[Sample B: Approval/Signature Sheet] - George Mason University

The double Oswald theory is a key component of many conspiracy books. The
popularity of the theory reflects the failure of the Warren Commission to adequately
explain testimony and evidence that ran counter to the official version of Oswald’s life.
Some of the double Oswald theories and the Manchurian Candidate Oswald also appeal
to those who believe U.S. and Soviet intelligence agencies would capable of just about
anything in the espionage wars of the Cold War. Such ideas flowered in the 1960s and
1970s with revelations in the United States of CIA misdeeds and because of the secrecy
surrounding intelligence activities. Some authors, such as Lincoln Lawrence, appear to
have exploited paranoia about secret cabals and intelligence agencies.
Mark Lane was part of the “first generation” of Warren Commission critics who
questioned the official findings. Along with Sylvia Meagher, Edward Epstein, and
Harold Weisberg, Lane used the evidence and testimony gathered by the Commission
itself to question its findings. In Rush to Judgment, published in August 1966, Lane
accused the Warren Commission of preparing “brief for the prosecution,” in which the
evidence against the accused, Lee Harvey Oswald, “was magnified, while that in his
favor was depreciated, misrepresented or ignored.” 478 Lane had sought to represent
Oswald’s interests before the Commission, but was rebuffed. His book can be seen as the
brief for the defense of Oswald, and some of his criticisms resemble the rhetoric of an
attorney’s closing arguments before a jury. For example, he noted the Commission’s
statement that having Ruby silence Oswald would have presented grave risks to any
478
Mark Lane, Rush to Judgment, (New York: Thunder’s Mouth Press, 1992 (1966)),
378.
214