Reclaiming History: The Assassination of President John F. Kennedy
This extraordinary and historic book required twenty years to research and write. The oft-challenged findings of the Warren Commission'¬ ;Lee Harvey Oswald, acting alone, shot and killed President John F. Kennedy'¬ ;are here confirmed beyond all doubt. But Reclaiming History does much more than that. In addition to providing a powerful and unprecedented narrative of events and a biography of the assassin, it confronts and destroys every one of the conspiracy theories that have grown up since the assassination, exposing their selective use of evidence, flawed logic, and outright deceptions. So thoroughly documented, so compellingly lucid in its conclusions, Reclaiming History is, in a sense, the investigation that completes the work of the Warren Commission. In it, Vincent Bugliosi, the nation's foremost prosecutor, takes on the most important murder in American history. At 1:00 p.m. on November 22, 1963, President John F. Kennedy was pronounced dead, the victim of a sniper attack during his motorcade through Dallas. That may be the only fact generally agreed upon in the vast literature spawned by the assassination. National polls reveal that an overwhelming majority of Americans (75%) believe that there was a high-level conspiracy behind Lee Harvey Oswald. Many even believe that Oswald was entirely innocent. In this continuously absorbing, powerful, ground-breaking book, Vincent Bugliosi shows how we have come to believe such lies about an event that changed the course of history. The brilliant prosecutor of Charles Manson and the man who forged an iron-clad case of circumstantial guilt around O. J. Simpson in his best-selling Outrage Bugliosi is perhaps the only man in America capable of writing the definitive book on the Kennedy assassination. This is an achievement that has for years seemed beyond reach. No one imagined that such a book would ever be written: a single volume that once and for all resolves, beyond any reasonable doubt, every lingering question as to what happened in Dallas and who was responsible. There have been hundreds of books about the assassination, but there has never been a book that covers the entire case, including addressing each and every conspiracy theory and the facts, or alleged facts, on which they are based. In this monumental work, the author has raised scholarship on the assassination to a new and final level, one that far surpasses all other books on the subject. It adds resonance, depth, and closure to the admirable work of the Warren Commission. Reclaiming History is a narrative compendium of fact, forensic evidence, reexamination of key witnesses, and common sense. Every detail and nuance is accounted for, every conspiracy theory revealed as a fraud on the American public. Bugliosi's irresistible logic, command of the evidence, and ability to draw startling inferences shed fresh light on this American nightmare. At last it all makes sense.
What people are saying - Write a review
Reclaiming history: the assassination of President John F. KennedyUser Review - Not Available - Book Verdict
In this massive, compulsively readable legal study of JFK's assassination, Bugliosi (former L.A. county deputy district attorney;Helter Skelter: The True Story of the Manson Murders ) claims that ... Read full review
It is the best of books; it is the worst of books. Former Los Angeles District Attorney Vincent Bugliosi takes on one of the biggest mysteries in American history, the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, and, with explosive bloviating, fuming, and fiery prosecutorial zeal, attempts to prove that JFK assassination conspiracy theories are all just a figment of our paranoid imaginations.
This perhaps the silliest book of all time written from the point of view of a conspiracy debunker (even if I’ll grant that the silliest books written about the JFK assassination have always been from the point of view of the conspiracy theorists). It is a concerted and confident leap into a giant manure pile that we cannot look upon with the dignity it asks, even begs of us.
Bugliosi believes Lee Harvey Oswald was a lone assassin. He repeatedly
scolds anyone who has ever entertained that any of myriad conspiracy theories out there is worth more than something to line your canary cage with.
He attempts to analyze the consistent folly of conspiracy theorists in the following way: 1) they find some anomaly in the case; 2) they spin a theory using the most creative forces of their imagination; and 3) they cherry-pick supporting evidence out of the wide body of evidence of the case, irresponsibly omitting details disadvantageous to their theory. Then again, the old tale goes that when you point your finger at someone, there are three fingers pointing back at you. In this way, Bugliosi unintentionally adapts what he perceives to be the disingenuous guile of conspiracy theorists and proceeds to fight fire with fire.
In all fairness, anyone cocksure of himself in explaining the JFK assassination is going to fall into the same trap Bugliosi falls into. No one has ever successfully written the type of book that Bugliosi envisions.
But wait a minute. Bugliosi is a prosecutor. The granddaddy of conspiracy theorists, Mark Lane, has always described himself as a defense attorney for Lee Harvey Oswald—with the blessings of Oswald’s late mother, Marguerite. Why not put the two great legal minds together—Bugliosi’s and Lane’s—and come up with an adversarial approach to justice, even if it is outside the hallowed halls of a court of law and into the arena of pulpy conspiracy theory books? In other words, if we let Bugliosi and Lane duke it out, we might come to some useful conclusions.
Actually Bugliosi did just that in 1986 with a defense attorney named Gerry Spence in a mock televised trial sponsored by London Weekend Television. Bugliosi reminds us that he won the case: a 12-person jury unanimously found Lee Harvey Oswald “guilty.” We assume this mock verdict means that the jury thought Oswald was involved in the killing, but the jury did not rule out a conspiracy, as Bugliosi so vehemently does.
Here’s the problem: Bugliosi does not present himself or his arguments in the context of a prosecutor, rather in the context of an historian, if not even a scientist or advanced logician. He claims that people who doubt the substantial conclusions of the Warren Commission are not living in the “real world” where bullets are fired from specific guns and specific people pull the triggers of these specific guns from specific places. Such theater may the gist of a court of law, but Bugliosi suffers from the severe delusion that courts of law and their theater do not exist outside of courts of law. The real world may be the predictalbe but confusing world of cause and effect, but it is also the world of eyewitnesses that disagree as to what they saw, while sometimes change their stories over the years, and of the general public trying to piece the confusion all together for themselves—without the Jedi mind tricks, thank you