My Review of “The Inheritance” Revisited, Again.

A Response to Bill Kelly’s critique of my book review

fROM JFK Contercoup2 blogspot: “A Critique of My Review of The Inheritance by Philip [sic] Nelson”, by Bill Kelly (WEDNESDAY, MAY 8, 2019)

BK NOTES: I was quite surprised to read Phil Nelson’s review of The Inheritance in which he is critical of my review. Well now I am quite critical of my own review too – for believing anything Fulton says. Nelson is one of those who writes multiple books blaming LBJ for the Dealey Plaza operation, something that he could not have done. ††††

[PFN response]: Evidently, Mr. Kelly has not read any of my books, at least not thoroughly, as I have described in considerable detail precisely how LBJ was uniquely qualified to plan and direct the “Dealey Plaza operation” as no other person could have done. For a summary of those reasons, please refer to the menu above for “The Books” and read the descriptions, beginning with the first book, “The Mastermind”. Of course, a fuller understanding can only be achieved by reading the books entirely, at least the first or second of them. But for a single paragraph summary explanation, read closely the following, then explain what I got wrong:

The premise of the book, and the term “Mastermind”, is that there had to have been one key person who was the single most important catalyst behind the JFK assassination who would have provided the “critical mass” required to bring all other elements together and held them together throughout the planning and execution of the 1963 coup d’etat. That person would have necessarily been someone who had the power to assure the others that they would succeed and be protected from discovery and prosecution afterwards; he would have to be someone who recruited and marshaled all the others and he would have had to have influence across the federal government bureaucracy as well as the Texas state and local judicial and law enforcement agencies. Lyndon Johnson was uniquely positioned to fulfill all of these requirements and be able to provide the unifying “driving force” required to pull off “The Crime of the 20th Century.”

The following reprint of the original book review — augmented with Mr. Kelly’s rebuttals (in red) and my responses to them (in blue) — is done so that readers will understand the context within which they appear.

A Review of an Incredible Book: “The Inheritance”


This book is taking the “JFK Assassination Research Community” (if one can seriously refer to it as such) by storm.  Like men scurrying around a ship in distress looking frantically for safe harbor – in this case, words that will sustain the test of time – many old-time researchers are scrambling with the dilemma presented to an established institution by a “newbie” who has burst onto the scene with what appears, at least to some of them, to be a veritable solution to a fifty-five-year-old puzzle: “Who really killed JFK?”

For the naysayers, the vetting of Christopher and Michelle Fulton’s story is so conflicted that even the 120 pages of photos and documents, and as importantly, the numerous citations to sworn affidavits of key witnesses contained within the narrative (including many verbatim copies of other original materials) do not seem to mitigate the shock of those whose contrary opinions have been entrenched for many decades.

But more about that aspect of the “Crime of the Century” later. 

Christopher Fulton’s life was forever altered when he acquired, in 1995, a gold Cartier watch that was worn by JFK on the last day of his own life.

Little did he know that the watch had once been covered by the slain president’s blood and brain matter, nor that the finely shattered lines – Fulton called them “striations” – on the crystal, were caused by a shock wave impacting it from the fatal shot to JFK’s head. That occurred just as he held his hands toward his neck, instinctively reacting to an earlier shot to his throat,  and those striations would collect not only JFK’s bodily tissues, but traces of the mercury that had been infused into the bullet to ensure his death (p. 119).

What Fulton would find out later, from Robert Bouck – who, in 1963, had been in charge of the Secret Service’s Protective Research Section – revealed that Robert F. Kennedy had obtained absolute proof of a conspiracy with a number of shooters and many more shots than the official reports had stated.  But that information would only come to him years later, though its provenance was a forensics examination done in the mid-1960s that RFK had obtained from a private entity, done specifically to keep it away from the FBI and Secret Service laboratories, where Kennedy knew it would never be properly analyzed.

When he had originally purchased the watch, Fulton had no reason to believe that it was material evidence directly related to the murder of President Kennedy that would have absolutely proved the existence of a conspiracy, had there ever been an honest investigation of the crime.  Nor did Fulton realize, until much later, that it was Robert Kennedy who had discovered that truth and had taken steps to preserve it, and other such incriminating evidence, out of the reach of either the government – or, to ensure their safety, his own family – when he entrusted much of it to JFK’s secretary Evelyn Lincoln for safe-keeping. Likewise, Fulton later discovered that Robert Kennedy had also taken precautionary steps to ensure that other evidence, proving the truths of his brother’s murder, would be kept safe for discovery by future generations; he did that by burying them with JFK’s casket when it was reinterred on March 14, 1967 at Arlington National Cemetery.  These items included photographs of the watch, the original watch strap, the president’s brain, blood reports, and copies of the x-rays and autopsy photos.

