On the Trail of the RFK Murder

Investigative reporter and author Dan Moldea began 27 years ago believing two gunmen were involved in RFK’s murder but his pursuit of the case led him to a different conclusion, which we republish here in the ongoing debate on the killing. 

By Dan Moldea

Late one night in January 1991, I got a call informing me that a close friend, researcher Greg Stone, had committed suicide. Because I had talked to Stone, who seemed fine, earlier that day, the news seemed impossible to believe. Five days later, after I returned home from his funeral, I received a signed note from Stone in the mail that simply said, “Sorry about this, Dan. Stay a survivor.”

Stone and I had met during the summer of 1985 while I was living in Los Angeles, working on a book. A long-time aide to Allard Lowenstein, the former New York congressman who had been murdered in 1980, Stone had been trying to reopen the investigation of the murder of Sen. Robert F. Kennedy. Because of my background as an organized crime investigator, Stone wanted me to get involved in the case.

Kennedy had been shot and mortally wounded in the early morning of June 5, 1968, in the Ambassador Hotel in Los Angeles. Just moments earlier, the 42-year-old Kennedy had left a celebration in the wake of winning the California Democratic presidential primary. No fewer than 77 people were crowded in the narrow kitchen pantry when 24-year-old Palestinian immigrant Sirhan Bishara Sirhan, using an eight-shot .22 caliber revolver, opened fire. Kennedy was shot three times and died early the following day. Five other people were each shot once but all survived.

At our 1985 meeting, Stone explained that evidence of a possible second gunman was based, in part, on an official FBI report that indicated more shots had been fired than Sirhan’s gun could hold.

In addition, Kennedy’s wounds, according to a thorough autopsy, came from shots fired at point-blank range — six inches or less. However, not a single eyewitness saw the muzzle of the shooter’s gun get anywhere near that close.

Also, a court-appointed firearms panel that had refired the murder weapon seven years after the shooting could not match the intact bullets removed from Kennedy and two of the other victims with Sirhan’s gun.

And, Stone told me, Thane Eugene Cesar, a security guard with extreme right-wing views, who hated Kennedy, was standing next to the senator at the moment of the shooting and had a gun in his hand and powder burns on his face. When I began to read the limited amount of available documents concerning the assassination, I was shocked by what I saw. Without question, the case I had always assumed was open-and-shut had been badly mishandled by the Los Angeles Police Department, particularly with regard to crime scene evidence. It was clear that law enforcement officials had misrepresented key facts in the case, destroyed material evidence and obstructed independent attempts to resolve the critical issues surrounding the case.

Seemed Unlikely Sirhan Acted Alone

Helping to perpetuate doubts about the official investigation was the fact that the LAPD’s case file had remained hidden. Promises to release these 50,000 documents began as early as the end of the Sirhan trial when District Attorney Evelle Younger said, “The Los Angeles Police Department has agreed without reservation that the interests of the public and law enforcement are best served by full disclosure of the results of the comprehensive investigation which they have conducted.”

But full disclosure had not come. And evidence that had not been tampered with made it seem unlikely that Sirhan was the only person to fire a gun that night. Stone prompted me to write an investigative piece about the unanswered crime scene questions. My first effort appeared in the June 1987 issue of Regardie’s.

In addition to examining the inconsistencies in the official version of the killing, the story also contained my exclusive interview with security guard Gene Cesar.

That same June, the city of Los Angeles reversed the LAPD’s position, ordering the immediate release of the entire Robert Kennedy murder case file. And on April 19, 1988, with a minimum of censorship, the RFK case file was made public in a microfilm edition. However, on the day of the release, California state archivist John Burns announced that 2,410 photographs — with subjects unknown — had been inexplicably burned by the LAPD on August 21, 1968, just three months after the murder and nearly eight months before the conclusion of Sirhan’s trial.

Also missing from the files were numerous items from the crime scene, as well as the taped statements of 51 key witnesses, including 29 with accounts that related directly or indirectly to questions of conspiracy.

Davis: Like giving porn to addicts.

In the midst of widespread criticism, the LAPD remained unrepentant and even defiant. Regarding the release of the files, former LAPD chief of police Ed Davis told UPI, “It’s like opening up a collection of pornography to a bunch of sex-hungry pornography addicts. They’re going to fondle the gun, touch the wood, stick their fingers in the bullet holes, and read all the reports. But there isn’t going to be much there.”

