April twenty three, twenty twenty five, allegedly according to that thing we call a calendar, and this is the o'celli effect. Now you probably already know that, but you know, being that you already know that, and being that it is this part of April and it is a Wednesday, I thought it would be a good idea to get into something that has been in the news lately for sure, but also has been I don't know, just kind of a strange, a strange sort of situation. Now I'm actually
looking at, believe it or not. I was just looking at something that I can do to record the call and on Skype, because I was going to do that just you know, as an added sort of thing right here at the end, and so on and so forth, because Skype is about to go away, and I had this whole thing set up in mind with Larry Hancock, who is my guest. And you know what's funny, They've taken away my record option on Skype. So whole thing I went through setting up the show no reason to
even bother. I can still do captions, I can still translate calls, I can put calls on hold, all that stuff. But guess what no more video recording from Skype? The end of an era? Larry, Anyway, what are we talking about tonight? It's not going to be Skype. It is instead going to be the other Kennedy who was assassinated in the nineteen sixties. Why. Well, in recent news, what have we been confronted with? Trump dropped more documentation out there? Right,
he did the JFF thing. But now there's a records collection at Nara, Okay, at the archives over there at archives dot org, and it's the records related to the assassination of Senator Robert F. Kennedy. And it made some news for a minute. People said, wow, this is amazing. We got a whole bunch of new stuff. And indeed
we got a few new things out of it. But I'm gonna ask Larry about what we actually got out of it, because you know, there's been material over the years, and I'm gonna give you links to all this stuff. I'm mentioning, by the way, but there's been material over the years. Columbia University put out something in twenty twenty, apparently, you know, related to the RFK assassination. There's an article which is over in the CIA reading room titled The
Shaw's Secret Police are here. In case you don't know about the Shaw and the secret Police, the Savak, I know. I brought it up on shows before when I talked about the CIA's involvement in the overthrow of Mohammed Mozadek, who was a democratically elected leader of Iran, and the implementation or the reimplementation or the reimportation or gee, what do you do? You install a king, don't you? And a Shaw in Arabic is a king. We reinstalled our CIA,
did not you and me? We reinstalled the Shaw of Iran, his son from the previous Shaw of Iran. And if you're old enough to remember, in the late seventies there was a whole controversy about Iran wanting to put him on trial and return the Shaw to Iran. There was also a hostage crisis and all that good stuff. That's how we got Nightline and the countdown of the many days of this is day number one hundred and whatever of the hostage crisis went on for a long time.
Did I go away from the RFK discussion? Maybe maybe not. Sir An Serhannah Palestinian, somebody who was allegedly angry with Robert F. Kennedy for what support of Israel. And then in later years we've heard about RFK himself as Attorney General seeking to what make Apak a sort of a foreign enemy among us being listed as hostile because of the spying and this and that and so on and
so forth. And then you get into the strange tropes of people thinking that maybe the massad was connected to the Kennedy assassination, but anyway, not the Robert F. Kennedy assassination, by the way, but the JFK assassination. Meanwhile, a lot of unanswered questions for a guy named Sir Han Bashir sar Hahn, yes both names first and last same, but anyway, questions about his family. We've gone on this show over
the years. We've gone over a lot of things over the years, and Larry Hancock has been with us for a lot of it. Of course, carmin and Sabastano with us as well. Carmine the author of Two Princes and a King, the two princes being John F. Kennedy and FK, and the King being Doctor Martin Luther King Jr. He
focused on those three assassinations. But I got to say, one of the most underserved discussions, explorations, or even revelations that come out of anything has been regarding the RFK assassination, which again was investigated through Special Unit. Senator. There's a book by that name. It's an old one, but it's still valid to read it and check it out since the guy who headed it up wrote it, as I remember anyway. But anyway, a lot of stuff going on, a lot of discussion, and a lot of it ill
informed or uninformed, generally speaking in my estimation. But enough out of me. How about the author of a ton of books on my bookshelf, a guy who's written about the RFK assassination. Wait a minute, Larry, you might have written less about RFK than you did about the other two assassinations as far as stuff that's been published. Or maybe I'm wrong, No, maybe that's just the books. I'm confused, Larry.
But of course you're the author of a great many books, not just on the JFK assassination, which, of course the Oswald puzzle is the latest, and that's what I highly highly recommend, But I recommend all of your stuff, including tipping Point, and someone would have talked any version of it. Those are all great for JFK and MLK the awful Grace of God. And what is a Killing King? I think is the other title? Is that right? I don't want to turn around and try to squint to read
my book spines? Is that the other title?
But Larry Killing King would beat?
Okay? I got it. See, Look sometimes I get stuff right. But RFK, even in your writing, although I know you've done a ton of study on it, I would say maybe I haven't published as much on it. Anyway, I'd like to get your impressions about the recently distributed stuff what it means. And again, my humble estimation is that I've only never seen some of the photographic images, and some of this stuff sort of organized a little differently.
