From the Book Depository to the Texas Theater

March 18, 2025, Final Release of Information

On March 18, 2025, the National Archives released over 63,000 pages of documents related to President John F. Kennedy’s 1963 assassination, following an executive order by President Donald Trump. This release aimed to promote transparency and address longstanding public interest in the event.​ The newly available documents offer deeper insights into the activities of U.S. intelligence agencies during the Cold War era, particularly concerning covert operations against Cuba and surveillance of individuals like Lee Harvey Oswald.  They confirm suspected deeper intelligence connections, potential CIA involvement, and Oswald’s Soviet ties.

However, these documents do not substantiate theories suggesting a conspiracy beyond Oswald’s actions. ​ Notably, the release inadvertently exposed personal information, including Social Security numbers of former congressional staffers involved in past investigations, raising concerns about privacy breaches. ​ A summary of new information from these documents indicates that in 1961, nearly 47% of political officers in U.S. embassies abroad were actually CIA intelligence agents working undercover as diplomats.

I believe the relevant documents – those which were not consistent with a lone gunman theory that also implicated the Secret Service, the CIA and even the FBI, were long ago destroyed.

No Significant New Evidence

The documents released in 2025 largely reinforce existing historical understandings of the assassination, with no significant new evidence pointing to alternative explanations. The release is supposed to underscore the U.S. government’s commitment to transparency regarding this pivotal historical event as crafted shortly after the assassination. They do not.

These documents, which were intended to be released in 1992, include over 2,000 pages that shed new light on key aspects of the investigation, particularly concerning Lee Harvey Oswald and Jack Ruby’s connections to organized crime.  However, many of these pages are the same that were previously released but the redactions have been removed (including social security numbers of parties involved in the investigation).

Key points from the records include:

1. Lee Harvey Oswald’s Activities: New details about Oswald’s actions, particularly his trip to Mexico City and a cryptic phone call he made to the Soviet embassy, which may suggest foreign support or deeper conspiracies than previously understood.
2. Jack Ruby’s Connections: Information on Ruby’s interactions with figures from organized crime, which could imply that his killing of Oswald was influenced or orchestrated by other persons controlling events rather than being a spontaneous act of patriotic rage.
3. Edgar Hoover’s Involvement: A note from Hoover emphasizing the need to convince the public that Oswald was the sole perpetrator, suggesting possible attempts by high levels of government to control the narrative surrounding the assassination.
4. Connection between Oswald and Ruby: The released information suggests a prior meeting between Lee Harvey Oswald and Jack Ruby, which adds complexity to their subsequent interactions and Ruby’s motives for killing Oswald.
5. CIA Knowledge and Inaction: The files suggest that the CIA had more information than previously disclosed and may not have acted appropriately. This aligns with broader conspiracy theories suggesting government foreknowledge or involvement in significant events but failing to act.

FBI Wrongful Actions

Suppression of Evidence:

The FBI allegedly downplayed or ignored witness testimonies that contradicted the lone gunman theory.

Important leads, including those involving possible accomplices or other suspects, were not thoroughly pursued.

Manipulation of the Warren Commission:

The FBI heavily influenced the Warren Commission’s findings and discouraged exploration of conspiracy theories.

Reports suggest the FBI pressured witnesses and shaped their testimonies.

Failure to Monitor Oswald:

The FBI was aware of Lee Harvey Oswald’s defection to the Soviet Union and his return, but failed to fully monitor his activities prior to the assassination.

Alleged Destruction or Withholding of Evidence:

There are claims that key documents were destroyed or never turned over to investigators, including Oswald’s file.

CIA Wrongful Actions:

Withholding Information from Investigators:

The CIA did not fully disclose its surveillance of Oswald, especially his contacts with pro-Castro and anti-Castro groups.

It failed to inform the Warren Commission about Oswald’s visit to Mexico City, where he reportedly contacted the Soviet and Cuban embassies.

Potential Ties to Covert Operations:

Oswald may have been manipulated or monitored as part of CIA operations related to Cuba, which were not disclosed.

Some researchers allege that elements within the CIA may have used Oswald in counterintelligence or disinformation roles.

Obstruction of Later Investigations:

During the 1970s, the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) cited the CIA for withholding information and obstructing inquiry.

CIA officials misled or stonewalled congressional investigators and failed to provide access to internal records.

Involvement of CIA-Linked Individuals:

Some individuals with known CIA connections (e.g., David Atlee Phillips, E. Howard Hunt) were suspected of being linked to Oswald or to events surrounding the assassination.

Conclusion:
While neither agency has been officially held accountable for direct involvement in a conspiracy, their failures to share information, their manipulation of public narratives, and their lack of transparency have fueled widespread suspicion and undermined trust in the official account of JFK’s assassination.

