Conspiracy of One: The Definitive Book on the Kennedy Assassination

by Jim Moore

I am convinced...that Jim Moore knows more about the John F. Kennedy assassination than anyone else alive. It's very persuasive! Whatever other book you buy or have bought about it (the JFK assassination), you should get this, too. With publishers rushing to release sensational books without substance, it takes nerve to reverse that trend. Conspiracy of One is a return to sound thinking and research. It is a must-read chronicle of an investigation...its conclusions are most thought-provoking.

236 pages, Paperback

First published October 28, 1990

About the author

Librarian note: There is more than one author with this name.

Reviews

[Daniel · Rating 2 out of 5]

After essentially declaring himself the world's foremost expert on the JFK assassination, Jim Moore decries what he describes as the cheap and baseless tactics used by Warren Report critics - then proceeds to engage in those very tactics throughout his entire book. How his personal attacks on those he disagrees with equates with the "just the facts" approach he claims to engage in is a mystery to me. He throws out frequent half-truths, ignores facts and testimony that do not fit his theory, and makes some incredibly dubious assumptions along the way. The arrogance of this man is truly galling. I think Moore's contribution to the JFK assassination literature is best represented by his assertion that Oswald's purchase of a Coca Cola - rather than his preferred Dr. Pepper - in the 2nd floor lunchroom of the Texas School Book Depository in the wake of JFK's assassination "holds the key to his guilt." Adding even more absurdity to this notion, he follows up by speculating that Oswald "no doubt mentally kicked himself for wasting a nickel" immediately thereafter.

Moore doesn't just pick and choose his "facts," he obfuscates, lies, and makes baseless assumptions. While there's no record of what Oswald said while being interrogated, Moore says it's perfectly OK to assume he lied; after all, he says it is ridiculous to think that Oswald might have been innocent. He also claims that critics of the Warren Report haven't read the report - and, more than likely, haven't even read any books about the assassination at all. The very idea of the police working with gangsters? Obviously ridiculous, he says. A former Mafia member told Moore that those guys don't stage killings like that of JFK - and that's proof enough for Moore to reject any Mafia involvement in the assassination. He rejects reports of any arresting officer saying "Kill the President, will you?" to Oswald in the Texas Theater because they could not have known that Oswald was linked to the assassination at that point.

Jim Moore has a simple answer for everything. How does he explain all of the Parkland medical personnel's description of a hole in the right rear of JFK's head? It's simple, Moore says - "the wound at the side of the head would, of necessity, have been at the `back' of the head, since they could see no further than the rearward margin of this wound." It matters not at all that they say the autopsy photos do not match their observations because they wouldn't be able to remember what the wound looked like fifteen years or more after the fact. He asserts that the bullet hole in the President's back did transit through his neck; sure, doctors said that they could feel the end of the wound with their fingers, but that's because "strap muscles in the neck blocked the path of their surgical probes" and they weren't permitted to dissect the complete track of the bullet. As for the back wound appearing to be too low to have exited through the front of the neck, Moore argues that JFK had an abnormally large amount of soft tissue on the back of his neck - and the exit wound was so small because the President's shirt collar and tie held the skin surface too tightly for even a tumbling bullet to have made a significant exit wound. He even comes up with new facts. Did you know that the missed shot that struck the curb would "doubtless" have showered JFK (and him alone) with bits of concrete and perhaps even metal fragments? That is what JFK is reacting to when you see him raise his arms towards his neck when he first emerges from behind the Stemmons Freeway sign - so says Moore. That's his only real beef with the Warren Report - he says the first shot rather than the second is the one that missed the President.

Moore thinks it was morally wrong to have ever released any autopsy X-rays or photos, especially since the critics he hates so much dare present these sorts of things in their books in their efforts to confuse the American public, which he describes as "ignorant" and easily fooled. His personal attacks on critics, especially Mark Lane, David Lifton, and Robert Groden (whom Moore seems to hate with every fiber of his being) are simply mean-spirited and lacking in substance.