Indeed, there wasn’t. But although it was immediately evident that the LAPD files in the case were incomplete and that valuable evidence and records had been destroyed, Greg Stone convinced me that there was enough new information to draw me back into the investigation.

My first stop in Los Angeles was Parker Center, headquarters for the LAPD. I had earlier given my Regardie’sarticle to three homicide detectives, whom I had used as sources for my previous work, and asked for their opinion of my story. In essence, these officers criticized the article because I had relied too heavily on the testimony of eyewitnesses who lacked the experience necessary to make their stories credible.

114 LAPD Cops Interviewed

Instead, I started to conduct a series of interviews over the next several months with the people whose training and experience would be beyond dispute: the officials, detectives and patrolmen in the LAPD, the Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department, the Los Angeles Fire Department and the FBI who performed their routine duties at the crime scene after the shooting.

Of the 187 principal law enforcement officials, detectives and officers identified in LAPD records as having been involved in the 1968 Kennedy crime scene investigation, I was able through my contacts to locate or learn the fate of 158 of them. A total of 114 agreed to be interviewed and speak on the record.

Virtually none of these law enforcement professionals had ever been interviewed about the Kennedy case. During our conversations, most of them were honest and unguarded in their responses to two basic questions: “What did you do?” and “What did you see?” Many officers had kept their field officer’s notebooks, and some even referred to their notes during my interviews.

Several LAPD and L.A. Sheriff’s Department officers told me that during the 105 minutes after the shooting, from 12:15 a.m. to 2 a.m., when the LAPD’s crime lab took control of the area, they saw or heard about evidence of what they believed to be bullet holes in the walls and door frames in Sirhan’s line of fire. Other LAPD officials and officers told me that they believed that they had also seen bullet holes at the same location.

With its own crime scene report, the FBI had essentially made a case that at least two guns had been fired the night of the murder. And now officers and officials of the LAPD were corroborating the FBI’s findings.

The preliminary results of this investigation were contained in an Outlook article that appeared [inThe Washington Post in 1990]. In the article, I concluded: “{I}t would be a mistake to rush to quick or simplistic judgments concerning the origin of additional assassination gunshots. The importance and complexity of this matter demand that it be examined impartially by a reconstituted official investigation.”

On the basis of the new evidence, Greg Stone, just two months before he killed himself, sent a letter to Ira Reiner, the new Los Angeles County district attorney, requesting a grand jury investigation into the police investigation of Kennedy’s death.

Cesar is Polygraphed

Because I am an independent journalist, personal and professional restrictions forced me to fade in and out of the case, depending on how much time and money I could afford to spend satisfying my curiosity: Do we really know the truth about Robert Kennedy’s murder? It was not until I received the backing of a major publisher that I could do what was necessary to resolve my own questions about this case.

I continued to study the case file; I continued my interviews with law enforcement officials. At last, I arranged for Cesar to be polygraphed. He passed — the first indication that my “plot” was taking an unexpected turn. It became clear to me that an innocent man had been wrongly accused of involvement in murder for over 25 years. I also began to learn how the physical evidence might have been misunderstood; for example, the “bullet holes” in the door frame could have been mislabeled by a sheriff’s deputy who lacked expertise in ballistics and firearms identification.

Cesar on the night of the murder.

I had not abandoned the idea of a second gunman, but realized that Sirhan himself had become my last hope for conclusive proof of a second gunman or other co-conspirators. I guess I had known all along, whether I fully realized it or not, that this entire case would begin and end with him. The six-hour interview between us in September 1993 went well, as did my second four-hour interview two weeks later. In each session, I recounted my work in the Kennedy murder case — which he was already well aware of — that indicated that two guns had been fired at the crime scene. For the most part, I had been lobbing softball questions, allowing him to smack them over the fence.

My third interview with Sirhan occurred on June 5, 1994. Assuming that this would be my last formal interview with Sirhan, I decided to go over some of the same ground we had covered during the previous two interviews and then to go for his throat to see how he would react.

Deep into the interview, I again took Sirhan through his day on June 4, 1968.

