16-09-2009, 06:20 AM
(This post was last modified: 16-09-2009, 06:25 AM by Bernice Moore.)
more on the aldredge sidewalk hit......
March Madness at the ARRB Part II
by
Joseph Backes
Copyright © 1995
Note: This article was written shortly after the ARRB public hearing in Boston, March 24, 1995 and was never published. As it has been nearly two years since the event the reader is advised to read my previous articles that are more contemporaneaous with March of 1995. My article "March Madness at the ARRB" in "The Fourth Decade" would be a good start.)
This article is a review of the Review Board's meeting in Boston. However, I want to pick up on some items I mentioned in the last article (March Madness at the ARRB). I am still concerned about the agreement between the Smithsonian and the Archives relevant to exchanging items. I got the impression from the Board that no JFK material went to the Smithsonian. Ms. Anna Nelson shook her head as if to say of course that didn't happen at me at the March 7th, 1995 hearing in Washington, D.C. However, I would still like that whole story clarified.
There is still a need to be concerned about "artifacts". Ms. Marian Nesbit in the December 14th, 1994 meeting of the Board told Chairman Tunheim that a catalogue of material that the archives considers to be artifacts exists and that it would be provided to the Board. I asked for a copy of this. As of April 18, 1995, "we have not yet been provided with a catalogue of artifacts from the National Archives."1 Mary Ronan, an archivist at NARA, cited Nichols vs. United States, 325 F. Supp. 130, 135, (D. Kan 1971) as one of her reasons for her belief that artifacts are not records.
This was an interesting case. Please forgive me now for what may strike you as a digression from the main point of this article, namely reviewing the Boston hearing, but I feel this is important. "Nichols" is the late Dr. John Nichols.
Dr. Wecht spoke of Prof. John Nichols at A.S.K. `91. "I had a colleague, now dead, Prof. John Nichols, he can be named, a professor of pathology, University of Kansas Medical School, excellent man, he repeated the experiments of the shooting clandestinely. He got human cadavers, he got animal carcasses, he got a Manlicher-Carcano, he got 6.5mm lead core, copper jacketed, military type ammunition and he shot, in his backyard. And I have seen those pictures and I have reviewed them over and over with John Nichols and they were even more destructive of the single bullet theory than was the Edgewood Army Arsenal experiment, and yet John could never get anyone to look at those, nobody in the government."
Prof. Nichols "sought to require production of various materials relating to the assassination of President Kennedy....namely rifle belonging to Lee Harvey Oswald, coat and shirt worn by President Kennedy at moment of his assassination, and various bullets and fragments thereof."2 The court ruled that these materials were not classifiable as "records" within Federal Public Records Act. If they were government agencies would have to make them available upon request.
There was no mention of Section 5 of Public Law 89-318 in the courts decision. The court instead went to a dictionary for a definition of "record". "Since no better definition of term "record" within Federal Public Records Act is provided by legislative enactment, executive order or controlling judicial determination, reliance may be placed on a dictionary...for a reasonably accurate meaning of word."3
On p. 131 under heading 4 Records 1 "A record is intended to serve as evidence of something written, said or done and is not kept to gratify the curious or suspicious."4 Nice little insult. What are records for then if not for the curious who want to learn?
Under paragraph 7 on page 131 it sounds like all evidence is controlled by the Kennedy family. "Government could justify its refusal to produce for examination items relating to the assassination of President Kennedy on ground that items were in possession of Archivist Division of General Services Administration pursuant to a letter agreement with executors of the Kennedy Estate, notwithstanding claim that donor did not have full title to items, since statutes governing archival depository do not require that items of property deposited with archivist be owned by donor if they fall within description of those things which may be deposited, and, under provision of letter agreement, no examination of material could be permitted without permission of a Kennedy family representative.5 "
They are referring to an agreement made with the archives by the Kennedy family on some of the evidence. This agreement is still in effect and the evidence is controlled by Burke Marshall. This is nothing new to the research community. However, the agreement is on the personal effects of President Kennedy and does not extend to all of the evidence. The New York times on Saturday, January 6. 1968 published the entire letter from Burke Marshall to Lawson B. Knott, Jr., then the administrator of the General Services Administration. The letter is prefaced with a brief explanation by the Times, "Following is the text of a letter on the personal effects of President Kennedy gathered as evidence after his assassination and deposited by the Kennedy family in the Archives of the United States."6
Notice how the Kansas District court made it sound like all of the evidence that was not presently being considered a "record" was controlled by Burke Marshall. This is not the case. Burke Marshall did not then, nor does he now control the bullet, bullet fragments or the rifle. Notice how the word that described these pieces of evidence was "items".
In paragraph 8 on page 131 of 325 Federal Supplement mention is made of Public Law 89-318. "Proceedings taken by government for purpose of acquiring and preserving certain items of evidence pertaining to assassination of President Kennedy were valid. Act of Nov. 2, 1965, 79 Stat. 1185; 44 U.S. C. A. § 2108." 7 However, there is no mention of section 5 of that act, "All items acquired by the United States pursuant to section 2 of this act shall be deemed to be personal property and records of the United States for the purposes of laws relating to the custody, administration, and protection of personal property and records of the United States , including, but not limited to,sections 2071 and 2112 of title 18 of the United States Code.
There it is in plain English, "items" shall be deemed to be "records".
