Vaughn-Barber-Mack Acoustics Controversy And Miscellaneous Stuff

              PENN JONES T H E
CONTINUING
INQUIRY
I VOLUME VI, NUMBER 7 FEBRUARY 22, 1982 I
In this issue: Vauglian-Barber-Macic Acoustics Controversy and miscellaneous stuff
The NAS Acoustics Panel continues in a state of indecision, and even tlie critics can't agree on ttie subject,
especially since it now appears that the Dictabelt studied by the HSCA was a dub and not the original. This issue
starts with correspondence by Vaughan, Barber, and Macl< arguing points of controversy not yet resolved. We
also are printing some interesting transcripts from November commentaries on KABC-TV in Los Angeles regar­ding
the "Roy Payne rifle story,"which is well known to some critics already. Also a roundup of clippings we
hope you'll find interesting: Beverly Oliver McGann Massegee (the babushka lady) donates a kidney to her
daughter; some Dallas police officers who are still around; the CBSA/Vestmoreland "controversy" which seems
to indicate a lot of infighting in the "Power Control Group" (which includes, some people believe, people like
Walter Annenberg, the owner/publisher of TV Guide); the death of an FBI informant's wife just 7 days after she
blew the whistle on the Bureau; the death of LHO's initial Russian contact in the U.S. after his return; and as pro­mised
several months ago a story on LHO's English-Russian dictionary, which was recently given by John
Cullins to Lee's eldest daughter Rachel.
There is now every reason to believe the month of March will bring several major breakthroughs in the JFK
mystery. Many of you whose research activity has been on vacation will find it easy and rewarding to get back to
work. We need more original articles to keep the newsletter going! Our backlog is almost gone. We hope many
serious researchers will contribute articles. Please submit them typed single-space for reproduction (about 7V2"
wide) if possible, please.
'^^r Gary Mack et a l : Dec. 15, 1981
I Ju3t received from a friend of mine, Todd Vaughan (not Vaughn) a few TCI articles
in which there is deep c r i t i c a l views on my position with vAiat the NAS panel is
reporting.
I t is quite obvious to say the least, that no matter what any one says to dispute your
"baby" Gary, your close minded attitude is uncalled for. A^ least the other researchers in
this field ai^ open minded enuff not to distort the facts such as you do, and i t is also
obvious that you have a good time cutting other c r i t i c s down. You cannot expect for some­one,
\Aen they find evidence, to s i t on i t . When I discovered the Decker statement on
channel one, I didn't know what to do. I thought about telling you f i r s t , but then I
thought', to what avail, you will only come back sctylng this and that about how much
s c i e n t i f i c ' s were involved in BBN's analysis. This I've heard before.
The reason I didn't respond to your Feb. TGI a r t i c l e was because Cutler (Cutler's in­tentions
were good. I don't discredit him. He's a good c r i t i c and a damn good friand)
screwed the whole of ray research up with his timing-which I had no part of. My name
was added to the research, when I did HOT do that. That was Vaughan and Cutlers idea:
"Cover-Up in extremis". I don't waste my time on closed minded people such as yourself,
thus, no reply (critique, if you will) to your distorted views.
If you have so much acoess to a l l that audio equipment, then I suggest you do thla,
like I have done.
j ^ ^ o r d channel one's "hold everything secure until the homicide and other investigators
'^JK get there.** in one channel of a stereo recorder. Record these aaune worda in the
right channel from your copy of channel two (removing the skip of course). Equate
the two in each speaker so you have stereo, if you can't hear these same words I really
feel that you should have your ears checked. I've done this for several people to get
their opinion and a l l of them can hear the words on channel one by Decker. Don't