Mark Lane (1)Besprekingen

testimonianze di reduci e disertori americani sulle torture e sui crimini di guerra

Although this book may now seem dated, it was one of the first to critique the problems with the Warren Commission report

אחד הספרים הראשונים והמשפיעים ביותר על רצח קנדי וועדת וורן. ספר שעשה עלי בזמנו רושם עז

Mr Lane is an attorney, which- imho- gives his writings a lot of authority..
And, yes, I do think his dissecting the Warren Commision' s finding does have a ring of truth.
But still, after all these years I don't know what is wrong or what is right;
I guess we will never find out what really happened-
but bless Mr. Lane for at least trying!½

Mark Lane is a defense attorney, and that is an important thing to note as you read through his evidence and assertions in Rush to Judgment. Lane is one of the most prominent critics of the Warren Commission, and his point by point dissections of the Report have earned him praise and savage attacks.

After having read dozens of books on the tragic day in Dallas, I have come to believe that Oswald was a nut, and that he acted alone.

But Lane's criticisms of the Warren Commission actually don't stand on whether Oswald was the lone gunman. Rather, Lane puts forth a huge number of compelling arguments about the strength and veracity of Warren Commission findings. Having read this and other of Lane's books, it seems plain to me that the case against Oswald wasn't proved "beyond a reasonable doubt" in the Commission Report.

As an attorney, Lane can dissect an argument deftly, pointing out what is known and what is conjecture. That to me is the essence of what is great about this book -- that ability to separate the two. At the same time, however, it seems plain that Lane is acting as an attorney making an argument -- just as anxious to prove his point as the Commission. He is a man with an agenda. That's OK, great even. But we as readers need to keep this in mind.