it was because JFK was going to pull out of Vietnam, refused to invade Cuba, was going to “cast the CIA to the winds”, issued Federal Reserve notes, signed the Test Ban Treaty and was fighting Organized Crime.
a) McAdams has a point, conspiracy buffs are mistaken, b) McAdams is wrong, JFK’s policies were all instrumental motivation for his death.

9. Ruby shot Oswald because he
a) wanted to prevent Jackie Kennedy from the ordeal of a trial, b) was ordered to, c) wanted revenge for JFK.

10. The House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) claimed that an actuary’s 100,000 trillion to 1 odds against 18 material witnesses dying within three years of the assassination was invalid because the
a) witness universe was unknown, b) witness connections were unproven c) both, d) none.

11. There were 552 Warren Commission witnesses. The probability that at least 18 would die unnaturally (homicide, accident or suicide) in 1964-1978 is approximately
a) 1 in 2, b) 1 in 100, c) 1 in 10,000, d) 1 in 1,800 trillion.

12. There were at least 67 deaths (46 unnatural) among approximately 1100 witnesses called to testify in four investigations from 1964-1978. The probability of at least 46 unnatural deaths is approximately
a) 1 in 1 million, b) 1 in 100 trillion, c) 1 in 1 trillion trillion trillion.

13. In claiming the actuary’s odds were invalid, the HSCA failed to consider
a) unnatural mortality rates, b) the actuary’s methodology, c) that WHY witnesses died was irrelevant (only HOW, WHEN and the NUMBER who died matters), d) all of these.

14. To calculate the probabilities of rare events, the applicable function is:
a) Binomial, c) Normal, c) Poisson

15. NY reporter Dorothy Kilgallen was found dead in Nov. 1965 from a drug overdose, just days before she was going to “bust the case wide open”. This was
a) just a coincidence, b) highly suspicious, c) of no consequence (otherwise the media would have covered it).

16. Jack Ruby died of a rapid cancer in Jan. 1967, just 29 days after being injected for a cold and preparing for a new trial. This was
a) just a coincidence, b) highly suspicious, c) of no consequence (otherwise the media would have covered it).

17. David Ferrie died in Feb. 1967 from a brain aneurysm, just after being named as a witness in the Clay Shaw trial. This was
a) just a coincidence, b) highly suspicious, c) of no consequence (otherwise the media would have covered it).

18. Seven top FBI officials died within 6 months in 1977 (five from heart attacks, two accidental), just prior to their scheduled testimony at HSCA. Assuming 20 FBI were  called, the probability is 1 in 190 trillion. This was a) just a coincidence, b) highly suspicious, c) of no consequence (otherwise the media would have covered it).

19. George de Morenschildt, Oswald’s friend and a CIA contact of George H.W. Bush, allegedly shot himself the day he was to be interviewed by the HSCA. This was
a) just a coincidence, b) highly suspicious, c) of no consequence (otherwise the media would have covered it).

20. Mary Moorman’s polaroid photo of a shooter (“Badge Man”) firing from the Grassy Knoll taken within a split-second of the fatal head shot was declared authentic by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. This evidence is
a) of no consequence (otherwise the media would have covered it), b) highly suspicious, c) proof of a conspiracy.

21, According to at least 10 witnesses, J.D. Tippit was shot no later than 1:06 pm. Oswald was spotted standing outside his apartment at 1:04, 0.9 miles away. The Warren Commission said he was killed at 1:16, but Tippit was pronounced dead at the hospital at 1:16. This indicates that
a) the 10 witnesses were mistaken,
b) Oswald ran a two-minute mile and shot Tippit,
c) The Warren Commission was determined to frame Oswald.

22. Of 59 Dealey Plaza witnesses who were interviewed, how many said the JFK limo came to a complete stop? a)12, b)27, c)33

23. Billy Lovelady and Wesley Frazier worked at the TSBD. Both testified at the Warren Commission. When asked to point out where Lovelady was standing in the Altgens6 photo, they each pointed an arrow to Doorman standing on the TOP entrance level (the first floor) of the TSBD. But they also testified that Lovelady was standing on the STEPS in front of Frazier. Which of the following is false?
a) both statements were truthful,
b) their testimony was contradictory; Lovelady could not be on the TOP level and also on the steps,
c) they lied when they pointed arrows to Doorman claiming he was Lovelady.

24) Over 90 Dealey Plaza witnesses claimed they heard shots, saw smoke or shooters in the vicinity of the Grassy Knoll. The probability that they would all be mistaken is
a) 0.50, b).01, c) 0.0

25) A telex sent to the FBI on Nov.1, 1963 warning of an assassination attempt in Chicago forced JFK to cancel the trip. The telex was signed “Lee”. There is evidence that Lee Oswald was an FBI informant. Therefore, it is a) unlikely, b) possible, c) likely that he sent the telex.

Answers:
1b 2b 3a 4b 5b 6a 7a 8b 9b 10c 11d 12c 13d 14c 15b 16b 17b 18b 19b 20c
21c 22c 23a 24c 25c

 

How many of the following must be true to prove a JFK Conspiracy?

How many of the following must be true to prove a JFK Conspiracy?

Richard Charnin
August 11, 2013

Click Reclaiming Science:The JFK Conspiracy to look inside the book.

JFK Blog Posts
JFK Calc Spreadsheet Database
These graphs are mathematical proof of a conspiracy.