In the end, it's pretty hard not to characterize Jim Moore as a government shill. In his view, Warren Report critics have done more harm to America than the Vietnam War and Watergate combined by sowing distrust of the government among the people. Yes, Moore apparently believes that the American government is absolutely wonderful and can do no wrong - and certainly wouldn't lie to the American people on any account (with the obvious exception of Robert Blakey, of course, the man who Moore believes sabotaged an otherwise complete and comprehensive House Assassinations Committee report with a conclusion of probable conspiracy purely for reasons of personal gain). I have to wonder if he still has such implicit trust in the honesty and integrity of the government now as he did when he published the book in 1991. As for Warren Report critics and anyone who disagrees with Moore's "definitive" conclusions on the JFK assassination, he argues that they all "genuinely detest this country and deplore our form of government." This statement is absurd, as most critics seek the truth about the assassination because they believe that true American freedom and liberty were snuffed out that day along with the life of John F. Kennedy.

[Steven H · Rating 5 out of 5]

AN EXCELLENT DEFENSE OF THE ‘LONE ASSASSIN’ AND ‘NO CONSPIRACY’ VIEWS

Author Jim Moore wrote in the Preface of this 1990 book, “I can say with great candor that [this] is one book you can and should believe. There are five reasons why. First, I have spent the last 23 years researching my subject…. Second, I have no axe to grind. I began as a critic, and I have progressed through their ranks. Third, my book deals with nothing but evidence… Fourth, I do not accept a government-sponsored version of the assassination in its entirety… this book is not a rubber stamp for the Warren Commission. Fifth, and most importantly, this book names and produces evidence---something no Warren Commission critic has ever done. Since my final solution does not correspond to the Warren Commission version of what happened that day in Dallas, it is as novel as one that propounds a gunman atop the grassy knoll… The difference … is that I have taken pains to prove each point I’ve made herein, while most critics substantiate their questions with more questions… realize that the critics of the Warren Commission Report have not done us any favors. Indeed, they have managed to convince the majority of the American public that their institutions of government are not to be trusted.”

He recalls, “My confidence in the government report would be shaken when I ordered a copy of Mark Lane’s ‘Rush to Judgment,’ the first really successful book attacking the Report and its conclusions… ‘Rush to Judgment’ was a turning point in my life. From the moment I put the book down, I took nothing else for granted. Convinced that conspirators of some sort had plotted and carried out the assassination of President Kennedy, I began… my quest for the truth.” (Pg. 6)

He outlines, “Notwithstanding how the [Warren] panel arrived at its conclusions, it’s my belief that the Commission reached the only conclusions tenable to reasonable men… I’ve already mentioned the problem the Commission courted by allowing its investigative agencies---the FBI, the CIA, and the Secret Service---to investigate themselves. The panel also did itself irreparable harm by not viewing the Kennedy autopsy x-rays and photographs… the Commissioners might not have known how to read x-rays, but they would have forestalled later charges that they neglected this evidence intentionally.” (Pg. 23)

He notes that “an eyewitness, Jean L. Hill, has been telling researchers for years that she witnessed a man running behind the knoll… A reporter … apparently tried to convince Mrs. Hill that she could not have seen a gunman running behind the knoll because she had no way to view the area from her south Elm Street vantage point… Standing where Mrs. Hill stood on November 22, you can’t see behind the rise that culminates at the top of the knoll. It’s impossible to see anyone running, walking, or standing behind the wooden fence, and you certainly can’t observe anyone running toward the point where railroad tracks in the area join the triple underpass. Yet Mrs. Hill testified that she had.” (Pg. 29)

He notes of the ‘puff of smoke’ that “I have no doubt that these men saw smoke rising from the trees near the corner of the wooden fence. I have… noticed identical smoke there myself. It is generated by automobile exhaust when a car parked near the fence is started or idled…. I believe mine to be the more logical explanation. But… many critics aren’t interested in logic---just lurid speculation.” (Pg. 31)

He observes, “the Plaza is a vast echo chamber… Various individuals in various locations heard various sounds. Some thought the shots were backfires. Others thought they came from high above. Still others looked toward the knoll… Of sixty-four witnesses who gave an opinion as to where the shots originated, thirty-three pointed to the grassy knoll. Another twenty-five pinpointed the Depository. Two claimed … the east side from among the County buildings. And four witnesses heard noises from two directions.” (Pg. 33-34)