Apparently this judge from Kansas could not count to five so this part of the Act of November 2, 1965 was totally missed.
Maybe this is the fault of Prof. Nichols because he sought action under the Federal Public Records Law. If Prof. Nichols pointed out Section 5 of Public Law 89-318 first, and therefore sought action under the Federal Public Records Law, maybe it would have been different, maybe.
The General Services Administration questioned the Court's jurisdiction claiming that Nichol's demands, "do not constitute requests for any "identifiable records".
Well, the court was not falling for that one. Nichols could not be more clear. The reason why the GSA took the stance they did was because under the Freedom of Information Act "...each agency, on request for identifiable records made in accordance with published rules stating the time, place, fees to the extent authorized by statute, and procedure to be followed, shall make the records promptly available to any person."
The term "record" was not defined under FOIA. The GSA came up with its own definition in C.F.R. 105-60-104(a): Records. The term `records' mean all books, papers, maps, photographs, or other documentary material, regardless of physical form or characteristic, made or received by GSA in pursuance of Federal law or in connection with the transaction of public business and preserved or appropriate for preservation as evidence of the organization, functions, policies, decisions, procedures, operations, or other activities of GSA or because of the informational value of data contained therein."8
Also, the GSA was allowed to define what is excluded from the term "record".
The court went to great lengths to find a definition of the term "record" without once referring to Section 5 of the Act of November 2, 1965 (Public Law 89-318).
The court ruled, "The following items requested by plaintiff for examination by plaintiff for examination, inspection and study, described in paragraph 5 of plaintiff's complaint may not be classified as a "record" within the meaning of the Act (FOIA) to wit:
(a) The 6.5mm Manlicher-Carcano rifle, C2766, formerly the property of the late Lee Harvey Oswald. This was designated Exhibit CE 139 in the Warren Report.
(b) A live 6.5mm round manufactured by Western Cartridge Company and found in the chamber of Oswald's rifle, C2766. Warren Report Exhibit CE 141.
© The coat worn by President Kennedy at the moment of his assassination believed to contain trace metals from bullet CE 399. The coat is Warren Report Exhibit CE 393.
(d) The shirt worn by President Kennedy at the moment of his assassination believed to contain trace metals from the bullet that penetrated the fabric. Warren Report Exhibit CE 344
(e) [As a Monty Python character named Bruce would say] There is no subparagraph (e).
(f) The 6.5mm bullet found on the floor of Parkland Memorial Hospital in Dallas, Texas on November 22, 1963, where the late President and Governor Connally received medical treatment, believed to be the bullet that traversed the President's neck and on through the body of Connally. Warren Report Exhibit CE 399.
(g) Three empty 6.5mm Cartridge cases manufactured by Western Cartridge Company and found on the floor of the room on the 6th floor of the Texas School Book Depository in Dallas, Texas. Warren Report Exhibit CE 543, CE 544, and CE 545.
(h) Bullet recovered from the wall of the home of General Edwin A. Walker in Dallas, Texas. Warren Report Exhibit CE 573.
(i) The clip presumably from the magazine of the Oswald Rifle, CE 2766. Warren Report Exhibit CE 575.
(j) The two or three metal fragments removed from the wrist of Governor Connally. Warren Report Exhibit CE 842.
(k) Fragments of metal removed from the brain of the late President at autopsy. Warren Report Exhibit CE 843
(l) A mutilated bullet recovered by United States personnel after firing through a cadavers wrist for the purpose of weighing it. Warren Report Exhibit CE 856.
The loss suffered by Prof. Nichols has an impact today, for what the GSA defined as "record" is now the law of the land, 44 §3301 is the verbatim definition the GSA used, which brings us to the December 14, 1994 hearing before the ARRB where Ms. Mirian Nesbit stated that, "Very briefly, the position of the National Archives has been and remains that objects or artifacts are not records within the meaning of the various records laws."
The Board decided to include "artifacts" within their guidelines but like "records" in the FOIA the term is not defined. I shudder to think what will happen if NARA gets to define "artifacts" like they did "records".
And now for the review of the Boston hearing. Chairman Tunheim mentioned that there would be a Public hearing in Boston at the March 7th hearing. I found out that Priscilla Johnson McMillan was to speak at the Boston hearing. I sent faxes to everyone I could find that had a fax number in the A.S.K. `93 Program Guide. I sent faxes to Prof. Peter Dale Scott, Dr. Gary Aquilar, Jonathen Cohen, Wallace Milam, Dr. Cyril Wecht and Walt Brown. To date I have not heard any reply from any of them that they sent a letter to the ARRB criticizing Priscilla Johnson McMillan or that they sent anything to the ARRB about her at all.
I drove over to Boston. It was a cold overcast day and snowed at times. I managed to find Beacon Street and park the car in a lot and arrive just as the hearing was about to start. I saw John Judge and Dan Alcorn. Dan was doing an interview with a camera crew. There was a good amount of press there.
Henry Graff was absent.
Chairman Tunheim opened the hearing. He gave a brief opening statement.
This was mainly for the press. He did mention that the Board met with members of the library staff of the JFK Library. No details were given as to what was discussed
or what records were looked at, if any. Mr. Tunheim mentioned that the Board is due to expire on October 1, 1997. He said he thought that the Board would be done with its work by that time. He then said, "I don't think the American public wants a many-years effort to try to further uncover records on the assassination of President Kennedy."
