Reclaiming History: The Assassination of President John F. Kennedy Hardcover – May 15, 2007

I found Bugliosi's book to be the last word on the assassination of JFK and the most reasoned work on the subject of who killed the president.The author utterly destroys the numerous conspiracy theories surrounding Kennedy's -- and Oswald's -- murder by applying logic and skepticism. I have read many books on this subject and have always been interested in the tragic events in Dallas. I began my early adult life believing that Oswald could not have murdered the president without being part of a wider conspiracy after reading several books that promoted that argument. But as I have aged and read more measured and reasonable books on the assassination, it became obvious to me that Oswald and Jack Ruby carried out their crimes completely on their own.Reclaiming History has proven that Oswald's temperament could never have allowed him to work with others to plan and execute the murder. Likewise, Bugliosi, as well as other authors, conclusively show that Ruby's quicksilver personality, as well as being in the right place at the exact right time, led to his shooting Oswald. Bugliosi has slammed the door on the possibility that the Mafia, the Russians, the Cubans, the FBI, the CIA or any other group or individual, were responsible for the murders of Kennedy, Oswald, or Dallas police officer J.D. Tippett.I will admit, you have to have a deep interest in the subject to read this massive book, but I read every word and keep it on my bookshelf to re-read certain chapters from time to time. Make sure you read the chapter on Oliver Stone's absolutely bizarre and goofy movie, JFK, and how the director has helped plant many of the murder's twisted conspiracy theories in the public's mind.

Vincent Bugliosi, the famous Los Angeles prosecutor best known for his successful prosecution of the Manson Family, was inspired to research the John F. Kennedy assassination after participating in a mock trial presented on Showtime in 1986. The “trial” featured many of the original witnesses, with noted defense attorney Gerry Spence representing Oswald. Shocked at the prevalence of conspiracy theories and the number of people who rejected the evidence of Oswald's lone guilt, Bugliosi spent the next 20 years researching and writing “Reclaiming History.”What he produced is the definitive summation of the subject. Divided into two major sections, the first thousand pages cover the facts of the case (“What Happened”), and the next five hundred cover the major conspiracy theories (“What Didn't Happen”). The footnotes are so extensive as to require a separate CD-ROM included with the book; printed in its entirety, the book would have comprised thirteen normal-sized volumes. Many of the sections, indeed, could stand on their own as separate books. These include a detailed account of the “four days in November” from the day JFK was assassinated to the burial of Lee Harvey Oswald, separate biographies of Oswald and Jack Ruby, a recap of the crime's investigation by the Dallas Police Department, a summary of the evidence against Oswald, the Zapruder film, and many more. The conspiracy section covers the major theories, addressing the claims that JFK's assassination was carried out by the CIA, the FBI, the KGB, the mafia, pro-Castro Cubans, anti-Castro Cubans, the Secret Service, right-wing groups, and others. A separate, lengthy section discusses Oliver Stone's film “JFK,” which dramatized the only prosecution case filed on the assassination, conducted by New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison.There are two impressions the reader comes away with. The first is that the evidence against Oswald was overwhelming. The standard for conviction is “beyond reasonable doubt;” in Oswald's case, it's beyond any doubt whatsoever that he fired the fatal shots from the sixth-floor window of the Texas School Book Depository. Bugliosi summarizes fifty-three separate pieces of evidence pointing to Oswald's guilt. Anyone claiming that Oswald was innocent would have to address each of these, along with providing separate evidence that they were fabricated. For example, the bullets were proven to have been fired from Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano rifle; anyone claiming they were not should be required to provide evidence that the tests were fabricated, not merely say they were. Or, they should have to provide evidence that someone stole Oswald's rifle, fired bullets from it, returned it, and then placed the bullets in JFK's skull. If someone did that, who were they, and how did they keep from being caught? Conjecture is not evidence.The second impression is that the various conspiracy theories too often substitute motive for evidence. As a prosecutor, Bugliosi is well-suited to explain that motive is not necessary to establish guilt. We often hear the phrase “motive, means, and opportunity,” but none of these are evidence. Criminals are convicted when a jury concludes that the evidence points to their guilt; the fact that someone wanted to commit a crime and had the means and opportunity to do so does not mean that they did it. Recognizing this would dismantle most conspiracy theories. Theorists tend to work backwards, starting with motive and assuming that because a person or group had the means to carry out the assassination, they must have done so. There are many examples of this:The CIA was upset that JFK may have planned to remove 1000 of the 16,000 “advisors in Vietnam.J. Edgar Hoover, whose entire life was centered around the FBI, was worried that JFK would force him to retire when he reached the mandatory retirement age.The mafia was angry with JFK for allowing his brother, Attorney General Robert Kennedy, to crack down on organized crime, after they had arranged for him to win the election.Anti-Castro Cubans were angry with JFK for not supporting the Bay of Pigs invasion.Pro-Castro Cubans were angry with JFK for not supporting Castro.The KGB wanted to eliminate what they viewed as an anti-communist president.Right-wing groups wanted to eliminate what they viewed as an insufficiently anti-communist president.Vice-President Johnson felt disrespected by the Boston elites JFK surrounded himself with, and was concerned that JFK was going to replace him on the 1964 Democratic ticket.Once someone has accepted one of these theories, it's easy to find examples of evidence that appear to support them. Bugliosi attacks each of these in turn, showing that the supposed evidence is misconstrued, and the conclusions fly against common sense. One example would be the theory that the mafia helped JFK get elected through fraudulent votes, then exacted revenge on him for allowing RFK to step up prosecutions of organized crime. The “proof” is that Jack Ruby was “connected to organized crime,” and once Oswald had served his purpose, executed him on the mob's orders. There are a few problems with this theory:While the mafia in Italy has a long history of executing judges and other government officials, its counterpart in the U.S. has scrupulously avoided this practice. Albert Anastasia went so far as to order the death of Dutch Schultz, to prevent Schultz from killing prosecutor Thomas Dewey. The idea that the mafia would break this tradition by carrying out the most high-profile assassination imaginable, for such a silly reason as ingratitude, flies against common sense.While Jack Ruby owned a nightclub, there is no indication that he had any involvement at all with organized crime. In fact, Ruby was a great admirer of the police, and knew many police officers personally. Ruby was also known as an unstable blabbermouth. He would have been a very poor choice as a hitman, and would have spilled the beans at some point between his arrest and his death several years later. Also, it would have been impossible to coordinate Ruby's being in the Dallas City Hall basement at the precise moment when Oswald was briefly exposed. Oswald's transfer to the city jail was delayed an hour by a surprise request from a Postal inspector to question him, and it was further delayed by his own request to change his shirt right before he was brought out. But for the shirt change, Oswald would have been in the police car on his way to the jail by the time Ruby walked down the ramp. For his part, Ruby stopped to wire a paycheck advance to one of his employees right before going to City Hall, and left his beloved dog Sheba in his car when he went down to the basement. None of this makes sense as the actions of a mafia hitman. Conspiracy theories involving Ruby tend to ignore the people who knew him, instead getting their information from people who never met him.There was no guarantee that legal pressure on the mafia would cease with JFK's death, and if their involvement had been discovered, the entire force of the U.S. government would have been brought to bear, completely obliterating the organization. Why would they have risked this in the unfounded hope that LBJ would be more lenient?This is just a summary of Bugliosi's argument in this one area; he treats the other major conspiracy theories with equal detail. For anyone daunted by a 1500 page book, Bugliosi is, if nothing else, a riveting writer. “Reclaiming History” isn't merely enlightening; it's entertaining.Bugliosi observes that the grassy knoll is familiar to more people than the Texas School Book Depository. As the assassination recedes into the past, the conspiracy theories threaten to supplant the truth (that Oswald killed JFK and acted alone), if they have not already done so. The blame for this rests primarily on Mark Lane, the “dean of conspiracy theorists” who almost single-handedly inspired the vast JFK conspiracy theory industry, and Oliver Stone, who revived it with his film that popularized what was possibly one of the most absurd theories, one held in disdain even by other theorists. But history should not be based on conjecture and innuendo.In “Don Quixote,” Miguel de Cervantes describes “truth, whose mother is history, who is the rival of time, depository of deeds, witness of the past, example and lesson to the present, and warning to the future.” The frontispiece of “Reclaiming History” says something similar: “To the historical record, knowing that nothing in the present can exist without the paternity of history, and hence, the latter is sacred, and should never be tampered with or defiled by untruths.” The confusion engendered by the JFK conspiracy industry has contributed in no small part to the idea that historical truth is not objective, but rather what we wish it to be. We ignore this trend at our peril.