The exhibits and the way they scan them today look a little different than when they used to press things up against the photocopy machine. I guess, you know, in the old days, and you got stuff from the archives there in Sacramento, California, I think it is. But either way, a lot of studies still to be done and a lot of things still to be known about the RFK assassination. And again that's my estimation. But like I said, enough
outam me, Larry. First off, how you doing tonight? And you know, if you want to talk to me about these things, I'm going to give links to the guys in the chat room and also in the show notes the articles that you and I discussed that I was going to put on video can't now. But also I'm going to give them the links to the new records collection and anything else we mentioned along the way here as best I can. But let's get you know, the word from the best recent urse we have, which is you.
So first, how you doing tonight? And second, you know, go ahead and start commenting where you want regarding RFK, the assassination and the most recent action regarding you know, transparency anyway in the investigations or whatever on RFK, please you bet, Chuck.
And sure life is difficult.
It becomes more difficult when you I think we're all going to be split in like three pieces with records releases on MLK, RFK and JFK, And you know, can you really deal deal with three of them in real time when you're talking about lots of information?
But yeah, I think we're coping.
We have tools to allow us to do that, and there are a lot of people looking at it. But just to set some background, it is true that the one assassination that I have not written about in terms of a book is the RFK assassination.
No book.
There pretty extensive autograph that we didn't go out for a book on. The monograph is called Incomplete Justice, and it's on the Mary Pharaoh website and it's it's extensive
with a lot of sources. But the difference in the two is one of the big things that we're lacking in regard to RFK and and the sort of thing that that Stu Wexler and I who was working with me on an RFK and MLK both found a problem was that the House Select Committee did, of course collect a lot of records and documents and it's it's invested. They were supposed to deal with all three is at political assassinations. They did JFK in great depth, MLK and
lesser rep depth, and RFK not at all. So there was not an HSCA collection. The HSCA didn't go back to the FBI or CIA and really probe into whether or not there had been a federal investigation into what was a state crime in California that that whole element was missing. So we had a very incomplete picture, far less complete than we did in the two other assassinations, and we just didn't feel without that part of the picture, it was too speculative. So that's why no book ever
came out of it. And we put what we could in what we had learned into that monograph. And that's that's an important stage for what people are talking about, because everybody's talking about file releases without asking the question of what file and where? You know, where has this stuff been all this time? Was this stuff actually not released before it?
Has it been hidden? Is it secret?
And what we're learning in almost all cases is what we're seeing now is material that we've either seen before through one of the collections efforts, the HSCA, you know, the warrant Commission for JFK, the Assassination's Record Review Board for JFK. That's all put new stuff into the collections, which is why we're seeing so much stuff, but stuff that we've seen before, just with a few redactions lifted.
Right now, I haven't.
I mean that there's good stuff in there, but that's much more familiar to us because there were collections efforts.
Right now I want to just ask you a question here and interrupt you at exactly this point, because in a lot of cases, what we're seeing here now, though, are also copies of something that may have been shown to us before, but now it's a copy. Let me give you it. For instance, if the Dallas Police sent a report to the FBI, Now the FBI has a copy of it. The Dallas Police have a copy of it. The FBI sends that same report over to the CIA,
now has a copy of it. I'm doing this in a very oversimplified way, but each one of them has a copy of essentially the same thing, and each one of them might actually dump this into the collection, and now you have a triplicate of the same report. That's one thing. But the other thing I wanted to ask
you about really quickly. And I've seen speculations about this, and I have mixed feelings, because there were people that stated that the RFK assassination was going to be part of the House Select Committee on Assassinations, and then it was decided that it was not something they were going to go into because it was a little more definitive.
They caught the assassin right there. It wasn't like they captured him later in a movie theater, or caught him after he left the country, you know, as in the MLK and JFK cases. Right, Either they caught him sometime later in that day at a movie theater, or they wound up with a man hunt. He wound up leading the country, and they got him back James L.
Ray.
So therefore it was sort of like, that's more of a case closed situation. And in the seventies it was sort of determined, maybe we will, maybe we won't. Never mind, it's already kind of solved. Is that an accurate portrayal of what you understand? And also what about my idea that sometimes we have things in triplicate because agencies communicate
with each other. And now I have, you know, like I said, the CIA and the FBI's copy of what I already have from the Dallas police because they sent it to them in the first place.
On the first point, no, I don't think that's what happened with the RFK and the HSCA. Literally the point was the House Select Committee ran out of time, they ran out of money, and they had to make some choices, and quite frankly, black legislators, the Black Caucus, the Black legislator had been very important to pushing the HFCA and
lobbying for its creation, being behind it. So there's a very there's a very strong voice to look at JFK and MLK, not not to ignore RFK, but the point is those those were the starting points, that's where the real kickoff was.
And this they just literally ran out a time of money. They could not even complete everything that they had wanted to do on those two subjects.
So I don't think there's because if it had been as you described, I mean, quite frankly, James el Ray is there, he's convicted.
You know that that.
Was not you know, you wouldn't set it aside because yes, somebody had been convicted in the crime legally, just as Sir Han so to that extent, Sir Hann and James R. Al Ray are equivalent. There's no just because someone has has gone to trial and been convicted. I don't think that would that did not parse out RFK. I really think it was a matter of time and money.
Okay, well it may have been a matter of time, and I you know me, I don't like to counterpoint you very much, but I but I will counter with this. G Robert Blakey had stayed it in several places, and I've seen a record he returned some of the money at the end of the HSCA. He had more money left that he did not use even at the end. So I I don't know if they ran out of time, or they ran out of interest, or but something happened there.
