The Sirhan Sirhan Story

On June 5, 1968, Sirhan Sirhan fatally attacked Robert Kennedy -- he was tackled, disarmed and arrested immediately. Yet for decades after the murder, the arrest, and the trial, people still wonder exactly what happened. Could it be possible that Sirhan was not acting on his own -- or of his own free will?

They don't want you to read our book.: https://static.macmillan.com/static/fib/stuff-you-should-read/

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
From UFOs to psychic powers and government conspiracies. History is
riddled with unexplained events. You can turn back now or
learn the stuff they don't want you to know. A
production of iHeart Radio.

Speaker 2 (00:24):
Hello, welcome back to the show. My name is Matt,
my name is Noel.

Speaker 3 (00:27):
They called me Ben. We're joined as always with our
super producer Paul Mission Controlled decad Most importantly, you are here.
That makes this the stuff they don't want you to know.
This evening, we're returning to one of the strangest cases
of assassination in US history, which is saying a lot
if you know anything about US history. We talked about

(00:50):
parts of this story in numerous previous episodes. Do check
out our work on the assassination of JFK in nineteen
sixty three. Also check out Rob Reiner's excellent recent deep
dive Who Killed JFK, And then also look into some
of our previous work in this and other shows on

(01:11):
the death of JFK's brother, Robert Kennedy just five years
later in nineteen sixty eight.

Speaker 2 (01:18):
Oh yeah, there's a ton of previous work. We would
send everybody over to listen to the RFK tapes, which
is a show that came out June fifth, twenty eighteen,
exactly fifty years after the assassination of RFK. It's Really Good,
hosted by a guy named Zach Stewart Pontier and Bill Klaber,
who then went on to host the MLK tapes that

(01:40):
we made in twenty twenty two about Martin Luther King's
assassination also in nineteen sixty eight.

Speaker 3 (01:47):
It was a heck of a year.

Speaker 2 (01:49):
Oh yeah, and just up top, guys, I wanted to
mention this because I literally found out as I was
doing research for this episode, the connective tissue between rfk's
assassination and mlk's assassination is this attorney named William Pepper.
He was a big part of the MLK. Well, he

(02:09):
was interviewed for the RFK tapes, but he's a big
part of the MLK tapes, and the host Bill Klaber,
spent a bunch of time with him in his home
and I just found out he passed away on April
seventh this year.

Speaker 4 (02:23):
Yeah, this year.

Speaker 2 (02:24):
Really sad. He's like an amazing human being that's done
an incredible amount of work and it's just really sad
that he's.

Speaker 3 (02:30):
Passed and he has quite a record, mister Pepper of activism,
of investigation.

Speaker 2 (02:39):
Yeah, and well he represented Syrah and Syrian and he
also represented James Earl ray On, behalf of the King family.

Speaker 3 (02:46):
Yeah, it may surprise some of us, especially younger listeners.
You might hear us some an assassination happened multiple in
nineteen sixty eight. That was a long time ago, so
it might it might baffle you to realize that the
man who murdered RFK is alive today. The man who
was convicted a first degree murder in the case of

(03:08):
Robert Kennedy is alive today. In fact, he almost got
parole not too long ago, and his legal team has
been attempting to get him parolled for decades as well.
We had in our episode on Drugs as Weapons, we
had a conversation about Jimson whed and Datura. Yeah, it

(03:30):
prompted us to return to a question that well over
thirty five percent of Americans have been asking for a
very long time. Was rfk's assassin, Sirhan Sirhan involved in
a conspiracy? Here are the facts. First, I mean, I
feel like maybe we're in an information bubble because the

(03:51):
three of us know or the four of us know
who Sirran Sirrahan is, But do we think most people
know or is it just a name they might have heard.

Speaker 4 (03:58):
I think it might largely be a name I might
have heard, simply because it's kind of remarkable as a name,
you know, it immediately makes you sort of take notice
with what, what's a double name? What's that about? And also,
by the way, Jimson Weed, doesn't that sound like a
nom de plume for like some sort of Southern Fried
like author or something. I really like.

Speaker 3 (04:19):
We like him as an old prospector. Yeah, his dog's
name is silver, of course. Okay, yeah, I think I
was on that episode.

Speaker 4 (04:27):
But I do love that. Sirhan Bishara Sirhan Man literally's
first name, last name, same thing that must have been intentional.
Was born in Jerusalem mandatory really yeah wow, mandatory Palestine.
It's very consistent upon itself on March nineteenth, nineteen forty four.

(04:48):
He was raised as a Palestinian Christian and was also
born with Jordanian citizenship. He moved to the US at
the age of twelve, to New York and then eventually
to California, where he attended Pasadena City College.

Speaker 3 (05:04):
Yeah, it's kind of an American dream. Sirahan has as
of this point not acquired US citizenship and remains a
citizen of the nation of Jordan. I love your point
out religion because he was always a fervent Christian growing up,
and like many people, he was on a search for

(05:24):
spiritual meaning, so he evaluated several different Christian denominations. As
an adult, he attended Baptist services, he spent time as
a Seventh Day Adventist, and eventually he joined an esoteric
organization called the Rosicrucians in nineteen sixty six, which will

(05:48):
be familiar to longtime listeners.

Speaker 4 (05:50):
For sure, the Order of the Rose Cross.

Speaker 3 (05:53):
Yes, yeah, in his case he joined the largest one,
the ancient mystical Order of the Rose Cross. Its describes
itself as a fraternal order, a philosophical, a political order
that is devoted to quote, the study of the elusive
mysteries of life and the universe. Nothing weird, nothing vague.

Speaker 4 (06:13):
Well, folks might remember that from our conversations around the
Georgia guidestones and the potential identity of R. C. Christian,
which that you know, a pseudonym RC believed to be
referring to Rose Cross and then was a member of
that order as well, which has a lot of parallels
to Freemason kind of ideology.

Speaker 3 (06:36):
Yeah, this is I'm glad you mentioned that as well,
because Rosicrucianism is already bound up in multiple unrelated conspiracy theories.
So for the many people who believe there's more to
Sirhan Sirhan's story, whatever that might be, this association can
feel like not quite a red flag, but maybe a

(06:57):
rosy one, a not worth it, I don't.

Speaker 4 (07:00):
Know, look of the world through Rosaicretian colored glasses.

Speaker 3 (07:03):
You will, However, Surhan Surhan is now not famous for
not best known for being a member of a rose
Crucian order, is unfortunately best known for the assassination of
Senator Robert Kennedy at the Ambassador Hotel on June fifth,
nineteen sixty eight, the one year anniversary of the nineteen

(07:27):
sixty seven Arab Israeli War.

Speaker 2 (07:29):
And another name for that war is the Sixth Day War.
You can look that up if you'd like to. It's
another one of those times in history where there was
there was a lot of often hidden and sometimes overt
anti Israel sentiment.

