Sunday, April 28, 2013

Disrali Gears -Truth in Action

Disrali Gears - Truth in Action - The Legal Imperatives in the Case of the Murdered President

By William E. Kelly, Jr

The fiftieth anniversary of the assassination presents of President Kennedy is the last chance for truth and justice for JFK, as witnesses die, the public loses interest and the case slowly fades from a cold case homicide to an historical anomaly that may remain unsolved and justice never served.

One of the main characters in the JFK assassination drama, David Atlee Phillips, besides writing his autobiography “Nightwatch - 25 Years of Peculiar Service,” also wrote a spy thriller novel called “The Carlos File,” and “Money, Sex, Scandal,” a work of non-fiction on the true-crime Cullen Davis murder case.

As a  Fort Worth, Texas native, it was like a homecoming for Phillips to return to Texas to write about the trial, and he sought out the counsel of an old family friend who he refers to as “the Old Judge,” and quotes saying: 

“Knowing (who) is innocent or guilty would only resolve another murder case,” he quotes the judge as saying. “The thing that matters … is the integrity of the law, the conduct of the process. That’s what matters! Disraeli defined justice as truth in action, and I’m still trying to locate the truth in action…” 

-         David Atlee Phillips – Quoting “The Old Judge” in “Money, Sex, and Scandal – the Great Texas Murder Trials – A Compelling Account of the Sensational T. Cullen Davis Case.

“Knowing who is innocent or guilty would only resolve another murder case. The thing that matters is the integrity of the law, the conduct of the process....justice as truth in action.”

When it comes to the assassination of President Kennedy, the integrity of the law has been ignored, the conduct of the process violated, justice avoided and truth lost, and no one seems to want to rectify the situation.

As every official inquiry has shown, the government does not want to know the truth in the assassination, and therefore refuses to follow the constitutional requirements to resolve such a crime - dishonors the integrity of the law, and neglects to put the truth into action.

Rather than a third class crime that can be legally ignored with the words of a falsified official report, the murder of the president must be considered a terrorist act against the office of the presidency, and all of the powers available must be put to use to resolve the crime.

Today, the assassination of any public official would be met with a Joint Agency Task Force, a special prosecutor assigned to handle the case, a special grand jury convened to examine the evidence and witnesses and in Obama’s words, “the full weight of the government” should be pressed against those who committed this crime. 

If those individuals responsible for the actions of the government today refuse to do it, then it must be done by private individuals on the their own - and in this time and place, it can be.

Towards that end,.....

Tuesday, April 9, 2013

COP OUT on Political Assassinations

COP OUT – Texas DA Quits Prosecution of ABT in Fear

Now Who Isn’t Afraid To Go After President’s Killers?
By William E. Kelly, Jr.

The federal prosecutor who quit the racketeering case against the Aryan Brotherhood in Texas reflects the failures of all those in positions of authority who chose not to enforce the constitution and pursue those who kill policeman, prosecutors and presidents out of fear for their own careers and personal safety.  

According to news reports from Texas, “Two days after a Kaufman County District Attorney and his wife were gunned down in their home, a federal prosecutor withdrew from a racketeering case against the white supremacist group, reportedly citing security fears.” 1).

The Ayran Brotherhood Texas (ABT) unlike most criminals, don’t abide by the rules laid down by the organized crime syndicate’s Commission that made killing cops against the rules – the rules maintained among the criminal underground, mainly because killing a cop brings down more and unnecessary heat on all criminals and increases the determination of some law enforcement authorities to jail them all. 2).

Such political assassinations does achieve the goal all terrorists aspire of intimidating those legally responsible for upholding the law, instilling a fear of retaliation – ala the Gregory Peck film “Cape Fear,” in which a convict released from prison gets revenge against the family of the lawyer who put him behind bars.

In this case the federal district attorney placed his own personal safety and security above that of the Constitution he had sworn to uphold, which is understandable to some, and according to the Constitution, he is duly replaced by someone who is not deterred by threats to his personal safety or job security, or accepts those threats as part of the job.

