| Revision as of 05:32, 19 August 2007 editEsemono (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers11,063 edits →Page Full of Errors← Previous edit | Revision as of 08:16, 19 August 2007 edit undo69.180.6.48 (talk)No edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 136: | Line 136: | ||
| * Conspiracists do not understand the differences in the qualifications of the experts interviewed for the documentary. Unlike Philip Van Praag and Wes Dooley, who are, essentially, audio engineers, Philip Harrison is a professional acoustics expert who works for a professional acoustics firm, JP French Associates. | * Conspiracists do not understand the differences in the qualifications of the experts interviewed for the documentary. Unlike Philip Van Praag and Wes Dooley, who are, essentially, audio engineers, Philip Harrison is a professional acoustics expert who works for a professional acoustics firm, JP French Associates. | ||
| *Conspiracists are misrepresenting the provenance and quality of the digitized version of the tape used by Barber and Harrison. They comment that Harrison did not have access to the ‘Master Tapes’. Van Praag had this to say about the copy of the digitized version sent to Steve Barber who in turn forwarded it to Philip Harrison, “The copy I made for you resulted from a request to me from the CSA, asking if I would do them a favor by responding to their requestor (Mel Ayton) regarding his desire to obtain a copy of better quality than the stock cassettes that the CSA normally provides…….. I did not apply any filtering to the recording you obtained from me. The transcription I made utilized the FINEST studio professional console analog equipment for playback (quite necessary), along with multiple digital and analog machines on the record side.” After examining the digitized version of the tape Steve characterized it as “…identical to the cassette in every way, except that it is much clearer.” Digitized copies lose nothing in the transaction. | *Conspiracists are misrepresenting the provenance and quality of the digitized version of the tape used by Barber and Harrison. They comment that Harrison did not have access to the ‘Master Tapes’. Van Praag had this to say about the copy of the digitized version sent to Steve Barber who in turn forwarded it to Philip Harrison, “The copy I made for you resulted from a request to me from the CSA, asking if I would do them a favor by responding to their requestor (Mel Ayton) regarding his desire to obtain a copy of better quality than the stock cassettes that the CSA normally provides…….. I did not apply any filtering to the recording you obtained from me. The transcription I made utilized the FINEST studio professional console analog equipment for playback (quite necessary), along with multiple digital and analog machines on the record side.” After examining the digitized version of the tape Steve characterized it as “…identical to the cassette in every way, except that it is much clearer.” Digitized copies lose nothing in the transaction. | ||
| *****It appears Mr. Ayton has misunderstood. Let's review: "While all four experts bypassed a crude cassette copy of the Pruszynski recording that had been created years before by the California State Archives in Sacramento, only the first three experts worked directly from SEVERAL high-quality digital and analog master dubs of the recording; the fourth expert had to rely on a COPY of JUST ONE of those master dubs." Therefore despite what Mr. Ayton claims, it would appear that the point being made here is not that Harrison did not have access to any master tapes. Rather, it appears the point being made is that Harrison had access to one copy of only one of the masters. Whereas other experts had access to all of the masters, both digital and analog (all of which were the originals, apparently analyzed via the original equipment used to create them, and none of which was a copy).***** | |||
| *Conspiracy bloggers are misrepresenting the teams of acoustics experts and purported acoustics experts who have examined the Pruszynski Tape. They allege that three experts say there were more than 8 shots and one expert dissents. This mischaracterizes the truth of the matter. | *Conspiracy bloggers are misrepresenting the teams of acoustics experts and purported acoustics experts who have examined the Pruszynski Tape. They allege that three experts say there were more than 8 shots and one expert dissents. This mischaracterizes the truth of the matter. | ||