Robert Kennedy probably selected Mrs. Lincoln’s assistance because of his knowledge that she had already acquired, on the day after the assassination, many other mementos of JFK and her time working in the Oval Office (undoubtedly made more numerous due to her anger with Lyndon Johnson, who had demanded that she complete the task of removing JFK’s property in less than one hour; her complaint to RFK about it succeeded in extending the deadline another two hours.[1]  Johnson then claimed in his memoirs that he didn’t take over the office until three days later [forcing his future biographer Robert Caro to go along with it] among the many other lies contained within Johnson’s tome).

Fulton had walked innocently into the middle of the morass when he bought the watch from the man to whom Mrs. Lincoln had gifted it in her will, Robert L. White of Catonsville, Maryland, a collector of presidential memorabilia, after she had become friends with him through years of correspondence and visits; two years after she died, once the government discovered the existence of the hidden secrets, Fulton would begin experiencing a decade-long, nearly unbelievable, gestapo-like government-induced torture program including visits to some of the worst prisons in the country that almost defies description.  But Fulton attempted to do just that by devoting nearly half of the book’s narrative to his personal long-term nightmare that essentially destroyed his previous life, as well as his wife’s and his mother’s, even the lives of his four rescue dogs. In all of their cases: Literally, destroyed.

In Fulton’s writing about such painful memories, he has laid bare the awful truth of the lengths to which the government will go to protect the original lies – now devolved into apparently permanent myths – that were meant to portray its own innocence as the original plotters cunningly replaced their own blame for the assassination of the 35th president onto a “lone nut” simpleton / malcontent.
The “lone nut malcontent” façade became another pattern to be twice repeated five years later with similar other “misfits” blamed for the murders of Martin Luther King Jr. and Robert F. Kennedy.  Both of them had already become national heroes yet their public popularity had caused them to become feared by the plotters as being potential threats to the existence of those same myths that protected the truths from being exposed.

Mr. Fulton’s travails exposed still another long-buried, very plausible explanation for how and why JFK’s son – John F. Kennedy, Jr. – died.  
In early 1998, Fulton met with JFK Jr. in Florida and subsequently sold the watch to him, suddenly shifting the object of the government’s wrath with it, from one man to another, yet not releasing its grip on the first of them.  Shortly after their meeting, JFK Jr. made the mistake of writing to President Clinton to suggest a proper forensic autopsy of his father, to establish “the truths behind my father’s murder being released to the public.”  Those two events led to a series of others, not the least of which was Fulton’s indictment in February, 1998 and his arrest on August 9, 1998, then the beginning of his torture and the loss of his freedom until finally being released in February, 2007.

For JFK Jr., it appears that the interview he conducted with Christopher Fulton at the hotel in Florida was part of his larger plan for a major expose’ in his magazine George, but, as he cautioned Fulton, “I want to keep this under wraps until late next year.” (p. 181).  Unfortunately for him, Mr. Kennedy would not live that long.  He would die in a mysterious airplane crash on July 16, 1999.  There has been a plethora of news articles written since then which suggest still another cover-up has been in place for two decades and counting. One such document is headlined: “HARD EVIDENCE OF CONSPIRACY, COVER-UP IN JFK Jr. DEATH” and includes the following sentences in its eleven (11) pages: [2]

  • JFK Jr.’s 9:39 PM radio contact was without doubt DELIBERATELY and literally “covered up”: hours of time on the tape archive of WCVB’s July 17 broadcast, during which information on Kennedy’s radio contact was continually reported have been intentionally cut. The record has in fact been FALSIFIED.
  • FAA Flight Specialist Edward Meyer of LaGuardia Airport in Queens N.Y., . . . stated in the report that visibility in the region was AT LEAST very good on the evening of July 16. Meyer himself became SO distressed by endless spewing of erroneous disinformation about these weather conditions by government agencies and mass media, he took the unprecedented step of issuing a public statement ON HIS OWN–which THOROUGHLY SLAMMED this onslaught of disinformational noise as complete, total NONSENSE. . . . To quote from Meyer’s personal statement as released to mass media: “The weather along his flight was just fine. A little haze over eastern Connecticut.”

There have been many other “dots connected” within the Fultons’ book which will be discovered by the careful reader.  Ergo, we need not tabulate all of them within this paper, however a hint at some of them may be intuited from some of the following material as we return to the issues raised in the opening paragraphs.  They relate to the paradox of how some of the most “experienced” researchers have not fully embraced the revelations contained within this extraordinary personal account, and how Christopher Fulton’s original desire to own a key piece of history, JFK’s watch, turned his world upside-down.

The Fultons stipulated on the copyright page:

This is a memoir; it is sourced from my memories, letters, and recollections. Dialogue is reconstructed, and some names and identifying features have been changed to provide anonymity. There is some informed, educated supposition about how actions affected historical event and meetings.  The underlying story is based on actual happenings and historical personages.

These literary devices have been used by many authors of personal-witness books in the past as a means to attract a wider readership for their works.  Authors writing to an audience more concerned with readability than technical detail have found that people are generally attracted to those works that utilize the novelist’s artful lilt over the scholarly technical mechanics of a research historian.[3]  Such authors face the essential handicap of being in a position of creating a new historical record where none previously existed, therefore normal citations to previous works cannot be reduced to footnoted references to those other sources; they must, of necessity, describe the pertinent facts within the narrative itself.