Speaker 3 (07:44):
Yeah, and a lot of Islamophobia as well. A lot
of bad blood is the best way to put it.
This is also known as the Third Arab Israeli War,
and it's called Arab Israeli, of course, is a specific state.
It's called Arab because a coalition of Arab states. We're
on the other side of the conflict, primarily Syria, Egypt,

(08:07):
and Sirhan, Sirhan's homeland of Jordan. So there's a lot
of context that goes into this, and will later learn
what Sirhan himself says about this, and then later reneges
upon a couple of times. Things are On the day
of his death on June fifth, nineteen sixty eight, things
are looking pretty great for Robert Kennedy. It's a very

(08:30):
tense situation. You know, if you've ever lost a sibling,
you don't just get over it. So the death of
his brother and one of his closest friends is still
very much haunting him. And like the rest of America,
Robert Kennedy has very serious questions about the official investigation
into the murder of JFK.

Speaker 2 (08:51):
Well, as we learned with our previous look at JFK,
his brother RFK that we're talking about today, is he
owes his political rear to his brother, right, Like he
was brought into the fold by JFK essentially appointed, and
you know, America overall was not too happy about RFK
getting appointed to where he was, Like remember when he

(09:14):
brought when he was brought in as I think attorney general.

Speaker 3 (09:16):
He was yes, without despite not having qualifications to be
attorney general.

Speaker 2 (09:22):
So you can imagine they're not just brothers. They're like
in a way, business partners, very closely tied right in
their political careers. So when JFK is assassinated, it's let's say,
it was of high interest to his brother and business partner.

Speaker 3 (09:36):
And just like his brother, Kennedy, Robert Kennedy is no
fan of the company or the agency, the CIA. They
do not get along.

Speaker 2 (09:47):
He in the FBI right because because of some of
the implications that had been going on with activity, let's say,
monitoring activities by the FBI.

Speaker 3 (09:59):
Yeah, these are the days of a different kind of
wire tapping than people labor under in this country. In
twenty twenty four, Robert Kennedy is running for president. He
is the Democratic front runner. Right now, he's in California.
He has successfully done his bit to achieve like to

(10:21):
get one step closer to being the Democratic candidate for
the next presidential election. So he's at the Ambassador Hotel.
The reason we're bringing up the CIA FBI connections, they
go deep. It's also interesting to note that he has
a lot of unofficial bodyguards at this point, several athletes
who just believe in his cause, believe in his mission,

(10:44):
and he has been on record saying to the FBI
and CIA associate it's like, stay away, you know what
I mean. I don't need your involvement here. I am
running a presidency for the people, so I want to
meet the people.

Speaker 2 (11:00):
But he has a former FBI agent rolling with him, right.

Speaker 4 (11:03):
He does.

Speaker 3 (11:04):
He has a former FBI agent that we'll get to
or or a former associate. We'll see, we'll see.

Speaker 2 (11:12):
Like Bill Berry, isn't it right? Am I wrong?

Speaker 3 (11:14):
I thought, Oh, I'm thinking of Thane Caesar, who was
a security guard was in the in the area but
not working directly with r fk.

Speaker 2 (11:24):
Oh Okay, not that was Bill Berry. There was a
there's an ex FBI agent who was also rolling with
him at the time when like at least when he well,
we'll get to. But when he went into the area
where he was shot.

Speaker 3 (11:35):
Emphasis on x FBI agent. What we're saying is that
many of the people in the Ambassador Hotel at this
time had interesting past all their own. Each could be
an epic. Well, many of them could be their own episodes. Uh,
we'll give you the official story, Sirhan. The court found

(11:57):
Sirhan shot Robert Kennedy four to times with a twenty
two caliber pistol, leading to Kennedy's death twenty six hours later,
due primarily to injuries to the brainstem and to his head,
his occipital lobe and so on. Other victims were there.
Other people got shot. There were six shooting victims all

(12:20):
in all, including some journalists, a democratic activist, a campaign volunteer.
All of the other people except RFK survived thankfully. And
Sirhan has tackled immediately he's brought to the ground. He's
still firing wildly in the air by ourn.

Speaker 4 (12:37):
Tired football player, right.

Speaker 2 (12:39):
Yes, and Rayfer Johnson, who was an Olympic athlete and
to Catalon gold medalist. Yeah, those two guys were the
kind of the security detail we were talking about.

Speaker 4 (12:51):
Rosie Greer being the name of the La Rams I
believe former football player.

Speaker 3 (12:56):
Yes, that's correct. No relation to the Rosicrucians that we
know of, or there or. This is definitely an or
is there episode, because when Sirhan is being taken down,
he is alleged to have been yelling out things like
I can explain, and I did this for my country.

Speaker 4 (13:17):
What a thing to say whilst mid shooting spree. No, really,
give me a chance to explain. It's all good. Don't
worry about it.

Speaker 3 (13:27):
Right, Yeah, like someone's gonna go wait, let's hear.

Speaker 4 (13:30):
Him out, Jesus.

Speaker 3 (13:33):
So later he would note in a couple of different conversations,
he would note that he felt betrayed by rfk's support
of Israel. There are there's a specific moment he cites
where he says, I decided RFK had to die three
weeks ago before I came to the Ambassador hotel because

(13:57):
I was incensed by his that he was going to
send military support to Israel, specifically jets.

Speaker 2 (14:06):
Well, yeah, in his pocket there was a newspaper clipping
that specifically said, quote, the United States should, without delay,
sell Israel the fifty phantom jets she has so long
been promised, which is a quote from Kennedy in that clipping.
And I think it can also be noted that when
when Sire and Sirhan's home was rated, there was a

(14:26):
notebook allegedly in there that had scribbling all over it
quote RFK must die. Like like, we'll.

Speaker 3 (14:33):
Get to that too. Oh yeah, yeah, that's.

Speaker 4 (14:36):
The stuff of like conspiracy movies, you know where you
see it like scrawled on the wall and blood or something,
you know what I mean.

Speaker 3 (14:42):
Yeah, as we'll find later in this episode, it's definitely
the stuff of premeditation.

Speaker 2 (14:47):
If he actually wrote it, put it there, just just
putting that out there.

Speaker 3 (14:52):
Yep. And before it gets all of that, let's get
to the let's go back to that specific day, the
aftermathic conspiracy. As we said, he's captured, he's tacked, he
is disarmed at the scene. A few days later, he
confesses to the murder to police and interrogation, but then
he pleads not guilty, and there's this trial that goes

(15:14):
on for quite some time. A judge. His legal team
later asked the judge to allow him to change his
plead too guilty after those papers are found in his
home that have what you would call highly implicating language,
you know what I mean, kind of the way that
a celebrity stalker might be found to have a bunch

(15:37):
of writing in their home that for prosecution can function
as evidence of escalation, right, evidence of going from compulsive
thoughts to action. And this is a thing that happens.
The question is, you know, the question about the providence

(15:57):
of the handwriting, the origin of the writing, stuff like
that that has been an extreme focus for a lot
of what we will call independent researchers. Maybe he also
he did something I don't know how to feel about this.
According to witnesses and reporters during this lengthy trial, he

(16:20):
behaved in an odd manner and for more I guess
cynical or skeptical observers. They were certain that he was
acting this way on purpose, trying to put on a
show to bolster his legal team's argument that he had
diminished capacities, diminished mental capacities at the time of the

(16:41):
time of the murders and even during the trial. And
we kind of, I hate to say it, but we
do see that kind of attempt at theater in court
cases in the US, you know, somebody is filing for
a personal injury and they make sure that they show
up like kitted out right, even if they might not

(17:04):
need all the cast or the neck braces, et cetera.
And then what's that thing. Like a lot of celebrities,
there was this halcyon era in the nineties and early
two thousands. Whenever a controversial celebrity or musician went to court,
they always for some reason that glass is on.