| *****It appears Mr. Ayton is wrong. The Discovery Times Channel program does not appear to have misrepresented or mischaracterized these matters. Discovery Times clearly reported that when it came to the analyses consulted for its program, there were three experts who found more than eight shots in the Pruszynski recording: 1. Mr. Van Praag, 2. Mr. Dooley (along with Mr. Dooley's associate, Mr. Pegas, thus counting these two men as one team) and 3. the Danish expert; and that there was a fourth expert (Mr. Harrison) who dissented. Discovery Times seems very clear on this matter, that these four were the experts used for its program (and no more than these four were consulted) and that it was their conclusions that were reported in the program.***** | |||
| Philip Harrison, together with Professor Peter French, a lecturer in acoustics at the University of York examined the Pruszynski Tape and found no more than 8 shots recorded on it. In the United States, audio expert Steve Barber and Michael O’Dell and Dr Chad Zimmerman, who have a wealth of experience researching the scientific aspects of the JFK assassination, also examined the tape and found no more than 8 shots. Both teams had independently examined the tape then Barber and Harrison consulted with each other. We can eliminate the ‘Dutch’acoustics expert as no scientific journal in the world would accept findings from an anonymous source. | Philip Harrison, together with Professor Peter French, a lecturer in acoustics at the University of York examined the Pruszynski Tape and found no more than 8 shots recorded on it. In the United States, audio expert Steve Barber and Michael O’Dell and Dr Chad Zimmerman, who have a wealth of experience researching the scientific aspects of the JFK assassination, also examined the tape and found no more than 8 shots. Both teams had independently examined the tape then Barber and Harrison consulted with each other. We can eliminate the ‘Dutch’acoustics expert as no scientific journal in the world would accept findings from an anonymous source. | ||
| *****It appears Mr. Ayton believes it is important to count the exact number of experts on each side of this debate. Well, in the interest of using a fair and consistent method of counting both sides, we might want to count experts who are members of the same research team as one and not count them individually (as was done above in the case of the team comprising Mr. Dooley and Mr. Pegas). If we decide to apply that rule, then it would appear that we should count Mr. Barber, Mr. O'Dell and Dr. Zimmerman as comprising one team and count Mr. Harrison as comprising another (one-member) team. By this measure, our score of experts becomes 3 to 2 in favor of more than eight shots in the Pruszynski recording (and if we eliminate the un-named Danish -- not Dutch -- expert, our score is then tied at 2 to 2). Mr. Ayton is welcome to place as much emphasis as he wants to on the exact number of experts on either side of the debate and he is welcome to use any method of counting he personally favors. Next, with regard to what sort of things scientific journals might or might not accept, Mr. Ayton might have a point there worthy of some consideration, although this is in the realm of speculation. With regard to Discovery Times' decision against revealing the name of the Danish expert, this was naturally the prerogative of the television network. Since Discovery Times chose not to eliminate the conclusion of the Danish expert from its program but to include it, the un-named expert's conclusion must therefore be included in any accurate and thorough article that describes the content of the Discovery Times program.***** | |||
| We thus have three experts in the United States, Philip van Praag, Wes Dooley and his assistant, who examined the tape and who concluded there were 10 or 13 shots fired and five experts in the US and UK who found no more than the acoustic signatures of 8 shots fired. Philip Harrison provided a written report of his findings. Steve Barber was interviewed for my book and his comments about his research is included within the narrative of my book. The Discovery Times Channel ‘teams’ have produced no written report. It should be quite obvious to EVERY person in the scientific community that Van Praag’s and Wes Dooley’s findings can never be accepted without publication of their research for peer review. (No scientific journal in the world will accept anything the so-called Danish expert has to say whilst he remains anonymous.) | We thus have three experts in the United States, Philip van Praag, Wes Dooley and his assistant, who examined the tape and who concluded there were 10 or 13 shots fired and five experts in the US and UK who found no more than the acoustic signatures of 8 shots fired. Philip Harrison provided a written report of his findings. Steve Barber was interviewed for my book and his comments about his research is included within the narrative of my book. The Discovery Times Channel ‘teams’ have produced no written report. It should be quite obvious to EVERY person in the scientific community that Van Praag’s and Wes Dooley’s findings can never be accepted without publication of their research for peer review. (No scientific journal in the world will accept anything the so-called Danish expert has to say whilst he remains anonymous.) | ||
