This is a link to Mr. William Pepper’s court filings representing Sirhan B. Sirhan.
Of all the assassinations this one is often represented by assets of the Enemy as “open and shut”, a suspect caught red handed smoking gun in hand and apprehended by the witnesses themselves. They would refer any curious people to LAPD jerks like racist Darrel Gates, or Houghton’s assemblage of lies in a book “Special Unit Senator”. But wait a second or many of them….
That book came out of Bob Loomis’ Random House, a point that would raise suspicion for many researchers later.
Disregard for a moment that the book was
1) written by a Deputy Chief of Police of LAPD and
2) It condones nay doesn’t detail “officer” Hank Enrique Hernandez abusing witnesses in not interviews of witnesses but exercising interrogation methodology to dictate what the witness would be allowed to enter into record as if the witness were a “person of interest”.
SUS is a much a fable of cover-up as the WCReport. Worse yet it employs much of the same methodology as the 1964 cover-up. And again the local police leadership and the FBI do not appear in any kind of a good portrayal for integrity and honesty.
What if the projectiles entered as evidence lack a valid chain of custody? Familiar? Like the murder of the Senator’s brother in Dallas?
What if a “ballistician” expert of the LAPD involved in the so-called investigation can be shown to have committed perjury relative to ballistic evidence?
What if the coroner’s report covers much ground in proof that Sirhan B. Sirhan could not have and did not kill the Senator?
Legal documents are deadly dry and I haven’t read all of the materials yet but I think this exposes much of what we all have learned since 1969 when the “case” was closed to cover up.
A probable identity of the polka-dot dress accomplice (in my opinion accomplice), as well as the possible identification of where and by whom Sirhan was manufactured as the real Raymond Shaw of Condon’s novel ‘The Manchurian Candidate’. The Chicoms didn’t do this one in Manchuria.
The existence of both the person in the dress and the concept of MKUltra programming were denied in SUS, but I have become a little more cynical about any government issuances since 1970 or 71 when I first read SUS.
We are the change. The Sirhan B. Sirhan case is one reason we must be the change. This cannot be condoned as an abortion of Justice, but as a harbinger of change. And that is us.