Speaker 4 (17:22):
Yeah, because it makes you, like, what a little more
approachable seeming, Not sunglasses though, right, like glass No, no, yeah,
that would be the opposite of fact if it was
anyone wearing sunglasses inside immediately sus. But now if you're
wearing glasses, it makes oh, you're a human being, just
you know, you have flaws, right, your eyes are are perfect.

Speaker 3 (17:41):
This guy couldn't have done it that much cocaine, like
did his.

Speaker 4 (17:45):
Glasses almost did a spittack just sorry, well, let's talk.

Speaker 2 (17:49):
His demeanor was described really strangely when he was there,
like at the assassination. So trial is one thing you're
talking about. I've seen that too. But when he was
there at scene, his calm demeanor was noted several times
just how he acted. He acted and did a thing

(18:11):
and then was calm. But they also described him as
being quote not in complete control of his mind while
at the scene, which what does that mean?

Speaker 4 (18:21):
Well, the calm aspect combined with that really makes me
think of like someone's been activated, right, and then they're like,
you know, kind of non emotionally going through these pre
sat instructions, right, yeah, right.

Speaker 3 (18:36):
The idea then that a series of commands had been
enacted and afterwards you're just done, the program has run. Right,
that's the implication here, But there is there's even more
to the story, which we'll get into. These are still
just the facts. The jury was not convinced by this

(18:56):
argument for diminished capacity. There are long standing questions about
whether defense dropped the ball in some way and be
that as it made. Sirhan was convicted on April seventeenth,
nineteen sixty nine. He was sentenced to death in the
gas chamber three years later. This sentence, like all of

(19:19):
the death sentences in California, is commuted to life in prison,
and that's due to a Supreme Court ruling People versus Anderson,
which outlawed the death penalty in that state. So that
was a blanket change. It's very important to note he
was not singled out and getting his sentence commuted. The
way that the way that George Bush did for those

(19:41):
serial killers in Texas or for that one serial killer.
But there's another strange aspect to the story that we
have to give you right before we get to the
ad break. It's one that remained consistent for quite some time.
For decades, Sirhan. Sirhan has claimed he has little to
no memory of the assassination at all.

Speaker 2 (20:02):
Yeah, and the reason why we're talking about this is
because we talked about that drug and like what it
would do in the moment, you could lose your memory.
So I say we dive in to any of the
possible conspiracy theories surrounding this thing and just go through
each one.

Speaker 3 (20:18):
Yeah, we'll get to it after a word from our sponsors.
Here's where it gets crazy. How does that old saying go?
Every prison is full of innocent men, depending on who
you ask. Sirhan's case is different because there is never

(20:39):
really a question about whether he was in the room,
whether he attacked RFK. Well, just say whether he attacked
our FK. There's no question about that. Absolutely happened, multiple witnesses,
ballistics evidence, he had a gun, he fired the gun,
he admitted that, and earlier he had written, or he

(21:00):
appears to have written, a manifesto calling for Kennedy's death.
It's chock full of vitriolic language condemning Kennedy. It is
clear and inarguable that he did not particularly care for RFK.
But again, the world is full of people who don't
like each other, and most of them never become assassins, right,

(21:22):
most of them are just like it's Greg.

Speaker 2 (21:25):
Well, yeah, I think it creates a problem for anyone
who comes after to look at this thing, because if
you've got an individual who has a depresentment of someone,
then they could be used as a very helpful We'll
use the phrase that Rob Reiner used when we talk

(21:47):
to him, patsy. That is the word that Lee Harvey
Oswald used to describe himself in his situation. And if
you've got somebody like Sirian Cyerhan who has a hatred
or maybe even a psychological thing going on where he's
writing down RFK must die in his notebook, if he
has a gun and he's on premise, you know, for

(22:08):
the place where let's say you're a group that's going
to kill RFK, it would be a fall guy. It
would be a pretty easy fall guy. But he did,
according to multiple witnesses, he shot that gun see your
hands here, and shot the gun that he had at RFK,
hitting him. So it's a I don't know, but.

Speaker 3 (22:30):
Hitting is not necessarily not every gun shot is fatal.
There you go, and we're going to learn some more
specifics that that are troubling. Okay, So an interrelated couple
of theories here, double dragon kind of theory set involves
the idea of orchestrations by the CIA or CIA associates

(22:51):
and a second gunman. Again, there's a lot in common
with the allegation surrounding the JFK assassination. Just a few
years prior. There was a twenty eighteen interview with Washington Post.
A lot of the sources we're going to be talking
about are coming kind of recently because there is a
cyclical media interest in the Sirhan case whenever he comes

(23:16):
up for parole. So Robert F. Kennedy Junior, a somewhat
controversial political figure today, talks to the Washington Post in
twenty eighteen and says, you know, I traveled out to
California and I met Sirhan Sirhan where he is incarcerated,
and I talked with him for a long time, and
I left believing what Sirhan told me that he himself

(23:40):
did not kill my father and that a second gunman
was involved. And then RFK Junior's sister, Kathleen Kennedy Townsend,
herself a politician, would later say that her brother made
a compelling case. She talked to him about his conversation
with Sirhan, and they both called for the investigation to

(24:02):
be reopened. They also were pretty their credit. Take it
as you will. RFK Junior said, I don't think that
my opinion will really change anything, but I, as his son,
I think Sirahn should be out of prison or we
should at least look into this again.

Speaker 2 (24:20):
Isn't it weird? Guys? Isn't it weird that Martin Luther
King Junior's son did the exact same thing, came forward,
talked to his father's alleged assassin, was convinced by a
bunch of research and witnesses and other evidence that was

(24:41):
coming forward that this person wasn't the killer of his father,
and tried to get him out of prison like that happened.
These are two assassinations that occurred in nineteen sixty eight
and they both have sons. Both men who were killed
have sons that were convinced that the person who was
in jail didn't kill their father.

Speaker 3 (25:03):
And now that's not the same thing as conclusively proving
in a sense, but it is powerful.

Speaker 4 (25:07):
Yeah, it makes people take notice. You know. Those are
usually the people that are like, yes, justice has been done,
you know, I feel vindicated, or my father's death has
been vindicated, as opposed to the exact opposite, which certainly
makes people take a little bit of pause.

Speaker 3 (25:21):
Right, agreed. And we know that there has been extensive
research into this because a lot of people, again weren't
satisfied with the legal proceedings nor the government's conclusions. One
book I want to give a big shout out to
is A Lie Too Big to Fail, which you can

(25:42):
read for free on archive dot org right now by
an author named Lisa Peas Pea se and this author
argues that the real mastermind of the assassination was not
sir Han Sirhat, not a politically motivated lone wolf act,
but instead a CIA fixer named Robert Mayhew. Have we

(26:06):
heard we were talking about Mayhew a little bit off air.
Have you guys heard about him? Dug into his story.
Have you seen Mission Impossible?