For the same reasons, in the wake of the assassination of President Kennedy, those in a position of authority chose not to challenge the Warren Commission’s report’s false conclusion that the president was the victim of a deranged lone assassin, and follow the evidence that indicates the accused assassin was set up as a patsy and the President was murdered by a conspiracy of his enemies.

Why is the government so reluctant to do what it does in almost every other case of a suspicious death and conduct a grand jury inquriy? Why?

Their motives may be the same as the DA in Texas who resigned in fear of criminal retaliation, or they may just want to maintain job security and personal and family safety, especially from criminals who are powerful enough to kill a Dallas Policeman and the President of the United States and got away with it.

But we do know how they did it. They’ve managed to keep the case of the murdered president out of court by keeping the evidence and witnesses from a grand jury and by keeping the pubic debate going vigorously, for as long as the debate over the single-bullet theory, the Zapruder film’s authenticity and other such details continue, the Constitutional directive is conveniently ignored, the real killers go unpursued and there is no justice.

As E. Martin Schotz so eloquently puts it, “All of this brings us to the real cover-up over all these years, which was not ‘Oswald’ per se but rather ‘the debate over Oswald.’ In this process we see…the principles of intelligence agency assassination and cover-up as outlined by Isaac Don Levine, an associate of Allen Dulles, in his analysis of the assassination of Leon Trotsky by the Soviet Union’s NKVD. As Levine revealed, the classic manner by which an intelligence agency attempts to cover itself is by the use of confusion and mystery. The public is allowed to think anything it wants, but is not allowed to know, because the case is shrouded in supposed uncertainty and confusion. This was and is the big lie, that virtually no one is sure who really killed President Kennedy or why.”

“Of course over the years” Schotz continues, “the terms of the ‘debate’ have been shifted as the public has learned more and more about the case. Thus initially the phony debate was organized around the question of whether the Warren Report was accurate or not. In other words, the public was supposed to debate whether there was or wasn’t a conspiracy. As this position was gradually eroded and it became evident that more and more of the public did not believe in the lone assassin theory, another aspect of the debate was developed. The first fallback position of the government was to acknowledge that perhaps or more than likely there was a conspiracy, but if there was, the chief suspects were Fidel Castro, the KGB, or the Mafia. And while these theories were pushed, it was argued that the Warren Commission, acting in haste, had perhaps erred in missing an assassin here or there. But all this was framed as honest error.”

Shotz wrote, “In order to bolster the government’s credibility, the government always needed some writers who would argue that the Warren Report in fact had been true, that Oswald was the lone assassin after all. Thus the ‘debate’ was broadened and complicated, but the honor of the members of the Warren Commission was never conceded by the government. It is important to understand that for the purposes of the government it was not necessary that anyone actually be convinced that these defenders of the Warren Report were correct. It was only necessary that people believe that their writings were debatable, i.e., that there was some substance to their arguments that Oswald was the lone assassin. If that point could be debated, then the government was safe, because the criminal conspiracy of the government of the United States to shield the assassins after the fact was obscured.”

Thank you for setting us straight on that point Martin.

And so the debate continues and there is no Justice for JFK, at least there is none in the Department of Justice of the government of the United States.

The same fear exhibited by the resignation of the Texas DA is personified by the Justice Department officials who refuse to abide by the Constitution, follow the evidence where ever it leads and prosecute those suspected of having committed crimes related to the assassination of President Kennedy.

“As a general policy,” former Justice Department official Ben Civiletti testified before the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) in its last session, “the Department of Justice seldom turns down at least exploring, or reviewing a petition or reasonable request,…(and)…to some extent it becomes a matter of public will…but also a matter of judgment that falls within the duties of any particular department or agency of government…as to how far questions…can be explored to a useful or fruitful purpose.”

When John T. Orr, Jr.  Chief of the Anti-Trust Division’s Atlanta Office, received the Distinguish Service Award from the Attorney General he presented a paper that called attention to the fact that the bullet fragments from the floor of President Kennedy’s limo had not been tested for DNA, and he vigorously pushed for it and got it! (That deserves an exclamation point)

According to an official DOJ memo, “We met with Mr. Orr, while he was in Washington to receive a Distinguished Service Award from the Attorney General, and we have since reviewed the report which he prepared. It is our opinion that Mr. Orr’s observations justify the performance of certain modest preliminary investigative measures to test the foundation of his assassination conspiracy theory.”

