Originally posted June 27, 2016 on my blog as a solution to the JFK Mandela Effect regarding how many people were in the car: 4 or 6? And who were they? Those questions led me to this. It is an original. Hard to imagine that when people have been obsessing about JFK for half a century. Maybe some Steem can blow the lid off of it and we can finally let it go? At the very least, it might tickle a few brains and there's never anything wrong with that. Enjoy!
Epiphany
Lonesome Nellie: An Herstorical Perspective on a Woman who got away with the Crime of the Century
PLEASE NOTE: I am just copying and pasting from the website. You can get the gist of it here and if you want to look closer, you can just go directly to my blog from the link.
Consider the following two questions. Grab a pen and paper and write down the answers before you go look it up. For this exercise, there are no wrong answers.
How many people were in the car the day JFK was assassinated?
Try to name them as best you can, note your recollection if you can't recall a name.
I have spent the past week asking people these questions. Family, friends, co-workers, people in line ups, practically every person I come across. The total sample size was around 50 people. The results of my experiment were the following (estimates only, no statistical analysis was performed on this data because the sample is too small):
Question 1: Approximately 75% of those polled said 4 people, another 20% said 5 people and a handful said either 3 people or they couldn't remember.
Question 2: Approximately 90% named the following people as being in the car: JFK (1), Jackie (2), Govenor Connally (3) and the Secret Service agent who was driving (4). (Almost all of the people who recalled 4 people had this for an answer.)
The other 10% (who were all within the 20% that remembered 5 people) cited the 5th person as probably Governor Connally's wife (5).
Only one person in all of those polled remembered her name.
Her name was Idanell "Nellie" Brill Connally and she has been invisible to just about everyone for over 50 years. As JFK conspiracies go, and there are LOTS of them, I could find no record on the internet of this particular sequence of events I'm about to describe. Once you see it for yourself, I'm sure you will be just as amazed as I was that nobody ever considered it. If they did, they kept it to themselves. My source for that is the internet itself; I couldn't find it because it isn't there yet.
Humanity almost forgot about Nellie Connally and I'd like to correct that record so that we never forget who she was. She is worthy of recognition regardless of the act I believe she committed on November 22, 1963.
For the record, I was in the 80% group described above and I didn't even remember the Governor's name or that he was the Governor of Texas. I just remembered that he was some political dude accompanying the President. I watched JFK back in 1993 when I was bored and alone to see what all the "fuss" was about.
Not only am I guilty of not seeing Nellie myself, I also forgot her husband and this is just as much a tragedy for him as it was for JFK because he suffered a great deal in order to honour his vows so he could protect his family; including a wife who he discovered tried to kill him but didn't succeed. I'm willing to entertain the notion that he was the only person who knew what she did that day.
Have a close listen to what he says here from an interview less than a year later (1964) and observe his emotions and take note of the flowers shown in the back seat, they'll be important later:
"What she'd done..."
That is what I heard him say at the 7:24 mark and he doesn't collect his emotions until 7:33. That's about the same time it took for the two bullets to inflict the damage that changed the world on that fateful day, oddly enough. This is a man who is deeply wounded, not of the flesh but in his heart because he knows what happened and he has chosen to protect her at real risk to his own life, at any time. She could literally take him like a thief in the night. Every night.
There are so many interviews that mention the nightmares he had. He was terrified and he had good reason to be. As I read Nellie's book, I found myself crying for him as I felt the pain he hid so well. No man or woman deserves that.
One of my assumptions is that somehow they came to terms with it and agreed to a "story" that would fit the circumstances; either through a deal of some sort, or very private counselling or both, because they continued to live out their lives together without public incident until he died in 1993. It's obvious to me now that he knew. I think he knew as soon as he heard the first shot because his first movement is slightly down and to the left, exactly where she was holding the gun in her left hand, hidden from view under the yellow roses (frames 229-231). He even says that in his first public interview from his hospital bed. The problem with their initial plan was the future evolution and enhancements of the Zapruder film, along with additional information yet to be revealed of which neither of them had any way of knowing at the time.
The first images from the film (only 30 frames) were made public November 29, 1963 just seven days after the incident. Just after this, on December 4, 1963, is when she says she wrote her 22 page journal and I have no reason to doubt that claim even though I do have serious doubts that the entirety of the original diary was fully published in her book. There is clear evidence to show that she replaced a number of the pages beginning at page 7 (I'll get to that in more detail below). They had as much public information as was available at that time and constructed their story around it so that it would fit without arousing suspicion.