1. At least one witness would be killed to prevent them from talking.
2. At least one witness would be killed as an example to keep others from talking.
3. At least one bullet would be in Connally’s leg, destroying the single bullet theory.
4. At least one of the four bullets which struck Tippit was not from Oswald’s handgun.
5. At least one eyewitness would be correct in hearing shots from the Grassy Knoll.
6. At least one eyewitness who saw gunmen and smoke at the Grassy Knoll would be telling the truth.
7. At least one person with the power to order a cover-up would do so.
8. At least one person would have the means, motive and opportunity to set the Big Event in motion.
9. At least one media talking head would claim JFK fell forward despite seeing the Zapruder film.
10. At least one government agency would withhold evidence in multiple investigations.
11. At least one person would have the power to control the investigation.
12. At least one Oswald photo would be tampered with.
13. At least one Zapruder frame would be switched or deleted.
14. At least one CIA operative would claim in a deathbed confession that Johnson originated the “Big Event”.
15. At least one Parkland doctor would tell the truth about entrance wounds in JFK’s neck and back.
16. At least one Parkland doctor would tell the truth about an entrance wound to JFK’s right temple.
17. At least one fingerprint would be found on the 6th floor of the TSBD but not Oswald’s.
18. At least one of three eyewitness would tell the truth about seeing a 7.65 Mauser on the 6th floor.
19. At least one eyewitness would claim Oswald was sipping a coke 90 seconds after the shots.
20. At least one Oswald note to the Dallas FBI office would be destroyed.
21. At least one set of Hume autopsy notes would be burned.
22. At least one autopsy photo would cover JFK’s head wound.
23. A rifle stamped “7.65 Mauser” found on the 6th floor would morph into a Mannlicher Carcano.
24. Poppy Bush would be photographed standing in front of the TSBD.
25. Three “tramps” hiding in boxcars would be questioned, released and never identified.
26. Oswald would be photographed standing in front of the TSBD.
27. Gerald Ford would admit moving JFK’s back wound up by 5 inches.
28. HSCA investigator Sprague would be fired when he insisted on a subpoena of CIA documents.
29. HSCA investigator Blakey would admit years later that the CIA covered up.
30. Arlen Spector would propose that a single pristine bullet would cause 7 wounds to JFK and Connally.
31. A paraffin test would prove that Oswald did not fire a rifle on Nov. 22.
32. Jack Ruby would shoot Oswald to prevent a trial.
33. Oswald’s interrogation would not be recorded or transcribed.
34. Seven FBI officials due to testify at HSCA would die within 6 months in 1977.
35. George De Morenschildt would shoot himself the day of his HSCA interview, Bush’s phone in his wallet.
36. David Ferrie would die of a brain aneurysm the day after he was declared a witness in the Garrison/Shaw trial.
37. Dorothy Kilgallen would die from a drug overdose just days after she claimed she would “break the case wide open”. Her notes and manuscript were never found.
38. William Sullivan, FBI #3, would be shot and “mistaken for a deer” just before he was to due testify at HSCA. He was going to blow the case wide open and predicted that he would be murdered.
39. Jack Ruby would die of galloping cancer 29 days after being injected for a cold and awarded a new trial.
40. John Paisely, CIA Deputy Director, would be shot and thrown in the ocean before he could testify at HSCA.
41. Regis Kennedy, Oswald’s FBI handler, would die of a “heart attack” the day before he was to meet HSCA.
42. William Pawley, investor in Cuba, worked with anti-Castro Cubans and involved in Executive Action to assassinate foreign leaders, would shoot himself prior to his scheduled HSCA testimony.
43. Ruby’s lawyer and two reporters in Ruby’s apt. 11/24/63 would die in one year (reporters murdered).
44. Gary Underhill, CIA agent, predicted his death and would be murdered shortly afterwards.
45. Grant Stockdale, JFK friend, would tell his attorney that “people are trying to get me” and jump off a building.
46. Dr. Mary Sherman, a cancer researcher who worked with Ferrie, Judyth Baker and Oswald in developing a cancer virus to assassinate Castro, would die in an apartment fire the same day the Warren Commission came to New Orleans.
47. Guy Banister, ex-FBI agent who knew Ferrie and Oswald, would have a “heart attack” but a bullet hole was reportedly found.
48. Warren Reynolds, who told the FBI that the man he saw running from the Tippit murder scene was NOT Oswald, would be shot in the head, miraculously recover and change his testimony at the WC.
49. Mary Pinchot Meyer, JFK mistress, would be shot while jogging. She said the WC was a “whitewash” and would reveal all in a book. Her diary was taken by CIA chief Angleton.
50. Robert Kennedy would be shot in the BACK of the head at close range after winning the 1968 California primary. He told intimates that he would investigate the assassination after becoming president.
51. Judyth V. Baker would write “Me and Lee” about her 1963 relationship with Oswald in New Orleans. Baker confirmed FBI and former Secret Service agent Abraham Bolden’s account that a FBI informant named “Lee” warned of a possible assassination attempt in Chicago three weeks before Dallas. JFK’s trip was cancelled with a cover story that he had a “cold”.
52. Seventy (70) of 656 individuals in the Simkin JFK Index would die suspiciously, 44 unnaturally. The probability of 44 unnatural deaths among the 656 is less than
P= 1 in 100,000 trillion trillion trillion (4.4E-41).
The probability of 22 homicides is P= 1 in 100 billion trillion (6.4E-24).

The following is a summary of unnatural witness deaths from 1964-78.
– 20 of 552 who testified at the Warren Commission.
Probability: 4.3E-17 (1 in 20,000 trillion.)
– 46 of approximately 1100 called to testify in four investigations.
Probability: 4.9E-45 (1 in a trillion trillion trillion).
– 99 of 1400 in “Who’s Who in the JFK Assassination”.
Probability: E-113 (113 zeros to the right of the decimal point).

This is a sensitivity analysis of unnatural witness deaths.

 

Comments on an LA Times article on the upcoming PBS JFK special

Comments on an LA Times article on the upcoming PBS JFK Special

Richard Charnin
Aug.10, 2013
Updated March 9, 2014

Click Reclaiming Science:The JFK Conspiracy to look inside the book.

JFK Blog Posts
JFK Calc Spreadsheet Database

From the article:
“Sorry, conspiracy theorists, modern forensic science shows that John F. Kennedy was likely killed by “one guy with a grudge and a gun,” said professor John McAdams during a panel for Nova’s new “Cold Case: JFK” on Wednesday at the Television Critics Assn. press tour in Beverly Hills”. http://discussions.latimes.com/20/lanews/la-et-st-pbs-cold-case-jfk-conspiracy-theorists-20130807/10

“Killed by one guy with a grudge and a gun”?

That’s a lie, pure and simple. No, Professor, Americans are not so gullible as to believe this pathetic nonsense. Do you dare tell your students that it was a communist malcontent with a grudge? They probably would laugh you out of the classroom. Modern forensic evidence (videos, photographs, acoustic, medical, ballistic, geometric) and overwhelming eyewitness testimony proved a conspiracy a long time ago. Not to mention the mathematical impossibility that at least 100 of an estimated 1400 material witnesses would die mysteriously in the 14 years following the assassination.

Officially 77 deaths were ruled unnatural: 34 homicides, 24 accidents, 16 suicides and 3 unknown cause. But statistical expectation based on mortality rates indicates there should have been just 12 accidents and 3 suicides. Approximately 25 of the 40 deaths officially ruled accidents and suicides were actually homicides. Therefore, approximately 59 of the 77 deaths ruled unnatural were homicides. But that’s not all. The 43 deaths officially ruled as “natural”, including heart attacks and sudden cancers, was also overstated based on statistical expectation. As many as 25 were actually homicides, therefore approximately 80-90 of the 1400 material witnesses deaths were homicides.

Here are the graphs and probability calculations which prove a conspiracy: https://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/2013/10/14/jfk-witness-deaths-graphical-proof-of-a-conspiracy/

This is a sensitivity analysis of unnatural witness deaths.

Since you cannot refute the mathematics, you are left with the lame response that the data, logic and calculations were not peer-reviewed. You are not interested in the scientific method and are apparently mathematically challenged; that’s why you cannot peer-review it yourself. https://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/2013/07/08/debunking-john-mcadams-debunking-of-jim-marrs-witness-list/

To you, all honest JFK researchers, authors, Parkland doctors and Dealey Plaza eyewitnesses are “mistaken” and/or trying to sell books – just like you did. But unlike these truth seekers, you and the corporate media gatekeepers are classic examples of how factual omission, misinformation, disinformation and logical fallacies are used to cover up the truth about the JFK assassination.

Now these comments to the article are for readers (and students) who can think for themselves.