“Jurisdiction. Federal criminal statutes covering the assassination of the President and assaults against federal officials generally were enacted after 1963. Accordingly, the criminal statutes of Texas represent the best, and probably only viable, mechanism for prosecution of any living person determined to have been involved in the assassination of President Kennedy. Despite the lack of apparent federal prosecutorial jurisdiction over the November 1963 assassination of President Kennedy, Congress and the Executive Branch have historically recognized Department of Justice investigative jurisdiction over the matter, concurrent with Texas investigative jurisdiction. The Federal Bureau of Investigation has been deemed the appropriate federal investigative agency for this matter, partly in recognition of the potential appearance of a conflict of interest which the Secret Service, as the protective force at the time of the assassination, would confront.”

“...It is our view that the Department has retained investigative jurisdiction over the assassination, though such investigation is restricted to activities which are not based upon the expectation of an eventual federal prosecution. Thus, the examination of evidence in federal possession is seemingly appropriate, while obtaining evidence by grand jury subpoena would likely be inappropriate. This position was adopted by the Division and endorsed b the Office of the Deputy Attorney General when we declined to seek a court order for exhumation of former Governor Connally’s body following allegations that bullet fragments remaining in his body from the incident would reveal, by weight or composition, the existence of additional bullets.” 

So the Department of Justice “retains investigative jurisdiction over the assassination, but restricts activities which are not based upon the expectation of an eventual prosecution,” and that’s even if they develop evidence of conspiracy or crimes related to the assassination.

And more than anything else, they think a grand jury, the one legal avenue the Constitution lays out to accept evidence in a murder "would be inappropriate."
1) NEW YORK DAILY NEWS  THURSDAY, APRIL 4, 2013  A federal prosecutor in Texas has quit a major case against the Aryan Brotherhood allegedly over fear for his life after the targeted slayings of two other prosecutors, the latest of which occurred on Saturday. [   PHILIP CAULFIELD 

2) See: 1929 Atlantic City Mob Convention.
3) Civilitti, Benjamin. HSCA Testimony

4) Schotz.  History Will Not Absolve  Orwellian Control, Public Denial,
and the Murder   of President Kennedy   by
E. Martin Schotz 

5) Orr Test Request of WCE-567

Saturday, April 6, 2013

Basis for Legal Action in the Assassination of President Kennedy


It is a myth that the assassination of President Kennedy will always remain an enduring mystery. Though justice may never be served, the murder of John F. Kenney is not an unsolvable crime, but rather a homicide that can be solved to a moral and legal certainty by traditional detective work.

To keep people questioning, to allow multiple theories to abound, to let time slip away and drag on before applying the basic and routine legal procedures for investigating and solving such a crime is only a reflection of the institutional unwillingness, resistance and refusal to challenge the powers that took over the government on November 22, 1963.

The feeling of citizen helplessness is reflected in the subtitle of the book by one of the living victims of the same criminals – James Tague, whose book is called The Truth Withheld – A Survivor’s Story – Why We Will Never Know the Truth About the Assassination. But those responsible for JFK’s murder win and go free only if they die before being exposed, and escape justice.

The reason for the Congressional law that established the “50 year rule” on the classification of all Congressional documents is that is the amount of time it is estimated for the people mentioned in the documents to be dead. Since it is not yet 50 years after the assassination of President Kennedy, some of those suspects are therefore still alive.

It is simply not true that the murder of JFK will forever remain a mystery, and we’ll never know the truth, since thanks to the JFK Act, we have most of the evidence, the documentary records and witness testimony in the public domain.

Despite the institutional unwillingness to make the effort to solve the crime, a strong regiment of independent researchers, determined investigators, honest witnesses and ordinary citizens have taken upon themselves to determine the truth and solve the crime, but justice has yet to take its course.

“We need not accept (the) view that mankind… doomed,” JFK said in his landmark June 10, 1963 ‘Peace Speech’ at American University. We need not accept, “that we are gripped by forces we cannot control…Our problems are manmade – therefore, they can be solved by man….No problem of human destiny is beyond human beings. Man’s reason and spirit have often solved the seemingly unsolvable – and we believe man can do it again.”