And I just was wondering if you knew about the potential for them covering RFK, because it's an it's an open question to me if they were even going to do it, but but Blakeney to do it, if he returned money, it was simply because they ran out of time and didn't have the time to spend it. Fair enough, I just want to make they absolutely were they were
supposed to do it, There's no doubt about that. And I had to counter that because I know that I got about three listeners out there that would have written to me telling me, gee, Robert blake returned money. And here's the I know he did, Okay, So I just want to make that clear, and that's why I did it. But running at it, But the interest isn't important here because we had a serious public outcry after the Suppruter film was shown on TV nationally, and of course it
had been stewing in a cottage industry. I hate to use these terms because now I sound like Gerald Posner, but in a cottage industry of books and films and various speculations that were out there in public that were causing public discourse and pressure on Congress. Literally. Okay, there was the Citizens' Council, you know, there were you know,
going after the truth. There was all of that. It's sort of like the culmination that brought together the ARRB, where you had people pushing and pushing for the files for years, and the push over the line was the Oliver Stone film because that upset people that they you know, what do you mean, I can't see this up until twenty twenty nine, you know, and we almost made it
to twenty twenty nine before we got it a home. Anyway, another story, But my point is I just wanted to bring that up and also bring up the idea that some people say, well, RFK might have been in the HSCA exploration too, since you brought it up and there is no HSCA for him. There is a lot of things that are not and there's not as many films
about Bobby, even though there were a few films. Yes, there were a few documentaries, but Hollywood didn't grab onto it, and when they did, they did weird things like that old thing about the hotel. Remember they followed the hairdresser and the hotel guy around for the whole movie during the assassination. I forget what the name of that was. Might have actually been called Bobby that film right. Anyway, Either way, Hollywood didn't grab it as much. TV didn't
grab it as much. It just didn't cause the same public outcry. And the King thing definitely had had a well, a racial element to it that made black caucus members, you know, really anxious to put their two cents in, and that's what made sense there. So it does make sense from a this was politically advantageous and maybe RFK wasn't. Would I would categorize it more like that. But did they run out of time? Were they under all sorts of pressure to just get it done and over with?
Seems like it when you listen to Blakey and you listen to other people that you know were removed before Blakey took over. So there's a lot to be said there for that, I just wanted to qualify hold that, Larry.
Sorry, but I think the bottom line is there was no HSCA collection of RFK materials, right, So if we want to step back of saying it's like, okay, where is this stuff?
What are the files that are being released? No, there's no.
RFK collection at NARA. From the work of the HSCA to consolidate things, to collect things to do an investigation, there was There were.
Was JFK. Yes, So which takes us.
Back to what you were saying earlier in the fact of what's really there and what could be released from there and the point being, for example, with the RFK we saw I'm sorry with with JFK, we saw this big announcement that the FBI had identified thousands of pages that were associated with JFK that they were going to turn in after the President had issued as the directive. Great, we just you know, we found these they related to JFK, We're going to turn them in.
Well, what those.
Really were, literally were bulk files, bulk name files under the subject of the JFK investigation, which is as you described them, or material that had been copied to the FBI letters that had come to the FBI. They're not assassination materials, their assassination related materials, but there's nothing that unique as far as the FBI is concerned. They're just setting there and that's the reason they were just sitting there.
You know.
Periodically, the record's retention process, you know, cleans out records and the agencies box them all up and they send an an aura and generally those things unless they're you know, they die in a declassification room, you know, with thousands of pages just stuffed in boxes, you know, or these ever going to make it into the files.
Maybe probably not. So that's that's what they did.
Now to some extent, what we're seeing with RFK is the same sort of thing. There was no federal investigation of the assassination of Senator Kennedy.
Well, no publicly wait, no publicly known federal investigation. There could have in investigations, but there's no publicly like, hey, look we're definitely looking into this and so on, And there was no official public investigation.
Right, there was no order from the president or the Justice Department, right, So there is no official sanctioned investigation.
There is a directive for RFK.
You know, to the FBI if if LAPD ask you for help, sure help them, you know, if they if they want you to do a file check on someone, look in your files and tell them what you have if they you know. So there's they're certainly enabled to assist, but they're not enabled to go out and take over the investigation. Essentially is as they did with JFK, or as they did with MLK. MLK was a little bit in between, because Memphis police still had that, but they're
in a much lower profile role. So what they might have done on their own is another question, which I would talk about separately, but officially, what you've got setting there in the FBI is a collection of letters to the FBI about the assassination of Senator Kennedy, and you can see those. You can go through what's been released now and say, you know, there are a lot of letters from people talking about how it's a shame Sir Hann was a communist, Sir Han was a terrorist.
You know, there's Sir.
Hann was carrying out just part of the attacks on Israel. A lot of private communications going to the FBI, some request for help from l A p D A lot copied to them from other agency, copied from l A p D, copied from newspaper sources, copied from military intelligence. All goes into this into this name file, and it's all sets there and after some period of time, you know, it's trotted over and sets it NARA and those appear to see. You know, that's what we're seeing show up.
Now that the thing about that is, you know, there are two things that we would like to see. We would like to see something unique and you know that we haven't seen before related to the actual investigation of the crime. You know that that would be great not seeing that, Which makes sense in a way because that was lap D and sus uh was not FBI. The FBI did did do some interviews.