Ironically enough, they didn't really need to do any of that because nobody was paying her any attention anyway. She was scared of getting caught and because she knew exactly what happened, she unknowingly offered clues without being specifically asked in various interviews and testimonies to come (i.e. the second carpet cleaning* and why she didn't wave during the motorcade*). She must have assumed someone would be observant enough to suspect her. That's how liars behave when they've done something with intent and are afraid of getting caught, they overthink it. Whether the action was harmful to others or to themselves doesn't really matter much, the process people go through for how to best hide the truth is very much the same.
They continued to tell their "story" multiple times right up until his death. If you watch all of interview and testimony videos in chronological order, not only can you identify how their story changed based on the most recent information but you can also feel the struggle within him. She never genuinely expresses any emotion about that day. Not once. She is a master of false modesty and always knowing the "right" things to say. She s a very clever and highly intelligent woman with extraordinary mental discipline.
Unfortunately, her lack of genuine emotion is the biggest tell of all. Her story is almost always "correct", obviously rehearsed and memorized as you continue to observe her in interviews over the years. Her husband messes up his side of their story much more than she does because he wasn't the perpetrator of the crime, he was a victim of it, so he was just desperately trying to keep it from coming out. In some interviews, particularly the earlier ones in the 60's and 70's, she is visibly and audibly annoyed with him when he screws up his lines. As victims go, John Connally is one and behaves as one, even through his own polished and charismatic veneer. His life continued a downward spiral after that day until his final release.
The Larry King interview from 1992 with both of them is one of the most interesting of all until she comes back on her own in 2003 to promote her book. I ordered the book online so I could read it myself but I also had a good friend borrow it from the local library because I wanted to read it ASAP. In her own words. The ego being displayed on her book tour interviews led me to believe that by the time she decided to write the book, history had told her she'd gotten away with it. I imagine on some very deep level, that made her angry. She wanted recognition for her actions, whether she was aware of it or not. And, sure enough, her book has it written on almost every page. This was a woman so far removed from herself that she became even more resistant and controlling of the narrative. She was angry and alone for as long as she can remember.
She repeats the phrase often about how alone she felt. This part is true. In fact, I would say much of what she says is actually true. The lies are how she presents the facts, not so much the facts themselves. Like all practiced liars, Nellie Connally learned from a young age that the best way not to get caught is to stick to the truth as much as possible because it's not memory that is infallible, it's memorization. She even explains this belief in detail on her book tour. Listen to her explain it here for yourself. What she is describing here is not memory but memorization and they are two very different things, especially when they are at odds with each other. This is the modus operandi of those trying to control the narrative, and she was very good at that given her lifetime in politics.
Nellie was in a uniquely powerful position as the First Lady of Texas in the 60's. Not only were women still mostly ignored in general but, precisely because of that, she was able to access information and locations without anyone harassing her or questioning her. Nobody was suspicious of her, she could come and go as she pleased. I wouldn't be at all surprised if the Secret Service didn't even check inside of her purse. She was, in effect, invisible and hiding in plain sight at the same time.
And she was not alone. Many women from her generation were faced with that reality and learned to manipulate it to survive. It still happens based on my own life experience but it does seem to be a vibe that's on its way out. I imagine many of us have Mothers or Grandmothers or other women from that generation in our lives who exhibit these controlling traits as it is a learned behaviour passed on from Mothers for generations.
Thankfully most of us aren't faced with the kind of extraordinary life that Nellie experienced. The vast majority of us aren't so far removed from ourselves that we would even contemplate such an act. But I do believe she did. I am convinced of it well beyond a reasonable doubt and I will explain the evidence that convinced me as best I can. I'm sure there is much, much more out there and available that may discredit my own belief and that's OK. If I'm wrong, the Internet has a way of making that evident fairly quickly. As a former control freak myself, I have come to appreciate the relief of allowance. I am quite capable of owning the consequences of making this claim, if there are any.
So, let's get to it. Call it fiction if you like but this is the story as I see it. Some of this is speculation on my part as I can never truly know the full extent of the how's and the why's. The who's, what's, where's and when's are all there for anyone to interpret how they see fit. Facts are facts for the most part and in this story all of the facts fit the story being told. Inductive reasoning is indeed a valid investigative technique when objectivity and rational thought are part of the equation. I will attempt to note my assumptions with underlined text so the reader can fully discern fact from supposition for themselves.