He recalled leaving a practice gun range during the late afternoon, wandering through Pasadena, searching for a party in downtown Los Angeles, arriving at the Ambassador and drinking Tom Collinses at a party for Republican senatorial candidate Max Rafferty; then, after going back to his car, returning to the Ambassador for coffee.

Blacked Out

“At that point,” Sirhan told me. “I blacked out.”

Sirhan has always maintained that he had been drunk on the night of the shooting and does not remember either firing his weapon or even seeing Kennedy.

I asked him, “You don’t remember anything about the shooting?”

“No, nothing,” Sirhan replied. “It just isn’t in my mind. I just remember being choked {by those at the crime scene trying to subdue him}.”

“Do you think the contributing factor to your memory loss was the fact that you had drunk too much that night?”

“I didn’t know anything about beers or liquors. I was a square. The Tom Collins tasted just like lemonade. I was tired. It was late. I was an early-to-rise, early-to-bed person. I was out of my element. Whether I was drunk, programmed or out-maneuvered, what has happened has happened. They never gave me a breathalyzer, and they only drew my blood the next day \. \. \. .”

“Then, once again, why don’t you just accept responsibility for this crime?”

“If I was to accept responsibility for this crime, it would be a hell of a burden to live with — having taken a human life without knowing it.”

“Then you are saying that you are willing to take responsibility, but you have no memory of committing the crime?”

“It’s not in my mind, but I’m not denying it. I must have been there, but I can’t reconstruct it mentally. I mean no disrespect here, but I empathize with Senator Ted Kennedy in the Chappaquiddick incident. He was supposedly under the influence of alcohol and couldn’t remember what he had done. When he finally did realize what had happened, someone was dead.”

“Why did you take credit for the murder at your trial?”

“{Sirhan’s defense lawyer} Grant Cooper conned me to say that I killed Robert Kennedy. I went along with him because he had my life in his hands. I was duped into believing that he had my best interests in mind.”

“You were willing to go to the gas chamber for a crime you didn’t remember committing?”

“I did a lot of self-exploration while I was on death row. It changed my whole vision of the world. I was trying to justify that I was going to the gas chamber. I wanted to search myself to find the truth, but I could never figure it out. I had nothing to lose.”

“Did you ever examine whether you had acted with premeditation?”

“When I got to death row, I started reading the law about diminished capacity and the requirements for premeditation. There was no way that I could have summoned the prerequisite for first-degree murder. That was no part of me. They said that I didn’t understand the magnitude of what I had done. They’re right. I don’t truly appreciate it, because I have no awareness of having aimed the gun at Bobby Kennedy.”

Confessed to Seek Parole

“Why did you admit to the murder before the parole board?”

“They want the prisoner to admit his guilt and take responsibility for the crime. They want us to confess and to express remorse, which is what I have done. In fact, I have been told that I won’t be paroled because of the Kennedys.”

“So, once again, you were willing to take credit for the crime without remembering that you had committed it?”

Sirhan then seemingly became overwrought, exclaiming, “It’s so damn painful! I want to expunge all of this from my mind!”

As if I had been punched with a straight right hand, I suddenly thought to myself: This guy has been lying to me all along.

“I am not a court of law,” I told Sirhan. “I am not a parole board. I’m a reporter who doesn’t want to be wrong. I want to know, Sirhan: Did you commit this crime?”

Sirhan fired right back, “I would not want to take the blame for this crime as long as there is exculpatory evidence that I didn’t do the crime. The jury was never given the opportunity to pass judgment on the evidence discovered since the trial, as well as the inconsistencies of the firearms evidence {the bullet evidence} at the trial. In view of this, no, I didn’t get a fair trial.” With that reply, I finally began to understand Sirhan’s strategy: As long as people like me continued to put forth supposed new evidence, he still had a chance to experience freedom. And I also understood why he was talking to me in the first place. More than any other person in recent years, I had been keeping this case alive.

At that moment of my stark realization in that prison visitation room, I barked at Sirhan, “You don’t remember writing in your notebooks in which you articulated your determination to kill Robert Kennedy and why — That’s motive! You don’t remember getting your gun when you returned to your car from the Rafferty party — That’s means! You don’t remember having been in the pantry, getting close to Kennedy, and firing your gun — That’s opportunity! “Every time you have a memory lapse, it goes to motive, means or opportunity!”