| *****We probably should assume that the Discovery Times Channel program is intended for a television audience. If Mr. Van Praag, Mr. Dooley, Mr. Pegas or the Danish expert wish to publish their research, that of course will be up to them. We must not assume at this time that none of them will ever publish. Meantime, if Mr. Ayton would care to publicly announce how Mr. Harrison's ENTIRE body of work on the Pruszynski recording (as opposed to the short Harrison summary provided in Mr. Ayton's book) can be accessed by the general public, then Mr. Ayton is hereby invited to do so immediately; the same invitation is extended with respect to the body of research conducted by Mr. Barber, Mr. O'Dell and Dr. Zimmerman. Again, please note that what is being requested here is Mr. Harrison's ENTIRE body of research on the Pruszynski recording (and not merely the Harrison summary).***** | |||
| *Van Praag’s comment to Steve Barber following the broadcast of the Discovery Times documentary (“Until I finish sorting it out …..a day, a week, a month…”) reveals how Van Praag did not complete his research into the tape but had the audacity to present his half-cocked findings to viewers. | *Van Praag’s comment to Steve Barber following the broadcast of the Discovery Times documentary (“Until I finish sorting it out …..a day, a week, a month…”) reveals how Van Praag did not complete his research into the tape but had the audacity to present his half-cocked findings to viewers. | ||
| *****This appears entirely too vague for anyone to understand. Therefore it reveals nothing. Would Mr. Ayton care to be more specific here? Sort WHAT out, exactly?***** | |||
| Mel Ayton | Mel Ayton | ||
Revision as of 08:16, 19 August 2007
 | This page is not a forum for general discussion about Assassination of Robert F. Kennedy. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Assassination of Robert F. Kennedy at the Reference desk. |
| This topic contains controversial issues, some of which have reached a consensus for approach and neutrality, and some of which may be disputed. Before making any potentially controversial changes to the article, please carefully read the discussion-page dialogue to see if the issue has been raised before, and ensure that your edit meets all of Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines. Please also ensure you use an accurate and concise edit summary. |
 | This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Some information from the FBI review of the Sirhan Sirhan trial:
All info below taken from the 1977 review by Thomas F. Kranz, Special Counsel to the Los Angeles County District Attorney's Office.
(from page 3) In an indictment returned by the Grand Jury of Los Angeles County, defendant Sirhan was charged in Count I with the murder of Robert Francis Kennedy in violation of Penal Code Section 187. In Counts II - VI defendant Sirhan was charged with assault with a deadly weapon with intent to commit murder of Paul Schrade, Owen Stroll, William Weisel, Elizabeth Evans, and Ira Goldstein, in violation of Penal Code Section 217. Defendant Sirhan pleaded not guilty. The trial court denied defendant's motion for separate juries on the issue of guilt and the possible issue of penalty was denied. Defendant's motion to quash and set aside the petit jury list was denied, as was his motion to quash the indictment. After a jury trial, defendant was found guilty as charged on all counts, the jury fixing the degree of the offense charged in Count I at murder in the first degree. After further proceedings on the issue of penalty, the jury fixed the punishment on Count I at death. The defendant filed a notice of appeal from the judgment of conviction, and the California Supreme Court modified the judgment to provide a punishment of life imprisonment instead of death for the murder of Senator Kennedy.
(from page 5)
Earlier in the year, Sirhan had had a conversation with Alvin Clark, a trash collector employed by the City of Pasadena, in which Sirhan had expressed his concern about how the assassination of Martin Luther King would effect "Negro people and how the Negroes would vote in the coming election." Clark testified at trial that he told Sirhan he was going to vote for Senator Kennedy and Sirhan responded by saying, "What do you want to vote for that son-of-a-b for? Because I'm planning on shooting him" Clark then told Sirhan that Senator Kennedy had paid the expenses of bringing Martin Luther King's body back from Tennessee and that "you will be killing one of the best men in the country." Clark remembered that Sirhan stated that Senator Kennedy had done this merely for the publicity involved, and that this conversation had occured in mid-April, 1968.
