I took a few weeks away from JFK research to concentrate on my master's thesis. I'm writing on the Civil War. I'd like to write in about the JFK assassination, but the topic is radioactive in academia. Too many conspiracy theories implicate too many people with motive to kell Kennedy, which in turn means serious historians avoid the subject. This is terrible because in the History Department we don't explain big events in history with motive. We explain them more often by the intersection of big competing forces on a national or global level. The Civil War predicts the JFK assassination because the ideological descendants of the old Confederacy were active in Dallas in 1963, somewhat more active than they were in Charlottesville in 2017.
Forget motive. Forget about JFK's enemies.
When a murder investigation points in multiple direction in terms of motive, you should put motive aside as inconclusive. Too often people looking at the JFK assassination locate a motive and then magically allocate all evidence to the motivated killers they designate.
I've said it before - start with Dealey Plaza. Start with the crime scene.
Considering the effectiveness of untraceable poisons and planned accidents, the Wild West shootout in Dallas that killed JFK is not the work of professional assassins whose first and only motive is eliminating the president. Why take the big risks in shooting at guy driving by in a convertible if you have the ability to slip tasteless poison into his coffee?