Book Review: Reasonable Doubt by Henry Hurt

Henry Hurt's "Reasonable Doubt" is an overview of the JFK assassination. Hurt was a researcher for the book "Legend: the Secret World of Lee Harvey Oswald" by Edward Epstein. Hurt's research involved little more than contacting US Marines who knew Oswald. After providing research for Epstein, Hurt set aside the JFK case.

In 1981, his odysessy started anew. A man named Robert Easterling contacted him. Easterling was prepared to confess his role in the assassination of President Kennedy. Hurt, in an effort to prepare himself for this unusual interview, Hurt versed himself in the JFK assassination lore.
Hurt's overview of the case is amazing. His prose is easy to follow. His conclusions are logical. The biggest flaw in his research is, unfortunately, the inclusion of the Robert Easterling testimony.

The first chapter reads like a newspaper report. It's nine pages of who, what, where and when. After finishing this, the reader knows the basics of the official story.

Hurt then turns a critical eye to the Warren Commission's findings. There is no index from which to review the Warren Commission's hearings and exhibits. The report is hardly the corrollary of 26 supporting volumes. Congressional committees concluded that the FBI and CIA were derelict in submitting evidence to the Warren Commission. The FBI had destroyed or altered testimony or evidence. Credible leads that pointed away from the Warren Commission's main thesis were ignored.

After concluding the Warren Commission had not settled the issue, Hurt then looks at the autopsy and the Magic Bullet. The doctors in Dallas do not agree with the doctors at Bethesda. The Magic Bullet is pristine whereas test bullets fired into cadavers show significant deformation.

The author spends the next two chapters looking at the Texas School Book Depository and Dealy Plaza in general. Could Oswald have moved that quickly from the 6th floor to the 2nd floor? Were there two men on the 6th floor when the shooting began? And were there shots fired from the grassy knoll? Hurt looks at many witnesses who either were not called to the Warren Commission to testify or whose testimony was not used to draw the conclusions that the Warren Commission drew.

The shooting of Dallas police officer JD Tippit has been called the "Rosetta Stone" of the JFK assassination. Hurt entitled chapter 7, "Tippit's Murder: Rosetta Stone or Red Herring?". He proceeds to cover ground that the Warren Commission covered and some ground that the Warren Commission ignored.

The Warren Commission concluded that Jack Ruby had no ties to organized crime. The House Select Committee on Assassinations concluded that Ruby did have ties to organized crime. Hurt examines this discrepency in chapter 8, "Jack Ruby: Pimp for all Seasons".

Oswald learned the Russian language while he was a US Marine. He was discharged from the USMC and then defected to the Soviet Union. When he came back to the US, he was an open Marxist and an outspoken supporter of Castro--in cities with strong conservative or strong intelligence ties (New Orleans and Dallas). Was Oswald affiliated with some branch of US intelligence? Hurt examines this in chapter 9, "Fingerprints of Intelligence".

The only case ever brought to court regarding the assassination of President Kennedy was the case brought forward by New Orleans Parish DA Jim Garrison. Oswald spent the summer of '63 in New Orleans. There are tantalizing connections between Oswald and elements of US intelligence including ex-Cuban patriots, Guy Bannister and David Ferrie. The author spends a considerable amount of time looking at Oswald's ties to New Orleans in chapter 10, "New Orleans, USA".

The last two chapters are a summation of the conspiracy information up to 1985, the year this book was published. The information is good. Hurt gives you the names of the researchers who put forward certain aspects of the case and how he feels about them. It is hard to disagree with Hurt--he calls them like he sees them. If a conspiracy theory is bizarre, he says so. This section of the book is particular good for the beginner. The beginner can get a brief review of the other researchers and their works here. This section can be used as a stepping stone to other areas of research the beginner may find interesting.

Alas, Henry Hurt's book, "Reasonable Doubt" has one glaring flaw. This flaw is chapter 12, "The Confession of Robert Easterling". Hurt dedicates almost 50 pages to the laugable premise that Robert Easterling was involved in a conspiracy to JFK. Easterling claims he was at a bar having a drink when an acquaintance of his named Manuel Rivera came up to him. He had not seen Rivera in some time so the men had a drink while making small talk. Then Manuel asked Easterling to be a part of a plot to Kennedy. This highly unlikely event is followed up with numerous other claims which not only are unsubstantiated but are completely based in fantasy.
Here's one example. Easterling claims that to make their escape, the real assassins repelled from the 6th floor of the Texas School Book Depository to the ground via grappeling hooks and rope. Obviously, no person witnessed such a dramatic escape despite the fact Dealy Plaza was filled with throngs of people.

I'm not sure what to make of Easterling's confession other to conclude it's not accurate. Was Hurt duped? Was Easterling a plant? I don't know. But the fact that Henry Hurt dedicated so much time and energy to Easterling is why I have to give this book a mere 3 stars.