(from page 6)
While Sirhan was being held in the pantry awaiting the arrival of the L.A.P.D., Rafter Johnson asked Sirhan repeatedly, "why did you do it?" Sirhan replied, "Let me explain" or "I can explain." At this time Sirhan also remarked in answer to Jess Unruh's question "Why him?", "I did it for my country," and a few seconds later, "It is too late".
Sirhan's pockets were emptied and the following items were taken from his possession: an automobile key, two live .22 caliber bullets and an expended bullet, two newspaper clippings (one from the Pasadena Independent Star News dated May 26, 1968, a story by columnist David Lawrence which in part noted noted that in a recent speech Senator Kennedy had "favored aid to Israel with arms if necessary."; the other newspaper clipping, an advertisement from an unidentified newspaper inviting the public "to come and see and hear Senator Robert Kennedy on Sunday, June 2, 1968, at 8:00 p.m., Coconut Grove, Ambassador Hotel, Los Angeles"). Also removed from Sirhan's pockets was $410.66 in cash, including four one hundred dollar bills. No wallet, identification, or information indicating Sirhan's identity was obtained from the examination of Sirhan's person.
(from page 9)
diary - notebook found on the top of Sirhan's dresser, which Mr. Laurence Sloan, employed in the District Attorney's Office as specialist in handwriting and questioned documents, identified as having been written by Sirhan. These pages read in part as follows: "May 18, 9:45 a.m./68 - My determination to eliminate R.F.K. is becoming more and more of an unshakeable obsession... R.F.K. must die...R.F.K. must be killed...Robert F. Kennedy must be assassinated before 5 June 68..."
Other quotes taken from these pages were the following:
"Ambassador Golberg must die"..."Ambassador Goldberg must be eliminated...Sirhan is and Arab" "Kennedy must fall (underlined), Kennedy must fall...Senator R. Kennedy must be sacrificed for the cause of the poor exploited people..."
(from page 10)
(taken from glove compartment of Sirhan's car)
a wallet containing among other things, current membership card in Sirhan's name in the Ancient Mystical Order of Rosacrucian, as well as other cards identifying Sirhan by name and address
Evidence introduced at trial established that at 8:00 a.m. Police Department arrived at the Sirhan residence, having been assigned to security at the rear of the residence to guard the premises from unauthorized persons. At approximately 11:00 a.m., upon discarding a paper cup of coffee into the trash which lay inside several boxes and cans of trash on the Sirhan property, he observed an envelope which bore on its face the return address of the Argonaut Insurance Company. Mr. Laurence Sloan, handwriting specialist of the Los Angeles District Attorney's Office, testified that the writing on the back of the envelope was that of Sirhan. The following words, repeated several times, were written on the reverse side of the envelope, which had been put in evidence by the prosecution: "R.F.K. must be...disposed of properly. Robert Fitzgerald Kennedy must soon die."
Other trial evidence introduced was testimony of Mr. and Mrs. John Weidner, the owners of a health food store in Pasadena, who had employed Sirhan as a box boy and delivery boy. The weidners had discussions with Sirhan on the subject of politics in which Sirhan asserted that violence was the only means by which American Negroes would achieve their goals, and that the state of Israel had taken his home, and that the Jewish people were on top and directing the events in America. When Sirhan stated to the Weidners that there was more freedom in Russia and China than America, Mr. Weidner had inquired, "Why don't you go there yourself?" Sirhan replied, "Maybe one day I will go."
(from page 11)
Sirhan stated at trial that he "read everything about the Arab-Israeli situation that he could lay his hands on," including publications from the Arab information center in the United States and a book on Zionist influence on U.S. policy in the Middle East.