Which is precisely what the Fultons have done; their book includes numerous verbatim copies of correspondence, photos and legal documents.  Finally, it should be understood that stylistic writing points do not, of themselves, have any pertinence to the intrinsic accuracy of a book.  For example, the famed biographer of LBJ, the aforementioned Robert Caro, has studiously appended his books with very lengthy endnotes and chapter summaries which, to the average reader, suggests that the heavy documentation proves its veracity.  That is, unless they take note that he has omitted numerous issues and/or persons which/whom do not comport with his narrative:

  • As one illustration of the point, among many, the names and related stories of men closely associated with Johnson’s darker side, including his aide/hitman Malcolm Wallace or Billie Sol Estes (whose name appeared in practically every newspaper in the country, multiple times, during 1962 specifically because of his association with Johnson), and the names and mysterious deaths of five of Estes’ associates during the previous year could thus be ignored as well. Even his long-time aide / appointee as U.S. Attorney in the Northern Texas District, H. Barefoot Sanders, who showed up in the Western District, outside his normal jurisdiction, just in time to take control of the tainted 1962 grand jury to ensure that Henry Marshall’s death certificate would not be changed from the ludicrous “suicide”, at least for another twenty-two (22) years – eleven years after Johnson died and was thus safely “out of reach” of the law.  None of those names appear in any of Caro’s four tomes.

Contrast that elegant subterfuge by Caro with the works of famed “Gonzo Journalist” Hunter S. Thompson, whose essays contain some of the most profound truths ever written, yet seldom did he use conventional “literary rules” to accomplish that.  For example, on the very day of JFK’s assassination, he wrote a lengthy letter to a friend that included these excerpts, which belie his immediate knowledge that this was no act of a “lone nut”:[4]

  •  “No matter what, today is the end of an era. No more fair play . . .”
  • “This is the end of reason, the dirtiest hour of our time”,
  • “Politics will become a cockfight and reason will go by the boards,”
  • “We now enter the era of the shitrain, President Johnson and the hardening of the arteries”,
  • “My concept of the new novel would have fit this situation, but now I see no hope for getting it done, if indeed, any publishing houses survive the Nazi’s scramble that is sure to come.”  (Emphasis added, due to the profound truths he immediately predicted).

That document also contained the first use of his “patented” term Fear and Loathing along with those predictions of what suddenly appeared on the horizon, the truths of which are still being witnessed.

The Fultons’ choice of mixing “informed, educated supposition” to explain otherwise sketchy and fragmented events and known, but undocumented, meetings between conflicted principals and related matters – together with numerous hard-copy memoranda, legal documents and other artifacts – should serve them well in delivering essential truths to a larger audience than that which might have been, had certain critics made the decision for them.

Against that backdrop, long-time JFK researcher Bill Kelly recently wrote a review of the book in which he objected to the use of the literary devices the Fultons used: [5]

  • [The book was] “written in a novelized fashion so while it’s an easy read, the contrived conversations and fictionalized style takes away from the seriousness of the story and detracts from the basic facts that should be of concern to all JFK journalists and historians . . . Instead of novelizing this story, Fulton should have written this book with Dick Russell as a true to life non-fictional account, and it would have served us all much better.

What Mr. Fulton had called “reconstructed” dialog (meaning using his original notes and memories, he paraphrased actual conversations) Mr. Kelly has ridiculed as being “contrived,” as if his long conversation with Robert Bouck, one which Christopher remembered so vividly, never occurred.  Having nothing to back up his rejection, Kelly forces the reader to decide who is the more credible, a very risky act when asking the reader to decide “who has the bigger biases.”

Kelly then lamented the fact that Evelyn Lincoln had willed the property entrusted to her by RFK to a noted collector of JFK memorabilia, Robert L. White, whose notability was well established in the Baltimore-Washington area (to which I can personally attest, having seen numerous articles about him in the local press when I lived in Catonsville and worked in downtown Baltimore in the 1970-90s).  Kelly wrote, 

  • “… instead of doing the right thing, and turn over what she had to the Kennedy family before she died, Mrs. Lincoln willed the whole treasure trove to a total stranger, the unassuming and typical American Robert White.”  (Emphasis added).

[BK NOTES: White was a blue collar worker from Baltimore who wrote to Mrs. Lincoln for JFK’s autograph – that’s how they met. He was a total nobody, and Mrs. Lincoln willed him the Oval Office memorabilia that rightly belonged to the Kennedy family when she was not invited to Caroline’s wedding because she hoarded the family’s personal items that truly belonged to the family, not a total stranger like White. And we only know about the watch and other items because White tried to auction them off.]