Secret Service Cover-Up Allegations After JFK Assassination

Destruction of Evidence
Vehicle Cleaning:
Just hours after the assassination, the presidential limousine (SS-100-X) was cleaned, repaired, and altered, despite being a crime scene. Blood, brain matter, and other physical evidence were removed before a thorough forensic examination, effectively destroying crucial evidence.

Failure to Preserve the Car for Investigation:
Changes were made to the windshield, upholstery, and rear seat of the vehicle, which could have provided valuable ballistic and blood spatter evidence.

Witness Tampering & Coercion
Suppression of Testimony from Agents:
Several Secret Service agents who were present in Dallas later reported that they were instructed not to speak freely to the Warren Commission or the press. Some were even warned not to express opinions that contradicted the official narrative.

Altering Reports:
There is evidence suggesting that original field reports were edited or rewritten to fit the lone gunman theory. Some agents later contradicted their earlier statements, raising concerns about pressure or coercion.

Silencing of Clint Hill and Others:
Clint Hill, the agent who climbed onto the limo after the shots were fired, initially suggested that the fatal shot came from the front. This position changed in later statements, leading to allegations of coaching or suppression.

Destruction and Withholding of Documents
Missing Reports and Logs:
Certain logs, radio communications, and trip planning documents were either lost, destroyed, or never turned over to investigative bodies.

Unaccounted Explanation Advance Route Changes:
Questions remain about who approved the motorcade route through Dealey Plaza, and some planning documentation has never surfaced, fueling suspicions that crucial materials were intentionally withheld.

Failure to Follow Protocol
Breakdown in Protective Procedures:
JFK’s motorcade lacked standard precautions, such as motorcycle escorts in the proper formation and agents on the rear bumper. While this is often attributed to error or relaxed protocols at JFK’s request, some researchers argue it was a deliberate decision, and no internal accountability was ever enforced.

Conclusion
The Secret Service’s destruction of physical evidence, suppression of internal dissent, and withholding of key records have led to serious concerns about a cover-up—if not of the crime itself, then of gross negligence and procedural failure. These actions damaged public trust and remain a focal point in alternative theories of the JFK assassination.

Dallas Police Department and Dallas County Sheriff’s Office

The Dallas Police Department and the Dallas County Sheriff’s Office have been the subject of significant scrutiny in the aftermath of President John F. Kennedy’s assassination on November 22, 1963. Various investigators, historians, and critics of the official narrative have pointed to a number of questionable or potentially wrongful actions during the investigation. While not all actions were necessarily intentional or malicious, several key concerns have been raised:

Mishandling of Evidence

The rifle found at the Texas School Book Depository was reportedly misidentified at first as a Mauser, not a Mannlicher-Carcano, leading to early confusion.

The chain of custody for several key pieces of evidence, including the rifle, bullet fragments, and photographs, was not clearly maintained or documented.

Poor Scene Security

The crime scene at the Texas School Book Depository was not adequately secured, allowing many people to come and go, which may have contaminated evidence or made reconstruction difficult.

Dealey Plaza was not locked down, and spectators were seen picking up pieces of what may have been evidence.

Questionable Handling of Lee Harvey Oswald

Oswald was paraded before the press multiple times, which was not standard procedure and could be seen as prejudicial.

Most critically, Oswald was murdered by Jack Ruby inside Dallas Police headquarters during a prisoner transfer, in an event broadcast on live television. The security failure was monumental and has led to persistent theories that Oswald was silenced before he could speak.

Interference with Witnesses

Several witnesses reported being intimidated or discouraged from speaking about what they saw. Some alleged they were told not to mention certain details to the press or public.

Witness testimony that contradicted the official version—such as reports of gunshots from the grassy knoll—was often downplayed or omitted from formal reports.

Breakdown in Communication

There was a lack of coordination between the Dallas Police, the Sheriff’s Office, and federal agencies like the FBI and Secret Service.

Important evidence and reports were sometimes not shared in a timely manner, and internal rivalries and turf battles may have compromised the investigation.

Tampering and Destruction Allegations

There were unconfirmed claims that certain records were altered or destroyed, particularly handwritten notes and early statements from officers or witnesses.

For example, Sheriff Roger Craig, who said he saw Oswald fleeing the Depository and get into a car, was later marginalized and his claims dismissed.

Inadequate Protection of the President’s Route

Although not criminal, questions were raised about why the Secret Service accepted a route that had sharp turns and brought the motorcade near tall buildings—factors that contributed to vulnerability.

While some of these issues may stem from chaos, inexperience, or poor leadership under intense pressure, they contributed to public distrust and decades of speculation. The Warren Commission and later investigations criticized aspects of the Dallas Police Department’s handling, and some of these actions remain central to alternative theories regarding the assassination.

The “grassy knoll.”