Some time in the Summer/Fall of 1963, Nellie decided to play Kingmaker for LBJ and kill her husband at the same time. It wasn't quite killing two birds with one stone but it was close. There were two birds taken out that day with two bullets. JFK died instantly making LBJ President in a way that he never wanted and her husband died a little inside every day for four decades as she claimed complete control over him. Mission accomplished. Even though it didn't work out quite as perfectly as she'd planned, it still worked out.
Nellie hated LBJ. In her book, she describes this herself better than I can. As a teenager working for him, there was an occasion when he threw a book at her because she mistakenly ended an important call he was on and it was in that moment that she came to despise him on a very deep level. She did, however, idolize Lady Bird and this is also quite clear as you read her book.
As to why she wanted her husband dead, I suspect it has to do with a number of things. Perhaps she blamed him for taking away her life; she wanted to be an actress before meeting him when she was just 18 and then she married him when she was 21. It could be connected with the circumstances surrounding the death of their oldest child, Kathleen "KK" Connally, four years prior. It could be her belief that he was a philanderer, she seemed to believe until the end that he didn't really love her.
She was a very jealous woman even though she became very skilled at claiming she wasn't. Pages 25-28 of her book make it quite clear that she was envious of Mrs. Kennedy and she describes in detail her perceptions of an evening when she watched her husband and Mrs. Kennedy getting on a little too well for her liking. Yes, she was indeed a jealous woman. Anyone who has witnessed this in another human being knows how vicious and decptive that kind of hatred can be.
Perhaps it was just all of these things combined plus a whole lot more that we'll never know about that caused her to pull the trigger twice that day with no obvious remorse or regret.
I don't know why she did it. Only she knows for sure and she's gone. As are all the people who can confirm or deny this potential sequence of events. What I do know is that it is no coincidence that she "found" the diary she "forgot" about precisely after everyone who could challenge her claims was either dead or incapacitated. This includes her husband who died in 1992, Mrs. Kennedy who died in 1994, LBJ who died in 1973 and Lady Bird Johnson, who became blind in 1993 and was unable to communicate verbally due to a stroke in 2002 only a year before Nellie published her book. I suspect that's what finally propelled her to put it out there and make one last effort to get the world to see who she really was.
And again, nobody really noticed. Nellie died three years later in 2006. Perhaps she was able to make peace with her actions before she passed but the level of forgiveness required by that point would have been a difficult target for such a well developed ego to attain given the callousness of her actions. Her pain was buried so deep that it's possible she could no longer even feel it. It's possible she convinced herself she did the right thing even to the end. If so, death was the only form of repentance left available to her and she had no choice but to finally accept it. Life can often work that way for those who have caused the level of pain that she caused.
One quote from the book that I found somewhat chilling can be found on page 128: "John and I were never quite comfortable expressing our private spiritual thoughts to others. Age has made that no easier. But I keep coming back to one idea: God created the heavens and the earth in 6 days. A lone, and possibly mad, gunman in Dallas remade that universe in 6 seconds."
It's difficult to find empathy for Nellie. That has been the biggest struggle for me in telling this story. I think it would be easier to just call her a psychopath and be done with it but I no longer believe that there are some people who can't be redeemed. Everyone has a soul. To believe otherwise takes us backward, not forward. It took me two years of my own deeply inward searching to discover my own lost soul and that discovery allows me to search deeper within others as well from a place of compassion. Therefore, I will not personally accept the judgement of psychopath for this woman but I know that many others will and I also know there is nothing I can do to prevent that other than to be as conscientious of her worth regardless of what she's done, for myself.
Picture
There a many versions of the Zapruder film on YouTube. Pick any one of them after reading the following and you will see the events transpire as I describe them. I will note the relevant frames in brackets as necessary but I would encourage any one of you reading to trust your own eyes, just be sure they're open. The image to the right is the precise moment I believe Nellie pulled the trigger a second time.