Uh, they got to lead.
They did do some interviews in a couple of cases they got to lead interview somebody and handed it off to l A p D. So we see some of that. But to get to your point, and a point that I would like to stress what would have interested me more is if you think about it for a moment, the investigation of a senator, a US senator running for presidency is a national security issue. It should be thought
of a national security issue. These days, that certainly would be thought of as a national security issue, So there would be a charter for the national intelligence community to take a look if you know, this was this totally domestic?
Is there some foreign element?
And they would have this charter irrespective of the criminal investigation. So one of the real questions is was there any sort of national security investigation done of potential foreign links, foreign influence on Syrien, manipulation of Surien done by the FBI or the CIA more importantly, but anybody, did anybody in the national intelligence community treat it as a national security issue and investigate it?
And we haven't seen those files. Now.
If those were to turn up, I think it would be fascinating, but you know, there they probably somewhere else, you know, and the Director of National Intelligence, it's not just a matter of you know, would have to issue some directors and say, guys, look back at your file history. Did you guys actually investigate this on the CIA, did you do any investigation of you know, this is a national security issue. I don't think we're going to see that in what's sitting.
There at NARA.
Well, another valid check might have been with the nssay as well, because if you're talking about Sir Han getting any sort of foreign influence regarding this and the idea that he was indeed Palestinian and this might have been over the American support of Israel, et cetera, Well, could there not have been the Palestinian communication to the Palestinian sitting in America? And that would be I think under the nssays, you know, investigative arm to check out things
like communication. So that would be a possibility too, wouldn't it.
It would be.
But again, since the SA actually works for CIA in that regard, you know, there could be a copy in NSA. There could be a you know, an RFK box, an
RFK collection of NSA intercepts related to that assassination. Right, there's But the possibility is simply if if NSA was task with surveillance on Palestinian groups, Arab groups, student groups, et cetera operating inside the United States, operating for that matter, against Israel inside the United States, because there was a great concern that a lot of these students were here in the US operating against either you know, their own
country back home, against Israel. Whatever they're they're essentially in refuge here because they can operate you know, revolutionary activities back home, say more safely here. So yeah, that there certainly could be files like that. Savok itself, we absolutely know, and you have links posted to that Savak was operating inside the United States, conducting bombings, kentuckting, assassinations against the anti Shaw.
Student community in the United States.
Surely the CIA was monitoring that. Surely the NSA was monitoring communication. There should be a whole body of national security information related to these, you know, Arab radicals, Iranian radicals, the different student communities, the intelligence services of these nations operating here trying to cope with them. You know, it is like warfare going on in the US, and it
was it was known that it was going on. What we do know now is that the CI, because the Johnson administration was very support of the Shaw For example, the State Department was very supportive of the Shaw, the CIA, Richard Helms, who went to become ambassador to Iran, the intelligence community was.
Very supportive of the shawven regardless of what he was doing.
That doesn't mean the community might not be doing its job, but that might also be that, you know, if somebody rushes into Richard Helps and says, look, I found this. Helps may not want to pursue that there's some embedded interest in all this. The Kennedy administration and RFK himself had been quite hostile towards the Shawven. RFK himself had routed money to support student groups that were trying to
ask the Shaw ofven. If you really look into the history, one of one of the Shaw's biggest international opponents and threats was Robert Kennedy himself, who had been trying to defoment revolution against the Shaw.
So just for.
Clarity in case somebody missed it or misunderstood something, the Savak was effectively the secret police of the Iranian regime that was installed when the Shaw of Iran was you know, put back at the head of the government after the overthrow momb But most of that okay, and again we could talk about, you know, Kermit Roosevelt and his involvement in it, and the CIA clearly at the very least assisted in what went on there, and quite frankly, in my mind, is responsible for all of what came after
because the Shaw was then deposed, ended up in America, died here. If anybody doesn't remember or isn't old enough, you know, in the what was it, seventy nine, I think he was here. I remember being a little kid and having to learn who the hell the Shaw of Iran was. You know, never heard of him before, but you know, other people on the planet and those that were more ast in international affairs knew. And the Savak being the secret police of this guy, yeah, they might have had an interest in.
You know, well, Savak had actually been trained by the CIA, and the CIA had assisted in setting up Savaka as a secure I mean setting up Slavaka as a security organization for this new regime that had put in place, so certainly it knew the right individuals.
Some of those individuals.
Had come over here for training, so that there were connections. And again, in light of the US foreign policy, what Savak was doing was actually, even though they were illegally in the US and acting against Iranian citizens, it was situationally in line with the American foreign policy, and nobody was arresting them and deporting them.
If anything, they were enabling them, right, it.
Would be fascinating to know to what extent they were enabling them.
And here's the truth about it. We would see that template of the CIA created trained whatever groups of secret police, special military, special civilian guard, et cetera, repeated again and again in Latin America. Okay, same kind of thing that you know winds up forming the Savaka also formed some of the death squads. Sorry, but that's the truth of it, right Anyway, Maybe Larry is a little not quite as far down the rabbit hole as I am on that.
I don't know, maybe he is, but that's the way I see it is that we have something that was standard operating procedure there.