However long it takes we want everything open.
The Chairman then said some words that I hope will haunt him, "Many of the prior official actions that have been taken by our government related to the assassination of President Kennedy have been very secretive, and Congress wanted to change that , and we are very mindful of that fact..." More on this later.
The Chairman then said words that cannot be over emphasized, "If you have information or have ideas, particularly on where there are records that we should be hunting for, we would like to hear about that, and please let us know, and you can pick up our address and telephone numbers here today."
Assassination Records Review Board
600 E Street NW, 2nd Floor
Washington, D.C. 20530
Phone: (202) 724-0088
Fax: (202) 724-0457
Tunheim mentioned that the Board now has a staff in place. They have the necessary security clearances and the process of reviewing records is about to begin.
First up was Mr. Steve Tilley. Tilley then made a small gaff, referring to Warren Commission documents being transferred to NARA and their slow release in the years following the transfer "Unfortunately, I guess, or perhaps fortunately for our purposes here today, the criticism of the Warren Report was not stilled, as we all know,..."9 .
Tilley explained that the JFK database consists of the forms that were created by the agencies during their review of closed documents. Only the RIF forms exist in the database, not the documents themselves. Only the identification forms on documents that were closed prior to December 10th, 1992 are in the database. Any document that was open prior to December 10, 1992 is not in the database.
This database is not a list of all the open documents at NARA relating to the assassination of President Kennedy.
Also on that day NARA, "distributed data collection system information, such as a training program showing agencies how to enter data into the database, data disks, and other information to allow them to conduct the work necessary to create the database."10 However, as of March 7th, 1995 some agencies are having "processing difficulties" as the FBI did according to Mr. O'Connor.
The database is not available for use by researchers. Only the staff of NARA.
(This has since changed as is available over the internet.)
Tilley gave an overview and update of released documents. At the time a release from the FBI was eminent. This material was released since this hearing.
Material on Gus Alex, Sam Giancana, and Operation:Solo has been released. In fact, the ARRB issued a press release on this particular release of documents, praising the FBI. "JFK ASSASSINATION RECORDS BOARD PRAISES FBI RELEASE OF RECORDS ON QUESTION OF OSWALD INVOLVEMENT WITH CUBAN OR SOVIET GOVERNMENTS"11
However, Mr. Tilley mentioned 149 or 150 pages from the Lee Harvey Oswald file that I do not believe was released. I did not see any press on these pages from the LHO file as I did the other three subjects. In a response from Director Marwell, Mr. Tilley said, "...there are no major groups of records that are pending in the near future to be transferred from any agencies."12 I find this annoying and alarming. Why are there no releases from any agencies coming up? There has been nothing from the military agencies, very little from the NSA. Are they just waiting us out?
Chairman Tunheim then mentioned that the Review Board will soon issue its final regulation on guidance to agencies on what constitutes an assassination record. More on this later.
Chairman Tunheim also mentioned, "a public hearing at some point, probably in Washington, a hearing at which we will bring in people who were investigators with prior investigations into the assassination of President Kennedy to gather their input on what records we should be looking for."13 This was an important announcement. More on this later as well.
"Our staff will be working within agencies to help agencies go through records that they have."14 Boy, would I like to be a fly on the wall there! "...our own review process of postponed records will start shortly. We have already seen some records and started a preliminary review. Staff has been reviewing records, particularly House Select Committee records and Warren Commission records,... that review process will result in an order from the Board which will either be a release order--that release order, if an agency does not agree with us, can be appealed to the President in, I think , a 30 day period. Once that period of time is elapsed, then that record will be fully available to the public if there has been no decision to reverse the decision of the Board."15
The first witness to speak was Mr. Philip Melanson, author of "Spy Saga: Lee Harvey Oswald and U.S. Intelligence". Mr. Melanson stressed the need to release documents pertaining to Lee Harvey Oswald prior to the assassination. He gave a brief history of Oswald. On p. 41 line 24 there is a deletion. It should read, "...proximity to a U-2 spy plane, defected or fake defected to Russia, came back,"
or fake defected was deleted from the transcript. I made an audiotape of the hearing, which I will be glad to share, which proves Mr. Melanson said "or fake defected".
Mr. Melanson also pointed out that when Oswald came back from Russia he was involved with groups that were the most heavily targeted domestic political groups of the era, the Fair Play for Cuba Committee, The Communist Party USA, the Socialist Workers Party, and the infamous American Civil Liberties Union. "Files of these groups should be looked at carefully", said Mr. Melanson, "the key to how they treated or thought of Oswald may lie in those files."16
Mr. Melanson gave a brief list of those agencies that should have records on Oswald prior to the assassination, namely, the Marine Corps, the State Department, Selective Service, FBI, CIA, probably National Security Agency, Army and Navy Intelligence.
Mr. Melanson also stressed that, "the research community would like to see special attention paid to the National Security Agency and to Army Intelligence, which has a very poor history of responsiveness, to be charitable, in this case...Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms is another agency.
On page 45 there is another deletion, after the word "found" on page 11 should be, "your experts, outside experts, and your own expertise, and staff, I don't mean to discount staff expertise clearly."
Mr. Melanson pointed out that some local agencies have mandates that require them to be in contact with Federal agencies and thus will lead to Federal agency files. An example of this is the Dallas Police Criminal Intelligence unit.