In the span of 6 long seconds, Nellie Connally lifts her right arm (165) while concealing a gun in her left hand under a pile of yellow roses given to her by Lady Bird when she exited the plane at Love Field. She then glances back at the President to get her aim (188) and shoots the President in the seat behind her at an angle corresponding to the location of where she previously placed the rifle (222). John Connally heard the shot and briefly looked down and to the left (228). He didn’t quite consciously understand what he saw at that moment but his survival instincts kicked in. He quickly turned away, almost in an attempt to exit the vehicle, looked behind him and saw JFK clutching at his chest where the bullet entered at the base of his throat (230-244). John Connally knew in his gut what had just happened and all he could say was, “Oh, no, no, no, no…” as he raised his right hand holding his Stetson hat to his chest (246). His head fell back as he tried to see Jackie over his right shoulder to warn her (259) and then he felt the punch of the bullet in his back as Nellie pressed against him to cradle him for the shot (273). Jackie was looking directly at him when it happened and I believe she also understood what was happening just as the gun went off in John Connally’s back (312). What Nellie couldn’t have predicted was that when the bullet exited her husband’s chest, it caught on the gold Mexican Peso cuff link John wore (313). The velocity of the bullet slowed down enough after passing through his chest that it may have actually landed inside the vehicle. The cuff link itself, flew open and split apart with enough force and speed that the larger section went in the direction of JFK’s dropped head and literally sliced through his skull and ripped his head off with a spiralling motion, a split second after Nellie pulled the trigger to kill her husband (313-315), and the smaller section deflected in the opposite direction to become lodged in John's leg. Nellie was so focused on her husband and her plan that she wasn’t fully aware of what had happened to JFK in that moment. She shoved her husband to the floor in front of her and then sank to the floor herself as she flung the yellow flowers over the top of them both for cover (336). Jackie, now in survival mode because the shooter is in the car with her, scrambles to get out of the vehicle (345).
In later frames, you can see the brain matter falling back into the car as the car moves forward in the same direction that the projectile and brain matter originally went. It is also possible the warped cuff link actually landed back in the car or deflected off the trunk. It's impossible to know for sure. What we do know is that on the way to the hospital, as she lay on the floor, Nellie may have had time to search for the bullet or any other evidence that may have been there. She certainly would have had time to put the gun pack in her purse, or wherever she stashed it, under the cover of yellow roses. Perhaps she even found the warped cuff link and kept it too. It was never recovered and is still missing.
Insights about the gun she would have used is obviously pure speculation because, as far as I can tell, nobody ever legitimately considered Nellie Connally to be the shooter so such a weapon was never looked for or asked about. She could have waltzed right into the Hospital with the murder weapon in her hand and I doubt anyone would have noticed...
And if anyone did notice, I'm sure they'd think long and hard before accusing the First Lady of Texas of being a cold-blooded killer. Fear of retribution is a powerful motivator that keeps people quiet, especially when people like Nellie Connally aren't afraid to abuse the power they are given. The only way to take down that kind of fear is to shine a light on it thereby exposing the lies that are used as shields in the process.
If anything at all comes from this, I hope it inspires people to find the courage to speak truth to power, no matter what that truth may be. It isn't easy, I get that. But the consequences of not stepping up are exponentially greater as time marches on and these abuses are left to form deeply rooted and systemic cancers growing unseen within our collective consciousness.
If we could ask John Connally right now, I'm sure he would agree. Or maybe he wouldn't? Maybe he was the type of man who would protect his wife and his hard fought reputation at all costs even at the expense of his own soul? We'll never know for sure. And maybe, after 53 years, it doesn't really matter any more. I don't know that either.
I do know that the death of JFK is still an unresolved story. Maybe if the mystery is settled, he can become a risen hero rather than a fallen one and America can finally remember him without the taint of the circumstances of his death clouding the type of leader he was and may have continued to be. My American cousins deserve some truth, they've suffered for far too long under the grip of darkness. Whether they believe it or not is up to them, only time will tell, but they have a right to be informed of all of the information available so they can make their own determination of the events that transpired that day.
I'd like to highlight a few more points that are relevant to the above scenario and note some of the issues that may require further research and consideration:
Picture
- The missing gold Mexican Peso cuff link from John Connally's right sleeve (the hand that was injured). I couldn't determine what those particular cuff links may have looked like but I assume they looked something like those in the picture to the right. This picture shows its location that morning on his right sleeve. What is most important to the analysis is the shape (shown in the picture) and the material (gold). At 1:33:084 in the HSCA hearings in 1978, she specifically states the remaining cuff link (from the left sleeve I assume) was given to her in the Hospital before her husband was taken to be operated on.
