"A Terrible Mistake" by H. P. Albarelli, Jr. - JFK Assassination

[Mark Stapleton]

Originally Posted by John Bevilaqua

While all this may be a bit hard to digest in one session, just suspend disbelief for a moment and consider this as one of the major breakthroughs in my research in this Century. If either Robert Maxwell, Mary Ferrell, James Richards, Bill Turner, Roy Hargraves or Hank Albarelli had been able to debunk or derail just a single major link in this entire argument then I would have abandoned that portion in a heartbeat or indicated the presence of any discontinuities or pointed out any valid objections or inconsistencies pointed out by any legitimate researcher whom I have known and trusted for an extended period.

Robert Emmett Johnson was a shooter in Dealey Plaza and both Roy Hargraves and Gerald Patrick Hemming were in Dallas on that fateful day.
There were probably 2-3 different teams in Dealey Plaza that day and Johnson was most certainly among them. Mitchell Werbell III provided rifles with multi-shot ammunition clips manufactured by Morehead Patterson of AMF for the Navy Seals between 1962-1964 and they had silencers as well. The ammo clips were capable of holding 5-6 Manlicher-Carcano cartridges. Most of the Dealey Plaza ballistics analysis never even bothered to consider the use of either the silencers provided by Mitch Werbell III, or the multi-cartridge ammo clips capable of firing Manlicher-Carcano cartridges developed and delivered by Morehead Patterson of AMF to the Navy Seals in either 1962 or 1963 which was documented on Spartacus already. For all intents and purposes this renders that ballistics or acoustical evidence into the category of yet another LaBrea Tarpit of irrelevant, but well-intentioned, erroneous or misleading sticky wicket research. Almost anyone could have put 3 bullets into that limousine within the allotted timeframe from the TSBD or from anywhere else using just such a device. Certainly JFK was also hit by shots fired by other shooters from other locations, but much credibility is destroyed without the considering the inclusion of silencers and multi-shot semi-automatic ammo clips in the application of a triangulation of fire during the attack on JFK. Sorry to be the one to break this news to everyone but I call them as I see them.


Until you or anyone else can convince me, with hard evidence and documentation that there are fatal flaws in this continuous spectrum of evidence, cross-correlated independently by serious and meticulous researchers then I will have to continue to stand by my statements.

Your idle speculation and rumor mongering just does not cut the mustard when compared to the years of work done by the combination of these dedicated researchers. I am just being honest here.


The rest is history.

None of that provides a convincing reason as to why you have elevated Robert Johnson to the role of shooter. I see it as speculation. I'm just being honest, too.

Robert Maxwell was a Mossad asset, was he not? Your continuous spectrum of evidence has a problem right there.

[John Bevilaqua]

Originally Posted by Mark Stapleton

None of that provides a convincing reason as to why you have elevated Robert Johnson to the role of shooter. I see it as speculation. I'm just being honest, too.

Robert Maxwell was a Mossad asset, was he not? Your continuous spectrum of evidence has a problem right there.

Wrong Robert Maxwell, dude. This Robert Maxwell was a bank trust officer
at The Bank of Maryland and he was an Iran-Contra whistle blower who opened the cracks and broke the story about the way that Iran-Contra slush funds were created by CIA proprietaries like Baldt Anchor and Chain and Boston Metals and other CIA proprietaties. Other writers picked up the trail and followed the money trail as it was transported and utilized to purchase guns and ammo. Your continuity of credibility has some serious problems here, too. I think you are just taking random pot shots as if this spectrum of internally consistent evidence was some sort of artificial construct with no basis in fact. And it was James Richards who first postulated Robert E. Johnson as a shooter, not me.

XXXXXXXXXXXXXX (sentence deleted by moderators)

Your objections are just off the wall and totally irrelevant, in my honest opinion. Keep trying though. You will hit on something sooner or later and make a name for yourself, too.

[Mark Stapleton]

Originally Posted by John Bevilaqua

And it was James Richards who first postulated Robert E. Johnson as a shooter, not me.

That's the only point I'm trying to make. You claimed Robert Johnson was a DP shooter as an unequivocal statement of fact. But it isn't a confirmed fact. It's a postulation, a speculation, and I think you're wrong.

As for Robert Maxwell, I stand corrected. Your knowledge of this tangled web of lies exceeds mine by miles. I have no beef with you John, and respect your energy and diligence, whether it turns out to be on target or otherwise.

Wish you would show a bit more respect for Charles Drago though. He's on our side you know.

[Dawn Meredith]

Originally Posted by Mark Stapleton

That's the only point I'm trying to make. You claimed Robert Johnson was a DP shooter as an unequivocal statement of fact. But it isn't a confirmed fact. It's a postulation, a speculation, and I think you're wrong.

As for Robert Maxwell, I stand corrected. Your knowledge of this tangled web of lies exceeds mine by miles. I have no beef with you John, and respect your energy and diligence, whether it turns out to be on target or otherwise.

Wish you would show a bit more respect for Charles Drago though. He's on
our side you know.

With all due respect Mark- great to see you here by the way and I apologise for the condesending manner in which JB was addressing you- Charlie IS on "our side", but I am not so certain about the "side" or motives of John. You are now the third person here at DPF who I have seen him treat with near contempt. I find both his attitude and theories at the very least troubling.

Dawn