My conclusion on James Files...

[neab]

First off , let me give a bit of background before I delve into the serious stuff. I've been interested in the JFK assassination for the last few months, most of what I learned was from reading various sites etc, and watching plenty of documentaries I saw online. No, I was not around the time of the assassination, and I'm not american either.But I remember watchin footage of the assassination on youtube a while ago, and saw some of the obviously biased against oswald documentaries. But I just found it all amiss, too many inconsistencies and things not adding up.I then found the James Files excerpt, it was only like 90 seconds long if htat, and I thought...huh, interesting , this guy claiming to be assassin. I found this site, and read many old threads on here before I posted a few times. I recently ordered the confession 2003 and wanted another, but had problems, wim was very kind to send it till I could pay later, despite me not being able to pay online since paypal locked my account.So kudos to wim. So anyway, I recently watched it all the way through for the first time and found it interesting, alot of what I watched was stuff I had read before, but it was good to see the man in front of a camera for almost 3 hours , so you could absorb the character/person.I looked over on JFKresearch assasination forum, and remember my first posts there defending files somewhat and lookin at theircounter arguments, which I was unsure of after. But also confused as to how many of them were so convinced he wasn't the shooter.I watched the other dvd too, which corroborates the files story in many ways. So now I was left to peruse the forums a bit more.By chance now, I came across a video about reading body language etc, which I found interesting, (unrelated to jfk) but being an inquisitive person and playing poker professionaly currently, I thought it was interesting being able to read people's body language and motions. So I watched a few more, and tried the techniques demonstrated on my family.1 being, when recalling events, people will often look up and to the left. I tried this on some of my family, it worked on 4/5 of them! I would ask like "describe your first house mum," and it would ring true, she'd recall it and look up to left.The other thing taught in these vids, is lookin up and to the right is the opposite. You're constructing an image i.e. lying/pretending. Then there's other signs that I half knew neway, the touching of the face,covering of mouth,scratching of nose, is often a sign of deception. i.e. lying.So with this information , i thought, hmm would be fun to rewatch the confession and see if spot anything.Sure enough , I see many telltale signs, noyone can escape your nature, so it shouldn't have surprised me. My conclusions from rewatching it, albeit very amateur one, is that files for the most part , maybe 85% is telling the truth, but several times you see discomfort,touching of the face and widening of the eyes etc. Maybe he had itches I dont know. But the most obvious times were at the recollection him shooting JFK. There is no question files knows alot about the assissination, he delves into nicoletti/oswald/tippit killing and much of it would be totally unesscary to do if he was lying. So I don't doubt he was some how involved. But I am now much more a sceptic as to whether he was the shooter.The most interesting thing I found was him repeating the fact noyone was behind the fence but him. Now, unless he's lying here for some reason. Then this surely can't be true right? I mean bowers testimony is clear,something to the effect 2 people behind the fence just before shooting appearing to not be together. But he described them being pretty close.Files said there may have been some people near the trains, but definitely not near him. Also , when he says he took the shot or he shot 1 shot only, immediately after he scratches his nose. I know , I know, you guys will think this is nothing.But these techniques seem very reliable imo.I am starting to disbelieve his story about being the fatal head shot shooter.What I've drew from all this, is he was most probably even there that day, files knows too much and gives too many detail regarding it , to not be in the know. I would wager he was the driver for nicoletti that day, and that alone was his task.This doesn't discount his whole story entirely. I'm sure he did go there a few days prior, and do all what he said etc. I personally believe the front 2 shots , (yes 2), neck and head shot, were done by a frenchman, I forget the name, but bowers story got one man arrested that day, who was later released. William Raymond mentions him and says his name etc but I forgot it .(sorry). I contend, that nicolletti and roselli were firing from behind, actually just nicoletti most likely. Files was a driver, and they knew nothing of the man/men shooting from the front. Wait, I think I recall ,raymond saying it was one of the tramps. Sorry Im rambling now.I don't doubt wim's genuine efforts to find the truth, despite people on the other forum saying he is a hackster or something. I think he beleives files story 100%, and has no reason to question anything he has said since files has not really lied about anything up till now.His story has been added to but not disfigured,cos he's mostly telling the truth....except for the main part imo.Think about it, they killed off nicoletti and roselli near the HSCA time,yet files is still alive.The early letters between him and west are quite interesting too, they depict files knowing alot but not any KEY stuff about that day.A telltale sign imo.I don't want to convince everyone of anything. The fact is , its irrelvant anyway, nothing will change. The media doesn't care about the truth, so even if we all find out tommorow the truth. We couldn't convince america. I was just interested for my personal satisfaction (somewhat selfsh tbh). I'll continue to read the forum, cos I find this forum the most honest and genuine of the ones I've looked over. I find wim to be a great host and think he deserves alot of credit for his efforts too.Narciso

[ThomZajac]

Nice post Narciso, many excellent observations and insights. Plenty to ponder.....

[Bob]

I appreciate your viewpoint Narciso. Please see this thread from over three years ago in this forum...Lucien Sarti and the Marsailles-Connection by Clemens Lowenstein on Sat Mar 18, 2006 11:40 am I just saw parts of "The Men Who Killed Kennedy" for the first time. In there a "Christian David" - now in jail for killing a policeman (what coincidence) - claims to know 3 hired (french) assassins, and was even offered the contract to assassinate Kennedy himself. "Lucien Sarti" (don't know the proper spelling) is allegedly one of them. If this was true, there could have been 2 almost entirely seperate teams (consisting of 3 or more cells each) on Deleay Plaza that day - just to ensure things getting right. Or is it possible that this french team was positioned at the Trade Mart (or whereever else)? Has James Files ever mentioned such another team being around? (if I remember correctly he did not know all of the shooters, right?) Or has there been any effort to discredit this french-connection story yet?Clemens Lowenstein --------------------------------------------------------------------------------If memory serves me correct, Steve Rivele, the reporter that uncovered this, recently said that he was wrong on two of the three assassins he named in TMWKK. He still believes that Sarti was involved and that there is a strong connection to Montreal."Follow the money." - Deep Throat Bob --------------------------------------------------------------------------------by R Croxford on Sun Mar 19, 2006 4:52 am Always keep in mind that tons of people are trying to as we speek to disinform us. At the time Garrison came out with his revelations the country was facing towards LBJ, Maybe just maybe the whole Garrison thing was a disinformation ploy to keep our minds off the truth. He gave us a bunch of people mostly connected to the cia as participants but really no facts that lead us to the real people behind it. And for his efforts he became a federal judge so like I said take everything with a grain of salt and stay outside that box. Not to mention it caused a unch of people to surface that knew info and what did thet get for it? Whacked! PeaceR Croxford --------------------------------------------------------------------------------COMPARTMENTALIZATION AND CHAIN OF COMMAND:by Bruce Patrick Brychek on Sun Mar 19, 2006 6:13 am Dear Messers. Clemens Lowenstein, and Bob, I have just reviewed your email. I will make copies for Jimmy, and myself. Military, and Para-Military Operations, whether CIA or Mafia, are very strictly compartmentalized, and strictly subject to chain of command. At least the successful ones are. That being said, Jimmy had no knowledge, or need to know about other teams, or shooters, if in fact they existed. Although Wim Dankbaar has turned up very strong evidence of other shooters. Jimmy's direct, or indirect contacts in and around Dallas were limited to Charles Nicoletti, Johnny Roselli, Lee Harvey Oswald, Jack Ruby, X who killed Officer Tippett, and David Atlee Phillips. Of course, there are a few others, that must be left unsaid at this point in time. Bob, what are your thoughts on the Montreal connection ? Respectfully, Bruce Patrick Brychek --------------------------------------------------------------------------------Yes , there is a connection with Marseille. They had advance knowledge that JFK was goig to be killed in Dallas. Whether they ever delivered any shooters, remains unknown to this date. If they did, I do not believe they were Sarti, Bocognani or Pironti. http://jfkmurdersolved.com/NSA.htm The organized crime branch talked about in this letter is in fact the Marseille branch.dankbaar --------------------------------------------------------------------------------Bruce, I definitely think there is something to the French connection here. To what level, I'm not sure. Like Wim, I don't believe that the Corsicans sent over any shooters, but I'm not sure. The Montreal part of the story is interesting. You may recall a Montreal connection in the MLK assassination as well with the infamous Raoul, who was James Earl Ray's handler allegedly. Some people have theorized that Raoul was also in Dallas on 11/22/1963. There is no question in my mind that all three assassinations, JFK, RFK and MLK, were perpetrated by the same dark forces with a huge CIA influence."Follow the money." - Deep Throat Bob --------------------------------------------------------------------------------Don't forget the deaths of Marilyn Monroe and Karen Kupcinet"The truth shall make you free"John Bruno --------------------------------------------------------------------------------Bob wrote:Bruce, I definitely think there is something to the French connection here. To what level, I'm not sure. Like Wim, I don't believe that the Corsicans sent over any shooters, but I'm not sure. The Montreal part of the story is interesting. You may recall a Montreal connection in the MLK assassination as well with the infamous Raoul, who was James Earl Ray's handler allegedly. Some people have theorized that Raoul was also in Dallas on 11/22/1963. There is no question in my mind that all three assassinations, JFK, RFK and MLK, were perpetrated by the same dark forces with a huge CIA influence.Bob, I think the Montreal connection may be significant indeed. You may wish to research Robert Emmett Johnson and Arturo Espaillat; two cut-out/handlers of enormous interest. There is no proof of this but Johnson may have dispatched a French mercenary to Dallas. This guy was an explosives expert so I doubt he was involved in what happened in Dealey Plaza but if that operation was aborted, he may have come into play. Johnson may also have been the infamous Raoul who handled James Earl Ray. FWIW. James Richards --------------------------------------------------------------------------------James, I have heard this information also, from Gerry Hemming as it happens. I emailed the soldier of fortune magazine requestng info on Johnson, they gave me some and the editor said that he would ask around for me, he never got back to me. I have heard it theorised that Mario Tauler Sague was involved with the MLK assassination. It would be interesting to find a photo of Johnson. He aparently authored a few books for Espillat or Trujillo, I'm not sure which one, I will have to check my notes. Any comments on this? Johnhttp:/thepresidenthasbeenshot.4t.comjohn geraghty -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- john geraghty wrote:James,I have heard this information also, from Gerry Hemming as it happens. I emailed the soldier of fortune magazine requestng info on Johnson, they gave me some and the editor said that he would ask around for me, he never got back to me.I have heard it theorised that Mario Tauler Sague was involved with the MLK assassination. It would be interesting to find a photo of Johnson. He aparently authored a few books for Espillat or Trujillo, I'm not sure which one, I will have to check my notes.Any comments on this?JohnHi John, Robert Emmett Johnson did pen many articles for various print media outlets and was an excellent writer. I am not sure about any books though. He was a man of exceptional intelligence. My information came independently of Gerry Hemming where I also managed some good background on Johnson. I do have some photos of him but they are from the 1940's. Send me your email address and I will pass them on. As to Mario Tauler Sague, I too have heard rumors regarding his alleged involvement in the MLK murder. What his role would have been I guess we can only speculate. Cheers, James Richards --------------------------------------------------------------------------------James, Its wereallgointaheavenlads@hotmail.com . There is a photo relating to the King assassination that shows a police officer and in the background there is a man climbing down a wall, Hemming said this was either Johnson or Sague, I'm leaning more towards Sague. Hemming said that he wrote articles and books under a pen name, some for Soldier of fortune magazine. Johnhttp:/thepresidenthasbeenshot.4t.comjohn geraghty --------------------------------------------------------------------------------James Richards wrote:Bob wrote:Bruce, I definitely think there is something to the French connection here. To what level, I'm not sure. Like Wim, I don't believe that the Corsicans sent over any shooters, but I'm not sure. The Montreal part of the story is interesting. You may recall a Montreal connection in the MLK assassination as well with the infamous Raoul, who was James Earl Ray's handler allegedly. Some people have theorized that Raoul was also in Dallas on 11/22/1963. There is no question in my mind that all three assassinations, JFK, RFK and MLK, were perpetrated by the same dark forces with a huge CIA influence.Bob,I think the Montreal connection may be significant indeed. You may wish to research Robert Emmett Johnson and Arturo Espaillat; two cut-out/handlers of enormous interest. There is no proof of this but Johnson may have dispatched a French mercenary to Dallas. This guy was an explosives expert so I doubt he was involved in what happened in Dealey Plaza but if that operation was aborted, he may have come into play.Johnson may also have been the infamous Raoul who handled James Earl Ray.FWIW.JamesThanks James, I will indeed look into that. Again, thanks for your insight."Follow the money." - Deep Throat Bob

[saracarter766]

Neab i find it to be very flattering that those who live in different countries take an interest in the JFK assassination as an american it makes me feel proud to be an american and makes me love my country that much more. and even though i don't post here hardly anymore i will never speak i'll will about wonderful board and i will never speak i'll against wim he is the finest and most awesome people here on the board including others such as Bob,Pasquale,Jsnow,and katisha. i think the world of those people.

[Pasquale DiFabrizio]

saracarter766 wrote:Neab i find it to be very flattering that those who live in different countries take an interest in the JFK assassination as an american it makes me feel proud to be an american and makes me love my country that much more. and even though i don't post here hardly anymore i will never speak i'll will about wonderful board and i will never speak i'll against wim he is the finest and most awesome people here on the board including others such as Bob,Pasquale,Jsnow,and katisha. i think the world of those people. Sara,Just come back like you were before. You know you like us too much as we like you too.We miss you. PLEEEEEASE!!!

[ChristophMessner]

Sarah, I've never said you should stay away from this forum. I just questioned your authenticity one time which is legitimate but it turned out to be an error of mine, and I expressed my antipathy for your throwing around verdicts upon people like God. But in general I like everybody including you, who is authentic and honest with what he/she says, no matter whether it is what I like or what I don't like. Chris Narciso, very good observations and very convincing line of argumentation from you! I agree with you, that James Files' confessions contain some parts which are not quite true and I am even not quite certain anymore whether he really was the fatal shooter or not, for the same reasons you tell and I have another reason: a hitman of perfection like Nicoletti would not make the decision for a backup shooter so surprisingly close to the deadline and all this organized together with two fake ss-men who kept police away on the stairs. And: as far as I can see, driving around with Oswald through all of Dallas to check all redlights and railways was completely unnecessary. But I still tend to believe that he knows a lot about the things that went on behind the fence and behind TSBD and could tell more. Yes there were at least two men behind the fence! Files would not have made all those footprints by himself. But please also consider that most of the time when he says the following, he is NOT scratching his nose or looking to the left: J - Okay. So then what happened? The motorcade came?JF - Aah, I'm checking everything, most everybody, basically where a lot of different people are standing at. And I want to make sure that there, like I say, I don't have any cops standing right next to me. Because you know, something happens and I have to shoot, you know, I don't want to have to shoot anybody else unless it becomes a necessity. So I had walked away from the fence and I come back over, secured everything, got it ready, I could hear the rumble, the people murmuring, so you know the motorcade is approaching. So I got ready and opened it up. I'm holding the Remington Fireball down below the fence at this point. The motorcade comes down I believe that's Main street there, come down at Houston, turn back around onto Elm and come down that little sidedrive there. And when it came down and made its first right, that's when I brought the weapon up. And then I'm over the fence and as they come down , made the turn onto Elm there, that's when I started focusing through the scope and following the car. As shots started ringing out, I started counting the shots, but I'm not counting like 1, 2, 3, and 4, I am counting them as: miss, miss, miss, because I know we are going for the headshot. So I don't care how many rounds are being fired as long as we get a headshot. So as I'm hearing the shots being fired, I'm counting them as a miss, as a miss, miss. And that's the only thing I am concerned about. I've got the sign there, for the Stemmons freeway, that is fixing to come into my field of fire. As far as I could see at this point, the president has not been hit in the head at this time. I've seen the body lurch, I know he has been hit, how serious I don't know. But my last instructions were: We're going for a headshot. If you have to take a shot, take it, but don't fire unless it's a necessity, unless you really have to. He said: Jimmy, don't fire unless you have to, we want everything from the backside. I am not asking why. Okay, whatever you say. At this point, as he starts to approach and come behind that freeway sign . and I've already been instructed not his anybody but Kennedy, because they didn't want Jackie to get hurt or anybody else, I'm fixing to lose my field of fire. And at this point ... either I shoot or I put it in the suitcase and leave. One or the other. I took the shot. I fired one shot, one shot only.J - where were you aiming.?JF - Oh, I was aiming for his right eye, which to me is the left side of his head looking head on. But for him it would be his right eye, and when I pulled the trigger, and I'm right in on it, and it's almost like looking 6 feet away through the scope. As I squeezed, take off my round, his head moved forward, I missed and I come in right along the temple. Just right behind the eye.J - Here or in the hairline?JF - Well, I'm not sure, you know I can't see the penetration, I know I hit him right here (pointing at temple). I know I hit behind the eye. Somewhere within a half inch diameter right there (pointing again).W - So there were actually two shots almost simultaneously?J - You think he got hit as you squeezed?JF - What I believe is this : ... And I got my readings as a marksman, I'm a good shooter, always was, I'm not bragging on my stuff, don't get me wrong, but that's what got me my start with David Phillips. Because of something that I did in the service, and I made a mark there and it's on record and it's recorded, for headshots, for what I did, and the things that I did. But anyway, to make a long story short, as I am preparing to squeeze off my round, Kennedy's head moved forward, just as I squeezed. It was already in process, the head started forward. To me . what I believe is, . and I did not see, let me clear the fact now, I never saw Mr. Nicoletti shoot Kennedy, but I know he was the man in the Daltex building, the man supposed to be doing the shooting. Therefore the head started forward and as far as I am concerned Mr Nicoletti hit him at that point. As I squeezed off my round, the head started forward, I hit it and blew the head backwards.J - So the exit went where in the rear?JF - I didn't hit the rear, but the exit blew out and you could see Jackie .J - Yeah, but where was the exit? On the right side or on the left side?JF - Aah, partially, most of it on the right side I guess, back there where this section came right out. Part of the back of the skull, you know, I didn't go look at it, I didn't examine it, and a lot of people may find this hard to believe, but I have never read anything on the Kennedy assassination, because I was never interested in it. I did not like John F. Kennedy .

[Pasquale DiFabrizio]

Of course, when there is talk about lie detecting I have to put my two cents in there, being a private investigator an all. LOLNeab posted about what we call the "eye break," and, Neab, you have most of it correct. There are a couple of details that you need to remember or know about it.Everybody's eyes don't all move in the same direction when they're lying or not. Most people's eye's break briefly one way as you say when they're recalling pure fact, and their eyes will break the opposite way when they're using the creative side of their brain...creative as in making something up or lying. They don't all break in the same direction because some people's brains are just wired differently.When we interview people and want to use that method, we establish what direction their eyes break the majority of the time. This means that even when they're telling the truth, their eyes may still break the opposite way, so what we're looking for is what direction their eyes break the majority of the time when they're recalling pure fact and what direction their eyes break the majority of the time when they're making things up. The reasons their eyes may appear to break in one way (indicating a lie) when they're actually telling the truth could be for a number of reasons mostly depending on their answer. So, someone could be telling you the truth and trying to give an example of what they're talking about, in which case they're also using the creative part of their brain. So, eye's breaking to the left meaning they're lying isn't always the case and shouldn't be used as an absolute rule at all. When you're interviewing someone, you'll get a gist of what direction their eyes move when they're lying or telling the truth. You first have to ask them questions they have no reason to lie about where they have to recall pure facts. This is done to establish the pattern of their eye break. THEN you can start asking questions. A good liar will break their eyes in whatever direction they want to confuse you. The other things an investigator is looking for is the fear or defensive state of mind which is a reflex when people lie because they don't want to be caught. This is where you see people rubbing their noses (because it itches), veins popping up or bulging a little, figitting...anything that looks like adrenalin. Now, since a person's eyes may not necessarily break in the same direction every single time they're lying, you, as an investigator, have to put the story together as a whole.The key is also establishing how someone talks. I personally tend to use a lot of examples when I'm talking to someone. So, my brain is using its creative side a lot because I'm thinking of examples to give them to make my point. Someone strictly relying on the eye break information would definitely be confused talking to me and would get the mistaken impression that I'm lying. So, someone might ask me a question, and I might expand on my answer by giving an example. If they're not paying attention to my eyes, they might see my eyes break indicating the creative side of my mind and think I'm lying when all I'm doing it giving an example that I wanted to make up to explain further.That being said, you still did a great job. I'm going to look at the James Files interview tape again and see for myself. There may be many reasons Files appears to be lying in his answers. To me it seems that he tells the truth and still holds certain details back...like the Lansdale information. The nature of Files' "lying" appears to me to be in the nature of holding information back (which is still technically lying) rather than making stuff up. What I find important about Files' confession is that he hasn't taken anything back. He only kept information back then told it later for whatever reason. When confronted with the idea that two shell casings were found, he still stuck to his version of events that he only shot once.

[Bob]

You want to see the eyes of a liar?http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KlWSv0NZBRw&NR=1

[neab]

Yeah, good points all. Pasquale, I read somewhere too that it is not conclusive and also different for different people. It's supposedly the opposite for left handed people too.(was also impressed that the techniques had worked on most people I asked). I just went on the assumption he was right handed since most people are, and the stuff he seemed to be honest about to me seemed like he had more conviction.Pretty cool you're a proper investigator! I also agree it's not totally conclusive at all, and also saw a really cool youtube video of a guy who used to work as a lie detector sort of, he just does it from himself askign questions, and was using techniques exactly as you described.Anyway, just wanted to share the sort of epiphany I had, I might be less inclined to believe that files was the firing , but like someone said he could still be ommitting stuff.So he's very useful still imo.Also, just random question, but am I right in deducing Files likes the CIA? And hates the FBI?

[kenmurray]

[quote="Bob"]You want to see the eyes of a liar?http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KlWSv0NZBRw&NR=1[/quotBob, right on you are!!!!!