[PFN response]: “Blue collar worker” suggests that he was an unskilled laborer who barely had a dependable income. The truth is that he was a successful salesman living in a nice home in Catonsville, Maryland who had managed to collect many presidential mementos from various presidents and whose name frequently appeared in the Baltimore Sun as a result of his widely-growing reputation in the 1970s-80s (I personally saw them, and lived within a mile or two from him at that time). After corresponding with Evelyn Lincoln for several years, they began meeting for lunches and became close and trusted friends: Ergo, he was not a “stranger” or “total nobody” as Mr. Kelly has falsely portrayed him, in his efforts to denigrate Mrs. Lincoln; but, in doing so, he unwittingly, but implicitly, does the same to Robert Kennedy, who intentionally gave her many items of property or evidence from JFK’s property for safekeeping. It is completely and disingenuously incorrect to allege — as Kelly has done — that this property “truly belonged to the family” when RFK did it for the very purpose of keeping it away from them, thus any chance that it would ever wind up with NARA, the JFK Library, the Smithsonian, or worse, the FBI. (This is all explained in depth — through Fulton’s citations to Mrs. Lincoln’s letters — within his book, at pages 9 – 10 and 81 – 82, for anyone who still doesn’t understand the issue). But this is not the only instance in which Kelly resorts to deprecation of the characters of Robert Kennedy and Evelyn Lincoln in his efforts to attack Mr. Fulton.

In making this rather haughty declaration about Mrs. Lincoln’s not having done the “right thing,” Kelly indirectly denigrates Robert Kennedy’s provable personal decision to rely on her to protect his family, not to mention the historic truths of his brother’s murder.  He also neglected to reference the late Mrs. Lincoln’s specific written instruction furnished by RFK’s former secretary, Angela Novello, to the probate judge explaining that the purpose behind honoring RFK’s wishes was to “ensure the safety of the remaining Kennedy family;” furthermore, Mrs. Lincoln’s note continued, to ensure that the property “shall not fall under the control of the CIA, the FBI, the NSA, the Pentagon, the National Archives and Records Administration, the John F. Kennedy Library, the White House, or any other branch of government or agency” (pp. 9-10). Had he reflected on it a little more, perhaps Mr. Kelly might have realized that, in denigrating Mrs. Lincoln, he implicitly did the same thing to Ms. Novello, both of whom had merely served RFK’s wishes; did he mean to denigrate him too?  

[BK NOTES: Mrs. Lincoln did not serve RFK’s wishes after 1968 when he was killed.]

[PFN response]: After pledging her loyalty to Robert F. Kennedy to ensure the property he gave her would be protected for her lifetime — and beyond, as she agreed to select someone who could be trusted to take the baton — how could anyone believe that his death cancelled their personal agreement and that she was somehow obliged to return all of it to “the family” so that his greatest fears would “come true”? Such an assertion is profoundly disingenuous, and unworthy of any serious researcher.

As Robert Bouck, the Secret Service officer who had become a trusted friend and admirer of Robert Kennedy, told Fulton (p. 129):

  • “Without Evelyn Lincoln and Angela Novello, the little remaining assassination evidence, that the government was so determined to gather up and cover up, would have disappeared, or been doctored or lost forever.  Believe me, this country owes those women a great debt.  When the truth about John F. Kennedy’s assassination is revealed, it will be because of their faithful dedication.”

What would motivate Robert F. Kennedy to take such profoundly unconventional actions to ensure that the secrets he had discovered “behind the scenes” would either be buried with JFK’s casket in the 1967 reinternment or gifted by him personally to Mrs. Lincoln for safekeeping for the rest of her life, then entrusting her to find a new, privately run entity to preserve it into the unknown future?  It is instructive to re-read the last paragraph with the names of the various federal agencies to which the property would never be given for an idea about how emphatic he must have been to her when he gave her that instruction.  It was those agencies collectively (excepting the NARA and JFK Library, that he knew would always be subject to the orders and whims of the others noted) which RFK had come to realize had something to do with his brother’s murder.

Moreover, the book contains several descriptions of the reasons for Robert Kennedy’s concerns that this property be kept from the federal bureaucracy, knowing that if it were ever to fall into those hands it would be lost forever. It becomes crystal clear that he intended to become president and only then would he be in a position to expose the complete truth of JFK’s assassination. 

That story starts on pages 117-122, within Chapter 16, “The Secrets Man.”[6]  It is the story of how Christopher Fulton met the aforementioned Robert Bouck, and how Bouck had patiently waited for someone, preferably from the Kennedy family, to come to him so that he could personally explain the complete story.

When Mr. Bouck finally received a call from Christopher in July, 1997, he inferred that Fulton was somehow acting at the behest of John F. Kennedy Jr., though that was never actually discussed. Bouck agreed to meet Fulton and a few weeks later they spent the better part of an unusually cool and rainy August day walking around Arlington National Cemetery under umbrellas.  Christopher’s bona-fides were established when he showed Bouck the watch and the copies of Mrs. Lincoln’s letter and Bouck’s own original affidavit. His confidence in Fulton now firmly established, Bouck did most of the talking, covering even the most minute details of a story that he had learned directly from RFK, including this admonition:

  • “Robert said if anything happened to him during his bid for the presidency, everything he had collected should remain secret and silent in Evelyn’s keeping for the rest of her life, for the safety of the Kennedy family. That pledge of silence was Robert’s last request of her, and she kept it. It must have been an incredible burden to carry her whole life.  She held true for all those years; she was so fiercely loyal.”[7]

While Bill Kelly is certainly a man of notable accomplishments, including decades of serious research on peripheral related matters, his comments here reveal a man who evidently missed a number of the most salient points presented within the pages of the Fultons’ book.  