Yes, after writing Shadow Warfare, I think I'm pretty much at the bottom of the rabbit hole with you, Chuck. Yeah, it just it gets to be very repetitive. It's just standard operating practice. Right, when you replace a regime and put your regime in place, you help that new regime to do whatever is necessary to defend itself with its intelligence. It's counterintelligence, it's military area, it's weapons purchases.
That just standard practice.
Right, And look, it's not always one hundred percent successful. See also Vietnam, you know, because they had a secret police and the South Vietnamese. We were supporting them, weren't we. And uh, yeah, Okay, that didn't go so well.
But other places it never goes that well.
Long run, it's good for like five ten years, and then not so much.
Right, That's okay. I just wanted to make sure you know I wasn't taking you too far down the conspiracy rabbit hole, that's all. But anyway, back to the meat of the subject here, though, I only saw a couple of things that I don't recall seeing before in those files. Would you mind highlighting a couple of those things.
Yeah.
One of the things that shows up is some correspondence involving the State Department and various Arab nations Jordan, you know, and and it's clear that neither the State Department or these foreign nations really want the focus on Sir Han to be in regard to the Palestinian Cross, you know, Arab operations against you know, Israel, radicals in the US, you know, expats in the US from the that You'll see some letters in there on these State Department level
communications where you know, the State Department is not encouraging that and is trying to ensure foreign governments that they're
not going to encourage that. You know that this is not where anybody wants the dialogue to go at this point in time, and the files that we're looking at here are primarily during sir Han's trial, uh, you know, and and conviction, And at that point in time, there was a real no matter how much was introduced in court about Sir Han's writing and his remarks about you know, support for the Arab cause, uh, Palestinian rites, opposition to Israel, his hatred of RFK over support for his that was
it was reported on, but it was that it never became the theme. There were you know, there were nobody put it in context of sir Han as an Arab terrorist then or Palestinian later later when some some lawyers came to his aid when he started going into his appeal cycle, he kind of bought into that meme and actually kind of used it himself.
For a while. But initially it wasn't there. So you see some document.
You see a lot of letters, you see a lot of correspondents about a either people writing to the FBI and wanting to sell that essentially, you know, you need to look into this.
This guy as a.
Terrorist and he has consections to terrorists, uh, and he's been motivated by the terrorist theme right, and on the other side, state department level stuff trying to counter that. Other things that you will see I thought was very interesting.
There were some reports that again the FBI is just being copied on this stuff right from the Intelligent Military Intelligence unit that covers California, and they were supplying, you know, going through their files and seeing if they could provide information, uh, you know, on on Sir hand or Sir Ann's family,
you know, trying to be of assistance. And the interesting thing about that is we saw the same thing in Dallas of military intelligence jumping right into the FRAY and I don't know where they're trying to prove themselves useful or you know, maintain this connection. We saw the same thing in Memphis with MLK early on. You see reports
being copied to the FBI from military intelligence. And the interesting thing is that it kind of reinforces what we now know that at the time that military intelligence was monitoring a lot of activities that might have led to civil unrest, insurgency.
That sort of thing.
So we see those all in the files, and those are new. I mean, we have not seen those, and I think the reason we haven't seen those is they weren't part of the assassination investigation.
Per se.
We've been looking at things related to the crime, the attack at the ambassador. It's just like in the JFK records that we're seeing now, we've been looking at the crime. Did we look at some of the things that we're now looking at, like what was the CIA doing domestically?
Now it's interesting when we see.
That in a new record with fewer redactions. You know, what about this lessons Germanma. We just we weren't looking for that sort of stuff in the search place, but now we're seeing this corollary material. I guess you would call it, which is which is historically interesting. So somebody asked me today, so you're going to say there's nothing new, and that's not the story at all. There is new information, but it's not new information about the crime per se.
Well, right, Like, I'll tell you one piece of interesting information which is revealed in more than one place, is you know, over the years, it's been characterized as, oh, you know, these conspiracy theorists, they came up with this idea of the girl in the polka dot dress and blah blah blah. And you can see in initial reports. Now, there were people talking about a girl in a polka dot dress that were witnesses, not just you know, the
cherry picked stuff of conspiracy theorists. But there's a bunch of them in there actually corresponding about this. And I'm not saying that it's revolutionary. It's nothing new, but it does prove that it wasn't something that sat there and cooked and only got popular in the seventies, you know, after conspiracy authors kicked it around. That's garbage. It starts with the initial investigation and people volunteering this information and mentioned.
Contrast, SHARONO.
The meme that's generated at all is this polka dot dress girl came from one young woman who reported it and later admitted under polygraph that she'd made it up, which is totally untrue.
Okay, but that's another story.
Actually, if you go through the files that we've looked at, you know, for years, you'll see that there. I don't know, I would estimate they were close to two dozen people that saw and reported to LAPD the polka dot dress girl, in company with Sir Hand and with in company with two or three other people. And the interesting thing is that's all setting there in the file, right, and you
wonder why did it ever go anywhere? And that's because Detective Sergeant Hernandez, when he did this bogus polygraph on Serrano.
Went back to all those reports.
And what you find initial across the top of them is not relevant because of the polka dot. Serrano's been disproved. So like all these other witnesses no longer count strictly because Serrano's been Oh yeah, it's appalling when you see what he's done to all those reports.
