Researcher Chuck Ochelli is deeply invested in the JFK assassination and its repercussions, tying it to personal experiences and larger societal impacts. He explained how the assassination affected his father, a veteran who later took his life, connecting it to Kennedy's intention to withdraw from Vietnam by the end of 1965. This belief stems from National Security Action Memorandum 263, which would have potentially prevented years of warfare and numerous casualties, including his father. Ochelli joined guest host Richard Syrett (Twitter) to discuss his research into the JFK assassination, skepticism toward the official narrative, and how this historical event altered society's trajectory.

In discussing Paul Landis' claim about a bullet found during Kennedy's assassination, Ochelli questioned its credibility. He suggested Landis' motive as potentially driven by financial gain and expressed skepticism about his consistency between statements made in the past versus those in his book. Ochelli highlighted the complexities of the JFK assassination, pointing out the difficulties in piecing together a credible chain of events due to conflicting testimonies and the absence of concrete evidence.

Regarding the magic bullet theory and Warren Commission staffer Arlen Specter's role in formulating it, Ochelli criticized how it was crafted to fit a predetermined narrative, despite Specter's lack of expertise in forensics or ballistics. He emphasized the theory's necessity to uphold the lone gunman hypothesis and avoid a conspiracy, noting the scarcity of evidence to support it and the numerous wounds needing explanation in the absence of additional bullets.

When discussing Lee Harvey Oswald's alleged presence on the sixth floor of the Book Depository during the shooting, Ochelli cast doubt on the reliability of the primary witness, Howard Brennan, due to various factors like eyesight impairment. He also explored alternative theories about Oswald's potential location during the event, such as the "prayer man" in the doorway of the building, but expressed uncertainty and a need for further examination of evidence.

Ochelli has set up a discount for Coast listeners with coupon code "coast" when subscribing or signing up to be a supporter at ochelli.com.

------------------------------------------------

During the latter half of the program, researcher James DiEugenio reported on JFK assassination "chokeholds" that prove there was a conspiracy as outlined in the book, "The JFK Assassination Chokeholds."

DiEugenio is one of the five contributors to the book. He emphasized the legal perspective brought by three lawyers among the contributors: Matt Crumpton, Andrew Iler, and Mark Adamcyzk. Their goal was to establish standards of proof concerning Oswald's conviction, questioning why neither the Warren Commission nor the House Select Committee detailed their standards for convicting Oswald. The book presents compelling evidence to vindicate Oswald, examining different aspects, including the enigma of Kennedy's brain, proof of a front shot, Oswald's alleged location during the shooting, dissenters in the case, and the absence of due process for Oswald.

DiEugenio argued that the evidence, such as Kennedy's brain examination, multiple expert testimonies, and discrepancies in autopsy materials, strongly suggests Oswald could not have been convicted in a fair trial. He highlighted the discrepancy between official descriptions of Kennedy's skull damage, revealing that contrary to initial reports, numerous witnesses saw a significant hole in the back of Kennedy's skull. This evidence, along with X-rays showing particles indicating a frontal shot, strongly implies a conspiracy.

In addition, DiEugenio shed light on how critical information about the assassination was uncovered much later, thanks to the efforts of the Assassination Records Review Board. He criticized government agencies for withholding critical documents, pointing out how even scheduled declassification was delayed repeatedly under President Trump's administration, indicating to him a continued cover-up or resistance to revealing the complete truth about the Kennedy assassination.