On another note (so to speak) my University Honors Thesis is available online…:-)

This paper is the result of more than a year’s worth of research, actually on two continents, as I found myself fascinated with Ben Jonson while I was a student at the University of Edinburgh, Scotland. I discovered to my delight and surprise that a major book on Jonson, The Broken Compass, had been written by one of my profs at Bucknell, Ned Partridge. When I returned to Bucknell I requested that he be my English Lit advisor for this project, as was Dr. Robert Hilliard, my mentor, in History.

I was fortunate to graduate as one of two in my class, and the only woman, with a University Honors degree that year.


Sad to share…

I am deeply saddened to have to share that my dear husband and passionate JFK researcher Donner Brown has passed away. Donner worked with me on all my presentations and was my producer, putting together all the powerpoint presentations and providing the most wonderful support for me. Just about any credibility I have in this arena I feel I owe to him. He always pushed me to do more. We were just starting work on our first book, in fact, about the JFK limo and its star witness.

Here is Donner’s obit:

The photo above was taken on the roof of the Dallas Grand Hotel.

Let’s not forget the QMII follow-up car…

Right behind SS100X on 11.22.63 was the stunning SS parade limo (for some strange reason both a convertible and armoured).  It carried the SS men who were told to stay off of SS100X, and was driven by SA Sam Kinney.

This car is, to my thinking, every bit as interesting as SS100X.  It was sequestered with SS100X following the assassination, but there is no record of what, if anything, was done with it.  SA Robert Frazier did not do a forensic exam on it, as he did on SS100X.

It was the QMII that was used for the Warren Commission reenactment in May, 1964.  That is another story, as the reason it was used instead of the actual assassination limousine was that SS100X had been gutted to bare metal to be rebuilt and was, therefore, conveniently unavailable.

Here is an interesting page on the QMII:


The Nature of the Ongoing Coverup…EF reply…

It seems to me that there is information that those still pushing the Ongoing Coverup don’t care about.  Then there is information they don’t want the rest of us to have.  One example of that, from my experience, is the Ferguson Memo, which was sent to me by mistake long before they had RIFs when I asked for everything NARA had on the limo.

Prior to the acquisition of the information in the Ferguson Memo there was a great deal of confusion about what happened to the limo once it returned to the White House Garage.  Once I published the Ferguson Memo at my website a tsunami occurred.  Everyone’s pet theory was up for grabs.  Therefore, it seems to me those involved in the Ongoing Coverup use confusion to their advantage.  By refusing to release certain documents which they know would clear up the confusion, they can just let everyone go around in circles, coming up with crazy theories, which they can then point to as evidence of CT ‘looniness’…

When I published the Ferguson Memo, Mr. Marsh went to NARA demanding a copy of it. They refused, saying that it was still being withheld.  Marsh then produced MY copy of the Ferguson Memo and the people at NARA went “whoops.”  So they then had no choice but to release it.  But when they did so, they cut off the date of the memo, which on my copy had been December 18, 1963



Was this just an ‘accident’?  Or part of a deliberate process to encourage confusion?

Another issue is NARA withholding access to documents they have.  When you go to NARA for serious work, you are assigned to one of their people.  They vett you and know what you are looking for.  On one trip I hoped to see the Jim Garrison files, notes, memos, etc, that had just recently been donated to NARA.  I was told that I had not allotted enough time to do so (I had two days) and was denied access to any of the material at that time.  What that said to me was (1) the files had not been ‘gutted’ yet and (2) that they were, in their original state, dynamite.

So, basically, in whichever direction one goes, there will be those sincerely confused and doing their best, and those in-the-know who are trying to withhold information.  Ironically, the more controversy your research generates, perhaps the more on-target it is, especially if you find that people seems to be coming out of the woodwork to try to discredit you…