American political assassinations are murders that were committed by men, and therefore can be solved by men, if only the effort is made to do it. However belatedly, there is a new trend to at least attempt to resolve the civil rights and political murders of the 1960s, with the assassination of Medgar Evers, the murders of the Philadelphia, Mississippi Freedom Riders, the York, Pennsylvania race riot killings, the MLK assassination civil trial, and the passage of the Emmett Till Bill to establish a permanent department dedicated to such murders and assassinations all utilized the judicial system to solve crimes that were thought to be untouchable a decade ago. 

Whether the accused assassin Lee Harvey Oswald was the lone gunman, as the official report alleges, or was a patsy as he claimed, he was a former U.S. Marine who worked at a U2 base in Japan, was trained in the Russian language, defected to the USSR, returned with a Russian wife, reportedly took a shot at General Walker, participated in covert Cuban operations in New Orleans and Mexico City, and fits the covert operative profile that makes the assassination a covert intelligence operation. As former Senator Richard Schweikder (R. Pa.) put it, the case has “the fingerprints of intelligence,” and it must be properly investigated as such.

Just because covert operations are designed to conceal the actual perpetuators doesn’t mean that they can’t be exposed, identified and brought to justice, just as other, similar covert crimes have been exposed – Watergate, Iran-Contra, the assassination of the former Chilean ambassador to the U.S. in Washington, and more recent mob and terrorist conspiracies.

How can ordinary citizens force the hand of an entrenched judicial system? The system is changing, and a new guard are now at the ramparts, working on behalf of the taxpayers and citizens instead of the old political machine. There are examples of how other such political assassinations were solved through the system, and despite the system.

An examination of how the assassination of Medgar Evers and the other civil rights murders of the 1960s were resolved after decades presents a road map to follow, and one of the first stops on the way to justice is the grand jury.

“As a general policy,” former Justice Department official Ben Civiletti testified before the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) in its last session, “the Department of Justice seldom turns down at least exploring, or reviewing a petition or reasonable request,…(and)…to some extent it becomes a matter of public will…but also a matter of judgment that falls within the duties of any particular department or agency of government…as to how far questionscan be explored to a useful or fruitful purpose.”

Getting questions answered, getting questions answered honestly and under oath is one thing, getting the proper questions asked in a proper legal venue is another thing all together.

Besides determining the truth and seeking justice, it would be useful and fruitful to determine who killed President Kennedy, why they did it, and how they accomplished it, so such a thing can never happen again.

If the assassination of Medgar Evers was immediately pursued properly and justice resolved, President Kennedy would not have been killed in the same way, and if JFK’s assassination was properly resolved immediately, RFK and MLK would never have died the way the did. It is only because such murders are not properly and legally resolved that makes it viable to happen again.

Political assassination remain an effective tool for controlling public and political policy only because the true perpetuators of these crimes are permitted to remain hidden in the background, pulling the strings of the puppets and moving the pawns as they have for decades.

The assassination of President Kennedy has maintained its watershed mark as the single most significant political event of the past century because it remains unresolved.

Despite the tremendous amount of information that is now available, it remains an unresolved enigma and unsolved cold case homicide because there is no institutional willingness, motive or desire to simply solve it.

Unsolved cold cases, especially homicides, are usually reviewed every few years, sometimes by a new detective who looks over old evidence to see if there is anything that has been overlooked, or if there is any previously unknown evidence or witnesses, or recently developed scientific tools that could be used to help solve the crime.

There is no statute of limitations on murder, and under the rules of criminal procedure, homicide is given precedence over all other crimes, and once accumulated, the evidence in a homicide is presented to a grand jury by a prosecutor or district attorney, who represents the people. The People versus the Criminal Suspects.

Independent researchers, journalists and ordinary citizens can identify evidence, uncover conspiracies and witness crimes, but if there is no investigation, no case, no grand jury, no place to present the evidence, then there is no justice. As Mr. Civiletti explained to the HSCA, the DOJ “seldom turns down exploring at least, or reviewing a petition or reasonable request…”

Towards the development of a legal case, the grand jury Petition-Request is a citizen’s petition to a District Attorney responsible for prosecuting offenders to request a grand jury be convened to review the facts of a case and determine if there is enough evidence to indict someone for a crime.