In Nellie's book, at the bottom of page 16, she does indeed say, "The nurse dropped one of John's gold cuff links, made with a Mexican Peso, into my hand. The other had been shot off."
On page 119, she writes, "On the other hand, I had kept the little gold cuff link the nurse had given me and used it as a kind of talisman during John's recovery. I called a jeweler in New York, David Webb, who was designing a bracelet for me, and described the cuff link, telling him it contained a little Mexican coin. I said I wanted to preserve it - it was now a family heirloom - but I had no idea how to do it. I knew only I didn't want to wear it around my neck."
The jeweler then proceeded to attach it to her bracelet and she says, "... that's where I wear it to this day." She goes on to say that it came in handy during "the Warren Commission's so-called experts over the coming months." I haven't been able to locate a picture of this bracelet and I do wonder if the reason she describes it as "little" to the jeweller is because it was the smaller half of the cuff link similar to the picture above? Could her bullet have split the cuff link in two parts? The larger part spiralling towards JFK and the smaller one lodged into the Governor's leg? Was the reason she kept it on her at all times is because it was evidence? With all of the controversy surrounding the bullet, such a theory is not much of a stretch. Perhaps what the nurse handed her that day was the smaller piece they had just removed from his leg?
The velocity of the bullet exiting the Governor's chest, if fired at point blank range into his back, may have had enough force to catch on his sleeve as it entered his wrist while he gripped his Stetson, popped open the cuff link causing the cuff link to ricochet in a spiralling pattern as it hit the President's skull, then whipsawed through the softer brain matter, hitting the denser material at the back of the skull morphing its shape as it went and, while still maintaining the spiralling motion (Gold is soft and malleable and highly reflective to light), it proceeds to exit the skull in a direction that is back towards the front of the vehicle. See this screenshot for an image of the exit path of the cuff link and note the yellow roses at Nellie's shoulder. That screenshot came from this enhanced video and I added the text and lines to show you where to look as you watch it for yourself.
I had to view this section (frames 300-318) multiple times on a number of different videos before it also became clear to me that the yellow roses with green stems actually seem to inflate as though by some pressure coming from the area between Nellie and John. I'm not any kind of video expert but once you know what to look for, it's relatively easy to spot. The eyes are just naturally drawn to the President's head in those frames so it's easy to miss if you aren't specifically looking for it. The same could be said for everything I am proposing here for that matter.
A good test to run on this cuff link trajectory scenario would be to try in specific conditions to see if the pattern does indeed match the head wound the President suffered that day. Basic knowledge of physics would allow many people to visualize how that might transpire. Just imagine that object in the picture spinning super fast as it approaches a watermelon at high speed, spinning along and it's not difficult to imagine that what I have described is very likely what removed the Presidents' skull. And in order for that to work, the bullet almost had to have its original trajectory from directly behind Governor Connally. It would also appear that the Presidents head exploded at exactly the same time as John Connally was shot in the back. This would prove that only two shots were fired, not three. It's somewhat disturbing to note that there could have been a magic bullet in the form of a gold Mexican peso...
The bullet that apparently did all the damage to John Connally was found later on in the Hospital with no blood or fibres and appeared to be in rather good condition given what it supposedly went through. The story is that it fell out of his leg and onto the gurney and was found later in the Hospital AND it was a match for the rifle found on the 6th floor of the Depository. However, in her HSCA testimony at 1:27:48, she specifically states that the "bullet lodged in his leg". I imagine this is one of the few occasions where she messed up her own lines and told some form of the truth by mistake. Combined with the fact that the family refused to allow bullet fragments from John's leg to be retrieved after he died, it is my belief that the real reason for that is that there is some kind of evidence there (or lack of) that would arouse suspicion. Maybe she did locate the bullet while huddled on the floor of the car?
Mrs. Kennedy's Warren Commission testimony states that she only heard two shots and that she has no recollection of fleeing to the back the car. She also mentions that just before the Book Depository building, she heard Nellie say, "We will soon be there." This comment is not in any of Nellie's or John's testimony and it was not made public for 25 years. That doesn't mean Nellie didn't say it but it does highlight why she may not offer it under testimony if she was guilty, assuming she remembers saying it. Saying it at that moment may have been a way for her to gather her focus for what she was about to do.