One book read by Sirhan, entitled Cyclomancy(underlined), was described by Sirhan as follows: "The basis of what he says is you can do anything with your mind if you know how"..."how you can install a thought in your mind and how you can have it work and becom reality if you want it to." One Rosicrucian article read by Sirhan taught him that if he wrote something down, he would accomplish his goal. Sirhan testified that he had recorded various things in his notebook "with the objective in mind of accomplishing his goals...and in reference to that, the assassination of Robert Kennedy."
(from page 12)
At trial, Sirhan admitted writing on May 18, 1968, that his "determination to eliminate R.F.K. is becoming more the more of an unshakeable obsession...(and that he could have written this at the time Senator Kennedy had said he would send 50 planes to Israel.
During the two weeks prior to the assassination, .... After finishing his several hours of shooting at the gun range, Sirhan had dinner at a Pasadena restaurant and observed a newspaper ad which read, "Join in the miracle mile march, for Israel." Sirhan testified that "this advertisement brought him back to the six days in June of the previous year, and that the fire started burning inside of him as a result of the ad."
When Sirhan saw a sign for United States Senator Kuchel's Headquarters, he dropped by and was told that a large party for Senator Kuchel was going on at the Ambassador Hotel. When Sirhan walked toward the hotel, with his gun still in the automobile, he observed a large sign concerning some Jewish organization and Sirhan testified that this "boiled him up again."
(from page 13)
Out of the presence of the jury, Sirhan screamed to the trial court "I killed Robert Kennedy willfully, premeditatively, with 20 years of malice aforethought." Additionally, Sirhan stated, "I'm willing to fight for (the Arab cause)...I'm willing to die for it."
In front of the jury, on re-direct examination, Sirhan explained the circumstances under which he had declared that he had killed Senator Kennedy with malice aforethought. He had stated that at the time, outside the presence of the jury, had informed the court, "I at this time, Sir, withdraw my original plea of not guilty and submit the ple of guilty as charged on all counts. I also request that my counsel disassociate themselves from this case completely." Sirhan stated in front of the jury that he was "boiling" at this time. And when the trial court asked him "alright, and what do you want to do about the penalty," Sirhan had responded, again outside the presence of the jury, "I will offer no defense whatsoever...I will ask to be executed, Sir." The trial court had refused to accept the plea and had ordered the trial to proceed, finding Sirhan incapable of representing himself. Thereafter, Sirhan's mother and Mr. Nakhleh, a Palestinian Arab attorney serving as a defense advisor, had spoken with
Sirhan and had given him advice. Sirhan had agreed to proceed with the trial represented by his counsel, once they agreed not to call the two girls as witnesses.
(from page 17) (Summary of Trial Evidence)
It is clear from the record that there was abundant evidence of premeditation and deliberation of first degree murder. Sirhan had purchased the murder weapon almost six months prior to the assassination that Sirhan was "planning on shooting that son-of-a-bitch Senator Kennedy", and Sirhan's stalking of Kennedy, all reflected by Sirhan's own testimony added substance to this conclusion. Additionally, Sirhan's trip to the shooting range, his visit to the Ambassador Hotel two days prior to the assassination, and his conduct immediately prior to the assassination, including his asking of questions relative to Senator Kennedy's intended route and security protection, including his statements after the assassination that he could "explain" and committed his act "for my country," and his possession on his person of clippings relative to Senator Kennedy and the Senator's favorable position towards Israel, all added to evidence of premeditated murder. Finally, in front of the jury, Sirhan admitted that during a
courtroom outburst while the jury was absent, he had stated, "I killed Robert Kennedy willfully, premeditatedly, and with 20 years of malice aforethought."
Emobiles 13:06, 29 November 2006 (UTC) The article found in Sirhan's pocket revealing Kennedy's preference towards arms sales to Israel was from the Pasadena Independent Star News dated May 26, 1968 but Sirhan was quoted from his diary of May 18th. expressing his desire to kill Kennedy for his arms support for Israel. How did Sirhan know before the press made it public, Kennedy's preference?