A grand jury is asked to decide, not guilt or innocence, but whether there is enough evidence to have a person brought to trial for a crime. The grand jury only hears evidence of guilt, but does not render a verdict. Its decision is whether to indict, which is merely an accusation, or not to indict. Guilt or innocence is determined in a court of law; where the rules of evidence preclude hearsay evidence and allows the defense attorney the opportunity to cross-examine witnesses. Before a grand jury, hearsay is allowed, and witnesses must testify without counsel, as all attorneys, other than the prosecutor, are not permitted in the grand jury room.

If the grand jury determines there is enough evidence, they vote a “True Bill” and indict someone for a crime.

The DA can simply ignore such a citizen’s petition and request and not present the evidence to a grand jury, or even if a grand jury votes to indict, it is still up to the DA to issue the indictment and decide whether or not to proceed and take the matter to court.

The Grand Jury process, which stems from English Cannon law, has been refined by the United States Constitutional system as an extension of the prosecutor’s will, though historically the grand jury can investigate official corruption, review and develop evidence, attempt to answer questions, subpoena records and witnesses, order forensic autopsies and specialized tests and follow the evidence where ever it leads.

While grand juries composed of ordinary American citizens do not have the knowledge of the history and powers of a grand jury, and are often merely tools of the prosecutors, and do what the DA instructs them to do, sometimes a prosecutor will lose control of a grand jury. That happens when some grand jurors begin to ask questions and make requests of its own. Such a grand jury is called a “Runaway Grand Jury,” and often goes beyond the original intent of the prosecutors, such as the Rocky Mountain Flats Runaway Grand Jury. When the Colorado prosecutors refused to issued the indictments against major defense contractors for environmental contamination, the grand jury leaked its report to the press [See: Westword Rocky Mountain Flats ]

The previous reluctance of district attorneys to prosecute political assassinations, especially decades-old crimes, is being overcome by new, young and diversified blood in official positions of authority. Although those District Attorneys at the top of their profession know that investigating political assassinations is detrimental to furthering their careers, and witness what happened to New Orleans DA Jim Garrison, there is a younger generation of assistant prosecutors who look upon solving such major crimes as an achievement that will advance their future careers.

Former HSCA attorney, Dean Browning Webb, Esq., who specializes in RICO litigation, said that such indictments are possible and that, “I am especially interested in developing an approach to seek indictments of those who conspired to murder the President.”

“I believe that a prosecution is feasible,” says Webb, “especially when invoking the Pinkerton Doctrine,” which holds that “a person associated with a conspiracy culpable for any criminal act committed by a co-conspirator if the act is within the scope of the conspiracy and is a foreseeable result of the criminal scheme.” Agency theory holds that “all conspirators act as the agent or represent the other conspirators involved in the criminal scheme, and are liable for all criminal acts committed by the other conspirators.”

Another reason that District Attorneys are reluctant to investigate and prosecute political assassination, besides opposing the powerful cabal behind the murder, is the effort and manpower it takes to solve it, which takes away from the normal, day-to-day operations for which the District Attorney is also responsible.

This can be compensated by compiling the evidence accumulated by independent researchers and investigators over the past years and including the most significant facts, documents and witnesses (including their contacts), and detail the outstanding questions with the Petition-Request, thus laying out the case and reducing the work of the prosecutors. Such a convincing attachment would also help persuade a prosecutor to accept the case and take it to a grand jury.

It will only take one such JFK grand jury, and there are a number of potential jurisdictions, with Federal, State and County grand juries, each with many assistant district attorneys who work under the District Attorney, providing dozens of individuals in which to present the Petition Request. And only one needs to be convinced.

Establishing jurisdiction in any particular district will not be difficult. Although some will argue that it was not a federal crime to kill the president in 1963, it was a federal crime to conspire to kill a federal employee, whether it is a postman or a president, and if conspiracy can be demonstrated, a federal grand jury can handle it.