[BK NOTES: The most salient points are not even in Fulton’s book. Fulton is a fraud and what he doesn’t tell you about himself is the most salient. Stay tuned to JFKCountercoup for the deatils.] [sic]

[PFN response]: Your expectation that an author of a book has some duty to include every detail of his life is, at best, bizarre. Some might even call it sanctimonious.

The ones identified above may be the most mundane of them, considering what follows.

Mr. Kelly then attempted to minimize the credibility of Bouck as well as the veracity of his account, describing him – as if he knew him personally – as “a very discrete person, not someone who would spill his guts to a total stranger like Fulton, even if he did have JFK’s watch.” [8]  

[BK NOTES: Read Bouck’s WC testimony to get an idea of his personality.]

[PFN response]: That is a preposterous “idea.”

He didn’t note that Mr. Bouck was one of the few Secret Service officials who actually admired the Kennedys, had become very close to RFK after his brother’s murder, and that he was quoted in the narrative as saying (paraphrased by Christopher Fulton):

  • “What I’m about to share with you I’ve never shared with anyone, not even my own family.  The last time I spoke about any of this was to Robert Kennedy.  You see, Christopher, I made Robert a promise to stand with him until he could reach the White House, take power, and give it back to the people. He intended to set the record straight. He would have told the world there was a conspiracy to force his brother into a corner, and there was a coup that stole the power in this country. Robert Kennedy was the only man who could have disclosed that, but they got to him first.”[9]

It was quite easy for Kelly to dismiss Bouck after declaring that the book’s literary style was inauthentic, as when he stated:

  • “Fulton’s long and convoluted conversation with former Secret Service Agent Robert Bouck at JFK’s graveside is total BS . . . Nor do I believe, as Fulton attests, that LBJ had his Secret Service agents take JFK’s St. Christopher and Miraculous medals so they wouldn’t stop the bullets that he knew would be coming at him later that day. That’s BS. JFK accidentally left his medals in his Fort Worth hotel shower and they were retrieved by a Secret Service agent.”[10]

Here Mr. Kelly summarily – the term “willy-nilly” may apply here – tosses out key evidentiary points that Fulton obtained directly from the retired Secret Service official who had plaintively come forward to reveal secret truths that he had lived with for over four decades.  For some reason, Kelly noted only the medals, but those items also included a St. Christopher money clip he carried in his wallet (tucked into his breast pocket, close to his heart), his cufflinks, tie-clip and his watch, all taken under the pretext of having them checked for radiation, a practice only done in Washington; there was never a real intent to do that in Fort Worth.

As long-time researcher Edgar Tatro pointed out upon reading Kelly’s blog:

  • “Are we to believe that JFK “accidentally” left all of those items, even his wallet, in the bathroom that morning, according to Kelly’s thesis?”

[BK NOTES: Yes, Ed. The St. Christopher clip and Miraculous medals were found in JFK’s shower where he accidentally left them. The idea that the SS kept the medals from him so they would not deflect bullets is absurd.] 

[PFN response]: It is reasonable to believe that JFK might take medals into the shower, especially if they were on a neck-chain, and left them hanging there, forgetting them afterwards (which conforms to Fulton’s narrative). But why would he carry his wallet in there as well? Kelly’s comment that the “SS kept the medals from him so they would not deflect bullets is absurd” could only be logically supported if one believes that the SS–every man on the assignment–was completely innocent and all did their job that day honorably and with complete due diligence (and that, of course, such an order would never have been uttered by Lyndon Johnson). Their complicity in facilitating the assassination has been proven, on many levels; in fact, one could argue, so much so that it has become “legend” thanks in large part to Vince Palamara’s research. Thus, the comment itself is bereft of rationality, ergo “absurd” on its face.

Maybe the real reason for the “BS” assertion was because of the statement attributed to the highly knowledgeable Mr. Bouck, a friend of RFK who had pledged himself to remain true to him: “Those agents’ orders came directly from Johnson”?[11]

[BK NOTES: Read Bouck’s Warren Commission testimony in which he mentions a WC document that is a report on the threats from Texas made against JFK – dozens of them, when Bouck’s Protective Research Section told the agents leaving on the Texas trip that there were none.]

[PFN response]: It might be helpful to making your point (whatever it was) to cite a specific document, out of the dozens available, relating to Bouck’s testimony; the absence of such a link suggests that this is merely a “rabbit hole” to create a false reference to some document that refutes Bouck’s credibility, thus removing him from further discussion. Nice try, but, again, his presence as practically the only agent on the force who was friendly to both of the Kennedys–alone against the many who did not–should be sufficient to buttress his credibility. Whatever his supposed failure might have been, is it not possible that he was over-ridden by Rowley’s directives? This apparent attack on Bouck’s credibility parallels the similar treatment of Robert Kennedy and Evelyn Lincoln: Must their respectable names be dragged through the mud in order to demolish a book that you don’t like?