Speaker 4 (26:13):
Of course, the new one on the plane recently and
it was quite good.

Speaker 3 (26:17):
I don't know about the new one, but allegedly the
Mission Impossible idea was based on his life in part.
What would a movie series based on our lives be like?
I don't know if it would be as exciting as
Mission Impossible.

Speaker 2 (26:31):
Oh, we got time, we can write some more storylines.

Speaker 3 (26:35):
Geez, yeah, I gotta. It'll just be a cavalcated Casey
is here. But Mayhew is fascinating because he has never
been officially linked to the assassination. And the other CIA folks,
which I'm sure we'll get to that we're in the
area or for some reason, maybe operating, maybe just there,

(26:56):
they have not been linked to the assassination. But may
You in particular, has one a heck of a CV or,
since we're talking about prison, he's got a hell of
a jacket. He was an ex FBI agent and the
CIA worked with him through his own private company, and
they asked him job to handle jobs that it wanted

(27:17):
to keep at an arm's length, it wanted at a
remove you know.

Speaker 2 (27:21):
Wait a second, Yeah, Mayhew is one of the other
guys that Rob Reiner in his show Who Killed JFK
talks about with the the the anti Castro group.

Speaker 3 (27:34):
Yeah, yeah, he Mayhew is There really were cases where
someone would come to Mayhew under shady circumstances like this
is your mission, should you choose to accept it. He'd
lined up sex workers for Forton presidents, and he was
the connection between the CIA and the MOB in at

(27:56):
least one of the plans to kill Castro. He definitely,
he definitely did this stuff. I want to shout out
Chicago mag They have a great two thousand and seven
right up on this by Brian Smith that talks about
Mayhew's involvement.

Speaker 2 (28:11):
Geez man.

Speaker 3 (28:13):
So again, if you're looking for conspiracy, this guy is
perfect casting because he actively did conspire to do some
messed up stuff.

Speaker 2 (28:22):
Yeah. Well, and he's not the only JM wave associated
guy that was there at the Ambassador Hotel on the
day of the assassination, and we'll get into that. But
this is this is nuts.

Speaker 4 (28:34):
Yeah.

Speaker 3 (28:34):
His For more than a decade and a half, Mayhew
and his company they Mitch out of Washington, they were
on a monthly retainer with the CIA, and CIA records
would later confirm this. So we don't have a direct
connection with Mayhew and Sirhan, but you can see why

(28:55):
so many authors and researchers they Paul us at this part. Oh,
he also worked with Howard Hughes, and he would be
like the fixer for the CIA and Howard Hughes, because
Howard Hughes would fund CIA operations.

Speaker 2 (29:09):
Every so often just for fundzies.

Speaker 3 (29:12):
Yeah, what do you get the what do you get
the company that has everything, you know, lots of tissue boxes.
There we go, right, Oh geez? He also okay, so
p says Mayhew. Given his involvement in the murcurer side
of the trade, he would have had access to CIA

(29:34):
experiments and hypnosism mind control. He would have been read
on to things like Midnight Climax mk ultr. Everybody check
out Midnight Climax, which is hosted by our own Noel Brown. Yeah,
hell of a story.

Speaker 2 (29:47):
And mk Ultra ran from nineteen fifty three to seventy three,
so we're in the tail end of mk ultra here.

Speaker 3 (29:55):
So they had lessons learned, right, They at least knew
what didn't work, and they also officially ended in seventy three.
So yeah, I know that sounds snarky, but officially ended
whatever take it as will.

Speaker 2 (30:10):
They got the Internet, Yeah, they.

Speaker 3 (30:11):
Got the Internet, don't They don't need the LSD anymore. So.
This author reasons that his knowledge of this and his
previous involvement is deep connections would have allowed Mayhew and
his crew to frame Sirran Sirhan as a patsy for
the death of Robert Kennedy while having another gunman, like

(30:33):
a professional operator, fire the fatal shots.

Speaker 2 (30:37):
Like another agent that we already mentioned once in this show.
We'll keep going.

Speaker 3 (30:42):
Yeah, right, and again, none of the book is really compelling.
If you like this kind of stuff, it's a great read. Again,
it's free online, the author. The author also has to
point out that none of this was ever proven in court.
It's not been acknowledged by the US government. Parts of
the inconsistencies have been acknowledged. The book came out in

(31:03):
twenty nineteen, and the author spent twenty five years writing this.
But is also, to be very clear, is not the
first person raising these allegations. I don't know Robert Mayhew, though,
if you were going to cast someone for this conspiracy,
he's great. He's one of the best picks even though

(31:27):
I don't know, but he wasn't there. It wasn't he
was not physically there, right, because he's a professional. Why
would he be.

Speaker 2 (31:35):
Should you want to? Can we go to the johann
Edes thing, the connection?

Speaker 4 (31:39):
Yeah?

Speaker 3 (31:39):
Yeah, tell us about Johann Edes.

Speaker 2 (31:41):
Okay, So a person that again Rob Reiner mentioned to
us and then was mentioned extensively in his show Who
Killed JFK mentions this guy, George Joannedes, who was quote
chief of psychological warfare operations and worked extensively with jam Wave,
which was the CIA's Miami base for this whole secret

(32:05):
war they had with Castro, right with.

Speaker 3 (32:08):
The producers of things like The Bay of Pigs.

Speaker 2 (32:11):
Yes, and it has been known now that Joe and
Edes was at the Ambassador Hotel on the day of
the assassination. Despite Senator Kennedy or Robert Kennedy's distaste for
CIA activities and his unwillingness to be protected by a
lot of those official you know, bodyguard are facilitating security

(32:36):
systems which are like, you know, if you're operating as
a very high level person, it would be secret service,
but secret service wasn't available to him at the time.
It then would have probably been the FBI, and he
had an ex FBI agent with him, but he didn't
have any official acting FBI agents with him. And just
knowing that this guy Joann Edes was there along with

(32:57):
a couple other people from that same company, same crew,
it calls into question. I don't know it. For me,
it's like it's enough to need to be tracked down,
like we need to know exactly what Joan Edi was
doing there and where he was and all that other stuff,
but we just don't have the full details.

Speaker 3 (33:18):
Maybe there's a totally innocuous reason, you know what I mean? Maybe, yeah,
maybe there is. The point raising is that we don't know.
And until until we know what that reason is, until
it can be proven to be innocuous, then yeah, you
have to put it again in this weird Vin diagram
of stuff that doesn't prove something. But it doesn't feel right,

(33:42):
you know, there's something dissonant about it. I don't know.
They also twenty ten, Sirhun's lawyers argue, what's that what
was once treated like a wing nut idea? Sirhnen's own
lawyers in court say, look, the CIA hypnotiz Siirrahan Sirahat.
They made him an involuntary participant in the assassination. The

(34:06):
implication there is crazy, first off, because these are professional
attorneys saying this in court, but secondly because the implication
is like, why him though? Why him? If there seems
to be this preponderance of evidence in the weeks leading
up to it, or indeed the year's leading up to it,

(34:26):
Why him?