John Connally insisted time and again that he only heard two shots. I would be curious to see a map of witnesses geographically referenced as to the number of shots heard. I'm sure something like that exists somewhere but I've been unable to locate such a thing. If those witnesses closest to the car are mostly those who heard two shots and those further away are the ones who heard three, the third noise could have easily been an echo. On this point, Nellie and John obviously agreed to go with that discrepancy as it would appear more human and it was a very public point of contention. In Greer's testimony (the driver), he describes only two shots but says he heard three. Kellerman (front passenger seat) also insists he heard three shots. Geller and Kellerman were in the front seat separated from the Connally's by the seat itself with what appears to be a metal bar along the top of it. Nellie gripped that bar with her right hand for much of the trip to Dealey Plaza. If the data does indicate that the majority of witnesses closest to the vehicle heard two shots, how is it that a calm and collected Nellie is so convinced it was three? Because three shots is the one distortion that protects her and gives credence to many of the conspiracy theories floating about. She knows how to give people what they want to believe.
The rifle on the 6th floor of the Book Depository. It is my belief that Nellie did this alone. (I know, I know... The Lone Gunwoman, the eye-roll is not lost on me either...) If she did, then somehow she managed to plant that rifle on the 6th floor prior to the 22nd. This is where I wonder about the repeated references she makes to having the carpets cleaned a second time. It smells like an alibi in waiting for the previous day. She left Austin at noon on the 21st and met her husband there to fly to Houston with him, that is in her testimony. However, she had much of the morning to herself. It is possible that in the span of 6 hours, she could have driven a rifle to Dallas, stored it among the boxes on the 6th floor and left. Perhaps this was done even earlier. I don't know if that building was swept prior to the visit but I doubt it was. This is an obvious hole I have left for others more knowledgeable on the details to determine. It is also possible that she told Lady Bird what happened during their hospital visit and a cover was begun to protect her, they were very close after all.
The Confession. I've been fascinated by handwriting analysis for a LONG time. That is why I so desperately wanted to read the diary Nellie Connally published in 2003. She didn't disappoint. Script is difficult to read unless you're the one who wrote it and it took me almost half an hour just to get through the first 6 pages. I flipped through the pages before reading it to see if anything odd stood out to me and I noticed that for the first 7 pages, Nellie consistently began at the top of the page just under the one inch margin. For reference, she used a lined legal pad to write on. Then, on page 8, she suddenly switches and the script starts well down the page rather than in the consistent location at the top, it has pages written on the back side, not just the front and it also becomes tighter and more legible.
It was when I got to page 7 that I knew she had altered the document even though she specifically states on page 131 that she "...made no attempt to transcribe them or alter my original work".
The first 6 pages as I mentioned already took me a long time to read. When I got to page seven, I was about 3/4 of the way down the page when I noticed how much easier it was to read. The time it took me to read page 7 was about 50% faster than it took to read each of the previous pages. I asked a friend who is a speed reader if she noticed the difference as well and we timed her. Sure enough, 50% faster for her too. It is obvious just from the basic style of writing that the same person wrote each page; Nellie Connally indeed wrote all the pages. What the change in speed indicates, combined with the subtle changes to style (tighter, heavier, more legible) is that she wrote those pages at different times. And as I looked closer at the differences in the script, I would have to say the time necessary to cause that kind of shift had to be significant. My guess would be roughly 33 years. I'm not a professional handwriting analyst but I have enough experience with it as a hobby to feel fairly confident in that claim. A complete and thorough analysis by an expert would be needed to prove it more thoroughly.
I believe she must not have had access to that document until her husband died. I also believe that they did develop a plan together to keep it a secret. Given that she actually tried to kill her own husband, he had to have safeguards in place for his own safety. He wasn't a stupid man and he had reason to be afraid for his life. It makes sense to me that she actually wrote a confession and that it would be released in the event of his death, if his death was suspicious. It sounds like something out of a soap opera but it's one of the few scenarios that make sense given the story I've described. It's also possible that she was contemplating taking her own life as the enormity of what she'd done began to set in. I'm not sure... Again, the fact that original pages were obviously replaced/rewritten by an older Nellie, it's almost impossible to truly infer what was going on within her at the time she sat down to write that journal on December 4, 1963.