The ease with which Kelly dismisses all of these statements with a “BS” declaration is astonishing, given that Fulton did not just dream up this very lengthy and detailed discourse. Clearly, he did not think Fulton properly documented the long conversation conducted during their walk around the massive cemetery in Arlington, Virginia. Did he expect Fulton to document it with a portable tape recorder, equipped with dual wired mics, to get verbatim quotes from Bouck, carrying it in his free hand as they strolled around the huge, hilly cemetery in the rain, while holding his umbrella in the other?  Of course, such a recording would have had to be transcribed (by a court reporter?), its accuracy legally authenticated, apparently, for even that to be acceptable. Why can’t Kelly simply accept the far more reasonable premise, that Fulton would have written out contemporaneous notes afterward to jog his memory later?  

[BK NOTES: If Fulton kept contemporary notes he would have written so and printed examples in the back of his book, where he prints redacted documents – redacted to hide the names of those who can confirm or refute his story.]

[PFN response]: I have no idea what possible devices Fulton might have used, if anything beyond his own memories, to make a record of events for future use. The thought that he had plenty of time on his hands during his incarceration caused me to conjure how I might have approached it, knowing that the wildly preternatural circumstances that brought me to the prison would make a great story someday. That they would be burned into my brain’s permanent memory cells would probably obviate the need for such notes however, come to think of it.

If not, then what about the notarized affidavit?  He didn’t mention that, at the end of Chapter 16, where the bulk of Bouck’s discussion appears, Fulton even states that when they returned to the car after their long walk around the Arlington National Cemetery, Mr. Bouck reached into the trunk and pulled out a manila envelope, saying,

  • “This is my notarized and signed affidavit.”  And further, “It details everything we discussed today. I’m glad I was able to pass it on in person and talk about it while I’m still here; it’s weighed on my mind for so many years. I’m keeping the receipt that Robert Kennedy gave me for the watch . . . if John Jr. needs it for any reason, have him contact me.”[12]

Furthermore, regarding the key piece of evidence presented within the book, Kelly has this to say:

  • “Fulton says that because the watch was only inches from his head when he was shot there, traces of the mercury coated bullet that exploded JFK’s head could be found on the watch, proof of conspiracy. I don’t buy that either. I just don’t get it. How is the watch is [sic] proof or evidence of conspiracy?[13]

The obvious answer to the question is, “It’s the mercury!”  Fulton had been told by Bouck that the mercury was consistent with top-grade U.S. military munitions, and that “the x-rays showed fuzzy grey-clouded areas that were not caused by the minute bullet fragments, but rather by mercury dispersion.” There was never any evidence presented that any of Oswald’s alleged bullets contained mercury[14], so if in fact traces of it were discovered on the watch, then there was at least one more shooter . . . Can you say “BINGO”?

[BK NOTES: Bouck did not tell Fulton any such thing. In fact these watches contained mercury and the bullet that blew out JFK’s brain need not have to contain mercury to kill him or prove conspiracy.]

[PFN response]: Please supply a citation for your assertion that “these watches contained mercury.” I’ve searched the web for any indication that this is true and have found nothing of the sort. The only element that has been considered a danger to humans that was present in watches of that era is radon, which was painted on the “hands” or the dial to make them glow in the dark, until someone noticed that the workers doing the painting were dying like flies. (It might be a useful guide for you to consider, in the future, providing citations to support provocative statements such as this, because then you would not make them unless they are true).

All in all, Mr. Kelly’s blog post in this case suggests that he has gone out of his way to posit a very weak and perfunctory critique of what most objective researchers believe to be a truthful and well documented first-hand witness account.  

[BK NOTES: What objective researchers will believe Fulton when they find out who he really is – a fellon [sic] convicted of bank fraud? This is not a well documented first-hand witness account, and Fulton did not serve a lengthly time as he asserts, but three years. This is not a memoir, it is a continuation of his bank fraud conviction.] 

[PFN response]: According to the inimitable Kris Milligan, “Chris was actually in jail twice separated by a period of being a fugitive. Yes, Fulton was into watches, the fraud story is planted by a person involved, It went to court and was found in Fulton’s favor, more to it than folks are using it as.”

His reaction to Mr. Fulton’s lengthy descriptions, in painfully agonizing detail, of the incredibly inhumane treatment he received from the time of his indictment in February, 1998 to his conviction (coerced plea deal) in August of that year, then eight and one-half years spent under the most horrid circumstances in a series of federal prisons (many of the “maximum security” type) was particularly bizarre, given that the very first words, put into the copyright page at the front of the book, were “This is a memoir.” Yet Kelly aloofly asserted:

“Much of the book is about Fulton’s jail time and the characters he met there, totally unrelated to the assassination story.”[15]

[BK NOTES: Christopher Fulton never served eight years in federal prison as he falsely asserts. He spent three years in prison under the name Jon Dallas Holden, having changed his name. Why doesn’t he tell us the names of the other prisoners he says he met – the Catholic priest, the Philly mobster? And why does  he redact the name of White’s Atlantic City lawyer who informed Fulton that White was breaking their book deal with him? Is that my “tunnel vision” or Fulton’s?]