Mel Ayton article
i read this article is it a good source to put in there? he cites zero evidence. most of it sounds completely made up. things like this are a dead give away:
"The propaganda used by Palestinians had no less an effect on the younger generations of children from the 1940s to the present day. From an early age Sirhan had been taught by educators, family members, and friends that the Jews were "treacherous," "an evil enemy" and it was his "duty" to rid Jews from Palestine. Sirhan's generation was taught to hate, despise, and fear Jews, to believe that it was not only right for every self-respecting Arab to fight the Jewish state and that it was just and desirable to destroy it. Undoubtedly, this milieu of hatred had an intense effect on Sirhan as he grew up."
he doesn't cite a source for this. he's making up an opinion about something that happened in 1940. right before that he compares the palestinians to Nazis. more of the same:
"Sirhan's irrational hatred and anger towards the Jews did not originate with any mental illness he may have suffered. In fact, his attitude was no different from that of the majority of Palestinians and the rest of the Arab peoples. His ideas were entirely rational within the norms of the Arab world."
so here Sirhan's motivation is that all arabs are antisemitic. it's ridiculous.
i'm taking that part out.
Page discusses conspiracy theories more than Actual Assassination
This page is in danger of turning into the "Robert F. Kennedy Assassination Conspiracy Theories" page. I'm not against these alternative theories being on the page, as they are thought-inspiring, but they overwhelm the basic function of the page, which is to present the facts about RFK's assassination. The "official" story of the shooting is almost sidelined by all the paragraphs devoted to convincing the reader that the official recorded facts are unreliable.
Additionally, almost all the links are to "Alternate Theories" of dubious reliability.
Again, I don't mind these theories being on the page, but ought they not to be balanced with more facts from the "official" version? Woodson 04:53, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
For example, more links to eyewitness testimony, and the presented facts of the case, would at least better represent what is claimed to have happened, so that readers can better separate the official story from the conspiracy/"second-man"/Manchurian Candidate assertions. Woodson 20:45, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
Page Full of Errors
Conspiracy theories are one thing, but having honest intellectual debate about this subject is another. This page tends to give too much credence to conspiracy and not enough to actual facts. At one point, the athor says that, "there is no record of RFK supporting Israel during that period." In fact, there is evidence to RFK's support of Israel. When Sirhan Sirhan was processed, two newspaper clippings were found in his pocket. One of them was from the Pasadena Independent Star News, dated June 2. There is also much reason to believe that Sirhan Sirhan wanted RFK to die. The best evidence of this fact can be found on a page in Sirhan's notebook. He writes, "RFK must die- RFK must be killed. Robert F. Kennedy must be assassinated... Robert F. Kennedy must assassinated before 5 June 68." The whole page is dedicated to this mantra. Author Dan E Moldea concludes his book The Killing of Robert F. Kennedy with a story related to him by author Michael McCowan, which goes as follows:
Suddenly, in the midst of their conversation, Sirhan started to explain the moment when his eyes met Kennedy's just before he shot him. Shocked by what Sirhan had just admitted, McCowan asked,'Then why, Sirhan, didn't you shoot him between the eyes?' With no hesitation and no apparent remorse, Sirhan replied,'Because that son of a bitch turned his head at the last second.'
If this appaling admission isn't enough to convict Sirhan, then I don't know what will. To admit conspiracy is to absolve Sirhan of his crime of murdering an important individual that had the potential to alter the course of American history. This page ought to be dedicated to upholding the facts and conclusions that place blame on the guily party and give the proper respect to the slain Kennedy. Dissent is cool 23:39, 15 June 2007 (UTC)Dissent Is Cool
2) As to the "RFK must die" journal entry, there have been a number of handwriting experts who have claimed that the handwriting for this entry does NOT match Sirhan's handwriting for any other entries in that journal. Plus the question of why Sirhan, who only had a grade school education, would have used English phrases like "unshakeable obsession". These issues should be discussed further.
And, while RFK may have been a supporter of Israel, so was EVERY OTHER Democratic candidate, as was the Democratic incumbent, Lyndon Johnson, AND all the Republican candidates of that year. The only serious 1968 presidential candidate who could accurately have been described as "anti-Israel" was segregationist third-party candidate George Wallace(the candidate, for whatever it may be worth, that Thane Cesar later admitted to supporting).