Mr. Melanson requested the Board to ask the agencies about what they should have been giving over the decades and what they should have preserved but did not.
Mr. Melanson was interested in the Mexico City photo of Oswald. "Where did it go when it left the private safe of the Mexico City (CIA) station chief?"17
Mr. Melanson asked is there really no audiotape or any written record of any part of the 48 hour interrogation of Lee Harvey Oswald?
Mr. Melanson asked the Board to hold the agencies accountable for the evidence, evidence that is open, withheld, and especially missing. Yes, I agree hold them accountable. See my discussion on missing evidence in part 1 of this article.
Mr. Melanson mentioned Alpha-66. This was a terrorist group created by the CIA. It hated JFK. It was in Dallas. It was well armed, illegally. CIA case officers were at meetings of this group. This group was never reported to the Secret Service. The leader of this group was mistaken for Lee Harvey Oswald on two, reported occasions, one by the FBI, one by the Dallas police. When the Rockefeller Commission asked the agency to investigate Alpha-66 they said they could not find them in the Dallas phone book and that the street in which they had their meetings could not be found on a Dallas city map. Alpha-66 is still active. They attempted to assassinate Castro in 1983. They still exist in Miami.
Mr. Melanson offered to prepare a memorandum of insights from his experiences of filing FOIA requests and submit that to the Board.
Dr. Hall asked a great question of Mr. Melanson, "...do you have ...leads... for us relative to the assassination of the President beyond the materials associated with the 112 at Fort Sam Houston, and , do you have or would you suggest any names to us of individuals coming out of the military intelligence operation whose personnel files and/or other military records may be of value to us to search?"
Mr. Melanson responded that that was not something that he was prepared to do this morning but that he did have queues to other files and that he would prepare a list of individuals that relate to those files that he could submit to the board.
If you think you can answer this question or provide any help please write to the Board on this topic.
Dr. Hall was looking for names of people associated with military intelligence, specifically the Army, saying it would be of great value to the Board, since names can provide one route by which to begin a hunt.
I found that little exchange extremely interesting.
Mr. Melanson was asked to comment on that which has been released. "I think it's a fascinating mix of the useless and the absolutely essential. What has been released has been the minimalist definition of what the agencies wanted to release or what we knew to pursue, and I think our feeling in the research community is that the really good stuff, the best of the stuff, is there and is forthcoming." Mr. Melanson hoped that the files yet to be released will make "Spy Saga" look like a Cliff Note version of its thesis.
Amen.
Chairman Tunheim pointed out that the Board is working with people within agencies or taskforces, or compartments, or other entities within agencies today who are not aware of the filing systems of 30 years ago,. He asked Mr. Melanson if he had any thoughts on how the CIA and perhaps other agencies were organized back during that era.
In response to that I have sent a video of John Newman's presentation at
A.S. K. `94 wherein he plotted out the entire, or most, of the CIA's Western Hemisphere Division. I hope you don't mind my stating that Mr. Newman but this is information the Board needs to have and it will help us all.
The next witness was Priscilla Johnson McMillan. She opened with the statement, "I know that you are trying to redress the harm and the wound that was done to the American spirit in 1963 and the confusions that have arisen since...". She is largely responsible for disseminating those confusions. She then went on to list some of the records that she would like. She would like to see the draft chapter on Oswald's personality written by Wesley Liebler, Oswald's Marine Corps Record, the Marine inquest into the death of Private Martin Schrand. This last item was of interest to her because, "it might have helped to establish Oswald's ability and propensity to kill prior to the episodes that occurred later."
The death of Private Martin Schrand cannot be attributed to Lee Harvey Oswald. It is outrageous that Ms. McMillan would even imply it. In Warren Commission volume VIII on p. 316 there is an affidavit from Donald Peter Camarata in which he states, "I heard a rumor to the effect that Oswald had been in some way responsible for the death of Martin Schrand." In Warren Commission volume XXV on pgs. 862-867 there is Commission Exhibit 2586. It is described as the official Marine Corps report of investigation of circumstances surrounding the death of Pvt. Martin Schrand on January 8, 1958. The description also cites CD 492 pgs 2-12.
This report is incomplete. The report calls the incident an accident. Lt. Cmdr. C.B. Walbridge theorized that Schrand was performing the manual of arms with a loaded rifle which discharged when the butt of the rifle hit the ground. Actually, the Warren Commission reprinted only Lt. Miller's summary of the investigation and one of the ten enclosures to Miller's report, the report by Walbridge. Where are the other nine? Where is the autopsy report? Where is the real investigation of Schrand's death instead of the investigation of "circumstances surrounding"? Dr. Jerry Rose wrote an article on the Schrand death in "The Third/Fourth Decade" Volume 4, #2 pgs. 15-19. from which I quote, "After all, how much stock can be put in Marine scuttlebutt or "rumor" of an Oswald connection to Schrand's death? A well stocked imagination may have dreamed up such a connection and then retailed it for its attention -getting value in everyday gossip. Apart from such sensationalism, why suspect Oswald more than any of the other hundreds of Marines who must have been stationed in the Philippines at the time?" It could also have been the work of a Philippine guerrilla.
I would like to see the documents Ms. McMillan wants released too, but not to suggest Oswald's propensity to violence, I believe they will show that he had nothing to do with it.