[PFN response]: See previous comment; as Kris Milligan put it: ” . . . more to it than folks are using it as.” As for the name of his lawyer — unless it’s one of the names he changed as per the “disclaimers” in the book — I think his first name is Henry, as referenced on pages 73 and 80-81; the latter identifies him as being of Scottish heritage, which provides a clue to his last name. Also, you should know that there are many considerations in identifying people who may not appreciate having their name in a book; every author has the prerogative of deciding what to include, and what not, to tell the story that they wish to impart, always mindful that getting too far off the core subject runs the risk of losing the reader, not to mention the wasted words that might otherwise contribute to the point at hand.

In a very narrow “tunnel vision” sense, that is a correct statement.  However, when considered in the context that Fulton’s memoir is placed, it is really elementally critical to his story.  It is about the extremely long tentacles still in use by the government to protect secrets related to the truths about JFK’s assassination.  Let’s suppose for a minute that the assassination had never happened and that someone simply swiped JFK’s watch from the eponymously-named Boston library where many of his personal effects are ensconced.  Would the government have gone to such extremes to recover the same property?  Given the amount of effort expended by the government to protect the secrets, even now (the ones that were supposed to be released fourteen months ago, for example) it should be no surprise to anyone that the “Cover-up Continuum” has already proven to be not only continuous, but fierce, brutal and probably endless.

Another item from a posting by Larry P. Schnapf, a board member of CAPA (Citizens Against Political Assassinations), on the Amazon page for The Inheritance seemingly begs for a response, given that no one has given him such a response to date on that website:

  • somebody who read this book tell me one iota, a single new revelation in these documents that were supposedly so important that RFK hid them that provides evidence of a second gunman. nothing, nada, zippo so far. it just seems to be story about Fulton’s journey along with some JFK trickets [sic] and personal correspondence.”

Regarding that request for “one iota, a single new revelation in these documents” — what about these gems?:

  • Most obviously, to anyone who has even read a few of the reviews already published, the most notable item, the subject of the book and the reason for the government’s wrath against author Fulton, was addressed above in response to Bill Kelly’s confusion. 

[BK NOTES: The government’s wrath against author Fulton was not because he inherited Mrs. Lincoln’s memorabilia, or the watch or anything. Fulton, as the evidence will show shortly, was convicted of a felony bank fraud under an assumed name, the name he served time in prison Jon Dallas Holton. Christopher Scott Fulton never served time in federal prison under that name.]

[PFN response]: As the lawyers say, “Question asked and answered.” (See above). Kelly’s use of this incident is merely a device to belittle the larger story that Fulton has written, one much more important than the side show that he is using to distract readers’ attention from what is highly pertinent to understanding the profoundly critical insidiousness of the cover-up to the “Crime of the Century.”

  • It was the revelation that the Cartier watch worn by JFK when he was shot had been recovered outside normal channels and was eventually given by Secret Service official Robert Bouck to Robert F. Kennedy, who had it forensically tested, which established that it had been contaminated not only with JFK’s biological tissues and his blood, but the mercury encased into a bullet that was not consistent with other bullets allegedly (but not really) fired by Lee H. Oswald.  It is an elementary exercise to deduce that this is startling new evidence never dreamed of before this book was published, that it came from an entirely new source accompanied by much documentation.

{BK NOTES: I am not confused. This is not a startling revelation. The true fact is that these watches have mercury in them and if it tested positive for mercury that is not proof of anything, let alone that the bullet that blew out JFK’s head was laced with mercury – that’s total BS.]

[PFN response]: As noted previously, when one makes an incredible assertion–such that it was common general practice of the watch manufacturing industry to load up watches with mercury, a highly toxic chemical–it is essential to provide proof of that. Also, the use of non sequiturs like “that’s total BS” to dismiss a proposition does nothing to support an argument, other than reveal the absence of a substantive, reasoned rebuttal.

But beyond that essential piece, there were more newly harvested documents brought forth in this book, including but not limited to the following:

  • What about the numerous sworn affidavits and verbatim letters, not the least of which was Evelyn Lincoln’s letter of 6/5/92 printed on pp. 81-82, which stated in part “on Nov. 20, 1963 my husband Harold Lincoln overheard a conversation . . . Secret Service agents in in V.P. Johnson’s detail were discussing Pres. Kennedy being shot at in Dallas”?
  • How about the “revelation” that answers the long-term mystery of what happened to JFK’s brain (what was left of it) on p. 83:  Ms. Lincoln explained how it was one of several items that were placed in his new gravesite on 3/14/67?
  • Or the audio tapes described, of JFK’s conversations with McCone and Taylor about getting out of Vietnam, and how he planned to prepare for RFK to “continue” the changes he planned in his next term, and the litany of other planned programs listed on p. 89?