Speaker 4 (34:27):
Why there?

Speaker 3 (34:28):
Right? Did they identify someone struggling with mental issues who
already had a track record of threats against STARRFK? Did
they make those threats up? Did they put that did
they plant that diary? I don't know.

Speaker 4 (34:41):
I mean, it feels like the kind of you know,
candidate for a patsy or a fall guy that you
see in other conspiracies as well, you know, whether it
be pinning, you know, a murder for higher scheme on
somebody who was sort of like a low hanging fruit
kind of potential, like maybe low level drug runner or something,
you know, who could fit the bill, but definitely didn't

(35:04):
have the kind of motivation that maybe it would be
made out to seem.

Speaker 2 (35:07):
Cause I think we maybe have talked about this in
the past, but the route through the kitchen was not
the planned way to go to exite from the podium
where he was just speaking.

Speaker 3 (35:18):
It was a last minute switch.

Speaker 2 (35:20):
Yeah, and he was just told that by one of
those athletes that was acting as a security team. I
don't know. There's something about about changing a walking route
like last minute that for me, compromises RFK security in
that moment, which means if you were aware that that

(35:41):
was going to happen, or if you caused that route
change to happen, you could have somebody planted there and
it I don't know, there's something to that that feels
so important to me.

Speaker 3 (35:54):
There's also a counterpoint. There's another side to that point,
which is that it's not uncommon for those last minute
switches to occur. If you feel like your established route,
like if you've already signaled that and messaged that out
and you're worried about possible danger or shenanigans, then there
are completely good and smart reasons to change the path

(36:18):
at the last minute to keep them guessing, which is
sort of why you don't see I mean, you see
it all the time with VIPs, not even necessarily heads
of state, but you can see it with celebrities, right,
especially if they have ardent stalkery fans.

Speaker 2 (36:32):
I think you're right if they made it public, right,
or if you made it even public to like staff
at the hotel rather than just your internal security staff.

Speaker 3 (36:42):
Someone found out, right. It could be as simple as sliding,
you know, sliding one hundred to someone at the front
desk who happens to know the established route, or you know,
a place like the Ambassador Hotel also is home to VIPs,
and so in these fancy hotels there are often and
if you go to the right hotel, folks, trust me,

(37:06):
there are protocols in place, and you can see those protocols,
but they lose they lose value with every new person
that is aware of them.

Speaker 4 (37:15):
Well, because they're unspoken and like, you don't wanna, you
don't want to overplay that hand, and it kind of
dilutes the whole, you know, kind of secrecy of it all.
And then I guess it hasn't requires a shift in.

Speaker 3 (37:28):
Protocol, right, Yeah, And the thing we're quarreling with here
is it's again it's another great unknown. Where did they
decide proactively to change the route on their own due
to concerns or were they pushed into that? Were they
decision treed into walking through the kitchen and perhaps even

(37:49):
thinking that was their own idea. All of these are possible,
none of them are proven. Uh, and it's tantalizing, but
it's torturous. I mean, look, none of all of this,
which is bothersome, none of it is. Forgive us for
saying so smoking gun level evidence of anything. But there's

(38:10):
a lot of unusual stuff already. We haven't even gotten
to even weirder things yet. No, So these earlier authors,
these researchers conclude that they seem to conclude that Siahan
did not himself kill Kennedy, or if he was the killer,
that he was a lot more like a bullet than

(38:31):
an assassin. Right he would The argument is he was
made to do so. And they also say that the
LAPD and the district attorney at the time were either
crooked or incompetent, and maybe his defense lawyers were crooked
or incompetent because they didn't challenge any of the physical evidence,

(38:52):
and the physical evidence marri way falls not as ironclad
as perhaps prosecution made it out to be. Is that
fair to say that's not?

Speaker 2 (38:59):
Like?

Speaker 4 (39:00):
Take there, I think it is.

Speaker 2 (39:01):
I think they're just weird. There's other weird stuff that
was going on. Most of it came out after the trial.

Speaker 3 (39:07):
Way after the trial, Yeah, because they wanted to shut
this down. The US at the time was already already
had some threats to the status quo as the elite
saw it, right, widespread anti war activism, civil rights movement,
some secessionist movements like American Indian Movement, all this kind

(39:30):
of stuff. So it is in their interest to try
to nip something in the bud, make the story look right,
and move on as quickly as possible. The problem is
the stuff that comes out afterwards, like the autopsy findings,
right that Kennedy must have been shot at close range,
that somehow got shot in the back of the head. Yeah,

(39:53):
you don't have to be a gun nut to know that.
If you're shooting at someone from the front, it's really
tough to hit them in the back of.

Speaker 2 (40:00):
That well, unless they turn their head right as being
fired towards them.

Speaker 3 (40:05):
And to the left.

Speaker 4 (40:06):
Yeah, as a magic bullet.

Speaker 1 (40:08):
You know.

Speaker 2 (40:08):
Well, well no, but really, like if you're in a
situation and somebody in front of you or to your
side is firing a gun at you, a little twenty
two let you say a little Iiver Johnson twenty two revolver,
but it's not. It would sound loud and it would
be scary. You would probably turn away right, which then
a bullet could hit the back of your head. That's
what was argued.

Speaker 3 (40:30):
Or if somebody says watch out, depending on where they're
standing and turned to look at them, Yep, possible, possible.
Yet we also have to take tough. But the distance
is what we have to think about. Don't forget about
the distance because numerous eyewitnesses at the shooting, and I wouldn't. Yes,
we get eyewitness reports are sticky infallible, but numerous people

(40:52):
confirmed multiple times over time that Sir Had was not
close enough to fire at close range and that he
only got two shots out in Kennedy's direction before he
is getting held and tackled to the ground. And as
he's going down, he's just shooting wildly. He's spraying the

(41:15):
rest of the rest of his bullets, just out, go
with God style, And that's what tackled and dealt with basically, right,
I can explain. And his pistol had eight shots in it.
The earlier said revolvers that might think you had that
might sound like it had six shots. Right, No, this

(41:37):
is a twenty two caliber with eight bullets in it,
which will be important later. But I don't know, do
you guys? Right now, before you get any weirder stuff,
is it possible that Sirhan Sirhan could have been manipulated
by someone? Did he act on his own?

Speaker 2 (41:53):
Well? Yeah, but before we see that, Ben, there was
somebody with a gun standing right behind RFK when this
went down.

Speaker 3 (42:02):
Yes, yeah, we'll get to him as well, Fane.

Speaker 2 (42:04):
Right, there's somebody that has a gun who is holding
Rfk's arm as he's walking through the kitchen. I don't know, Okay,
whatever is.

Speaker 4 (42:13):
This the theory of like Sirhan Sirhan as distraction as
diversion while somebody else does the deed.

Speaker 2 (42:21):
That's the theory, that's the possibility.

Speaker 3 (42:24):
Let's go into the drugs too on the way to that,
because that's hypnosis and drugs. That's where That's what prompted
us to kind of re explore this. We talked about
a Manchurion candidate before over the years. Right, it comes
from a fiction novel. Right, it's not like a super
secret real Soviet program, but in this novel, a son

(42:49):
of a political dynasty is brainwashed into becoming an assassin
for the community.

Speaker 4 (42:53):
And this is not the same as say a sleeper agent,
where I think a lot of people kind of misconstrue
those concepts where someone is deployed as like a basic
you know, civilian, and then you know, whenever they're given
a particular order or code word or whatever, they are
activated and then they carry out these instructions. This is

(43:13):
much deeper. This is someone who is given a code
word that all of a sudden switches their brain and
makes them into a killing automaton of sorts.

Speaker 3 (43:21):
Right.

Speaker 2 (43:22):
Oh, yeah, and let's jump into that guys. After another
word from our sponsor, we'll be right back.

Speaker 3 (43:34):
We've returned. Yeah, that's an important differentiation, NOL. So if
you have seen shows like The Americans, which is loosely
based on real events, then you'll know that sleeper agents
can be a real thing and exist as to all
intents and purposes. They exist as citizens of the country
in which they're operating until they get their signal, their directives,

(43:57):
et cetera. The idea of a Manchurian candidate are argues
that subconscious demands have been embedded into your psyche. You
are a sleeper agent, but you are not aware you
are a sleeper agent until you get that code word.
You know, someone runs up to you, shows you a
picture of a white elephant and says shah mahlamading dong
and then you're like, hello, en up nukes.

Speaker 4 (44:18):
And presumably the idea here in theory is that this
is the deepest level of deniability for the handlers of
this individual or for the people that are actually using
them as a weapon, because I mean, even with the
sleeper agent, you could get information out of that person,
you could potentially figure out who they are answering to,
whereas with a Manchurian candidate, they don't know who they're

(44:41):
answering to. There they literally you can't get anything out
of them because it's not there for them to give and.

Speaker 3 (44:47):
It might not Yeah, that's a great point. Might not
also go to the extreme of murder. The idea or
this theory says that maybe you could have someone who
is induced to give over sensitive information right just because
they're you know, a top level defense engineer. But there's also,
as we gain it through, there's something else interesting about
the idea of deniability. So if there's a Manchurian candidate,

(45:09):
and it's operating purely on trigger words, right, casting a
spell for lack of a better word, or like a
visual series of visual accues, or even old factory stuff.
You as the person orchestrating this Shenanigan, you don't have
to present them the trigger yourself. You can just pay

(45:29):
somebody without who has no idea what's going on. You
can pay them and say, look, I gave fifty bucks.
You see that guy over there, or you know two
days there's going to be this guy over here. I
want you to hold up this picture of what's an
unusual animal, a zebra. I want you to hold up
this picture of a zebra I don't know, and then

(45:51):
and then I want you to slowly turn it upside
down and counterclockwise. Yeah.

Speaker 2 (45:56):
Or you plant somebody wearing a polka dot dress that
it walks by and says something, or just you know,
makes a gesture that is the trigger.

Speaker 3 (46:05):
Right exactly. There are a million ways you could do
it in this theory. There's never been a proving case
of a man sure an actual Mentorian candidate in the
real world, and that's because the problem goes to timeframe right.
A lot of this goes to distance and time. So
you can hypnotize someone and can give them trance state suggestions,
but hypnosis is not going to make people do stuff

(46:29):
they would not ordinarily do.

Speaker 4 (46:31):
Well, and it's not going to necessary. Again, we don't know.
There's a lot we don't know about how hypnosis works,
and you know, certain people are more susceptible to it
than others. But it does kind of beg credulity to
think that you could implant something that would just lay
dormant indefinitely, right, I don't know it.

Speaker 3 (46:48):
It's a little bit of hard to swallow for me
without continual maintenance, Without continual maintenance.

Speaker 2 (46:54):
Even if you're dosing someone with LSD, right with an
MK ultra style experiment, if that person is in an
LSD and you know, affected state, and you're telling them
things like RFK must die, you're repeating it over and
over and over and over and over in that state
while you're watching maybe film of the man's face and

(47:15):
death and all this stuff. These the conjured imaginations that
appear in fictional stories. Right, Even if you're doing that,
how does the human being not recall any of those
images or moments or just the very fine memories that
could occur.

Speaker 3 (47:32):
There, Right, How can you embed it deeply enough into
the psychic soil or the neurologicals.

Speaker 4 (47:38):
Without having other byproducts that people would remember? You think
you'd remember getting strapped to a chair with lidlocks on
and being forced to watch these films? Well, you know,
I mean you can't. We don't have the selectivity in
how we can mess with people's memories. It's kind of
to pick and choose.

Speaker 2 (47:56):
I don't think.

Speaker 3 (47:57):
Well yet, we're getting there.

Speaker 2 (47:59):
We stumbled on something just randomly in our last conversation
that that's why we're doing this, right.

Speaker 3 (48:04):
Yeah, So I like that we're pointing this out to
fiction versus fact. So another example of this is chloroform
is often portrayed as this sort of super spy knockout things, right, yeah,
But the reality is you have to keep applying chloroform
to keep someone knocked out if you Yeah, and.

Speaker 2 (48:26):
You can kill someone pretty easily.

Speaker 4 (48:27):
You could kill them.

Speaker 3 (48:28):
Pretty easily too, So if you take the rag off
of their face, they're going to get up and they're
gonna be pissed at you, So be very very you
know what. Actually, let's I hope this is not a
hot take. Your life is your own, but try to
avoid situations where you feel like you have to chloroform people.

Speaker 4 (48:46):
Yeah, at the very least get some sort of dart
you know, gun situation with like a much longer acting
sedative sedatives.

Speaker 2 (48:56):
There was a recent story, you guys, this guy there's
an Elvis impersonator that was allegedly killed by someone via
chloroform during a sexual encounter. You can read about it
in the New York Post search for New York Elvis
impersonator allegedly killed after being chloroformed during sexual encounter.

Speaker 4 (49:16):
Are people using chloroform like poppers like aminyl nitrate.

Speaker 2 (49:20):
Or some people?

Speaker 3 (49:21):
Get down man, they'd do it.

Speaker 4 (49:22):
Yeah, well, what you do in the bedroom is your home,
but be careful, don't go too heavy on the chloroform, guys.

Speaker 3 (49:28):
Right, Consent and safety are keys. And there's okay, So
there's the other question. All right, we know the problem
with the Manchurian candidate deployment in the real world is
the time frame issue. But what if you could get
around the time frame entirely. What if you just drugged
the right person on the scene directly before you needed

(49:50):
an action, and then you set them loose disturbingly enough.
And this is what Matt was alluding to. We know
with certitude that certain drugs can and do that. The
torah aka Jims and Wei is being deployed by criminals
throughout South America to do this very thing, as we
record right now, as you hear.

Speaker 2 (50:11):
This scopelamine, it's the thing that what was a devil's breath,
it's the thing that's what it can get blown in
your face. Then you are immediately a compliant automaton, essentially
with no memory of what's happening. Nogamed.

Speaker 3 (50:27):
It could be put on the tip of a cigarette.
It doesn't take much.

Speaker 2 (50:31):
Yeah, and you could literally you could literally make a suggestion.
You blow the thing. You make a suggestion. It's like
shoot RFK right, somebody even hands you a pistol, or
maybe you've already got a pistol. Uh. It's just it's
crazy that it I think it may actually work.

Speaker 4 (50:51):
It would.

Speaker 3 (50:52):
We know that it's worked in criminal cases. We know
that the effects are immedia. It's tasteless, it's odorless, it's
it's it's tough to find it if you're an investigator
and you don't know what you're looking for the results
of being poisoned. This way, we know that people will
be tremendously compliant. They will go to their ATM and

(51:15):
empty it out. They'll come to you hours later with
vague memories of helping criminals move the furniture from their houses.
This is nasty stuff. Check out our Drugs as Weapons episode,
and the lead toxicologist or the lead world expert I
should say on this, they agree that, unlike hypnosis, exposure

(51:36):
to these drugs can make you do stuff that you
would not ordinarily do. So this is if Sara Han
was under the influence of something like that, he would
have also been extremely compliant to suggestion throughout the interrogation process,
so long as it happened shortly after ingestion. And this

(51:57):
stuff can last like twenty four hours more.

Speaker 2 (52:00):
Dude. And they said he was calm, right, but he
wasn't of his own mind. He was like, like, I'm
just imagining. I have not seen anyone under the effects
of detura scope lamine or whatever, but I imagine someone
who is just compliant and looks normal. Maybe you might
think that he would be he would appear more intoxicated

(52:22):
because he was drinking. Tom Collins he had like several
Tom Collins drinks while he was there at the Ambassador Hotel,
at least according to the official story, which you could
slip something in his drink while he's there at the bar.

Speaker 3 (52:35):
You could slip something in his drink and have a
brief conversation. Oh my, coming right. I mean, there are
a thousand ways to get to people with this stuff.
Be safe, keep an eye on your drinks and joan edies.

Speaker 2 (52:47):
Again, the chief of psychological warfare operations was hanging out
at the hotel.

Speaker 3 (52:53):
For possibly innocuous reasons.

Speaker 4 (52:54):
Yeah, yeah, yeah, that we have to say.

Speaker 3 (52:57):
Yeah, there's also this other thing. I mean, you do
have to note the next part. The reason that the
check secretly stopped using scopolamine, the reason that so like
even the Nazis gave it up, is because it was
terrible as a truth seraha was terrible for suggestions and confessions,

(53:18):
because people under the influence of that will confess to
anything their interrogator suggests, even if it's impossible, like hey,
do you have a tail, And they're like, oh, yeah,
I haven't checked recently, but I probably do, you know
what I mean? Like that to that level of absurdity,

(53:38):
because they also do anything that suggested up to it,
in including killing someone. If that is Sirahan Sarahan had
actual bullets in his gun and not blanks. Paul, can
we get a record scratch?

Speaker 2 (53:52):
I haven't heard this one.

Speaker 3 (53:55):
So what if Sirrahan Sarahan was handed like going back
to the distraction second gunman theory, what if it was
handed a twenty two caliber pistol but it had blanks
in it and he was just functioning as a distraction.

Speaker 4 (54:12):
This is yeah, Anna Patsy, right, I mean, yeah, like
a fall guy.

Speaker 2 (54:18):
But wait, what because there I guess it depends on
what you what evidence you believe. But in the ballistics
there were twenty two rounds found, like embedded into the
walls in like a door frame.

Speaker 4 (54:33):
Wait, but from other people firing right at Sirhan.

Speaker 2 (54:37):
Now the trajectory, the trajectory from some of them were
Sirhan firing but he only had eight.

Speaker 3 (54:44):
Yeah, and people would also we'll get to people also
claim they are thirteen gunshots later. But anyway, so the
in a lie too big to fail. Peace quotes eyewitnesses
saying they saw I'm not sure how I feel about
the shredded paper fluttering through the air as Siahan was firing,
and that was indicative of ca scenes containing explosive charges,

(55:07):
but no actual bullets. I don't know. Again, eyewitnesses are imperfect,
and to remember shredded paper through the air. While that
may be true, that might not have anything to do
with the gunshots.

Speaker 4 (55:21):
Pretty circumstantial, right, Yeah.

Speaker 3 (55:23):
That's a good word for it. And then there were
other people who were strapped at this time. There were
armed men around behind Kennedy. One of the guys confirmed
to be present and armed was a security guard named
Fane Caesar aka Jeene Caesar, and he had previously done
some work in Los Angeles with a guy named Robert May.

(55:46):
It was not the kind of work that gives you
a four oh one.

Speaker 2 (55:48):
K And you may also see his name written as
Eugene Fane Caesar, but he has been described as holding
on to Robert Kennedy's arm, kind of leading him through
the kitchen while he is armed. And then what did
we talk about the bullet back of the head situation.

Speaker 3 (56:09):
Yeah, and he actually talks with Caesar, spoke on record
to researchers about this, and there was one interview he
had with an author named Dan Muldia, and he said, quote,
there are dozens of articles that come out saying I
carried a second gun that possibly could have been the
person who shot Bobby Kennedy because and this Caesar speaking,

(56:30):
because the bullet entered the back of his head. However,
to be clear, Caesar is always denied any kind of implication.
He passed away recently in the Philippines where he retired,
And there's nothing wrong with retiring abroad. I feel like
I made that sound like such a bread crumb, But

(56:50):
there's nothing wrong with retiring abroad. People go to Costa
Rica all the time or whatever. But if we bring
it all together, then the alternative narrative is something quite strange.
A world in which Sirhan Sirhan is also a victim
hypnotized or drug somehow compelled to appear to murder RFG,
while behind the scenes a shadowy cabal orchestrates the actual hit.

(57:15):
Not very straightforward. It's a little mouse trappy, isn't it. Uh?

Speaker 2 (57:19):
The little Yeah. This is complicated as all heck, unless
there was again, like we talked about it in the past,
when you've got that uncertainty thing you everybody tries to
throw darts to be like, oh, man, well maybe that's it. Well,
maybe that's it. Maybe this is the connection. Maybe that's
the thing, and you'll will do it forever until we

(57:40):
get some certainty or some truth. If somebody comes out
and just says blatantly, hey, here's what's going on.

Speaker 4 (57:46):
But do we have like a real reason why the
government would want to collude to assassinate Robert Kennedy? Is
it like finishing the job of what they supposedly were
doing when they colluded to assassinate J F. Kennedy? Are
these these connected, like, well, where's the threat? I guess
I've never fully wrapped my head around that aspect of it.

Speaker 3 (58:07):
The argument would be that factions of the government, most
notably factions in domestic and foreign intelligence agencies like the
CIA and the FBI, wanted to continue functioning without oversight
and saw JFK in particular and RFK as well as

(58:28):
threats to their operations. That's the idea that has not
been officially recognized in any court, but it's something I
think a slim majority of Americans still believe, at least
here in the here in the US you know where
you five. Most of the Americans anyway. I don't know either.

(58:51):
But I do have one question that isn't brought up
enough in the literature here. It's this, where was Bigfoot?
There's there's no documentary record of Bigfoot, has no alibi
for this.