Dallas District Attorney Craig Watkins, when he assumed office, found a cache of assassination records from former D.A. Henry Wade. Watkins also worked with the Innocence Project, which used DNA and new evidence to free those who were wrongfully convicted. If those convicted were innocent, then someone else must have committed those crimes. Watkins should have one assistant DA or a small team of lawyer, detective, investigator, researcher to reinvestigate such unsolved cold cases, including the still unsolved murder of Dallas Policeman J.D. Tippit. While Lee Harvey Oswald, killed while in Dallas Police custody, is blamed for the crime, it is clear that Oswald was frequently a victim of mistaken identity, sometimes apparently intentional, and the case against him in the Tippit murder is shaky, and new witnesses have come forward who should be required to testify before a grand jury to see if there is evidence enough to indict some living suspect for the crime, or one related to it – perjury, tampering with evidence, destruction of evidence, obstruction of justice and conspiracy.

Besides the local Dallas county district jurisdiction, there are Texas State grand juries, as well as the North Texas Federal District court, which is located in Dallas. The reluctance of any Dallas or Texas official to investigate the assassination will probably make other jurisdictions more inviting.

Of the dozens of the potential jurisdictions, it will be easiest to convene a Special Federal Grand Jury in Washington D.C., where most of the original evidence is located at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA), and the body of the victim can be exhumed for a proper forensic autopsy using the latest scientific equipment and knowledge.

Although conspiracy and homicide are the crimes being investigated, once the grand jury begins to subpoena records and require the sworn testimony of witnesses, other crimes, such as perjury, destruction of evidence, obstruction of justice come into play, and help persuade witnesses to tell the truth.

One aspect of the grand jury proceedings is their secrecy, which prevents the testimony from being made public before a trial. If there are no indictments, and there isn’t a trial, the grand jury could issue a report explaining what it learned and the reasons behind its action or inaction.

Historically, traditionally and legally, according to the Constitution of the United States, the evidence in a homicide is presented to a grand jury, which is where the evidence in the murder of John F. Kennedy must go before there can be justice.

“That we live as a nation of laws, and are not a ‘Banana Republic,’” said Warren Commissioner John McCloy, “requires us as individuals and as a society, to purse truth and justice, ‘even if the heaven’s may fall.’”

It is not too late now, but soon, this case will slip slowly from an unsolved homicide to an historical mystery, unless we act now, and present the best evidence in a Petition-Request to convene a special JFK Grand Jury, and let the legal take its course, wherever it may go.

Grand Jury Petition.

Federal Grand Jury Petition (Request) to evaluate the existing evidence and investigate the homicide of John F. Kennedy, the attempted murder of John B. Connolly, the wounding of James Tague and the murders of J. D. Tippit and Lee Harvey Oswald in Dallas, Texas in Nov. 1963.

[Note: Although the assassination of the President was not a federal crime in 1963, it was a federal crime to conspire to kill a federal official in the line of duty. Therefore we are submitting this petition, with evidentiary exhibits of conspiracy to Special Federal Grand Juries in the Northern District of the State of Texas, in New Orleans Parish in Louisiana and Washington D.C. requesting that a Special Federal Grand Jury be convened especially for these particular cases, guided by a Assistant U.S. Attorney and assisted by a Task Force of independent researchers, professionals, investigators, law enforcement officers and judicial officials.]

To: Richard B. Roper, U.S. Attorney for Federal District of North Texas, Earle Cabell Federal Building, 1100 Commerce St., 3rd Floor, Dallas, Texas, 75242-1699

We citizens of the United States of America do hereby petition you Richard B. Roper [U.S. Attorney for Federal District of North Texas] to fulfill your obligations [Under U.S. Code : Title 18, Section 3331(Summoning and term) –3332 (Powers & Duties) & 3331 (Reports); Or appropriate statute for correct jurisdiction]; See: Documentary Exhibits #1 (a), (b), (c)] and carry out your duties to convene a grand jury of American citizens to “operate as an investigative agency…in cases of civic corruption or misconduct by public officers….to look into the criminal conduct prior to the arrest of any suspect … (since) … the inquisitorial power of the grand jury may operate to develop evidence against civic corruption, organized crime, or a broad array of criminal activity.”