He suggests, “The only explanation for the paper bag… is that it was used to carry the Mannlicher-Carcano into the Depository. I believe that Oswald manufactured the bag (the paper was proven to have come from the Depository shipping department) at the Depository … on the afternoon before the assassination. And I believe, as the Warren Commission did, that Wes Frazier and his sister… were genuinely mistaken about the length of the bag. Since Oswald’s palm print was found on the bottom of the bad, it not only meant that he had handled the bag, but that it has been used to carry something … heavy… the easiest answer to critics who complain of inconsistencies in the paper bag theory is to ask them a question… Do they really think Oswald carried curtain rods to work that day?” (Pg. 45-46)

He argues, “The more I stood in the sixth-floor window, the easier Oswald’s feat became… I believe that Oswald took nearly seven seconds to fire three shots. The Carcano rifle bolt can be operated in 2.3 second between shots, without allowing much time to sight in on the target. Hence, my conviction that, even with the Mannlicher-Carcano, Oswald could have fired fast enough … Practice with the weapon’s bolt action was an all-important key, and Oswald apparently availed himself of many opportunities to work the bolt… in his screened-in back porch.” (Pg. 49)

He reports, “I was able to exit the shield of cartons, hide the rifle where Oswald hid it, and run down the new staircase to the second floor, then walk to the approximate location of the old lunchroom… all within ninety-one seconds. Oswald had just entered the lunchroom doors when Baker caught sight of him. Thus… he could have gotten there fast enough What the critics don’t tell you is that… Oswald walked down a grand total of seventy-two steps… hiding the rifle took longer than walking down the stairs.” (Pg. 52)

He states, “I believe that Oswald asked [the cab driver] to deliberately drive past his rooming house in order to make sure that law enforcement officers were not waiting for him… Mrs. Earlene Roberts, who recalled Oswald arriving… called, ‘Oh, you're in a hurry!’ Oswald went to his room and stayed for three or four minutes, then left… He had… concealed his pistol in the waistband of his slacks. Carrying a concealed weapon is a crime… Oswald’s actions can be explained in just one way… that he anticipated having a need for his pistol, so he brought it with him.” (Pg. 60-61)

He continues, “the Warren Commission’s star witness … watched spellbound as the gunman fire the final shot … he described the suspect as white, slender, weighing 165 pounds, about 5’10” and in his early thirties… [This} description led to a police broadcast in which the suspect was described… Officer J.D. Tippit doubtless heard the description of the President’s assassin… Tippit pulled to the curb, stopped Oswald, and called him over to his car… Tippit then opened his door and stepped out of the car… Oswald pulled a revolver and fired several shots. Four bullets hit Tippit… Oswald… was arrested a half-hour after the crime with the revolver still in hand. The empty shells the gunman cast aside as he fled the killing scene were fired in that revolver.” (Pg. 62-63)

Soon, “Officer McDonald … told Oswald to stand. Oswald got up… he heard Oswald mutter, ‘Well, it’s all over now.’ Oswald then reached for his pistol with his right hand; he punched McDonald … with his left. Keep in mind that critics will have you believe that this is behavior characteristic of a man who is innocent of any wrongdoing.” (Pg. 65) Later, he adds, “When he was first questioned, Oswald claimed that that only thing he’d done wrong was to carry a gun and resist arrest. Captain Fritz asked Oswald why he was carrying the pistol, and [Oswald] answered, ‘Well, you know about a pistol. I just carried it.’ He told officers he had purchased the handgun on Fort Worth, when in fact he’s ordered the revolved from a mail order business… Oswald further stated that he left the Depository because foreman Bill Shelley had told him there would be no further work that day. Shelly denied seeing Oswald at any time after the assassination.” (Pg. 69)

He asks, “If the conspirators fired four shots, and bullet 399 and fragments of another that caused the President’s head would were all that were recovered, where did the other bullets go? Did the bullet which wounded Governor Connally… vanish into thin air? Did another bullet fired from the knoll… just disappear…?” (Pg. 93)

He argues, “The problem with Lifton’s thesis is that, aside from Dr. Jenkins, no one examined the President’s back… no one in Dallas turned Kennedy over. It would have been impossible for any of the staff at Parkland to have seen a wound at the rear of the skull. Why do they describe it there? The answer is a simple one. When Kennedy was brought into the trauma room, he was lying face-up on a stretcher… to them, the wound at the side of the head would, of necessity, have been at the ‘back’ of the head, since they could see no further than the rearward margin of this wound.” (Pg. 99)