In response, Sirhan sat quietly, saying nothing but looking puzzled, probably wondering where the hell I was going with all of this. But I could tell that he wasn’t concerned. He knew, probably more than anyone else, that I had bought into the second gun theory and made a good case of it. “What’s Moldea going to do now that he’s in so deep?” Sirhan must have been thinking.

Knowing how close Sirhan was to his ailing mother, I asked him, “Sirhan, when your mother dies, God forbid, are you going to remember everything and come clean?”

Furious with me for having brought his mother into this, Sirhan exclaimed, raising his voice with each syllable, “Change my story? Mr. Moldea, you’re a {expletive}! Mr. Moldea, you’re a {expletive expletive}!”

I smiled at Sirhan and started jabbing my finger in his face. “Sirhan, it’s Dan, you’re a {expletive}. Dan, you’re a {expletive expletive}.’ ” As I started to laugh out loud, Sirhan paused for a moment and started laughing, too, breaking a very tense moment.

But he wasn’t laughing for the same reason I was. I had just wanted Sirhan to remember the first name of his last hope. Dan Moldea’s most recent book, “The Killing of Robert F. Kennedy: An Investigation of Motive, Means and Opportunity,” [was published in June 1995] by Norton.

This article originally appeared in The Washington Post on June 4, 1995 and has been reprinted here with the permission of the author.

Learn more in this video interview Moldea gave to the LA NBC affiliate KNBC on June 2, 1995 in which Moldea speaks of Sirhan’s ties to the mob.

Dan Moldea is an investigative journalist and the author of nine books, mostly dealing with organized crime as well as one on the RFK assassination, The Killing of Robert F. Kennedy: An Investigation of Motive, Means, and Opportunity (1995 and 2018 50th anniversary re-release). His other titles include The Hoffa Wars: Teamsters, Rebels, Politicians, and the Mob (1978); Dark Victory: Ronald Reagan, MCA, and the Mob (1986); Interference: How Organized Crime Influences Professional Football (1989); A Washington Tragedy: How the Suicide of Vincent Foster Ignited a Political Firestorm (1998) and his latest book, Hollywood Confidential: A True Story of Wiretapping, Friendship, and Betrayal (2018).

36 comments for “On the Trail of the RFK Murder

  1. Bob In Portland
    June 10, 2018 at 12:06

    Moldea’s work over the years has been a mixed bag, like many of the other investigative reporters left in the US. His book about the murders in Brentwood, written with the two lead detectives in the OJ Simpson murder case, was particularly shoddy and self-serving for the detectives, who broke protocol and very well seem to have planted evidence against Simpson. A look at the number of players who have been part of past intelligence show trials should have had real investigative reporters sniffing a little more deeply.

    I would also point out that Allard Lowenstein was a CIA asset. As a former military intelligence agent Lowenstein himself admitted that he had done work for the Agency prior to 1962, when released official documents suggest that he was applying for a more regular status with the agency. Considering reporting about how deeply the CIA had infiltrated the Eugene McCarthy campaign, and Lowenstein having been McCarthy’s spokesperson during the campaign, it should suggest that McCarthy himself, or his campaign, was used by the CIA in an attempt to block Robert Kennedy’s nomination.

    (Related to this point, Hillary Rodham went from being a Goldwater Girl to abruptly joining McCarthy’s campaign, then flipping back by attending the Republican convention that nominated Nixon in 1968 and spending the summer as an intern for the Republican congressional delegation and writing a speech about the Vietnam War for Melvin Laird, who upon Nixon’s election became his Secretary of Defense. That should go a long way to explain how the Clintons managed to move the Democratic Party to the right, and may explain why some fifty Democratic candidates this election cycle have deep connections to the CIA, military intelligence et al.)

    • Skip Scott
      June 11, 2018 at 06:23

      Great post Bob. The Democratic party has been ruined by the Clintons. It is beyond redeemable. I am hopeful that after the 2016 fiasco that progressives come to realize this and abandon the democratic party in droves for the Green Party in 2020. With the right candidate, we could finally destroy the utterly corrupted duopoly and start rebuilding our country and waging peace with the rest of the world.

  2. STAN
    June 10, 2018 at 09:01

    I wonder if Dan has seen the original version of “The Manchurian Candidate? Sirhan exhibited many of the symptoms of a mind control subject, in which case interviewing him would prove fruitless..

