I wish Ambrose and Schlesinger had read the Review Board's declassified files ... [and] used them for their work in this volume. Until they do, Stone is completely justified in making these films and therefore keeping the historical establishment honest, writes Jim DiEugenio.

Former Assasssination Records Review Board staffer Douglas Horne put his career on the line with the ARRB by writing up the story of how two different brains, both of which were claimed to be Kennedy's, were examined, and how the evidence cannot be reconciled. This landmark memo, which has been summarized elsewhere, is presented here in its entirety.

Steve Jones discusses the contents and contradictions within Marina Oswald's testimony to Jim Garrison's Grand Jury during his investigation of the assassination.

Sprague reveals his thoughts on the assassination and discusses his experiences with the House Select Committee.

Jim DiEugenio continues his detailed review, based on declassified records, of how Blakey manoeuvered the HSCA investigation towards preconceived conclusions, and his deference toward CIA.

[His] statements, to say the least, are not the pre-recorded stock answers that advisers beat into their bosses. Whatever one thinks of them, they show that, at least for right now, Ventura is his own man. And only that type could have made the remarks he did – to an audience of 3.4 million readers – on the murder of President Kennedy, writes Jim DiEugenio.

Jim DiEugenio looks closely at the record of one of the earliest critics, Edward Epstein, and questions whether he was ever a critic at all. Epstein's later work showed him to be little more than a wonk for the establishment. So how good was his first book, Inquest? DiEugenio answers that and other questions about Epstein, and talks about Epstein's work with the CIA and notably, James Angleton.

An excerpt from some of John Newman's groundbreaking work on the Oswald imposter in Mexico City.

Jim DiEugenio reports on his research into the Rose Cheramie story.

Robert Blakey has said that after his experience with the House Select Committee, it was his opinion that the JFK case was like a Rorschach test, people saw in it what they wished to see. Lambert's book is proof positive of this, write Jim DiEugenio and Bill Davy.