Clare Kuehn at 4:40 PM August 10, 2013
Not only is a wide and deep conspiracy far more horrible — the horrible way we can be fooled and that people would want to — than “odd events which just might happen” (though those can be horrible, too) …

There HAS to be a magic bullet simply within the back-near-spine to front-of-neck trajectory: An empty object (one without a spine/neckbones) could have such a trajectory, but centre front from (or to) near centre back REQUIRES A STOPPED OR DEFLECTED BULLET.

McAdams/PBS advisors’ “science” dies on this single point.

James Fetzer at 2:30 PM August 10, 2013
Does anyone really believe that the belief that our lives is dominated by powerful special interests who can even remove the President of the United States in broad daylight in a major American city is psychologically “more comforting” than the belief that it was done by “a lone, demented gunman”?

Psychologists observe that most of us suppress information that conflicts with our most deeply held beliefs, such as the belief that our government is nurturing and protecting us. The phenomenon, which is known as “cognitive dissonance”, can be illustrated by a woman who discovers evidence that her husband has been molesting their daughter, but cannot bring herself to accept it. Years later, when the truth emerges, she is at a loss to explain why she had not done something about it. The “magic bullet” theory is not even anatomically possible, as David W. Mantik, M.D., Ph.D., has proven, because cervical vertebrae intervene, which shows their knowledge of human psychology is no greater than their knowledge of human anatomy. The situation is the same with regard to 9/11, where Rachel Maddow touts it as “more comforting” to believe that the government murdered 3,000 of our fellow citizens to promote a political agenda than it is to believe that 19 Islamic terrorists committed the crime. They are bringing us a song and dance in lieu of rational analysis based on logic and evidence.

Harald’s Piget at 9:46 AM August 10, 2013
Why does George H.W. Bush choke on the words “deranged madman”?
He’s stifling a laugh cause he can’t even say it with a straight face. At Ford’s funeral H.W. brings up the Kennedy case. And yes, Ford was on the Commission and did the lynch pin altering of the data to make the “Magic Bullet” slightly more plausible.. Enough for government work..

Why do they call it “Magic Bullet”?
Because the alleged behavior of the bullet does not match the habits of nature as described by Newton! Get it, folks…It didn’t happen. The whole thing is a dirty American secret hiding in plain sight…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ft3eGWZd7LE

Harald’s Piget at 9:30 AM August 10, 2013
The “Commission” which allegedly cleared the air was not even independent – it was picked by LBJ. And didn’t even investigate, regardless of the 16 volume record that is now definitely not in your local library. Just read a few pages to discover it was most definitely not an investigation; if you know anything about what an actual investigation looks like.

There must be an emotional reason every single literate citizen who has access to the Internet could not figure this out and draw the appropriate conclusion. The “Magic Bullet” notion is just for people who believe the Bible was found under a tree and God put it there.

Harald’s Piget at 9:28 AM August 10, 2013
All the details those people who’ve studied the forensics and issues for 10K hours, at least, understand and think makes it all obvious, just make folks eyes glaze over… ’cause that’s how it’s been framed.

And the experts are so close to the material it inhibits the communication of the reality to folks who have no frame of reference for the details… So a McAdam’s can get away with reassuring people “there’s nothing to look at here. Move along”.
It also helps the public are not trained in logic, rhetoric and grammar.

The hit to the back of the head with the brains on the back of the limo? The alleged rifle that couldn’t load fast enough; a rifle so old it was difficult if not impossible to get bullets. The fact the evidence shows Kennedy was hit to the head with a high powered rifle.. The fact the alleged killer was not a marksmen and the image of him with a rifle – promoted by Time- Life was special effected.. The blocking tree the obscured the shot..

Not even touching on the patsy’s murder while in the custody of the Dallas police within a few days by a mob connected murderer. That alone was enough to make most Europeans know it was a State hit.

Harald’s Piget at 9:27 AM August 10, 2013
If it’s on TV. you know it’s a lie…Tom Hanks is as trustable as Earl Warren.. Remember, the first movie Hanks starred in was how video games made a kid (played by Tom Hanks) want to jump off the Trade Towers, since the games made Hank’s role think he could fly.

Why is McAdams so interested in propping up the falsified one-thousand-and-one ways to Sunday… ludicrous myth? It’s gonna take some big gonads to come out on the 50th with this horrendous lie. Ra Ra. lol

The perpetrators and cover – up artists never lacked chutzpah. Even to the point of making Oliver Stone a pariah in the movie business for 10 years after , his actually lukewarm “JFK”. For years, Stone’s name mentioned in the Mass Media organs never went by once without the accompaniment of a blaring laugh – track around the alleged slur “Conspiracy theorist.”

How’s that for fallacious persuasion and Mass Media control of information and perception? All this gigantically funded Propaganda push, marking the 50th year, is going to prove is the indisputable collusion of the Mass Media organs of information.

Richard Charnin at 8:32 AM August 10, 2013
“I no longer believe that we were able to conduct an appropriate investigation of the [Central Intelligence] Agency and its relationship to Oswald…. I do not believe any denial offered by the Agency on any point. The law has long followed the rule that if a person lies to you on one point, you may reject all of his testimony…. We now know that the Agency withheld from the Warren Commission the CIA-Mafia plots to kill Castro. Had the commission known of the plots, it would have followed a different path in its investigation…. We also now know that the Agency set up a process that could only have been designed to frustrate the ability of the committee in 1976-79 to obtain any information that might adversely affect the Agency. Many have told me that the culture of the Agency is one of prevarication and dissimulation and that you cannot trust it or its people. Period. End of story. I am now in that camp.” —Robert Blakey, staff director and chief counsel for the U.S. House Select Committee on Assassinations, statement from 2003

Richard Charnin at 8:32 AM August 10, 2013
“After the assassination the public was burdened with no quandary. Wherever the guilt really lay, the man identified as killing President Kennedy was stamped as a disciple of the extreme left. Rightly or wrongly, the political left was implicitly convicted along with Oswald. Was that verdict just, or were Oswald and his apparent heroes victims of a vicious double-cross by forces of the extreme right?” –Anthony Summers, Not in Your Lifetime

“I have felt, I always felt, a sympathy for Oswald, and I just don’t feel it’s right that he would be, or his children should be, stuck with that stigma, that’s all.” —Chauncey Holt, CIA contract agent and Mafia associate (also identified as one of the “three tramps” photographed in Dealey Plaza), video interview, 20 June 1997

“Lee Oswald was totally, unequivocally, completely innocent of the assassination. And the fact that history — or in the rewriting of history — has made a villain of this young man, who wanted nothing more than to be a fine Marine, is in some ways the greatest injustice of all.” —Jim Garrison, District Attorney of New Orleans, interviewed in the documentary, The Men Who Killed Kennedy: Part 4: The Patsy

Richard Charnin at 8:31 AM August 10, 2013
“It was common knowledge in the Tokyo CIA station that Oswald worked for the agency…. Right after the President was killed, people in the Tokyo station were talking openly about Oswald having gone to Russia for the CIA. Everyone was wondering how the agency was going to be able to keep the lid on Oswald. But I guess they did.” –interview of Jim and Elsie Wilcott, former husband and wife employees of the Tokyo CIA Station, San Francisco Chronicle, “Couple Talks about Oswald and the CIA,” 12 September 1978