He states “By far the biggest problem facing the HSCA was the question of the second gunman atop the knoll. No physical evidence suggested that a second gunman existed. Add to the lack of proof the HSCA finding that the shot from the knoll apparently missed… What is beyond the frame of serous thought is that the gunman fired a bullet that not only missed the President, the other five occupants of the auto, and the limousine itself, striking nothing despite its downward trajectory. In a word, the bullet disappeared.” (Pg. 142)

He explains, “Critics have maintained… that the wound in the President’s back was … too low for the bullet which caused it to echo from his throat… They overlooked two things. First, the President had more soft tissue about his neck than do most individuals. This lowered the position of the back wound when his body was measured… Second, the critics ignore the fact that the autopsy face sheets … were crudely drawn and not intended to represent actual wound locations… Had … the throat wound [been] one of entry and the back wound one of exit---there would surely have been some damage to the seat or trunk of the Presidential limousine. Of course, there was none.” (Pg. 153-154)

Of the ‘magic bullet,’ he says, “The critics never bother to point out that the bullet recovered at Parkland is extremely flattened at one end… The bullet would have lost very little velocity in penetrating President Kennedy’s back and throat… if Governor Connally had been struck by a bullet … which had not hit something first, he would have suffered much greater injury and probably would not be alive today… Striking the Governor’s fifth rib while flying sideways … may well have flattened the bullet to the shape it bears today… the only lead missing from [the bullet] is… two grains of metal… The metal in the Governor’s wrist and the fragment embedded in his thigh came from this portion of the bullet… all of the metal left in Connally could easily be accounted for by the two grains missing… [The single bullet], then, had the potential and capability to hit both Kennedy and Connally and emerge relatively intact… the two men were in precise alignment during the tenth of a second in which Connally appears to be hit on the Zapruder film.. Critics who maintain that the two men were hit by separate bullets are faced with a most difficult question: Where did the other bullet go?” (Pg. 169-172)

Of the theory that the autopsy and x-ray photos had been altered, he states, “the doctors at Parkland had doubtless … read account after account of the President’s wounds, information that wasn’t always accurate. So, it’s doubtful that any physician would remember the President’s wound in detail… the fact that the interviews with the doctors took place about twenty years after the fact didn’t seem to bother the [critics] at all. Second, the autopsy surgeons themselves authenticated that x-rays and photographs taken of the dead President’s body… Finally, the Zapruder film shows the President’s head wound in exactly the position the autopsy phots and x-rays depict it…” (Pg. 180-181)

He summarizes, “all medical evidence … points to a single bullet, fired from behind, entering the right rear high of the President’s head… Continuing through the brain, the missile obviously existed the right side of the President’s skull, causing a massive fracture… the bullet apparently struck the inside of the windshield glass, broke into two pieces, and dropped to the floor. The fragments were recovered there late on the night of the assassination. Neutron activation analysis proved that a fragment lodged near the President’s right eye matched the fragments recovered from the limousine floor.” (Pg. 181)

He continues, “there’s nothing in the medical evidence to suggest a shot from the right front… It’s also helpful to understand that the movement of the President’s head as seen in the Zapruder film isn’t immediately backward. Indeed, his head moves forward slightly as a result of the impact of the bullet on the back of the skull. Only after the bullet has … blown out the right side of his head does Kennedy begin the rapid and forceful movement backward… the House Select Committee’s medical evidence panel… [stated]: ‘The majority of the pane believes that there is a possibility that this movement may have been caused by neurological response to the massive brain damage….’ … Why, then, do so many people believe that President Kennedy moved backward in response to a shot from the front?... The answer is simple---because they want to.” (Pg. 182-183)

This book is one of the very best of those generally defending the ‘official’ view of the assassination, as stated in the Warren Report and the HSCA report. It won’t persuade many of the die-hard critics, but that’s to be expected.

[Randal · Rating 3 out of 5]

While I agree with the thesis of the book that Oswald acted alone, Moore’s presentation of his case is ultimately unconvincing if you lean towards a more conspiratorial explanation. His dismissive tone towards critics of the official story is also a little jerky and passive aggressive at times.

Still, this book is worth the read. And because I think the most likely reality is that Oswald did indeed on his own kill the President, I would recommend this book to anyone interested in Kennedy’s death.

[Christina Blake · Rating 2 out of 5]

I might have believed Jim before 2020. This year we have witnessed just how crooked the government can be and I am questioning everything a lot more.