Therefore, there was nothing in RFK's position on Israel that would have marked him for death in Sirhan's eyes any more than any other major party candidate of that year.
And the one thing that opponents of the idea of a conspiracy to shoot RFK STILL have never adequately addressed is the finding of Dr. Noguchi in his autopsy of RFK that the fatal shot was fired from behind, at an upward "nearly verticle" angle and at point-blank range. Sirhan was NEVER in position to have fired this shot. Sirhan was in position, however, to have inflicted the non-fatal wounds suffered by the other shooting victims that evening. Ken Burch 11:28, 30 June 2007 (UTC)Ken Burch
- I agree with the above poster.Who edits this garbage? Entries for this subject must rank as one of the most biased and undersourced I have ever read.You quote me in part but ignore my research about Shane O'Sullivan's ridiculous RKK/CIA allegations and Steve Barber's article about the acoustics evidence which is challenges everything about the new Discovery Times documentary - see below -
You omit so much it is difficult to know where to start - perhaps here - where you will find further books and information which challenge your conspiracy-minded editor:
http://hnn.us/articles/32193.html
http://hnn.us/articles/38496.html
http://hnn.us/articles/36915.html
You may also wish to add the following to your paragraph on the Discovery Times documentary, in which I appear - and you mention in a recent addition to the entry:
There are a number of issues which the Discovery Times program did not take into account:
- Conspiracists do not understand the differences in the qualifications of the experts interviewed for the documentary. Unlike Philip Van Praag and Wes Dooley, who are, essentially, audio engineers, Philip Harrison is a professional acoustics expert who works for a professional acoustics firm, JP French Associates.
- Conspiracists are misrepresenting the provenance and quality of the digitized version of the tape used by Barber and Harrison. They comment that Harrison did not have access to the ‘Master Tapes’. Van Praag had this to say about the copy of the digitized version sent to Steve Barber who in turn forwarded it to Philip Harrison, “The copy I made for you resulted from a request to me from the CSA, asking if I would do them a favor by responding to their requestor (Mel Ayton) regarding his desire to obtain a copy of better quality than the stock cassettes that the CSA normally provides…….. I did not apply any filtering to the recording you obtained from me. The transcription I made utilized the FINEST studio professional console analog equipment for playback (quite necessary), along with multiple digital and analog machines on the record side.” After examining the digitized version of the tape Steve characterized it as “…identical to the cassette in every way, except that it is much clearer.” Digitized copies lose nothing in the transaction.
- It appears Mr. Ayton has misunderstood. Let's review: "While all four experts bypassed a crude cassette copy of the Pruszynski recording that had been created years before by the California State Archives in Sacramento, only the first three experts worked directly from SEVERAL high-quality digital and analog master dubs of the recording; the fourth expert had to rely on a COPY of JUST ONE of those master dubs." Therefore despite what Mr. Ayton claims, it would appear that the point being made here is not that Harrison did not have access to any master tapes. Rather, it appears the point being made is that Harrison had access to one copy of only one of the masters. Whereas other experts had access to all of the masters, both digital and analog (all of which were the originals, apparently analyzed via the original equipment used to create them, and none of which was a copy).*****
- Conspiracy bloggers are misrepresenting the teams of acoustics experts and purported acoustics experts who have examined the Pruszynski Tape. They allege that three experts say there were more than 8 shots and one expert dissents. This mischaracterizes the truth of the matter.