“[Former CIA Director Richard] Helms told reporters during a break that no one would ever know who or what Lee Harvey Oswald … represented. Asked whether the CIA knew of any ties Oswald had with either the KGB or the CIA, Helms paused and with a laugh said, ‘I don’t remember.'” –Richard Helms, chatting with the Washington Post’s George Lardner and other reporters in 1978, during a recess of the U.S. House Select Committee on Assassinations, cited by Gaeton Fonzi, The Last Investigation

Richard Charnin at 8:30 AM August 10, 2013
“There’s no question in my mind that the twenty-six volume set [of the Warren Report] should be taken from the shelves of all the libraries where they now rest in the United States, in non-fiction, and placed in the fiction shelves, along with Tom Sawyer, Huckleberry Finn, and Gulliver’s Travels.” —Dr. Cyril Wecht, interviewed in the documentary, The Men Who Killed Kennedy: Part 1: The Coup D’etat

“If he had it to do over again, he would begin his investigation of the Kennedy assassination by probing ‘Oswald’s ties to the Central Intelligence Agency.'” –-Richard Sprague, first staff director and chief counsel to the U.S. House Select Committee on Assassinations, statement to Sam Anson of New Times magazine, cited by Gaeton Fonzi, The Last Investigation

“[Lee Oswald’s mother] Mrs. Marguerite Oswald frequently expressed the opinion that her son was recruited by an agency of the U.S. Government and sent to Russia in 1959, but she stated before the Commission that ‘I cannot prove Lee is an agent.'” –Warren Commission Report, Appendix XII: Speculations and Rumors, Oswald and U.S. Government Agencies, p. 660

Richard Charnin at 8:30 AM August 10, 2013
“We do know Oswald had intelligence connections. Everywhere you look with him, there’re fingerprints of intelligence.” —Republican Senator Richard Schweiker, member of the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, The Village Voice, 15 December 1975

“The question of whether Oswald had any relationship with the FBI or the CIA is not frivolous. The agencies, of course, are silent. Although the Warren Commission had full power to conduct its own independent investigation, it permitted the FBI and the CIA to investigate themselves — and so cast a permanent shadow on the answers.” –-Walter Cronkite, CBS News anchor, 28 June 1967

“I think the [Warren] report, to those who have studied it closely, has collapsed like a house of cards … the fatal mistake the Warren Commission made was to not use its own investigators, but instead to rely on the CIA and FBI personnel, which played directly into the hands of senior intelligence officials who directed the cover-up.” –Republican Senator Richard Schweiker, member of the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, speaking on the CBS News program Face the Nation, 27 June 1976

Richard Charnin at 7:37 AM August 10, 2013
Apparently, McAdams had a limited math background, otherwise he would have done the analysis. His total ignorance of probability theory is shown by his feeble, pathetic attempt to refute the testimony of eyewitnesses and medical doctors at Parkland Hospital. The man has no shame. And this is a university professor? http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/logic2.htm

As a quantitative analyst/software developer working in defense/aerospace and Wall Street investment banking, I had the pleasure of programming mathematical models that were more complex than calculating probabilities of JFK witness unnatural deaths. Facts, logic and mathematical proof are the bane of the disinformationist. Knowing the unnatural mortality rate (R) for (n) witness unnatural deaths in a group of (N) individuals over a given time period (T) is all that is required in order to calculate the probability of (n) deaths.
https://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/2013/07/01/jfk-mysterious-witness-deaths-london-sunday-times-and-hsca-cover-up/

Richard Charnin at 7:34 AM August 10, 2013
The following logical analysis represents a profound PARADIGM SHIFT in analyzing the significance of the “convenient” witness deaths. To prove a conspiracy, it does not matter one iota if individual witnesses were related or material to the assassination (even though they obviously were). Witness relevance and connection to JFK becomes obvious after the fact.

This straightforward probability analysis closes the book on McAdams’ decades-old barrage of disinformation and utter disregard for the truth. As a professor of political science, one would expect McAdams to seek the truth with an honest scientific evaluation of the facts. His avoidance – or inability – of engaging in an honest analysis cannot be attributed totally to pure ignorance. His agenda is obvious to anyone paying attention. He has been exposed time and again as an illogical coincidence theorist (CT). The “tell” is his inability to refute the basic mathematical analysis which proves that there was a conspiracy to assassinate JFK.

Knowing the unnatural mortality rate (R) for (n) witness unnatural deaths in a group of (N) individuals over a given time period (T) is all that is required in order to calculate the probability of (n) deaths.
https://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/2013/07/01/jfk-mysterious-witness-deaths-london-sunday-times-and-hsca-cover-up/

Richard Charnin at 7:23 AM August 10, 2013
John McAdams is the foremost Warren Commission apologist and Lone Nutter. To McAdams, JFK researchers seeking the truth are “conspiracy buffs” who are wrong to believe scores of eyewitnesses, Parkland doctors, photographic and acoustic evidence.

McAdams astounding propensity to obfuscate is best illustrated in his attempt to debunk Jim Marrs’ list in “Strange” and “Convenient” Deaths Surrounding the Assassination: http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/deaths.htm. But this is just one example of McAdams’ disinformation and obfuscations.

After reading this post, check out Michael T. Griffith’s extremely thorough debunking of McAdams’ Kennedy Assassination home page. The devastating article was written in 2001, yet McAdams is still “lone-nutting” for the Warren Commission. http://www.mtgriffith.com/web_documents/vsmcadams.htm

We will quickly prove that McAdams’ valiant effort to refute the relevance of the witnesses is an exercise in futility. He is apparently unaware that at least 56 of the approximate 800 witnesses called to testify by the Warren Commission, Garrison/Shaw Trial, Senate Select Committee and the HSCA met “convenient” deaths in 1964-77. The probability is ZERO.
https://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/2013/07/08/debunking-john-mcadams-debunking-of-jim-marrs-witness-list/

Richard Charnin at 6:04 AM August 10, 2013
Oswald said: “I am just a patsy”. Here is proof that he was. Aside from the impossible Magic Bullet trajectory, and the planted pristine bullet found on Connally’s stretcher at Parkland Hospital, we have Absolute proof of a conspiracy: The bullet in Connally’s thigh. Will this be shown in the upcoming Tom Hanks cover-up propaganda film “Parkland”? Not Likely. http://rechtiskrom.wordpress.com/2013/01/27/lee-harvey-oswald-i-am-just-a-patsy/

WinstonCourt at 10:53 PM August 9, 2013
There is no theory that a lot, if not most, of information on this was locked up for 75 years, and kept from the public. There is no theory about our government having been caught in the past killing people. There is no theory about the fact that our government frequently lies. There is no theory about the fact that government hides their evil actions under the title of “national security.” There is no theory that a bunch of perverts have been caught in our public servant offices. Etc., etc., etc.

So, it really becomes a focus on “conspiracy.” And, am I the only one who is a constant state of conspiracy in my actions? I mean, a LOT of what I do is a conspiracy. I hide facts, I lie, I manipulate, I choose words to lead people into believing scenerios which are less that true, etc., etc., etc.
So then, is government, our public servants, etc. like God, and are perfect people? I THINK NOT!