Right. And the thing about this again is Sandra Serrano is the girl who just happened to be standing somewhere and these two people ran by her, and one of them was in a polka dot dress, and she said the one the guy looked like he was Mexican maybe, and she thought he was because she's Mexican. This is like, I'm really badly crushing and you know, summarizing her statement.
But the thing is she was on film and the guy who did the documentary, you know, the second Gun or whatever, had her there, and people it picked up that piece of film and used it. And over the years we did get a copy of the recording of Hernandez and how he handled her, and people know that she got browbeat into changing her story.
Okay, he gave her liquor before he did the polygraph too under age, no less right, took her out for drinks, and then the polygraph.
I mean, it's atrocious.
Right, there's a whole manipulation here. And as for who Hernandez really is and everything else, you might want to check into that. But the thing is they were discounting her and therefore dismissing the rest of these reports. But they are there, They exist, unprompted. It wasn't a conspiracy author feeding them an idea. Okay, it wasn't some crazy story that got out of hand. This is literally an element that was in play at the time. And I'm not even saying that the pokenad dressed girl is like
the key to everything, like some people say. But who knows she's there? Okay? And did anybody ever actually track it down? And why not? These are relevant questions. So it's there. You can see historically where things stood and that they weren't simply generated out of the imaginations of authors that were trying to make a quick book on their book, which you know today you can't even make a buck on your book good luck. But I mean even back then it would have been hard for you
to make a fortune on an RFK book. But anyway, still it dismisses that notion in my mind. But also there was some photographic stuff in there, and the presentation of a couple of things was a little different in what I was able to download, and I haven't downloaded them all, Larry, But did you notice any different photographs in there?
Now?
I honestly did not.
But I think that's because again, it's not because they have not been available, it's because the collection is massive. And if you're really not interested in that sort of thing, I mean, I'll always refer back to my friend John Hunt, who was obsessively interested in the forensics information, went to the California Archives, went through all of that. No, I don't believe that we're seeing anything new in terms of
forensics material. I think we're just seeing stuff that nobody really bothered to look at in detail after the trial was over.
I mean, that sort of.
Stuff was not even dealt with in the trial because Sir Hann's defense attorney was not defending him on that issue. Sir Anne was being prosecuted. You know not, the defense attorney was not raising the issue of really whether Sir Han.
Had killed RFK or not that was a given.
He was accepting that he was trying to get him something other than a death sentence by going in another direction. So a lot of these materials that are forensics and crime scene and autopsy so never really came into dispute the way they have in the JFK case. For example, no nobody went there in the RFK case except John.
And sadly, I mean, you have the case of Thomas Negucci who wound up getting fired and everything else, and you know, going through a whole thing when he said, look, you know you got you have the stiffling marks on the back of the year, which means the gun is rather close to the back of his ear. And there you go. You got the shooter in the wrong position. You've got a problem with the distance being closed like that because sir Hand was not that close. So what
happens here that's relevant though, that's highly relevant. And the fact that they tried to get rid of the Gucci and all that is another story to follow. But you're not going to find it all in these files. Okay, you find the beginning of it, but not necessarily the end. So as we get ready to close down on this, I got one little question that I want you to run with. Whatever it is you feel like people need
to know about this stuff, and it's pretty simple. Is you know, have you talked to Stu Wexler, because I'll tell you something. As soon as I was thinking about, because I'm involved with the planning for Lancer this year, I was thinking about trying to get a representative to talk about RFK just for at least one presentation to kind of, you know, address the new files before I
even looked at them. This is what I was thinking, And I was kind of hoping that I could get all the Stu somehow, but I don't know what he's up to. So have you been in communication with Stu and you know, and also do you have any ideas about who currently might be an excellent presenter for this. I mean again, I still would love to see Stu in Dallas anyway, but either way, any ideas.
On that Stu is available.
He's working, actually he has a job, and it would be he can't deal with it because his job would not allow. He has a job working on MLK and the MLK CO cases that would not apply to RFK. So having him talk about RFK and talking about John Hunt's work, he definitely would be the person to do that. Gary Muir would also be the person since he'd dealt
with John's manuscript extensively. Both of those could speak to the case and to the to the evidence because this and all this file release stuff that's not going to come up, unfortunately, I very much doubt it unless Representative Luna decides to bring it up at the house level. It's not gonna it's not going to come up. And what the d n I is having scanned it at the National Archives, this is this is another story. This is the crime investigation, another story entirely.
So my impressions do would work? I think I'm sure go ahead you no, sorry.
My impression is that Tulca Gabbard is probably of the mindset of okay, now let's move on to MLK, you know, just checking boxes here.
So that would be my guess.
Yeah, but I would like to see that. I'll tell you what, if you can do me a favor, go ahead and let Stu and Gary know if you don't mind that, I would be more than interested in bringing them on board for Lancer, either on a video or in person. But I would prefer them in person obviously because I'm going to be there too, so I wouldn't mind hanging out with them. And you're still gonna run the Facebook thing for us though, right.
Yeah, that's what I plan.
Okay, great, I'm looking forward to it. Anyway, enough out of me and enough out of my asking a question. I'm asking him a favor on the air because I'm a jerk. But anyway, the thing is, you know, what else do you think people need to know about this? You know, give them the tie a bow on it, if you will, Larry go, Yeah.
I think the bow to be tied on it, and I agree with I think Gabert is just gonna consider it's done, and the President will consider it's done.
You know, I said, release stuff, They release stuff. Okay, move on.
But Aluna isn't a bit of a different a different position and a very simple question that she could ask. She could write a letter to CIA, n SA, FBI and literally say, did you independently conduct a national security investigation of any potential foreign influence or involvement with rfk's murder and literally you know, I did you or did you not? And if you did, I want to see those files, right, you know, if get them together, send them to me, send them to National We want to
go through those because that would be full transparency. Full transparency would involve whether or not the agencies did something at their level, I mean quite frankly, an intelligence community level that whatever. Again, talking about sources and methods, you know, nobody is going to want to disclose.
At the time, you know, what taps.
What informants, what sources they have on these radicals operating in the United States. They're not going to surface that unless somebody makes them. And since LAPD was definitely not asking for that sort of thing, the most they asked for, would you know, give us you guys have any criminal history on Sir Han's brothers. Okay, yeah, we'll give you that. But they didn't ask that question. So if nobody's asking, they're not going to volunteer it. But the only one could ask for that.
The only thing lap D would have been interested in is you have dirt on Sir hand or his family, basically so that we can make him look bad a trial. Because they were focused on ready prosecution.
Prosecution, absolutely so, and nothing else. They didn't really.
Basically, the DA let them have a possible conspiracy for about three or four weeks, and when they couldn't find the polka dot dress girl, it's like, give it up, guys, I got things to do here.
Yeah, it doesn't matter, close it up. He's the guy with the gun, he's the guy who got tackled. That's your man done. So yeah, that's what LAPD wanted because they were trying to close a case, and the case was for prosecution, not discovery. So there you go. Unless you had an obvious foreign influence that you know, jumped out right away, which they could have used against him too, what's you know, they're not going to spend all.
That extra Plutscher denied, you know, he said he didn't. How could there be a foreign influence? I don't remember anything, you know. Okay, he's not going to help you out right. And by the way, that just mudies the waters. You know, I've got him there with a literal smoking gun in his hand. What DA in the world is going to want anything more?
Right, You've got your man. There's nobody else on the scene with him. That's got a gun that you know of, so that's that right.
And you've got a criminologist who is willing to go to give you a scenario the accounts or all the gunshots and all the wounds with out without troubling itself about all the extra holes and the door panels and the ceilings.
You know, it's good.
I've got a criminologist that will give me what I want.
And he did. And I think, just to.
Close up, just to show you how awful the trial was and how awful things were. The DA, the defense attorney, did not challenge the DA's case in any respect. He accepted all the evidence. And when they got to this area of criminology and evidence where he might have challenged or at least raised a couple of issues, the criminologists literally said to the judge, Judge, I've got a flight to catch to go do something else.
Would it be okay if I just left.
And you know, don't stay around here any longer. And the judge said, oh yeah, I wouldn't want you to miss your plane, and he left. That's just how bad can it get?
There? You go? So, Larry, that's about the end of this. I mean, unless there's more material released. Really, even the I've seen online people say, oh, I never saw the autopsy materials before. Well, that's because you weren't really digging into it.
It wasn't just no Linn Magnum and you didn't go to the California Archives and you did it, It didn't mean they weren't there.
Right now, simply. And this is the point, this is where you can divide people in two categories, people that only did research on the internet and people that actually went and got physical files and went and physically investigated things. You can separate them right there, because here's the thing. You saw the autopsy materials if you went after it earlier,
but it wasn't made available online. It just wasn't. I think California Archives today might have u like that, maybe, but not for a long time, not for the majority of the time that we could have been looking into this. Okay.
I think even today you might indeed have to have Sir Han's family permission. Oh, there's a lawyer's permission, okay, because you got to remember, this is still a legal case that's being appealed.
Well that's true too, and it's.
Being appealed, and he's having having you know, hearings. Uh so, it's not like it's a it's a dead case, right What.
Was it a year or two ago? What parole was granted and then denied by the governor of California right.
Now exactly, Which it's a really interesting political question. But that's another story.
That's yet another story. But that's not what we were talking about tonight. We were talking about the files with author Larry Hancock. And again, if you go to Larry dash Hancock dot com you can definitely catch you up on it because I'm sure you have you already blogged about this or are you gonna no?
I do intend to do that sometime in the next few days. Basically addressing this question of you know, was there an investigation that we don't know about because it wasn't part of the criminal investigation and put up some of the links that you're putting up. It's just like these should have been obvious questions if you look at the reports LAPD was sending FBI about people reporting sir Han with Arabs and Arabs.
Talking about killing JFK.
Now, maybe that was all wrong, but at the time it should certainly have triggered a national security inquiry, absolutely.
And probably did, but we have yet to see it. Anyway, last question, and then we're going to close it completely out, and that is any any highlights or should I post a link to that because I think you had a discussion with Morley on his last his podcast last week. I think about this, didn't you.