- It appears Mr. Ayton is wrong. The Discovery Times Channel program does not appear to have misrepresented or mischaracterized these matters. Discovery Times clearly reported that when it came to the analyses consulted for its program, there were three experts who found more than eight shots in the Pruszynski recording: 1. Mr. Van Praag, 2. Mr. Dooley (along with Mr. Dooley's associate, Mr. Pegas, thus counting these two men as one team) and 3. the Danish expert; and that there was a fourth expert (Mr. Harrison) who dissented. Discovery Times seems very clear on this matter, that these four were the experts used for its program (and no more than these four were consulted) and that it was their conclusions that were reported in the program.*****
Philip Harrison, together with Professor Peter French, a lecturer in acoustics at the University of York examined the Pruszynski Tape and found no more than 8 shots recorded on it. In the United States, audio expert Steve Barber and Michael O’Dell and Dr Chad Zimmerman, who have a wealth of experience researching the scientific aspects of the JFK assassination, also examined the tape and found no more than 8 shots. Both teams had independently examined the tape then Barber and Harrison consulted with each other. We can eliminate the ‘Dutch’acoustics expert as no scientific journal in the world would accept findings from an anonymous source.
- It appears Mr. Ayton believes it is important to count the exact number of experts on each side of this debate. Well, in the interest of using a fair and consistent method of counting both sides, we might want to count experts who are members of the same research team as one and not count them individually (as was done above in the case of the team comprising Mr. Dooley and Mr. Pegas). If we decide to apply that rule, then it would appear that we should count Mr. Barber, Mr. O'Dell and Dr. Zimmerman as comprising one team and count Mr. Harrison as comprising another (one-member) team. By this measure, our score of experts becomes 3 to 2 in favor of more than eight shots in the Pruszynski recording (and if we eliminate the un-named Danish -- not Dutch -- expert, our score is then tied at 2 to 2). Mr. Ayton is welcome to place as much emphasis as he wants to on the exact number of experts on either side of the debate and he is welcome to use any method of counting he personally favors. Next, with regard to what sort of things scientific journals might or might not accept, Mr. Ayton might have a point there worthy of some consideration, although this is in the realm of speculation. With regard to Discovery Times' decision against revealing the name of the Danish expert, this was naturally the prerogative of the television network. Since Discovery Times chose not to eliminate the conclusion of the Danish expert from its program but to include it, the un-named expert's conclusion must therefore be included in any accurate and thorough article that describes the content of the Discovery Times program.*****
We thus have three experts in the United States, Philip van Praag, Wes Dooley and his assistant, who examined the tape and who concluded there were 10 or 13 shots fired and five experts in the US and UK who found no more than the acoustic signatures of 8 shots fired. Philip Harrison provided a written report of his findings. Steve Barber was interviewed for my book and his comments about his research is included within the narrative of my book. The Discovery Times Channel ‘teams’ have produced no written report. It should be quite obvious to EVERY person in the scientific community that Van Praag’s and Wes Dooley’s findings can never be accepted without publication of their research for peer review. (No scientific journal in the world will accept anything the so-called Danish expert has to say whilst he remains anonymous.)
- We probably should assume that the Discovery Times Channel program is intended for a television audience. If Mr. Van Praag, Mr. Dooley, Mr. Pegas or the Danish expert wish to publish their research, that of course will be up to them. We must not assume at this time that none of them will ever publish. Meantime, if Mr. Ayton would care to publicly announce how Mr. Harrison's ENTIRE body of work on the Pruszynski recording (as opposed to the short Harrison summary provided in Mr. Ayton's book) can be accessed by the general public, then Mr. Ayton is hereby invited to do so immediately; the same invitation is extended with respect to the body of research conducted by Mr. Barber, Mr. O'Dell and Dr. Zimmerman. Again, please note that what is being requested here is Mr. Harrison's ENTIRE body of research on the Pruszynski recording (and not merely the Harrison summary).*****
- Van Praag’s comment to Steve Barber following the broadcast of the Discovery Times documentary (“Until I finish sorting it out …..a day, a week, a month…”) reveals how Van Praag did not complete his research into the tape but had the audacity to present his half-cocked findings to viewers.
- This appears entirely too vague for anyone to understand. Therefore it reveals nothing. Would Mr. Ayton care to be more specific here? Sort WHAT out, exactly?*****
Mel Ayton
http://www.potomacbooksinc.com/Books/BookDetail.aspx?productID=146341
Categories: