Buy Used
£27.51
Condition: Used: Good
Comment: This item is used and has some wear. Qualifies for free shipping and prime programs.
Have one to sell?
Flip to back Flip to front
Listen Playing... Paused   You're listening to a sample of the Audible audio edition.
Learn more
See this image

Rush to judgement: A critique of the Warren Commission's inquiry into the murders of President John F.Kennedy, Officer J.D.Tippit and Lee Harvey Oswald Hardcover – 1966


See all 5 formats and editions Hide other formats and editions
Amazon Price New from Used from
Hardcover
"Please retry"
£21.10
Paperback
"Please retry"
£1.66



Product details


What Other Items Do Customers Buy After Viewing This Item?

Customer Reviews

There are no customer reviews yet on Amazon.co.uk.
5 star
4 star
3 star
2 star
1 star

Most Helpful Customer Reviews on Amazon.com (beta)

Amazon.com: 35 reviews
33 of 38 people found the following review helpful
Intrigue and Intelligence in his Argument 4 Aug. 2007
By Joseph Prescott - Published on Amazon.com
Growing up in New England, I have a great distaste for the sort of hippie or the anti-establishment nut case conspiracy theorists. In college, I wanted to write a paper supporting the Warren Commission's findings in order to spite the nut cases I had grown up around. I picked up this book expecting to tear it's arguments a part, however, Mark Lane ended up converting me. Mark Lane is one of the few people to take Ford's challenge and comb through the many volumes of "evidence" that the Warren Commission left behind. He points out many flaws and out right distortions of facts that the government made in their report. He is no "We did not land on the moon" kind of conspiracy theorist, but more a concerned citizen who was disturb by what he found and decided to write a book on it. His arguments are cohesive, well organized, and supported by many facts. It is a must read for anyone who is researching or interested in the assassination of JFK.
23 of 27 people found the following review helpful
The Conspiracy Theory Critique 13 Nov. 2003
By Acute Observer - Published on Amazon.com
Format: Hardcover
I first heard of Mark Lane (ML) in 1961 when he revealed that the Republican Speaker of the NY Assembly was part owner of a firm that could get the contract to build "fallout shelters" in NY state. The bill was defeated, and Mark Lane was later dropped from his Democratic Party office. When ML read the news report of Lee Harvey Oswald's guilt, he wrote an article that noted the contradictions. ML was then asked to be Oswald's lawyer before the Warren Commission. ML continued his investigation into the Warren Report; this book is his critique. ML gave lectures on his findings. David S Lifton was in the audience one day. DSL began to investigate the Warren Report and other articles. He then wrote "Best Evidence", the first book to point to "alterations of the wounds" to cover up the shootings from the front.

The Introduction by Hugh Trevor-Roper says the Warren Commission's function was to pass judgment on the facts given to it. They depended on the FBI, the Secret Service, and the police; did the latter reach a conclusion that was seconded by the Warren Commission? [The book "Act of Treason" by Mark North presents a final judgment and resolution of the JFK Assassination.] Why didn't the Warren Commission have a Devil's Advocate to represent the interests of the accused? The assumption that Oswald acted alone was take for granted: the fix was in. The Warren Report must be judged by the validity of its arguments. Many have found defects in it. HTR says "a pattern was made to emerge out of the evidence .. and seemed to subordinate the evidence to it" (p.10). One of the most important questions is: how did Patrolman Tippit know to stop Oswald? Evidence which seems solid at first fades away like a mirage when it is investigated (p.11). HTR says the Warren Report is NOT a faithful summary of the evidence. There is also evidence that was not presented to the Commission, but should not be rejected out of hand. The Warren Report has a whole series of conclusions based on carefully selected evidence, and ignored evidence that did not support their conclusion. One Commission lawyer said that no court could legally have found Oswald guilty. [Did the quick killing of Oswald point to a wider conspiracy?] The experienced doctors at Parkland Hospital said the wounds came from the front, and so did most of the onlookers there. This circumstantial evidence is more reliable than a "magic bullet" or other planted evidence.

If there is a lack of confidence in the evidence, and the Commission's handling of it, then was the Commission deceived or were they dishonest? Some might claim that the Commission of public figures and professional lawyers could not conspire to cover up a crime. [But isn't all that part of their daily life? See Watergate.] HTR says it could arise from prejudging a case before all the evidence has been seen. This is a very common psychological fact. HTR says the quantity of evidence presented in such a short period of time prevented any objective examination. The Commission accepted the foregone conclusion before they were given the evidence. Page 18 lists many unanswered questions. After forty years only one thing is certain. The conspiracy that killed JFK got away with it.

This 1966 book lacks the photographs that became available many years later. This pioneering book is still a classic critique after forty years. Mark Lane was hired by Lee Harvey Oswald's mother to defend LHO before the Warren Commission. These are ML's comments on the Warren Report.

Chapter 1 tells of the suspicious activity that occurred in the parking lot overlooking Elm St. Chapter 2 asks where the shots came from. 58 of the 90 witnesses questioned said the shots came from the grassy knoll. The actions at the time speak louder than anything said in the following weeks. Chapter 3 says JFK was hit first by a bullet in the throat, an entry wound; JFK had a massive wound in the rear portion of his skull. "Skull matter" was found on the south side of Elm Street; this is consistent with a bullet fired from the north. The police officers to the left of the limousine were spattered, consistent with a bullet fired from the right front. The Zapruder film shows Governor Connally shot from the back about 1.30 seconds after JFK's first wound. This suggests a second shooter.

Chapter 4 is on "The Magic Bullet" which allegedly hit JFK, then struck Governor Connally in his rib and wrist, yet remained in pristine condition. Chapter 5 wonders why a description of Oswald was broadcast at 12:45 pm when he wasn't charged with shooting JFK until the next morning. Oswald wasn't the only absent employee. Chapter 6 tells of the testimony from the 3 men on the fifth floor, and how it was changed for the Commission. Chapter 7 notes the testimony of the other witnesses: the shots sounded like they came from west of the School Book Depositary. None of these witnesses were called before the Commission! Chapter 8 discusses the 7.65 mm Mauser discovered on the sixth floor at 1:22 pm. The next day the 6.5 mm Mannlicher-Carcano was substituted for it! Chapter 9 discusses the tests of the alleged assassin's weapon. None of the experts who fired the weapon could hit the head or neck of the target.

Chapter 10 tells of the fictitious name "A J Hidell" used by Oswald. "Hidell" was the nickname of a Marine who served with Oswald and lived in New Orleans. Who else was entitled to receive mail at that post office box? Chapter 11 shows how the Commission created a story against the eyewitness testimony. Chapter 12 tells how a paraffin test cleared Oswald from firing a rifle that day! The freshly painted boards would give a positive response from both hands. Chapter 13 notes the 43 minutes from leaving the Depository to the shooting of Officer Tippit. No one saw Oswald leave the building. ML analyzes the other problems with the Commission's story. There are discrepancies between the different eyewitnesses stories.

Chapter 14 discusses the eyewitnesses to the shooting of Officer Tippit. One testimony "was inconsistent with the known facts or the Commission's conclusions or both". Chapter 15 says the two other witnesses who saw the killing who saw the killing did not identify Oswald. One who saw two men was warned not to talk - or she might be killed. The four bullets found in Tippet's body could not be matched to Oswald's revolver. There was a problem identifying the four shells. The found jacket had a laundry tag but could not be traced! Chapter 16 tells of the murder of Oswald while in police custody. There were warnings about Oswald's safety, and requests to move Oswald in secret on Saturday, but the Dallas PD held to the announce schedule.

The remaining chapters deal with Jack Ruby, the Oswalds, and the Commission. Later books had more of the facts gained from the Congressional Investigation. This remains one of the first books to critique the Warren Report.
6 of 7 people found the following review helpful
The Critique of the "Lone Gunman" Theory 26 Nov. 2010
By Acute Observer - Published on Amazon.com
Format: Hardcover
Rush to Judgement, Mark Lane

I first heard of Mark Lane (ML) in 1961 when he revealed that the Republican Speaker of the NY Assembly was part owner of a firm that could get the contract to build "fallout shelters" in NY state. The bill was defeated, and Mark Lane was later dropped from his Democratic Party office. When ML read the news report of Lee Harvey Oswald's guilt, he wrote an article that noted the contradictions. ML was then asked to be Oswald's lawyer before the Warren Commission. ML continued his investigation into the Warren Report; this book is his critique. ML gave lectures on his findings. David S Lifton was in the audience one day. DSL began to investigate the Warren Report and other articles. He then wrote "Best Evidence", the first book to point to "alterations of the wounds" to cover up the shootings from the front.

The Introduction by Hugh Trevor-Roper says the Warren Commission's function was to pass judgment on the facts given to it. They depended on the FBI, the Secret Service, and the police; did the latter reach a conclusion that was seconded by the Warren Commission? [The book "Act of Treason" by Mark North presents a final judgment and resolution of the JFK Assassination.] Why didn't the Warren Commission have a Devil's Advocate to represent the interests of the accused? The assumption that Oswald acted alone was take for granted: the fix was in. The Warren Report must be judged by the validity of its arguments. Many have found defects in it. HTR says "a pattern was made to emerge out of the evidence .. and seemed to subordinate the evidence to it" (p.10). One of the most important questions is: how did Patrolman Tippit know to stop Oswald? Evidence which seems solid at first fades away like a mirage when it is investigated (p.11). HTR says the Warren Report is NOT a faithful summary of the evidence. There is also evidence that was not presented to the Commission, but should not be rejected out of hand. The Warren Report has a whole series of conclusions based on carefully selected evidence, and ignored evidence that did not support their conclusion. One Commission lawyer said that no court could legally have found Oswald guilty. [Did the quick killing of Oswald point to a wider conspiracy?] The experienced doctors at Parkland Hospital said the wounds came from the front, and so did most of the onlookers there. This circumstantial evidence is more reliable than a "magic bullet" or other planted evidence.

If there is a lack of confidence in the evidence, and the Commission's handling of it, then was the Commission deceived or were they dishonest? Some might claim that the Commission of public figures and professional lawyers could not conspire to cover up a crime. [But isn't all that part of their daily life? See Watergate.] HTR says it could arise from prejudging a case before all the evidence has been seen. This is a very common psychological fact. HTR says the quantity of evidence presented in such a short period of time prevented any objective examination. The Commission accepted the foregone conclusion before they were given the evidence. Page 18 lists many unanswered questions. After forty years only one thing is certain. The conspiracy that killed JFK got away with it.

This 1966 book lacks the photographs that became available many years later. This pioneering book is still a classic critique after forty years. Mark Lane was hired by Lee Harvey Oswald's mother to defend LHO before the Warren Commission. These are ML's comments on the Warren Report.

Chapter 1 tells of the suspicious activity that occurred in the parking lot overlooking Elm St. Chapter 2 asks where the shots came from. 58 of the 90 witnesses questioned said the shots came from the grassy knoll. The actions at the time speak louder than anything said in the following weeks. Chapter 3 says JFK was hit first by a bullet in the throat, an entry wound; JFK had a massive wound in the rear portion of his skull. "Skull matter" was found on the south side of Elm Street; this is consistent with a bullet fired from the north. The police officers to the left of the limousine were spattered, consistent with a bullet fired from the right front. The Zapruder film shows Governor Connally shot from the back about 1.30 seconds after JFK's first wound. This suggests a second shooter.

Chapter 4 is on "The Magic Bullet" which allegedly hit JFK, then struck Governor Connally in his rib and wrist, yet remained in pristine condition. Chapter 5 wonders why a description of Oswald was broadcast at 12:45 pm when he wasn't charged with shooting JFK until the next morning. Oswald wasn't the only absent employee. Chapter 6 tells of the testimony from the 3 men on the fifth floor, and how it was changed for the Commission. Chapter 7 notes the testimony of the other witnesses: the shots sounded like they came from west of the School Book Depositary. None of these witnesses were called before the Commission! Chapter 8 discusses the 7.65 mm Mauser discovered on the sixth floor at 1:22 pm. The next day the 6.5 mm Mannlicher-Carcano was substituted for it! Chapter 9 discusses the tests of the alleged assassin's weapon. None of the experts who fired the weapon could hit the head or neck of the target.

Chapter 10 tells of the fictitious name "A J Hidell" used by Oswald. "Hidell" was the nickname of a Marine who served with Oswald and lived in New Orleans. Who else was entitled to receive mail at that post office box? Chapter 11 shows how the Commission created a story against the eyewitness testimony. Chapter 12 tells how a paraffin test cleared Oswald from firing a rifle that day! The freshly painted boards would give a positive response from both hands. Chapter 13 notes the 43 minutes from leaving the Depository to the shooting of Officer Tippit. No one saw Oswald leave the building. ML analyzes the other problems with the Commission's story. There are discrepancies between the different eyewitnesses stories.

Chapter 14 discusses the eyewitnesses to the shooting of Officer Tippit. One testimony "was inconsistent with the known facts or the Commission's conclusions or both". Chapter 15 says the two other witnesses who saw the killing who saw the killing did not identify Oswald. One who saw two men was warned not to talk - or she might be killed. The four bullets found in Tippet's body could not be matched to Oswald's revolver. There was a problem identifying the four shells. The found jacket had a laundry tag but could not be traced! Chapter 16 tells of the murder of Oswald while in police custody. There were warnings about Oswald's safety, and requests to move Oswald in secret on Saturday, but the Dallas PD held to the announce schedule.

The remaining chapters deal with Jack Ruby, the Oswalds, and the Commission. Later books had more of the facts gained from the Congressional Investigation. This remains one of the first books to critique the Warren Report.

In 1974 George O'Toole published "The Assassination Tapes" which provided objective evidence that LH Oswald was not guilty. Soon Congress reopened the Investigation and came up with a rebuttal of the Warren Commission. Mark North's book "Act of Treason" is one of the best and last explanations of the conspiracy to kill JFK. David Wrone's "The Zapruder Film" explains why LHO was in the front of the building when the shots were fired; movies showed no one at the 6th floor SE window. Lee Harvey Oswald was never convicted of killing JFK, he wasn't even indicted. Claims of his guilt are another Media Hoax put forward to obscure the fact that the powerful conspirators got away with it.
5 of 6 people found the following review helpful
A classic 1 Nov. 2009
By Stephen Deasy - Published on Amazon.com
Verified Purchase
Four decades later, this book can still hold it's own. It was the first widely read book questioning the official report. It was bold and risky to take on the establishment on such a huge cultural event, but Lane perservered. Like other early commentators, he didn't yet have access to the Church Reports of the mid 1970's, nor subsequent reports of what the CIA and the FBI withheld. It was the murder of the century. How often does a work of art (Oliver Stone's film) result in a new law passed unanimously by Congress to "open up the files?" In 2009, there are still a million pages withheld. Lane knew something was fishy.

This was the start, and many books have followed. Those by Sumners,Thompson,Marrs,Hancock,Fonzi,Epstein,Waldron,Talbot, Meager,Morley,Weisberg,Scott,Lipton,Newman,Kurtz,Kaiser and Douglas, have expanded upon Lane's initial impulses and provided the citizens with what the governmen, through it's leaders, withheld.
2 of 2 people found the following review helpful
A Real Rush 6 Mar. 2014
By Grunion - Published on Amazon.com
Format: Kindle Edition Verified Purchase
I lived through these times! I was vaguely aware of the behind the scenes stories and always had doubts about the Warren Report. Now I am convinced that there is "Something rotten in Denmark".
Were these reviews helpful? Let us know

Look for similar items by category


Feedback