Speaker 4 (59:06):
Can he fire a gun?

Speaker 3 (59:09):
Right?

Speaker 5 (59:10):
I mean thick fingers of his I'm having fun with this,
but yeah, if you have, if you have proof of
bigfoots whereabouts nineteen sixty eight, tell us, because that'll also
prove that Bigfoot is real.

Speaker 3 (59:22):
But it descends into this level of speculation. There's still
there is hard evidence of discrepancy. Sirahn's gun held only
eight bullets. Someone else was firing, right. We just don't
know the context.

Speaker 4 (59:36):
It does feel at the same level of weirdness as
what surrounded JFK's assassination. We know something fishy was going
on there, especially with now we've got this whole the
magic bullet theory kind of solved by that that CIA
agent who came out and said he found this other
bullet lodged, you know, in the in the seat and

(59:56):
didn't talk about it for years. That and of itself
is weird, but what a strange thing to have the
literal relative of this highest profile assassination of a public figure,
probably in the history of the world, with with the
most questions around it, leading to equal numbers of questions
and having equal amounts of suspicious details the.

Speaker 3 (01:00:19):
Court had to answer to. The court eventually had to
respond to something they had originally dismissed as hogwash. They
had to respond to the second shooter allegations. So Sirhan Sirhan,
after rest, after trial, after conviction, makes multiple appeals, as
many appeals as possible, and in one of the rejections
of those appeals, a magistrate judge named Andrew J. Wistrich said,

(01:00:46):
I don't love this, but the judge said, maybe there
was a second shooter. It doesn't matter. Quote even if
the second shooter's bullet was the one that killed Senator Kennedy,
Siirhan would still be liable for murder as an aider
and a better Yeah, convenient says like, remember that thing
we said was a conspiracy. Well, even if it's true, whatever.

Speaker 2 (01:01:09):
Move on, guys, that's crazy.

Speaker 3 (01:01:12):
But they also note h the idea of a second
gunman shooting Kennedy a close range with the same type
of gun and same ammunition as sir Han also escaping
a crowded room without notice in a room full of witnesses.
Say it lacks any evidentiary support, But I don't know.
I feel like in that kind of chaos, it's kind
of easy to do. What irish goodbye?

Speaker 2 (01:01:34):
Like, just get the heck out of there?

Speaker 4 (01:01:36):
Ghost.

Speaker 3 (01:01:37):
Yeah, no, if you're not you know, a prominent member
of the thing, you know well.

Speaker 4 (01:01:43):
And what of the idea of whether or not sear
Hand was actively colluding with another shooter and it was
aware of his or her or their presence. That's another
thing that's been dismissed as doesn't matter.

Speaker 3 (01:01:58):
Right yet, he said, and he again says now, And
for some time he's maintained that his memory of the
events is fuzzier, nonexistent in a way that perhaps coincidentally
jibes with de Toro poisoning. Be quite honest with you,
that does it? Again not proven, We don't know. But

(01:02:21):
there are a lot of pieces here where you can.
You can already see, folks, how easy it is to
string that red thread along from point to point. Sirhan
recently lost his seventeenth parole hearing on March first, twenty
twenty three, and he got really close this time, but

(01:02:44):
it was shut down, and as we record today it's
April nineteenth, twenty twenty four. He is eighty years old.
He is alive, like most people in their eighties, he
is not in the best of health. To all official
accounts and conclusion, he is served in life for a successful,
high profile, politically motivated assassination.

Speaker 2 (01:03:07):
Yeah. Well, let's just note here that one of the reasons,
at least one of the large reasons that his parole
was denied for the seventeenth time back in March was
because of the words of rfk's son, Christopher Kennedy. I
just wanted to read just a couple of the things
that he said, because I think it strikes at the
heart of why, at least the Kennedy family parts of it,

(01:03:29):
want him to stay in prison forever. But it also
points to I think a larger like a larger statement
about conspiracy theories and why they form. I really like
these words. These are the words of Christopher Kennedy speaking
against the being granted parole siance here and being granted pearl.
He says, quote, this is a man who has never

(01:03:50):
admitted to killing my father, never said he was sorry
for having ended his life, he's refused truth, thereby forfeiting reconciliation.
His repeated denial of his crimes have been devastating. His
lack of remorse soul crushing. And this is the important
part here. We don't want vengeance, we want justice. We
want to offer forgiveness, but we need to see repentance.

(01:04:13):
It's the oldest bargain in history. One side admits and
the other side forgives. One side offers truth and the
other side offers reconciliation. Basically saying that if Sirhan Syirhan
came forward and said, yes, I killed your father and
I'm terribly sorry that I did that. I can't believe
I did that that kind of thing, then I guess

(01:04:34):
Christopher Kennedy and others in his family would forgive him
and say, Okay, this man needs pearled, but he hasn't
done that. But if Sirhan Syirhan wasn't actually the person
that killed Robert Kennedy, then how do you go about,
you know, offering that it's just a sticky situation. And
I do think that whole it goes back to the statement, Ben,

(01:04:54):
what do you always say about when there's murkiness?

Speaker 3 (01:04:59):
In the absence of transparency, speculation thrives.

Speaker 2 (01:05:02):
I think it goes right back to that man.

Speaker 3 (01:05:05):
And yeah, you know, Richard is agreeing with again, to
be fair, the majority of the world, majority of public opinion,
but to others, a persistent group of questions. Sarah and
Sarad is one of the last pieces of a multi
decade conspiracy, living evidence of something whoever they are, something

(01:05:29):
they don't want you to know. And you know, we're
Indie with a question here too. I think we came
with some great recommendations if you want to read more,
if you want to learn more about this specific instance,
this period in time. There are some great podcasts out there.
We can say it because we didn't make all of them,
but there are some fantastic things out there, and we'd

(01:05:51):
love to hear your thoughts, folks, especially if you were
around when this occurred. If you happen to have any
or involvement, or you have a different take, let us know.
We try to be easy to find online.

Speaker 4 (01:06:05):
It's right. You can find us at the handle of
Conspiracy Stuff, where we exist, on Facebook, where we have
our Facebook group Here's where it gets crazy. On YouTube,
where we roll out new video content. Every week, George
Washington continues his time travel adventures in Hollywood, and in
this week's installment, he discovers the Deadly Escalator. We also

(01:06:26):
exist at that handle on x FKA, Twitter, on Instagram,
and TikTok or Conspiracy Stuff Show.

Speaker 2 (01:06:32):
Hey, would you like to say something with your mouth?
Call one eight three three STDWYTK. That's our voicemail system.
When you call in, give yourself a cool nickname and
let us know if we can use your name and
message on the air. You've got three minutes again, see
whatever you'd like. If you've got more to say it
and can fit in that voicemail message, why not instead
send us a good old fashioned email.

Speaker 3 (01:06:53):
We are conspiracy at iHeartRadio dot com.

Speaker 2 (01:07:14):
Stuff they Don't want you to Know is a production
of iHeartRadio. For more podcasts from iHeartRadio, visit the iHeartRadio app,
Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen to your favorite shows.