Clare Kuehn at 3:56 PM August 9, 2013
Psychologizing about which is more comforting — odd events, or corruption at high and low levels — is moot. The question is which science work is done properly.
Since a back wound just to the right of the spine would have to pass through bony process from the neck, no matter HOW the body was positioned, in order to reach the center front neck, there had to be at least a back and front shooter to be forensically anatomically possible.

As Arlen Specter’s own questions to the doctors in the Warren Commission admit, the shots require NO NECK BONE, as do McAdams’ and the hypothetical “science” of PBS advisors.

Kennedy could raise his head; he had a neck bone.This aspect (1 front shot, 1 back shot) does not exonerate Oswald as a shooter, but it is a start. And already posits the requirement of 2 or more persons: a conspiracy; and answers it with roughly where they were (a theory, i.e., explanation — of the forensics).
Now get real.

James Fetzer at 2:51 PM August 9, 2013
Citing John McAdams’ book, JFK ASSASSINATION LOGIC (2011), creates a grossly misleading impression. As David W. Mantik, M.D., Ph.D., has shown in his devastating review on the CTKA web site, McAdams commits so many fallacies that I, who offered courses in logic, critical thinking and scientific reasoning for 35 years, could teach a week’s worth of dissection in critical thinking. It is a compendium of irresponsible reasoning.

He grossly violates a basic condition of scientific reasoning, namely, that it must be based upon ALL the available evidence. In relation to the Zapruder film, for example, he does not explain that 60 witnesses reported observing the limousine slow dramatically or come to a complete stop, where it slowed dramatically AS it came to a complete stop. Nor that a half-dozen have viewed another film that includes it. Nor does he cite John P. Costella’s on-line Zapruder tutorial.

This had to be suppressed lest the public realize that the film has been massively altered, since the driver’s pulling it to the left and to a halt was such a stunning indication of Secret Service complicity. While the blow-out at the back of his head was painted over in black, it can still be seen in frame 374. For more, see “Who’s telling the truth: Clint Hill or the Zapruder film?”, “Did Zapruder film ‘the Zapruder film’? and “Thinking about ‘Conspiracy Theories’: 9/11 and JFK”.


James Fetzer at 9:23 AM August 9, 2013
As Michael Baden, M.D., who chaired the medical panel for the HSCA, has observed, if the “magic bullet” theory is false, then there had to have been at least 6 shots from 3 directions, insofar as the wound to JFK’s throat could no longer be counted as an exit wound and the wounds to John Connally would also require extra shots and additional shooters.

Since the “magic bullet” theory is provably false, there must have been at least 6 shots and additional shooters, which establishes the existence of the conspiracy that others, like John McAdams, are so eager to cover-up. (See “Reasoning about Assassinations”.)

The shirt and jacket JFK was wearing have holes about 5.5″ below the collar. The autopsy diagram shows a wound at that location. Admiral Burkley places the wound at the level of the 3rd thoracic vertebrae. An FBI sketch shows the back wound lower than the wound to the throat. Re-enactment photos show a large patch there, with a smaller patch at the back of the head. The mortician’s description places it 5-6″ below the collar.
Gerald Ford had the wound re-described from “his uppermost back” to “the base of the back of the neck”. But the hypothesis is not even anatomically possible, because cervical vertebrae intervene. What science shows is that JFK was killed by at least 6 shots from 3 directions. The question is easy to resolve by simply looking at the evidence.

James Fetzer at 12:33 AM August 9, 2013
Having pioneered the application of scientific reasoning to the assassination of JFK in ASSASSINATION SCIENCE 1998, MURDER IN DEALEY PLAZA 2000 and THE GREAT ZAPRUDER FILM HOAX 2003–which Vincent Bugliosi has acknowledged as the only exclusively scientific books published on the death of our 35th president–John McAdams’ stance is absurd.

I organized a research group of the most highly qualified experts to ever study the case in late 1992, including three M.D.s and three Ph.D.s. We discovered almost immediately that the autopsy X-rays had been altered, that another brain had been substituted for that of JFK and that the Zapruder film had been massively revised.

There are more than 15 indications of Secret Service complicity in setting him up for the hit; the CIA/military/Mafia/anti-Castro Cubans and local law-enforcement took him out, the FBI was used to cover it up and Lyndon and J. Edgar were principals with financing from Texas oil men. See “What happened to JFK–and why it matters today”.

“Reasoning about Assassinations”, which I presented at Cambridge and published in an international, peer-reviewed journal, provides the simplest proof of conspiracy, simply by establishing where JFK was hit in the back. We are in the midst of the most massive propaganda campaign in US history, where McAdams is far from alone in spreading false information about the assassination.

Richard Charnin at 10:38 PM August 8, 2013
In 1964-1977, at least 81 of 1400 material witnesses died unnaturally (46 homicides, 8 suicides, 23 accidental, 4 unknown). Applying the national unnatural mortality rate (0.000542) the probability is 5.62E-43. That is less than (1/trillion)^3. Using the actual observed weighted unnatural rate (0.000148), the probability of 81 unnatural deaths is less than (1/trillion)^6.

Warren Commission apologists have suggested that there were many more than 1400 material witnesses and therefore the probabilities are not valid – without providing a list.
Even assuming an impossible 25,000 material witnesses, then given the 0.000062 homicide rate, there was a 1 in 500,000 probability of 46 witness homicides in the 14 years following the assassination.

But this is a conservative estimate based on 46 of 81 unnatural deaths. If 24 of the 35 “accidents” and “suicides” were actually homicides, the probability of 70 homicides is 7.77E-16 (1 in 1000 TRILLION). So much for the bogus 25,000 witnesses argument. https://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/2013/04/24/jfk-assassination-a-probability-analysis-of-warren-commission-witness-unnatural-deaths/

Richard Charnin at 10:26 PM August 8, 2013
Exposing the Media and Coincidence Theorists (CTs) in the JFK Cover-up: Facts, Logic, Mathematics

Suppose that on Nov. 22, 1963, 1400 individuals were selected from the U.S. population and that within one year, at least 15 would die unnaturally (homicide, accident, suicides. Based on unnatural mortality rates, only one such death would be expected.

There are two possibilities. The 15 unnatural deaths were…
1) unrelated. It was just a 1 in 167 trillion coincidence.
2) related. There was a common factor -a connection- between them.
We can confidently rule out 1). But if the 15 unnatural deaths were related, what was the connection?
Once you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, is the truth.
– Arthur Conan Doyle

In 1977, an HSCA statistician said it was impossible to determine a defined universe of JFK-related witnesses. Therefore the London Sunday Times actuary’s 100,000 TRILLION to 1 odds of 18 material witness deaths in three years was invalid.But the Warren Commission had 552 total witnesses. At least 18 died unnaturally in 14 years; the probability is 1 in 140 BILLION.
https://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/2013/06/25/exposing-the-media-and-coincidence-theorists-cts-in-the-jfk-cover-up-facts-logic-mathematics/

Richard Charnin at 10:07 PM August 8, 2013
JFK Mysterious Witness Deaths and the HSCA
In 1964, the Warren Commission ignored the testimony of 51 eyewitnesses who claimed that the shots came from the Grassy Knoll area. Just 32 said they came from the Texas School Book Depository. In 1978 the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) was forced to conclude that there was a “probable” conspiracy based on acoustic evidence – a 96% probability of at least four shots (including at least one from the Grassy Knoll). The physical evidence indicates more than four shots. Some shooters probably used silencers.

