Further to your June 10 Associated Press story
by Michael J. Sniffen, "Feds: MLK shooting not conspiracy," the
Department of Justice's spokesman's choice of words is interesting -
"no credible evidence" and "no reliable evidence." Presumably, then,
there was evidence indicating a conspiracy that was deemed
incredible and/or unreliable.
This brings to mind the words I have heard and read on several
occasions by Gerald R. Ford, member of the Warren Commission that
conducted an "investigation" into the assassination of President
Kennedy: "The Commission found no credible evidence for a
conspiracy, domestic or foreign."
The Warren Commission found no credible evidence for a conspiracy
for many reasons, including:
Key FBI evidence was denied them.
Key CIA evidence was denied them.
The autopsy photographs were denied them.
Key witnesses in Dealey Plaza were not called to give testimony.
Witnesses who gave evidence inconsistent with the lone-assassin
theory were ignored or judged to be mistaken because their testimony
was inconsistent with the lone-assassin theory.
I have not read the new report on the shooting of Dr. King,
therefore I cannot comment on its specifics. Mr. Sniffen informs us
that its conclusion is the same as those from four earlier
It has slipped his mind that the deepest and broadest of all of
the investigations (albeit limited in time and financial resources)
including the most recent, i.e. that by the House Select Committee
on Assassinations in the late 1970s, concluded that the murder of
Martin Luther King Jr. probably resulted from a conspiracy.
Town of Enfield, June 12