  3. Paul G.
    June 9, 2018 at 20:22

    Uh, am I missing something here? He interviewed Gene Cesar who “passed’ the polygraph; but what did Mr Cesar say. Considering there were bullet holes in Bobby’s back (Cesar???) that is pretty important.
    All he proves is that Sirhan is a pretty cagey character; at least after the possibility of coming down from mind control drugs.

  4. Gerry L Forbes
    June 7, 2018 at 20:32

    Moldea’s next job should be a biography of Lee Hamilton, the go to Democrat for cover-ups. Highlights of Hamilton’s career as COO of the Foggy Bottom Sanitation Department include:

    Chairman, House Select Committee to Investigate Covert Arms Transactions with Iran

    Chairman, House October Surprise Task Force

    Vice-Chairman, 9/11 Commission.

    Perhaps he can clarify whether Mr. Hamilton was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom or the Medal of Presidential Freedom.

  5. June 7, 2018 at 20:16

    Dr. Cyril Wecht says “1 to 1.1/2” inches…i n c h e s – behind the right ear for the kill shot.
    Where in all the recorded evidence does Sirhan Sirhan get to within 1 and 1.1/2 inches of RFK’s right ear ?

  6. Verda
    June 6, 2018 at 20:31

    I love that CN commenters are so good at detecting BS. Warms my heart.

  7. Daniel
    June 6, 2018 at 17:38

    So, Moldea’s dear friend, Greg Stone is “suicided” just hours after Modea spoke with him, so he knew Stone was not suicidal.

    Then, Moldea goes to “interview” Sirhan and failing to get Sirhan to “confess,” actually taunts him about Sirhan’s mother’s death, and yells at him. And somehow, he thinks that’s a valid journalistic technique worthy of bragging about.

    He provides no refutation of any of the evidence showing Sirhan could not possibly have shot RFK (though he did shoot some of the people there). But, Moldea has made it publicly clear that he will no longer question the Official Story.

    • JWalters
      June 7, 2018 at 01:08

      Moldea could just as easily be saving his skin, or his family, rather than actually changing his mind.

  8. Garrett Zwar
    June 6, 2018 at 15:18

    Dan Moldea lacks the critical lens necessary to analyze the conspiracy angle to any sort of satisfaction. Any article with his name attached to it on the topic you can assume will be status quo. Thanks for trying however.

  9. Ol' Hippy
    June 6, 2018 at 11:53

    Without concrete evidence and not yet, reading a volume I have on his murder, I still believe the CIA had their greasy hands all over this one.

  10. GM
    June 6, 2018 at 11:49

    Commencing immediately, one hopes.

  11. GM
    June 6, 2018 at 11:48

    Notably no questions for Mr. Sirhan about the two young people (woman in the polka dot dress) fleeing the scene shouting “we killed Kennedy”, as reported by several witnesses.

  12. GM
    June 6, 2018 at 11:45

    It has long been established that the polygraph is legally unscientific. Just sayin’

    • vinnieoh
      June 6, 2018 at 16:15

      You’re absolutely correct. When the author blithely throws out that the guy passed a “lie detector” test, I quit reading. Those devices do not detect lies, they measure several physiological responses, and the use of same has been very recently called into question. I’d have to do quite a bit of digging, but Skeptical Inquirer (magazine of CFI organization) within the last two years reported on the (mis)use of lie detectors.

      I took a lie detector test once. Was applying for a temporary holiday job at a big box store – to stock shelves! Just out of the service and the culture of blind obedience, this requirement for a less than minimum wage temporary job really pissed me off. I had taught myself some very basic and effective relaxation techniques (originally to stop myself from grinding my jaw/teeth) and decided to use them during that test. The graphs of those measures produced by my body for both the baseline phase (preliminary) and the interrogation phase were identical and represented nothing more than a human body at rest. The “operator” was furious and began spouting something about putting my records in an office in NYC for eternity. ??????

      Admittedly, I had no crime or crimes to hide or lie about, but the whole experience was very instructive.

  13. Deniz
    June 6, 2018 at 10:45

    2400 photographs at the LAPD inexplicably burned, many loose ends, yet our plucky reporter manages to outsmart Sirhan through his razor sharp instincts.


    Mr. Modela is bought and paid for.

    Which story is harder to believe?