Despite all of the evidence to the contrary, the HSCA was not about to refute the Warren Commission’s outrageous Single Bullet Theory. It still maintained that Oswald fired from the TSBD – and the other shooter(s) must have missed. I

So it is not surprising that prior to the presentation of the acoustic evidence, the HSCA would use obfuscation and factual omission in an attempt to refute an actuary’s calculation of 100,000 trillion to 1 odds of 18 material witness deaths in the three years following the assassination. If the odds were essentially correct, it would force the HSCA to conclude a conspiracy.
https://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/2013/07/01/jfk-mysterious-witness-deaths-london-sunday-times-and-hsca-cover-up/

Richard Charnin at 9:59 PM August 8, 2013
JFK Assassination Paradigm Shift: Deaths of Witnesses Called to Testify

This post will describe the methodology used to calculate mortality rates and associated probabilities of the deaths of witnesses who testified or were sought in four JFK-related investigations. The method represents a paradigm shift in analyzing witness deaths and is mathematical proof of a conspiracy beyond any doubt.

The only relevant variables needed for calculating probabilities are the number (N) called to testify, the number (n) who died unnaturally, the time period (T), and the unnatural mortality rate (R).

Warren Commission (WC) apologists and “coincidence” theorists (CTs) have offered tortured explanations to refute the relevance of witness deaths by challenging the witness connection to the assassination and/or cause of death. But their explanations are an exercise in futility; they miss the forest for the trees. Focusing on any particular death is an irrelevant distraction.

First, they are debunked by the known number of witnesses who testified or were sought to testify in the four investigations. Second, the fact they were sought is obvious proof that they were relevant.
https://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/2013/07/17/jfk-assassination-paradigm-shift-deaths-of-witnesses-called-to-testify/

David Winter1 at 1:49 PM August 8, 2013
“And on its face, their science does sound good. ”

But that’s the problem, their science IS NOT very good. The evidence that there was more than one shooter, AND that there was a cover up is overwhelming. Even the United States government finally admitted in 1976 that there was a conspiracy and cover up.

Oswald was photographed on the ground floor by the front door. He was then seen, by a police man, drinking a Coke within second of the shots being fired. It is physically not possible for him to have been by the window at the time.

And let’s forget the fact that the Zapruder film clearly shows that the last shot (or at least fatal shot) came from the front. I spent many years in the Navy. I fired a lot of weapons. Heads do not move backwards towards the round and the skull explode out the back when a round enters the rear of the head. It just doesn’t happen and if this supposed firearms expert is claiming this then he’s no expert at all.

The ‘lone nut’ theory is more easily debunked than the creationist theory. PBS is reaching for straws if they think they can actually win this argument.

Tim Fleming1 at 12:24 PM August 8, 2013
Lone nutters like DeNooyer and McAdams have been peddling lies for decades. They do history a disservice and they protect those monsters (some of whom are still alive) who pulled it off. To believe these coincidence theorists, one must overlook a mountain of evidence which indicates a conspiracy took JFK’s life. Shame on PBS.
Tim Fleming
author, The President’s Mortician
http://www.neverlandpublishing.com

Bill Kelly3 at 9:49 PM August 7, 2013
How can science determine that the motive for the assassination was a “grudge”?

Why can’t an alleged scientific investigation into the assassination tell us more than we knew before rather than just reaffirm a lone shooter, which does preclude a conspiracy?
And how does believing in a conspiracy make one feel safer or more secure?

And how come these scientific documentaries on the assassination fail to explore the DNA testing of the bullet fragments by the ARRB in 1998, which would really be interesting but nobody wants to explore it?

And what about a scientific review of the acoustical testing by the HSCA?

And why not a proper forensic autopsy of the victims today, when better scientific x-rays, MRIs, DNA and other tests are available?

Science doesn’t oppose conspiracy theories, producers who don’t want to explore the best lines of inquiry and only interview professors with a grudge like McAdams are the ones who oppose conspiracy theories.

Science promotes the truth. Dig up the body and give it to science for a few hours and many of the outstanding questions will be answered. And releasing the remaining government records withheld for reasons of national security will answer the rest.
Bill Kelly

Richard Charnin at 9:31 PM August 7, 2013
McAdams and the Lone Nutters who still push the insane Magic Bullet Theory have been debunked a long time ago.

This article debunks the Magic Bullet theory. But the ballistics are moot. It’s very simple. Two FBI officials who attended the autopsy reported that the back wound did not exit. So much for the SBT.
FBI O’Neill https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tMzhKy-O4T4
FBI Sibert https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GDNZBfPkbPk

 

Debunking a JFK Mysterious Witness Death Lone Nutter

Debunking a JFK Mysterious Witness Death Lone Nutter

Richard Charnin
Aug. 6, 2013
Updated: March 8, 2014

Click Reclaiming Science:The JFK Conspiracy to look inside the book.

JFK Blog Posts
JFK Calc Spreadsheet Database

This post will debunk the following article on JFK witness deaths: http://www.vectorsite.net/twjfk_32.html

The author writes:
As something of a footnote, conspiracists have long played up the number of “mysterious deaths” associated with the JFK assassination, though an inspection of the list makes it seem substantially less mysterious. In any case, the bottom line of a half-century’s investigation of the assassination is that we are left with the conclusion that was apparent from the start: JFK was killed by a lone assassin named Lee Harvey Oswald.

One of the most preposterous claims of the conspiracists is that there have been large numbers of “mysterious deaths” of witnesses relevant to the JFK assassination. Jim Marrs, in his 1993 book (sic 1989) CROSSFIRE, cited 103 “mysterious deaths” up to 1984.

Conspiracists assert that odds of such groupings of deaths are so low that it is impossible to believe they couldn’t have been part of a plan, in particular citing a 1967 LONDON SUNDAY TIMES article with an early “mysterious deaths” list accompanied by a claim that an actuary had calculated the odds to be “a hundred thousand trillion to one”.

The HSCA found this citation of odds a little hard to believe. The list of people who could be connected to the JFK assassination was long, easily running to thousands, and the idea that a portion of them might have died over some period of years hardly seemed that improbable. The HSCA contacted the TIMES and got back a sheepish answer. It turned out that the question the paper had asked of an actuary was effectively:

Name 15 specific adults selected at random from the population of the USA. What are the odds that all 15 of these named people will be dead within a few years?

The odds are not at all good. Assume that adults in a population have, on the average, a 1 in 10 probability of dying in some given number of years. If 15 adults are selected at random from that population, the odds of all 15 dying to that time would be 1 in 10^15, a thousand trillion to one.

However, anybody with even a simple understanding of probability would know that was asking the wrong question. The right question was obviously: Given a group of several thousand people, what are the odds that at least 15 unspecified members of that group will be dead in a few years?