Ms. McMillan pointed out that RFK's desk diaries for 1963 are missing, telephone messages for `62 and `63 are missing, as are logs of Robert Kennedy's telephone conversations. I believe John Newman pointed this out at the organizational meeting for C.O.P.A in April of 1994.
Ms. McMillan wanted the Board to ask President Clinton when he goes to Moscow on May 9th, 1995 to ask for Yeltsin's assistance in obtaining records in the former Soviet Union. The presidential archive would contain important documents that were collected for Khrushchev. They would contain information on Oswald and Yosenko. Also, the Central Committee's Otdel Administrativnikh Organov has files that are sealed right now. According to McMillan, only Yeltsin himself can get those materials open. There are also KGB files and files of the Foreign Intelligence Service. The Byelorussian Republic had a security service of its own that may have tracked Oswald.
Ms. McMillan offered to give her own material, recorded interviews, etc. to the National Archive if the Board wished. (Did this happen? I haven't heard that it did.)
In a response to a question Chairman Tunheim asked about any information that Marina might have Ms. McMillan, responded, "We used to discover things unwittingly, in cookbooks and other unlikely places."
This reminded me of Mark Lane's presentation at A.S. K. `91. Mark Lane mentioned that Senator Richard Russell and Senator Sherman Cooper were asking questions about Mexico City because it didn't look right to them. They were both lawyers and trial judges. Suddenly Priscilla decides to visit where Marina was kept in a hotel. "And no one could see Marina, her lawyer could not see her, no one could see her, because as the Warren Commission said, `We don't want anyone to taint her by giving her any information.' And Priscilla was there talking to her for a short period of time, and then she said, Priscilla said, "Marina, look at this! This new magazine, what is this?' Marina said, `I don't know I never saw it before.' `Oh it's in Spanish. Look at the date. It's a TV guide from Mexico City, just the time Lee was down there, so Lee must have brought this back and kept it all of these months. Look at the inside. This appears to be a bus ticket stub. Let's call the Warren Commission and tell them what you found Marina.'
"Which they did. This is September of 1964. The printing press is starting to roll off the Warren Commission report, but the two former judges, Cooper and Russell, are having some difficulty with it. Hold the presses! This is September (the same month that the Warren Commission Report is released) and there is a special meeting of the Warren Commission held. And they bring Marina in and Marina is really interesting, the last session before the Warren Commission came out. And Russell and Cooper do not believe the story. And they start to question Marina.
"You said he couldn't speak Spanish. Why would he bring back something in Spanish? Even if he could, why would he bring it back, an old, outdated TV guide, can you explain it?"
Well, they were doubtful but in the interest of National Security Russell and Cooper signed the Report. And each of them before they died said that was a major mistake. They did not believe the report."18
Dr. Joyce, bless him, did ask, "Ms. McMillan, there have been several statements to the effect that you might have had a connection to the Central Intelligence Agency. I was wondering if you might elucidate the nature of them and whether you might have had any conversations with the CIA concerning Oswald in connection with the Soviet Union or Cuba." Ms. McMillan responded that her entire government service was for 30 days as a translator in Moscow in the winter of 1956 when she was a translator for the Joint Press Reading Service. A job she apparently lost because she did not have a security clearance. Does anyone believe this? She went on to state, "My conversations with CIA officials about Oswald came only following the assassination. I think it was the FBI who came to see me over the weekend of November 22-23. I'm not sure if I ever did talk to CIA people about Oswald after the assassination."
I did not believe any of Ms. McMillan's statements in answer to Dr. Joyce's question. I have sent copies of all of the articles Peter Whitmey wrote about Ms. McMillan in The Third/Fourth Decade to the Review Board. I would love for Peter to write another one on Ms. McMillan's performance at this hearing.
On p. 67 line 25, "I was writing about the Stalinization and Soviet painters and writers." The words "the Stalinization and" were deleted from the transcript.
Ms. McMillan did not explain how but apparently she got another job because she, "was returning to the Soviet Union after covering Khrushchev's visit to President Eisenhower in the fall of `59."
Speaking of people she knew in the Soviet Union, "I, of course, knew people in the American Embassy, the British Embassy, the French Embassy, and the Israeli Embassy, but I only saw them--contacts about things I was particularly interested in." Ms. McMillan said she went to the American Embassy to gain knowledge about agriculture and economy.
The transcript says it is Dr. Joyce but I believe this to be an error, I believe it was Director Marwell who noticed that in Ms. McMillan's written statement she wanted the Board to seek out the files of the U.S. Communist Party and also the records of John Abt. Ms. McMillan thought that, "Oswald's choice of Abt for a lawyer was very telling." Mr. Edgar Tatro waited for Ms. McMillan to finish and interjected, "Mr. Chairman, can I answer that question about Abt?". Instead the transcript has Mr. Tatro saying, "Mr. Chairman, can I ask another question about Abt." Quite a difference really.
The next witness was Mr. Richard Trask. Nearly every photographer named by Mr. Trask was misspelled in the transcript. Mr. Trask called for the release of, "photos and films, studies of these materials as prepared by the government or subcontractors, and all supporting documentation in the way of FBI or Secret Service field and lab reports...the National Photographic Interpretation Center and CIA records relating to the study of the Zapruder and possible other films and photos, as well as records relating to the Justice department's pursuit or lack thereof in regards to the Charles Bronson film which the HSCA had requested the further study of. All other records relating to photographs and photography acquired or generated by the Warren Commission, Rockefeller Commission, Church Committee, and HSCA. Also...all records and photos relating to several persons whose films or photos are not now available or for which information about them is quite incomplete. This includes the so-called Babushka lady, Norman Similas, James Hankin, Gary Field, Jack Weaver, and James Powell. In Powell's case, files from the Army Intelligence Corps should be examined relating to his activities in and around the TSBD.