The number of inconsistencies between their testimonies over the years, the alterations to the journal itself, the changes evident between the journal and the transcript of it provided in Chapter 15 of the book are so many that breaking that down and analyzing it more fully would take weeks and a more professional investigation. All I know is that I was able to identify dozens and dozens of outright lies and inconsistencies that only revealed themselves from the perspective of her being the one behind all of it. I started to note them so I could reference them here as proof but I know I don't need to. Anyone who takes enough time to listen to her interviews and testimonies over the years and then reads that book will know with the same certainty that I know right now.
One observation I will note is that on page 154 of the transcript section (which she apparently created after embarrassing herself by trying to read the script in front of an audience for the first time), there is one very important sentence from the original notes that she left out of the transcript. I won't insult anyone's intelligence by pretending that leaving it out was just an honest mistake. The part missing is from page 20 of the diary, located on page 177 of the book and it reads, "Someone took the ___ pink suit and had it cleaned". I can't quite make out the fourth word but I don't need to. It's pretty obvious she removed that from the transcript she used when reading it in public. If she did do it, there was gunpowder residue on that suit and she had no intention of bringing that bit of information to anyone's attention in a public setting.
Some of the outright lies actually make me sick. During her various book tour interviews, when she tells the story of holding him in her lap with her hand on his "sucking" wound saying "there, there", none of that is backed up by anything but her revisionist imagination. It's an outright falsehood when you watch the Zapruder film! Unless you only watched the zoomed in version, of course, because in those ones you cannot see her or the flowers. I wouldn't be surprised if that was the only version she thought existed. Whatever the reason for her making that up, it disgusts me to the core of my soul. She did no such thing. And the reason he vaulted away from her to get out of the car at the Hospital is likely because she was hoping if she didn't do anything, he might bleed out. He had to do it himself if he wanted to live! That sounds so harsh, I know, but it rings so true for me that I can't think of a kinder way to express it.
When John Connally eventually died of natural causes, the "diary" was released back to her. She says she didn't find it until 1996 but perhaps it took three years of legal back and forth before she finally got her hands on it. Maybe he hid and it took her that long to find it. I don't know. But I can deduce, from her own handwriting and obvious arrogance throughout the book, that when she finally did get her hands on it again, she proceeded to re-write the story to reflect 33 years of history to that point. She had access to all the facts of the case and she was the only one left who actually knew what really happened.
It must have appeared to her that people had moved on from the event and were not likely to question it or even notice. She felt safe to come out and finally lay claim to some glory. The coming out was not complete though and it was certainly not inspired by some sense of guilt or shame or remorse or repentance, but simply for her desire to feel the spotlight with nobody else taking her lead away from her. She still felt the same way about the people in the story that she did 33 years prior. She comes right out and admits it throughout the book! Her motives are not difficult to spot.
The moment I realized the proof was right there in front of me in Nellie's own handwriting, that knowledge, combined with everything else I've shared here, convinced me that she was the shooter and I wanted to tell that story. I could continue to research and offer proof but, in that moment, I had already convinced myself. And that was all I was interested in so I stopped and began writing this. I know enough when to stop so that I don't risk becoming the victim of schadenfreude myself.
I was undecided about how to tell this story too. It's worthy of a book, of that I have no doubt, but I'm not interested in writing a book so I settled on just providing the basics in this blog post and allowing it to go where it goes from there without further influence from me. I've also accepted that it may not go anywhere even though it's a compelling solution on so many levels. Therefore, I've decided to stop my research right here. If this feels true for others, then I know there are people out there far more qualified than I am to take it further, if necessary.
Concluding Remarks
"Part of me was afraid we would never find an answer. Part of me was afraid that we would."
- Nellie Connally, page 47, From Love Field: Our Final Hours with President John F. Kennedy
As I travel through the flow of time, it amazes me how the truth is such a malleable and subjective entity. Looking back over one’s own life from a more understanding and compassionate perspective can bring to light so much more truth that was hidden from view at the time an event or circumstance transpired. We always perceive truth from our own perspective and more often than not we accept another’s truth without question, particularly when the circumstance or event did not involve us directly.
The “narrative”, as they call it in politics, is designed to convince others of a specific perspective that defines the truth. Often it does originate from a genuine and honest concern for others but it can quickly morph into “controlling the narrative” when the origin of the perspective is borne from a place of fear.