The answer was that one could bet on it and easily win. Given 1 in 10 odds of an adult in a population dying in some given number of years, we would expect in that time that, duh, roughly a tenth of the population would be dead. The TIMES apologized to the HSCA for the blunder.

——————————————————

The article is a total fiasco

The Lone Nutter’s ignorance and naivete is confirmed by this utterly false statement: “However, anybody with even a simple understanding of probability would know that was asking the wrong question. The right question was obviously: Given a group of several thousand people, what are the odds that at least 15 unspecified members of that group will be dead in a few years? The answer was that one could bet on it and easily win. Given 1 in 10 odds of an adult in a population dying in some given number of years, we would expect in that time that, duh, roughly a tenth of the population would be dead.”

The author calls legitimate seekers of the truth “conspiracists”. But he does not understand the problem, much less the math. This is the correct definition: Given a group of N people, what is the probability that at least n members of the group will die unnaturally (homicide, accident or suicide) within T years?

He just repeats the usual Warren Commission apologist talking points. The mathematical proof of a conspiracy relegates his screed as pure propaganda. Lone Nutters are shameless and have no regard for the truth.

The author’s lack of specificity is the “tell”. He fails to consider any of the following critical factors: the total number of material witnesses in the group, the number and cause of unnatural deaths, the time interval, unnatural mortality rates. All are necessary input for the probability calculation.

This LN does not even qualify as an amateur. But that’s understandable. After all, he’s a Lone Nutter, who by definition is incapable of rational analysis.

His logical errors and omission of key factors in his “analysis” include:
1) not assuming a specific number of witnesses in the target group,
2) invention of a 1 in 10 probability of dying,
3) not assuming a definitive time period,
4) failure to consider unnatural deaths and related mortality stats,
5) use of a pathetically, unscientific probability calculation,
6) naively states that “roughly a tenth of the population would be dead”.
7) failure to refute the relevance of 100 “convenient” deaths
8) failure to consider the more than 60 deaths of witnesses sought to testify.
9) failure to correctly calculate the expected number of unnatural deaths:
E=N*T*R, where N =total witnesses in the group, T= time period, R= weighted average mortality rate.
10) failure to consider the “paradigm shift”: why the witnesses died is a non-factor. The only relevant factors are how many died unnaturally, the time interval and the universe of material witnesses or the number of witnesses called to testify.

There are 120 dead material witnesses in the JFK Calc spreadsheet database based on a 1400+ total universe. Of the 120, 63 were sought to testify at the Warren Commission, Garrison trial, Church Senate and HSCA.

The author does not consider that the number of UNNATURAL deaths among the 1400+ witnesses is the key factor – not total deaths. There was a STATISTICALLY IMPOSSIBLE 77 OFFICIALLY RULED UNNATURAL DEATHS (34 homicides, 24 accidents, 16 suicides, 3 unknown).

In fact, 25 of the 40 accidents and suicides were actually HOMICIDES – based on the STATISTICAL EXPECTATION of 12 accidents and 3 suicides – so we are up to 59 homicides among the 77 unnatural deaths. But by the same reasoning, there was a statistically impossible number of “natural deaths”: HEART ATTACKS and SUDDEN CANCERS. Therefore, the 34 OFFICIAL homicides UNDERSTATES the true number (estimated as 90+) based on STATISTICAL EXPECTATION.

These graphs are mathematical proof of a conspiracy.

The Paradigm Shift
But his most fundamental flaw was focusing on the relevance of individual witnesses in Marrs’ list without considering the paradigm shift: WHY the witnesses died is IRRELEVANT.

The relevant factors are how many witnesses were called to testify, how many died, their cause of death and the time period. In fact, from 1964-78, approximately 1100 witnesses were called to testify in four investigations. At least 63 died (38 unnaturally, including 27 homicides).

The author claims there were thousands of witnesses. In fact, the FBI claimed to have interviewed 25,000 (only about 1400 were material). But let’s assume there were 25,000.

There were at least 25 homicides of material witnesses from 1964-66. The probability of at least 25 homicides among the 25,000 is 1 in 38 BILLION (2.6E-11). The average homicide rate for 1964-66 was 0.000061.

There were at least 83 homicides from 1964-78. The probability of 83 homicides among the 25,000 is 1 in 43 TRILLION (2.32E-14). Only 32 homicides would normally be expected. The average homicide rate for 1964-78 was 0.000084.

The data and probabilities are displayed in JFK Calc: A Spreadsheet/Database of Mysterious Witness Deaths.

Statistically expected number of unnatural deaths
Expected unnatural deaths: E = N*T*R, where
N = 1400 material witnesses
T = 15 years (1964-78)
R = .000818 average unweighted unnatural mortality rate

JFK Material witnesses unnatural mortality
Among 1400 material witnesses from 1964-78, 77 deaths were officially ruled as unnatural – but only 17 were statistically expected: 34 homicides (2 expected); 24 accidents (12 expected); 16 suicides (3 expected) and 3 unknown (0.2 expected). There were 40 deaths officially ruled as accidental or suicide – but only 15 were expected. Therefore it is likely that approximately 25 (40-15) accidents and suicides were actually homicides.

Expected vs. Official Unnatural Death (1964-78)

Cause Expected Official Mortality Rate
homicide 1.76 34 0.000084 44%
suicide. 2.91 16 0.000130 21%
accident 12.47 24 0.000594 31%
unknown. 0.21 3 0.000010 4%
Total 17.35 77 0.000818 100%

Warren Commission
According to the CIA, N= 418 witnesses testified, but the total was 552 including affidavits and depositions.

There were at least n= 18 unnatural deaths over T= 15 years (1964-78). The probability of at least 10 unnatural deaths among the witnesses in 3 years is:
P = 1 – poisson(9, 1.06, true) = 1.81E-07 (1 in 5,509,693)
(based on the 0.000842 national unnatural rate)
P = 1 – poisson(9, 0.31, true) = 1.53E-12 (1 in 652,270,204,558)
(based on the 0.000245 JFK witness-weighted unnatural rate)

The London Sunday Times Actuary
The actuary’s 100,000 trillion to one odds of 18 material witness deaths in three years (13 were unnatural) is matched by assuming 459 witnesses and the 0.000207 weighted unnatural mortality rate. Only one unnatural death would normally be expected among 459 witnesses in the three year period.
The probability is:
P= POISSON (13, 0.29, false) = 9.96E-18 (1 in 100,000 TRILLION)

This is a sensitivity analysis of unnatural witness deaths.

Convenient deaths spiked in 1964 (Warren Commission) and 1977 (House Select Committee).

 

Sensitivity Analysis proves a JFK Conspiracy and Systemic Election Fraud

Sensitivity Analysis proves a JFK Conspiracy and Systemic Election Fraud

Richard Charnin
August 2, 2013
Updated: Aug. 5, 2014

Click Reclaiming Science:The JFK Conspiracy to look inside the book.

JFK Blog Posts
JFK Calc Spreadsheet Database

It’s all in the numbers. In both cases, we have a series of observations. The 122 JFK witness deaths (78 ruled unnatural) are from 1964-78; the 274 state presidential unadjusted exit polls are from the six elections in 1988-2008. There are numerous data anomalies in the accumulated totals in both.