Mr. Trask mentioned that photographs and documentation on photographs is in the the Dick Sprague Collection at Western New England College, in Springfield, Massachusetts, and at the Dallas Municipal Archives and Record Center.
Mr. Trask also mentioned that Dave Powers took film of the motorcade in Dallas on November 22, 1963 which has never been seen by the government or the public. (This film has recently been released to the Board and given to select media, not the general public. Supposedly it's in the National Archives. Mr. Powers retained a copyright.)
A large category of photos and film exists among the four television stations in the Dallas-Fort Worth area, the NBC and CBS networks and the Sherman Greenberg Film Library, obviously CBS has film out-takes from many significant interviews. Newspapers such as the Dallas Morning News, Fort Worth Star Telegram, and the Dallas Times Herald have important large numbers of negatives. The Sixth Floor Museum and the Dallas Public Library, which has the Dallas Times-Herald collection are also important. Time-Warner, Inc. has a large collection of material, as does UPI, and the AP.
Mr. Trask suggested that the Board and the National Archives actively solicit
known and unknown photographs. I agree. I hope they place an ad in several newspapers, especially in the state of Texas.
Mr. Trask closed with a great statement, when speaking of the photographers and the possibile difficulty in obtaining some photographs he said, "The importance of their documentation of that event transcends monetary or personnel considerations."
Dr. Hall wanted to know if the Board should have any responsibility to determine if any photographs are fakes. Mr. Trask would like the Board to do that.
Asked to prioritize Mr. Trask wanted to know about James Powell, special agent for the Army Intelligence Corp. Why is there only one photograph? There are a lot of questions to ask about Powell.
The next witness to speak was Dick Russell. Mr. Russell wants the Board to subpoena Richard Case Nagel. Throughout the transcript Nagel is spelled Nagal.
Mr. Russell mentioned a place that hold records on Nagel that might be of interest to other researchers for different areas of research, the Army Records Intelligence Repository Center in Fort Holabird, Maryland.
Mr. Russell also mentioned that there is a file at the JFK Library on Cuban exiles that has never been released to the public. Mr. Russell mentioned that the first assassination plots against Kennedy originated in Mexico City, which was news to me. CIA material on the Hotel Luna, its proprietor and, in particular, a head waiter named Franz Waehauf would be important in that regard, according to Russell. Russell also wanted the autobiographical manuscript of former CIA station Chief, Winston Scott.
Russell mentioned the odd story of Harry L. Power who left a Manlicher-Carcano rifle in an Indiana hotel.19
Mr. Russell also offered to turn over to the Board a collection of private papers from the H. L. Hunt family which reveal that they conducted an ongoing investigation into what Jim Garrison was doing in 1967.
Russell wants John Thomas Mason and Larry Schmidt to be looked at and called to testify.
On page 99 Atsugi is misspelled Otsugi, Bill Alexander is misspelled Bo Alexander.
On p. 101, line 5 Mr. Russell started with, "I know I have never seen..." but I know was deleted.
On p. 102, line 24, he would have is missing.
Dr. Hall asked if a grant of immunity should be given to Nagel. Russell said he thinks Nagel should be given immunity, yes.
On p. 104, line 21, Rolando Cuebela a.k.a. AM/Lash is misspelled Orlando Corvella. Also the program "FRONTLINE" is misspelled front-line on p. 105 line 8.
Mr. George Michael Evica was a surprise guest. Carl Ogelsby had dropped out. Mr. Evica pointed out that if the Board gets professional videotape, 2 inch, an inch and a half, from the `60's the Board may not have the machines today to run them.
Mr. Evica suggested that Dealey Plaza may have been a "security test", a covert test of the President's security, including a simulated attack justifying actual security stripping as part of the situation. I read something similar to this in Vince Palamara's "The Third Alternative".
On page 109, line 5 Dallas police officer Jack Revill is misspelled Reynolds.
Mr. Evica pointed out that records from Austin, Texas, the Johnson-Connally office and the Austin Secret Service would be vital in understanding how the motorcade route was planned. All documents relating to the motorcade route associated with, sent to, created by, or sent by Mr. Bill Moyers, the White House representative in Austin in the later part of November, 1963 are paramount. I would include his still secret HSCA Executive testimony.
On p. 110, line 23, it should be Austin, not Boston.
Mr. Evica referenced the SIFAR documents. These documents are crucial in understanding the rifle allegedly used in the assassination. The SIFAR documents are the Italian armed forces intelligence service documents that identify the rifle as a 7.35 rifle rebarrelled to 6.5mm. A fuller discussion of the SIFAR documents takes place in Mr. Evica's book, "And We Are All Mortal". Mr. Evica wants all the SIFAR documents in their original Italian, including those documents generated by SIFAR but not shared with U.S. Intelligence agencies, all SIFAR documents received by the FBI, the CIA, the Treasury Department from SIFAR directly or indirectly transmitted.