Oh yeah, we talked briefly, not nearly in this depth though in all honesty. Basically we were talking about this question of you know, what are we going to see that? That is what's in what's in the files that we are being given versus what my dependent files that were most definitely not and and Jeff, Jeff picked up as you would expect he would, on the foreign intelligence aspects, and that's what we talked about.
Okay, fair enough, but I I you know me, I'm more about have we learned anything new? Is my whole point. It doesn't matter which direction it comes from, just are we making progress here? And this isn't progress in a in a you know, in a big way. It is progress in that people now have access to some things that used to be more difficult to access, I think, but outside of that not so much, not as much.
People may be shocked I guess that's the good thing, Chuck, to kind of wrap that part up. If people read some of the things that LAPD was sending the FBI, it's online now, we have had all this on Mary Ferrell for ages. You could read the reports about the Polka Dot dress girl and some but this still might simulate people to read this stuff and go, what you know, they let that go, So that's that's not a bad thing.
Access is not a bad thing, even though we've had that out there for years now, this is okay too, right, And.
If you go you know, if you go to Mary Ferrell dot org, it's under a featured Incomplete Justice series and you can read that that short. Larry called it a monograph, but I think it's a sixth part. Let me see sixth part.
But we also have an RFK document collection that's probably our RFK document collection on Mary Farrell is bigger than what's being released from NARA right now, because we sucked up things from many different sources for that, not just the FBI.
Right, And that's why Mary Ferrell dot Org is an incredible, you know resource and something that you know, I'm even hearing them mention it on TV shows people that I know you guys don't even know, are mentioning it and going, yeah, well I've seen this stuff on Mary Farrewell before and I went, yeah, of course you have. But anyway, good thing. And again Larrydashancock dot com keep track of his blog.
I recommend all of his books. The most recent one, once again, the Oswald Puzzle, I think is absolutely central reading. That's of course on the JFK assassination and that particular historical character. And guaranteed you've never seen a work like this. It is very much a readable book, but also a reference book in my mind. So great job by you and David boy Land and I always pronounce his name
differently every time I say it, But sorry, David. I hope to see you in Dallas as well, David, and I'll hear from you from Dallas anyway, Larry, maybe it'll be virtually, but we're gonna definitely see what kind of progress we can make this year in Dallas's well. So with all that having been said, I'll say this to you guys out there, Yes, go to Larry dash Hancock dot com. I recommend all of his books, even the free ones that are up on the internet. Those are
good too. Maybe I'll give you a couple other additional links, but guaranteed all the stuff I mentioned tonight will be linked in the show notes. So check it out and read further and think for yourselves. I am merely o'celly. All of you are.
Indeed revel calm Sage dot com, radio net.
Go ahead in the truth about the Jay assassination?
Right, well, what do you want to know?
Dy Baker's wild claim?
Oswald girlfriends you knew? Ruby and Barry answer weapons? Really, I imagine I could claim I have four wheels. It doesn't make me a wagon, but.
Okay, bildy and trying to prevent the murder of John Kennedy.
Come on, now, has it.
Real effort on the day of hay as fascination into reclaim?
Go to Amazon dot com, enter Youjudith Baker in her own words. You'll get the results for a digital copy of a book where Walt Brown utilizes her own words and the known evidence in the case to get at well a different perspective. Let's say you can get Judith Barry Baker in her own words from the author himself, signed if you request it by contacting doctor Brown at kias jfk at aol dot com. It's a fun book
and it actually dissects the many, many fantastic claims. Judith Ary Baker in her own words, thank you information.
In Denial The Secret Wars with Air Strikes and Tanks by Larry Hancock. Secret wars became a staple of US covert operations and are still happening today. Larry Hancock's book In Denial rips the cover off many of them, using new files. It exposes things about the Bay of Pigs that no one has ever written about before. It shows why it really failed and why the United States did not learn from It also shows why other countries today are doing secret operations with more success.
This is the book that puts what some want.
To deny into the light.
In Denial, Secret Wars with Air Strikes and Tanks Larryhncock. For more information, go to larryheyphen Handcock dot com. Pick up your copy of In Denial at Amazon dot com, in digital or physical.
Oh Chili dot Com.
Revelation through Conversation oh Chili dot com.
The War State by Michael Swanson explains the great national transformation that took place and put the Kennedy presidency in the context of The Times and reveals never before published information about the Cuban missile crisis. President Kennedy would not have been assassinated if he had been president two hundred years ago. His assassination took place in the context of the Cold War and the rise of the national security state. Before World War II, the United States was a continental republic.
In the decade that followed, it became an imperial superpower. Generals such as Curtis LeMay not only wanted to invade Cuba, but knew that there were short range missiles on the island aren't with nuclear warheads that they could not destroy because they were on mobile launchers. Their invasion could have led to a Third World War, and they wanted to go to war anyway. The War State by Michael Swanson reveals why, and we'll show you what President Kennedy was up against.
For more information The War State.
Dot com revelation through conversation, the.
Muse expressed by callers, schools there anyone else who happens to get on the air of Jelly dot com do not necessarily reflect the views of Jelly dot com or Jeff o'chilli and we are not responsible for any stupidity which might ensue.
Thank you, O Chili dot Com.
Revelation through consation. Here it all shell chilly dreams and truth true. You are the a fag. You are the
Yeah mm hm, the Ochella dot com radio networ