This request is being submitted for the purposes of:

1) Completing previously impeded official investigations; by the Dallas Police, Texas State, Secret Service, FBI, the Warren Commission, Church Intelligence Committee, Rockefeller Commission, Pike Committee, House Select Committee on Assassinations, Assassinations Records Review Board; Justice Department of the United States;

2) To determine the disposition and establish the provenance of all relevant evidence, records and witnesses;

3) To answer all outstanding questions that can be reasonably answered by basic inquiry and independent investigation (and not by agencies or departments of the government that have been implicated in the crime);

4) To have qualified experts review the available acoustic, ballistic, medical and autopsy evidence and to order new, independent studies and tests you deem necessary, including proper forensic autopsies of victims;

5) To review the available documentary records and hard evidence, subpoena witnesses, take their testimony, determine what crimes have been committed and whether there is enough evidence to indict those individuals responsible for crimes related to the assassination, including but not limited to conspiracy, homicide, treason, destruction of evidence, obstruction of justice and perjury;

6) To conduct a thorough oversight review of how and why this case was permitted to go unresolved for so long and to determine the national security implications;

7) To help restore public confidence in government, the law and the legal and
judicial systems of this country; The public confidence in the government of the United States is lower now than ever before and began to decline, according to public opinion polls, in December, 1963, directly as a result of the assassination of the President, and has never been regained, and will not be regained until the remaining questions are properly answered.

We citizens of the United States hereby present you with this petition, along with the relevant discovered evidence, records and exhibits, and respectfully request that you carry out your responsibilities under the law to convene and present them to a grand jury.

When you are finished we ask you to publicly report [Under Sec. 3333] what steps you have taken, what you have discovered and whether you have determined if indictments should be brought against any individuals for crimes related to the assassination of John F. Kennedy, 35th President of the United States.

Attached: Evidence List; Exhibits; Living Material Witness List; Living Expert Witness List; Outstanding Questions; List of Related Crimes;

William E. Kelly, Jr. –

List of names of co-signers to petition.
To have your name added to petition email:

Petition on line:

Monday, April 1, 2013

Previous Legal Actions Taken in the Assassination of JFK

Previous Legal Actions Taken in the Assassination of President Kennedy

1-         JFK’s body removed from Parkland Hospital and Dallas before an autopsy. This was reportedly settled when the Dallas Coroner recognized the President’s physician Dr. Burkley as maintaining the chain of possession of the body if he stayed with it until the autopsy was done. (He didn’t, he left the body for the swearing in aboard AF1)

2-         Oswald charged with the murder of JD Tippit.

3-         Oswald charged with the murder of the President

4-         Jack Ruby Charged with the murder of Oswald

5-         There may have been a grand jury indictment of Ruby since Ruth S. of the Dallas Committee on the 50th reportedly served on this grand jury even though her family knew Ruby.

6-         Congressional Investigation threatened or began but was put off by:

7-         Executive Order establishing the Warren Commission, which was responsible fore issuing a report on the assassination.

8-         Warren Report Issued – Sept. 1964

9-         New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison convenes grand jury that indicts Clay Shaw.

10-         Clay Shaw trail in New Orleans ends in acquittal of Shaw

11-         Shaw indicted for perjury by Garrison, which was dismissed.

12-         Executive Order establishing the Rockefeller Commission, responsible for issuing a report on post-Watergate intelligence agency abuses.

13-         Congressional investigations sparked by the Watergate scandal included a number of significant congressional inquiries including

14-         Pike Committee - House of Representatives                     
15-        Senate Church Committee Senate Select Committee on Intelligence Activities (SSCIA)

16-         Schweiker-Hart Subcommittee of Church Intelligence Committee SSCIA

17-         House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) 1977-78

18-         Association of Former Intelligence Operatives (AFIO) David Atlee Phillips files libel suites against Liberty Lobby (Mark Lane), Washingtonian Magazine (Fonzi) and in UK against Anthony Summers. Not all cases carried out in court.

19-         JFK Act of 1992 established the temporary agency ARRB

20-         Assassination Records Review Board (ARRB) 1994-95

21-         Congressional Oversight Hearing on JFK Act extended life of ARRB by one year. 1996

(Let me know if I forgot anything - bkfjk3@yahoo.com0