Mr. Evica mentioned that FBI Special Agent Robert Frazier is still available and would be happy to talk about ballistics and about the rifle. Apparently Mr. Frazier worked with SIFAR documents. SIFAR documents are not in Warren Commission records. Mr. Evica pointed out that the Warren Commission seriously doubted the FBI's ballistic argument.
Mr. Evica pointed out that the Spectroscopic and Neutron Activation Analysis documents are now missing from the National Archives, however he has them and hopefully would be willing to give them to the Board.
Mr. Evica also mentioned that Parkland Memorial Hospital is a teaching hospital and, "no one has looked yet for the teaching institution records. Almost all of the doctors at Parkland and at Bethesda, many of them, had teaching institution connections, and some of them made reports to their teaching institutions; that is as part of an internship, residency, et. cetera."
Mr. Evica also referenced a discrepancy in the Bethesda medical record. The last time he interviewed former FBI agent Francis X. O'Neill, O'Neill said he left about midnight, where he saw in the morgue room a fully-clothed body, presumably of John F. Kennedy, in the coffin and the work of the autopsists and the cosmeticists had been completed. Yet, we know that at least two Secret Service agents saw an apparently naked John F. Kennedy lying on his face and they were asked to verify a bullet hole in his back.
Mr. Edgar Tatro was the last to speak. He mentioned that John Abt worked with Harold Weisberg years ago and he (I believe Mr. Tatro meant Mr. Weisberg) has files on Abt. Mr. Tatro also offered to hook the Board up with people involved with monitoring FBI abuses. He also mentioned that Harold Issacs worked at MIT, there are FBI documents that link him with Oswald's aunt Lillian Dorothy Murat. One of the rifles came through St. Albans, Vermont, and he wrote an 8,000 page article on the bullets. I would like to see that article.
Tatro spoke of the four scandals that were surrounding LBJ, Bobby Baker; Billy Sol Estes; The TFX jet fighter scandal; and LBJ's connections to Jack Halfen a mafia guy working for Carlos Marcello. All documents relating to these scandals
should be looked into. Tatro mentioned that George DeMohrenschildt was contacting Lyndon Baines Johnson and George Bush.
Tatro spoke of a document that he got from Emory Brown (Emily Brown in the transcript) who got it from the Air Force that placed Lee Harvey Oswald in Gulf Port, Mississippi. He mentioned he has numerous denials from the Navy Department on this.
Tatro believes that the military intelligence files on Oswald do exist somewhere.
Mr. Tatro said he has a letter form the Canadian government that they destroyed files on Lee Harvey Oswald as recently as 1990.
Tatro spoke of Spas T. Raikin, spelled with an m in the transcript. Raikin was the president of the anti-Bolsheviks nation. Mr. Tatro says he has documents that prove correspondence between Raikin and Hoover in 1959.
Tatro mentioned that there were at least five witnesses who saw a hole in the windshield and that issue has never been resolved. He think someone should look into the possibility of a windshield switch.
Tatro also mentioned the bullet scar that was removed from the sidewalk in Dealey Plaza. Like Livingstone, Tatro believes it was stolen by Earl Golz. Like Livingstone, Tatro believes it fits a bullet miss from the other knoll. He claimed he had a photo that showed a human-like figure with a rifle.
According to Tatro, "Oswald, allegedly was at the Monterey School of Languages in the Army, by one of the Warren Commission members in January of 1964.", "in the Army" somehow becomes "in Miami" in the transcript. For those of you who will read this transcript and be confused, it's on p. 121 of the transcript, lines 4-5. Mr. Tatro means that the allegation that Oswald was at the Monterey school was made in 1964 not that Oswald was in the school in 1964. Obviously, Oswald is dead by 1964. Also, the school is in California, not Miami, Florida. I believe we are dealing with a totally incompetent transcriber and a lazy staff at the Review Board that is ignorant of the case, and worse, unwilling or unable to proofread the transcripts for the most basic things, like misspellings and grammatical errors.
Tatro mentioned, "There are no records. Its called the Defense Language Institute now." He found it hard to believe there are no records. It is likely there were none where he was searching. They may be locked away in HSCA files now.
Tatro also mentioned that Allen Dulles' mistress, Mary Bancroft, who was also a CIA agent, was a friend of Michael Paines' mother. He would like to know what the relationship was between Allen Dulles, Ruth Paine, Mary Bancroft, and the Oswalds'
Tatro remembered from the HSCA days that 37 documents were missing from Oswald's 201 file. Tatro might be surprised to find out that according to Anna Marie Kuhns Walko (Anna, write to me please!!!!) Oswald has 3, count them 3, 201 files.
Tatro believed that there were microphones in the Bethesda morgue that night.
Lastly, Tatro mentioned that the FBI fingerprinted the boxes that Oswald supposedly used as a sniper's perch, there were 28 prints, 24 belonged to the 2 FBI agents, 3 belonged to Oswald, 1 remains unidentified. If the public had a copy of that print maybe they could find out who owned it, and maybe its a bad guy.
On March 23, the National Archives issued a press release announcing the release of 10,228 pages of investigative files from the FBI on Gus Alex and Sam Giancana that were reviewed by the HSCA. This is the first FBI transfer of materials. In addition, the FBI transferred assassination related material from the SOLO operation that focused on the activities of the Communist Party, USA. One copy of the 149 page Operation:SOLO document was given to media representatives at the downtown Archives building on Penn. Ave. for free. Did anyone in D.C., like John Judge, or Jim Lesar or anyone grap this? I got this notice after the fact so I couldn't get it.