That fear can manifest itself as feelings of shame, guilt, rage, envy, revenge, blame, frustration, grief, despair and powerlessness all coiled up into a dark ball and hidden inside in favour of maintaining the narrative because the consequences of accepting responsibility for one’s own actions is terrifying in a world devoid of compassion and understanding. This tumor of emotions, if resisted rather than being addressed or acknowledged, often has the power to compel a person to destructive action because the pain underlying all of that is just so unbearable and overwhelming, a release of any kind is preferable to continuing to suffer in silence, particularly when you have convinced yourself that the action required is justified somehow.
However, when that action involves taking the life of another, no matter how justified you think you are at the time, that alone tells you that the inspiration to take action is coming from a place of fear and not love. An action taken from that place will not heal the deeper pain. It may offer some temporary relief and compel a desire to control the narrative at all costs, to maintain appearances, to deflect, to manipulate, to obsess but it cannot make you feel whole. These are all protective mechanisms each of us have employed at some point or another in our own lives as a way to cope with having performed an unnatural act that has caused pain to others but those choices will never have the power to heal the damage done.
Forgiveness heals and forgiving oneself is where it begins.
As time travels on, the secret may never be revealed to others but deep inside, it never leaves you. No matter how tightly you shut your eyes or how long you hold your breath, “getting away with it” is never as appealing as we think. It’s not a solution, it’s a Band-Aid. It isolates you further and allows the dark tumor to become more compact and dense. The choice to hide from that becomes increasingly more difficult. Only the strongest of wills has the power to live the lie as they die inside, never quite fulfilling the desire we all share to be loved, without condition.
And sometimes, if you live long enough, there will be a part of you that looks for absolution and the truth will somehow reach out through the cracks of a well-designed mask without you even being aware of it. Given enough time, the mask will begin to crack and, if you're lucky, it may fall off completely, whether you are still alive to witness it or not. If there still exists pain in others as the result of your actions, the truth will continue to reveal itself until all of those affected are healed of the affliction.
In the case of Idanell “Nellie” Brill Connally, she is no longer with us to accept the consequences of her actions on that fateful day in 1963. However, her truth does have the power to heal our collective pain if we allow it.
I honour and respect her existence and her sacrifice and I forgive her the choices she made. She told us everything we needed to know and nobody was paying attention. It is tragic. Perhaps we weren’t ready for the truth until now? Perhaps many still aren’t, and that’s OK. We all come to our own truth, in our own time and in our own way.
For me, this is the truth of how and why John F. Kennedy died.
May they all rest in peace, for the benefit of all.
And may the remaining members of her family be offered honour, respect and compassion. They are the one group of people I feel an enormous amount of empathy for. They've suffered so much already, I'm sure. I cried when I read their accounts of that day in the book, particularly Sharon. She reminded me so much of myself at that age, a sensitive soul thrust into a harsh reality. I am not telling this story to inflict more pain on them, it is my sincerest desire that they all be allowed to heal and live their lives to their fullest potential.
NOTE FOR THE READER: I have complete confidence in your ability to discern the truth for yourself. I am not here to prove this account of events to you, I've already proven it to myself and that's enough for me. You can believe it or not, the choice is yours. I have provided a full account of how I came to see this and provided all of the necessary links so that people can prove it for themselves. My YouTube channel has most of the clips and interviews I've listened to if you want a shortcut and all other reference material used has been directly linked within the article. I was going to include the pictures of her journal from the book but decided against it. I'm sure the family still gets revenues from the sale of the book and they probably believe in the notion of copyright, so I will respect that for them.
However, the truth itself cannot be copyrighted, that's just ridiculous. If anyone wants to use what I have presented here in any way, whether to prove or disprove the story presented or to dig deeper still, be my guest. I am the arbiter of my own truth, as are you. A good starting point is to ask the same questions I did at the top of the article. You'll be amazed at what you discover.
I used an * to indicate pieces of evidence that I came across during research but forgot to note where they came from. If I locate those, I will do an edit to link it up.
It may take some time but the existence of Nellie Connally will not fade into the ether, not in my world at least. If we are going to survive, it begins with healing the world we are already in and letting go of the destructive tendencies that are based on fear and deception. A big part of that healing is embracing both sides of our nature, the masculine and the feminine. Nellie Connally is proof that all of us, women included, need to remember who we are and why we are here. We are not destroyers of worlds, contrary to popular opinion, we are here to make things better for all of us.
We are all worthy of existence, including Nellie.
Picture
If you would like to thank me for bringing this version of the story to your attention,
I will accept Ether at the following address:
0x4De8357a5D2ffea47934de70E3a805c6c2442B6c