While this book is excellent, be forewarned that it will include far more than 99.8% of readers will ever need to know about the JFK assassination. Unless you are absolutely religious about your belief in conspiracy theories it will make you conspiracy-proof. (Check the high percentage of 1-star reviews that, if you read the entire book are all addressed.) Vincent Bugliosi is a bulldog that won't let go.

It is THE definitive history of the Kennedy assassination. Painstakingly researched over twenty years, it is a facinating debunking of the conspiracy theories. A must read.

This is a very, physically, heavy book. Don't know what kind of paper they used to print it with, but it is quite physically heavy, takes both hands to hold, and is uncomfortable to try and rest on your lap. That aside, obviously, Mr. Bugliosi likes to argue, and he is well-spoken presenting both sides of the issues. His writing is very clear. As for the conclusion to his writing, I would like to use a statement from the writing that Bugliosi wrote that when he studies a case, he states in the book, "My only master and my only mistress are the facts and objectivity." Unfortunately, this is a relative statement, for it depends on what the facts are, or at least, what one thinks the facts are. The "Warren Report" is also extremely lengthy, but it seems that Mr. Bugliosi bit off a little too much and does not review the report enough and really examine the testimony of the one most important figure in all of this, the eyewitness to Oswald on the day of the shooting, Mr. Brennan.

An excellent book about the Kennedy assassination--exhaustively researched ,well written and easy to read. Bugliosi disproves all the wild, ridiculous conspiracy theories put forth by the shots-from-the-grassy-knoll crowd. It is a hefty book--sixteen hundred pages--but well worth the effort to read it.

Bugliosi proves it was Oswald to the nth degree

Good

I like this book very much. Still in the process of reading it (1700 pages!).Very well written. Lots of information. Easy to read.Describes the incidents very well. Well documented, factual and serious.Jacques Leboeuf

I have been reading this book (it is a massive work, more than 1500 pages!) and I must say, it starts to crush my strong belief against the "lone gunman theory": there is a lot of research behind it and the Author's main purpose is to set aside all the conspiracy theories once and for all. It works well, it's very readable but... I do think there is still something to be clarified, not details indeed (just an example: does the Author really think that Jack Ruby - a notorius mobster - acted out of personal indignation?).However the core of the book is strongly persuasive: one of the "must-read" about the Kennedy assassination.

Great