[BK NOTES: All I wanted to know – my only question to Fulton was what became of these tapes? I offered to make transcripts of all of them – which alone would be a fantastic book – but Fulton won’t respond to my questions. He was interviewed on video tape by Judyth Vary Baker, which might be more revealing.]

[PFN response]: My understanding is that, like the affidavits he once possessed, they were confiscated in the SWAT Team raid when he was arrested.

Still another assertion — made by ex-Secret Service SAIC – PRS Robert I. Bouck, one of the few who admired JFK — that Dallas mayor Earle Cabell and sheriff Bill Decker were CIA operatives (now proven in Cabell’s case by recently released government documents) who purposely told police and sheriff’s deputies to “stand down,” while a similar order was repeated to key Secret Service agents on detail as well, to facilitate a “false flag assassination attempt”.  Asked who turned it from a “false flag/simulated attempt” to a “real assassination,” agent Bouck stated “Lyndon Johnson” (pp. 102-103)

The recurrent meme laid out in the book, that Lyndon Johnson was behind it – implicitly as the single, key man who led all the others – is obviously the real reason for the desperate attempts by some people who claim to be “truth-seekers” to deprecate this ground-breaking book.   It is apparently a “truth” that they cannot accept, as though the rejection of the very premise was always a given (that is, it is not something new, and has been in place for many years), thus it can be construed to represent an intrinsic, long-term, unending objective.

[BK NOTES: LBJ wasn’t capable of pulling off the Dealey Plaza operation, that included the psychwar deception to blame the conspiracy on Fidel Castro, an active measure that continues today. That part of the plan was REJECTED by LBJ and the Lone Nut scenario was accepted instead. LBJ didn’t plan an operation in which he rejected the cover-story. If you are truly interested in the TRUTH – and say that Chris Fulton is – then why is he lying about the death of his mother while he was in prison, when she was in court with him over a second controversial watch sale years later? And why would Fulton redact his middle name? Because Christopher Scott Futon, as the Washington Post reported – is a convicted bank fraud felon [[sic]]. He obtained the money he gave to White for the watch through bank fraud. And that’s the truth that Fulton won’t tell you.]

[PFN response]: Like so many researchers who obstinately insist that “the CIA did it” without the help of any other entity, or individual, so too has Bill Kelly revealed that he will not accept the obvious connections to Lyndon Johnson’s complicity. If you read my first two books, you will understand that LBJ (as E. Howard Hunt and Evelyn Lincoln depicted the same thing) was the “man at the top” but, using his many contacts within the federal bureaucracy, delegated most of the planning and all of the execution to the CIA and SS (with the FBI brought in for the cover-up). Arguably the most adroit and experienced JFK researcher of our time, Edgar Tatro (who, BTW, has never used the term “Mastermind” in this context) has observed the numerous most obvious connections. He has referenced this issue in many speeches and within an essay which is in the Foreword to Richard Bartholomew’s book The Deep State in the Heart of Texas: The Texas Connections to the Kennedy Assassination (which may be read as a “free preview” on the Amazon webpage here)

Within that piece, he lists twenty (20) significant items related to the assassination beginning with “The CIA did not . . .” along with the caveat that the list “is by no means complete or thorough in rich detail, but it should be considered a significant guide to delve deeper into the issues and names delineated.”

Regarding Kelly’s derisive comments about Fulton’s conflation of events related to his mother’s death, Kris Milligan wrote this: “Remember the book was printed with two disclaimers one on copyright page and another within my Publisher Foreword.

“This is a memoir; it is sourced from my memories, letters, and recollections. Dialogue is reconstructed, and some names and identifying features have been changed to provide anonymity. There is some informed, educated supposition about how actions affected historical events and meetings.

The underlying story is based on actual happenings and historical personages. Yes, some names have been changed, some dialogue recreated, and there is some conflation of characters and minor events, but the story is very real. “

These early reactions from these two board members of CAPA suggest that they have concerns about how the public might react to this news regarding the 36th President, his political party, and the “Deep State” behind it.  Moreover, it appears that those concerns are so great that they evidently outweigh the catastrophic, permanent and continuing damage done through the coup d’état exacted upon the country on November 22, 1963.  And that fear might further explain the real reason that the “Crime of the Century” has remained unsolved for fifty-five years.

[BK NOTES: CAPA is exposing the coup in detail – and LBJ did not engineer it or have anything to do with it, as will be demonstrated. See: ]

[PFN response]: “Yawn” . . . (Would somebody poke me when that happens, can’t wait to review it!)

Could it be that Lyndon B. Johnson himself had planned for that very paradigm to protect himself, and his “legacy,” forever?

One thought on “My Review of “The Inheritance” Revisited, Again.

  1. Enjoyed “The Inheritance”, and enjoyed your review. So many interesting things in Fulton’s book. I would like to know more about Robert Bouck and if he wrote anything about the assassination that has been hidden. What a resource!


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s