The problems are similar. In the Election Fraud analysis, we need to determine the number of state exit polls which fell outside the margin of error for each candidate. We would expect a near equal split. In the JFK analysis, we need to compare the number of unnatural witness deaths to what would normally be expected based on unnatural mortality rates, given the number of JFK-related witnesses.

We assume the Null Hypothesis: No JFK Conspiracy; No substantive Election Fraud. The first step is to record witness and mortality rate data in a spreadsheet. A mathematical analysis determines if the observations are reasonable based on statistical expectation. If the resulting probabilities go to zero, we reject the null hypothesis; we have proved systemic election fraud and a JFK conspiracy.

The data parameters are limited in scope.
– JFK: witness universe, unnatural deaths, time period, mortality rate
– Election Fraud: state elections, exit polls, recorded shares, margin of error

In both studies, we seek to determine the probabilities based on the number of…
– JFK: unnatural deaths vs. expected number based on mortality statistics.
– Election Fraud: exit polls exceeding the margin of error vs. expected number.

I posted the following analysis on John McAdams’ JFK assassination site. His response was typical disinformation; he wrote that I am reluctant to have the analysis peer-reviewed. But no one has ever come forth to refute the election fraud or JFK analysis. The work has been available on spreadsheets to everyone with Internet access for years. It has been cited in Hit List by Richard Belzer and David Wayne, Crossfire by Jim Marrs and Presidential Puppetry by Andrew Kreig.

McAdams is apparently incapable of doing a peer-review himself. I suggested that he ask the math or political science professors at Marquette University but he has not done so. https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups=#!topic/alt.assassination.jfk/gy1LY3aTm60

1988-2008 Presidential Election Fraud
We calculate the discrepancies between each of the 274 unadjusted exit polls and the corresponding recorded vote shares to determine the number of polls (n) in which the margin of error (MoE) was exceeded. We then calculate the probability.

The MoE is a function of the number of exit poll respondents plus an additional 30% cluster factor. For example, the calculated 2.50% MoE and a 30% (0.75) cluster factor results in a 3.25% MoE.

In the six presidential elections from 1988-2008, the MoE was exceeded in 135 of the 274 exit polls, 131 moving in favor of the Republican and just 4 to the Democrat. At the 95% confidence level, we would expect that the MoE would be exceeded in 14 polls.

The probability that the MoE would be exceeded in 131 of 274 exit polls in favor of the GOP is a ridiculous E-116 (116 zeros to the right of the decimal point). That is a big fat ZERO. But what if the cluster factor is higher than 30%? It would increase the MoE; therefore, the number of polls in which the MoE was exceeded would be lower.

In the sensitivity analysis, we calculate probabilities for cluster factors ranging from 0-100%. The most likely base case is the 30% cluster factor (a total 3.60% average MoE). The exit poll margin of error was exceeded in 135 of the 274 elections. The probability P= E-83 = 0.0000000000 0000000000 0000000000 0000000000 0000000000 0000000000 0000000000 0000000000 001

Even assuming an impossible 200% cluster factor, the resulting 8.31% MoE was exceeded in 29 elections – a 1 in 10,000 probability. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AjAk1JUWDMyRdFIzSTJtMTJZekNBWUdtbWp3bHlpWGc#gid=43

If the six elections were fair, we would expect the MoE to be exceeded in approximately 14 of 274 exit polls. The margin of error scenarios all show that the exit poll discrepancies from the recorded vote were overwhelmingly one-sided in favor of the GOP. The probabilities of the red-shift were ZERO in all scenarios. Therefore we can conclude that Election Fraud is systemic beyond any doubt.

US Count Votes did a comprehensive simulaton analysis of the 2004 exit poll discrepancies which disproved the exit pollster’s reluctant Bush responder hypothesis. I created an exit poll response optimization model which confirmed the USCV simuation: http://www.richardcharnin.com/ExitPollResponseOptimization.htm

JFK Assassination Witnesses

There has been an ongoing controversy over the number of witnesses who died mysteriously ever since the actuary engaged by the London Sunday Times calculated 100,000 TRILLION to 1 odds that 18 material witnesses would die in the three years following the assassination. The HSCA claimed that the “universe” of material witnesses was unknowable, therefore the calculation was invalid and was not proof of a conspiracy. But an approximate number (1400+) was knowable.

Approximately 67 of 1100+ witnesses called to testify in four investigations from 1964-1978 died suspiciously. Of the 552 who testified at the Warren Commission in 1964, at least 30 died suspiciously (20 unnaturally). In three investigations (Garrison/Shaw trial, Church, HSCA) approximately 600 witnesses were called to testify; 37 died suspiciously. Most of the deaths occurred just before their scheduled testimony.

We have a finite universe of witnesses, the number and cause of unnatural deaths, and the unnatural mortality rates. Given this input, we can calculate the expected number of deaths and compare it to the actual number. This is analogous to the actual and expected numbers of exit polls exceeding the margin of error.

Here are the graphs and probability calculations which prove a conspiracy: https://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/2013/10/14/jfk-witness-deaths-graphical-proof-of-a-conspiracy/

Convenient deaths spiked in 1964 (Warren Commission) and 1977 (House Select Committee).

This is a sensitivity analysis of unnatural witness deaths.
We calculate a probability matrix of unnatural deaths over a range of material witnesses and number of deaths. We can then analyze the effects of these two key factors on the probability. As the number of witnesses (N) increase for a given number (n) of deaths, so does the probability that n deaths will occur. Conversely, as the number of unnatural witness deaths (n) increase for a given number (N) of witnesses, the probabilities will decrease.

There were at least 78 officially ruled unnatural deaths of 1400+ material witnesses over the 15 year period from 1964-78: 34 homicides, 24 accidents, 16 suicides and 4 unknown causes. The probability is E-62 assuming the average weighted JFK unnatural mortality rate (0.000247). It is E-41 assuming the average unweighted national unnatural rate (0.000822). But many suicides and accidents were actually homicides (the number of official unnatural deaths far exceeded the statistical expectation).

The sensitivity analysis table of unnatural deaths and corresponding matrix for homicides shows that the probability of unnatural deaths is ZERO in all plausible combination scenarios.

There are some who claim there were many more than 1400 witnesses. But other than the 1400 listed in Who’s Who in the JFK Assassination, there is no comparable list of material witnesses. The FBI claimed 25,000 persons were interviewed. But how many were material witnesses who had information related to the assassination? Even assuming 25,000 witnesses, the probability of 84 homicides in 15 years is 1 in 100 trillion.

Average 1964-78 Homicide rate: 0.000084
Sensitivity Analysis: Probability of 80 Homicides for N witnesses (1964-78)
N….Probability
1400 1.68E-100
2000 1.94E-88

3000 6.70E-75
3500 8.07E-70
4000 1.87E-65
4500 1.23E-61
5000 2.99E-58

5500 3.25E-55
6000 1.82E-52
6500 5.85E-50
7000 1.17E-47
7500 1.55E-45

8000 1.44E-43
10000 6.48E-37
15000 1.42E-25
20000 2.52E-18
25000 4.17E-13 (1 in 2,396,168,995,675)