    • Ken
      June 6, 2018 at 13:17

      Precisely, it was evident where the author was going with this when at the outset he gave the example of his friend’s suicide – things might look like one thing while actually being another.
      It is also more than evident that Sirhan is playing the only card he has for parole – formally accepting culpability as the board’s requisite for the only chance he could have for freedp,. That this obvious fact should strike the author as lying after so much time interviewing Sirhan is beyond ridiculous as is the fact that he interprets Sirhan’s puzzlement and the realization that the author wasn’t believing him as some fear that he was being “discovered”.
      The author clearly has an agenda and it ain’t truth.

  14. Marc
    June 6, 2018 at 08:58

    So — What happened to the best evidence about more bullets? Quoting Moldea –“bullet holes in the door frame could have been mislabeled by a sheriff’s deputy who lacked expertise in ballistics and firearms identification”. The holes are hard to classify, but did these holes contain a slug? Am I remembering correctly that the wood was removed from the scene — another example of destroying evidence?
    Moldea was aware of numerous apparent inconsistencies, and then in s stroke of “insight” decides that he can recognize a liar. This article is junk.

  15. Skip Scott
    June 6, 2018 at 07:01

    Don’t let the door hit you in the tush on the way out.

    • Ol' Hippy
      June 6, 2018 at 11:49

      I concur. We are looking for the truth and this reprint of a 20+ year article doesn’t tell me anything other than Sirhan is a liar. There bare too many inconsistencies in the “official” reports, this one included.

  16. Free Society
    June 5, 2018 at 22:31

    Thane Eugene Cesar was the murderer of RFK (although there were multiple shooters), and it is so obvious. He was the one in the perfect position standing right next to RFK (while leading him around by the arm into the kitchen ambush) to shoot him at point-blank range right behind the ear. It’s long past the time to extradite and arrest this murderer and stop the whole charade of : “we don’t know what happened” garbage. Cesar was hovering right over RFK with his Gun out (and having fired it). He is the guy who got RFK and assured the ambush succeeded.

    • Skip Scott
      June 6, 2018 at 07:12

      Where would Cesar need to be extradited from?

      • Joe Tedesky
        June 6, 2018 at 07:21

        Skip this one I would except a verdict being handed down in absentia, just to settle the RFK assassination once and for all. Joe

      • Bob In Portland
        June 10, 2018 at 11:38

        If I recall correctly, several years after the assassination he left the US for the Philippines. I have no idea where he is now. He may have to be extradicted from Hell now.

    • Brad Owen
      June 6, 2018 at 11:52

      I’m much more interested in who ordered the hit, than in the “guns-for-hire”. I just can’t believe some small, ideologically disgruntled, group of “cowboys” planned a hit in some bar room over a night of drinking & cussing. Given the other hits in this time frame (JFK, MLK, Malcom X, possibly Reuther, and Hoffa), I suspect greater design and purpose. Given the way the World has developed (devolved) since then, we can see which groups of people were hurt by these assassinations, and which groups benefited, not that this provides unimpeachable evidence…but it would make a “gumshoe” look in particular directions for any possible corroborating evidence.

      • Brad Anbro
        June 8, 2018 at 12:48

        Brad, I am interested in ALL aspects of the murders (not “assassinations”) of both JFK and RFK. I also believe that one or more agencies of our own government MURDERED Walter Reuther, president of the United Auto Workers union. In the case of James
        Hoffa, president of the Teamsters union, I believe that it was again one or more agencies of our own government, possibly in
        conjunction with various elements of the Mafia.

        Walter Reuther had many wonderful ideas, which, if they had been allowed to be implemented, would have made life much
        better for ALL working Americans, not just union members. John F. Kennedy was the most beloved and respected American in
        all of Europe and Walter Reuther was right behind him.

        I do NOT believe that any of the members of the Teamsters had anything to do with the MURDER of James Hoffa; as president
        of his Teamsters union, he was loved and respected by practically all of its members. Even the companies that Hoffa would
        bargain with had the utmost respect for Hoffa – they knew that he was for his union members and would NOT sell out. Also the
        companies respected the fact that Hoffa KNEW what was in every contract, since he was a part of writing them.

      • Paul G.
        June 9, 2018 at 20:29

        Hoffa had it coming; and most likely had become a liability for his buddies-mafia.
        That is one I wouldn’t give the CIA credit for. The rest all challenged the dominant paradigm particularly the war against Vietnam.

  17. June 5, 2018 at 21:26

    Does nothing to explain the coroners report that the shots were made within inches, from the back that left powder burns, and that Sirhan was never closer than 12 feet in front. Let us don’t forget that the coroner Noguchi was one of the most famous ones in the world and highly respected. Lie detectors are not admissible evidence for a reason.

    • Skip Scott
      June 6, 2018 at 07:11

      Polygraphs are not admissible because they are easy to beat. I have an acquaintance who told me he beat one once. Unless there was someone else who was armed as close as Cesar was, there is no other suspect close enough to have fired from point-blank range. They had the bullets out of Kennedy, and they failed to match Sirhan’s gun. Why didn’t they check them against Cesar’s gun?

    • JWalters
      June 7, 2018 at 01:15

      Here’s a great interview with renowned forensic pathologist and personal friend of Noguchi, Cyril Wecht, in which he discusses the RFK and JFK cases.

  18. Johnny Case
    June 5, 2018 at 19:59

    And we’ll all sure miss a pathetic leftoid troll like you.


  19. Brad Owen
    June 5, 2018 at 14:14

    Paul Shrade has different testimony to offer at Sirhan Sirhan’s parole hearing of Feb. 10th. Paul Craig Roberts provides linking evidence to Shrade’s testimony. All of this comes from “Eyewitness:Sirhan Sirhan did not kill RFK” from Executive Intelligence Review searchbox. Shrade was next to RFK that night and was wounded by one of Sihan’s bullets, of which only two of the eight bullets could have possibly been aimed before two men wrestled him to the ground. Someone’s recording of the event was analysed by an audio expert, identifying 13 shots fired. The fatal head shot was fired from behind at very close range. The main concern, to me, is NOT worrying about if Sirhan is getting away with murder (which seems an impossibility under these circumstances). The main concern is WHO actually did the deed and got away with murder…who are the potential beneficiaries of this deed? Who were the Kennedy’s enemies? I don’t fall for the old “lone gunman” garbage anymore, which has become a stale joke.

  20. hyperbola
    June 5, 2018 at 13:34

    CIA role claim in Kennedy killing

    New video and photographic evidence that puts three senior CIA operatives at the scene of Robert Kennedy’s assassination has been brought to light.

    The evidence is a result of a three year investigation

    The evidence was shown in a report by Shane O’Sullivan, broadcast on BBC Newsnight.

    It reveals that the operatives and four unidentified associates were at the Ambassador Hotel, Los Angeles in the moments before and after the shooting on 5 June, 1968.

    The CIA had no domestic jurisdiction and some of the officers were based in South-East Asia at the time, with no reason to be in Los Angeles. ……

    • Walt
      June 6, 2018 at 14:32

      Sorry to say but this research was shown to be incorrect. The persons identified as CIA operatives
      at the Ambassador by Shane O. were was later shown to be other guests and couldn’t be the CIA
      officials that he said they were.

      If that really was true then this case would’ve blown up way before this.

      • Tom F
        June 7, 2018 at 07:11

        Cases do not get blown away that easily and what is the evidence that proves the alleged CIA operatives were nothing more other than hotel guests.

      • Bob In Portland
        June 10, 2018 at 12:24

        CIA operatives do not admit to being CIA operatives. The CIA does not admit to who are their operatives. CIA agents are sworn to lie to conceal CIA operations. Perhaps if “Wait” could provide names, we could all looker deeper into this revelation. After all, over fifty years after the JFK assassination declassified CIA documents named Mayor Earle Cabell of Dallas at the time of the assassination, brother of Charles Cabell who was fired by JFK over the Bay of Pigs, was a CIA asset. Funny how our free press missed that one.

        (Charles Cabell was Robert Swan Mueller III’s wife’s grandfather, Earle Cabell was a great uncle, and Richard Bissell was in Mueller’s own family tree. This should explain why Mueller’s high-profile investigations and prosecutions always seem to miss any evidence of the CIA’s presence in such cases as John Gotti’s prosecution for cocaine that came from Mena, the Pan Am 103 case, the Noriega prosecution, BCCI, 9/11, the anthrax letter cases and on and on.)

Comments are closed.