The Department of Justice issued a press release for March 30. The DOJ press release mentioned that the SOLO document is "from several of the FBI' s "core" assassination files. The FBI has now declassified the SOLO operation and code name in response to the Act." This release foreshadowed the release of CE 1359, a document John Newman has been talking about for some time. At A.S.K. `94 Newman said, " I want to see CE 1359. CE 1359 is a Top Secret FBI document. And it talks about a very sensitive FBI source that goes down to Cuba, and then it gets to the part where it says, "And Castro said," and then its all blacked out. Well we know its the SOLO source, the Childs' brothers and we know Castro is saying it so what's the source and method? We already know that, they are not protecting the source and method, they are protecting what he said, they are protecting the intelligence value, that's not fair. I want to know what the CIA knew that Castro said about what Oswald did inside that Embassy." Well that document has been released now. See the new "AARC Quarterly" for more details.
The FBI postponed parts of 3,326 of the 10,228 pages on Alex and Giancana.
119 pages were withheld in their entirety. The last page of the 2 page press release is great. "To date, the FBI has expended over $6 million in personnel costs to respond to the JFK Act." Well cry me a river.
There is some very disturbing news to report on the Board's activities. Chairman John Tunheim has been offered a Federal Judgeship. It has been said he has not taken the job offer. I do not believe this is true. I believe he has accepted. I base this on a phone call I received from Dennis Effle editor of CTKA's "Probe" newsletter. There is a blurb on the bottom of p. 12 of Volume 2 issue #3 that he has not taken the job offer, the source for that was Mr. Thomas Samoluk, the Board's press officer. It would be an enormous loss if the Board lost Mr. Tunheim and had to appoint a new Chairman and/or if a new Board member had to be appointed. He has been doing a great job so far in my opinion. Mr. Tunheim has reached out to the research community in an unprecedented manner.
Dr. Kermit Hall has made some comments to the Boston press following the hearing. I was told he said something like, "80% of the American public supported the Warren Commission before Oliver Stone's movie. Now 80% doubt the Warren Commission. That has to be corrected." I got this information from Mr. Effle who got it from the Boston Globe. If anyone has this Boston Globe article please send me a copy.
Mr. Effle has received a letter from Henry Graff in response to his article, "Henry Franklin Graff: Write or Wrong" that will be spotlighted in the next issue of "Probe" that will be very interesting.
On April 27, I received copies of the written submissions from those who testified at the Boston hearing. In his written statement, Mr. Melanson points out that European stations of American intelligence agencies that would handle Soviet matters should be checked for documents. Mr. Melanson's written statement is great reading, especially if you have an interest in the RFK and MLK assassinations as well. It should be noted that Mr. Melanson wrote two outstanding books, one on each case. "The Martin Luther King Assassination:New Revelations on the Conspiracy and Cover-up, 1968-1991", a trade size paperback and "The Robert F. Kennedy Assassination: New Revelations on the Conspiracy and Cover-up" a hardcover book.
Priscilla Johnson McMillan's written statements are interesting. She asks if the Board has done everything possible to get records from, the Soviet Embassy in Washington with which Oswald corresponded in 1963. I do wonder about the Soviet Embassy in Washington, D.C. and Oswald ever since my document discovery published in the Third Decade Vol. 9 #3. She also wonders about Oswald in Japan. There is a huge, huge, story here that has yet to be told. She also pointed out that records should be sought from Oswald's American employers,
Leslie Welding, Jaggers-Chiles-Stovall, Reilly Coffee company. Not mentioned by Priscilla were the New Orleans employers of Oswald, Gerald F. Tujague, J. R. Michael's and Pfisterer Dental Labs.20
According to Priscilla, James P.Hosty has written a manuscript describing circumstances in which he destroyed evidence shortly after the assassination.
I almost want to give Priscilla some credit for her detail of Russian authorities and their archives but she has spun such lies about this case I can't do it. She suggested that the Board talk directly to Nosenko.
Ms. McMillan in her written statement goes into the Walker shooting which she did not in her testimony to the Board. She claims Marina persuaded Lee to burn much of the evidence and throw the burned remains down the toilet. She claims that this destroyed, burned, flushed material that may not ever have existed is, "evidence but not proof that it was Oswald who shot at Walker." She tries to use this as a context for viewing the Schrand episode, despite the fact that the Walker shooting occurred years later.
Ms. McMillan mentioned that some material at the JFK Library has not been made available, Oral Histories with Nicholas Katzenbach, Douglas Dillon, Robert Kennedy, George Ball, McGeorge Bundy, Abram Chayes, who was the State Dept. liaison to the Warren Commission, Chester Clifton, Adam Yarmolinsky, who was the Dept. of Defense liaison to the Warren Commission and Roswell Gilpatric.
There are other Katzenbach materials unavailable, papers of Carmine Bellino and Walter Sheridan. I have already mentioned the gaps in the RFK materials.
Trask in his written statement called for the Board to seek photographic materials from Fort Worth, (I believe this would be of enormous help as this was the first motorcade of that day, a fact that is enormously overlooked.) Love Field, (also overlooked, remember how Wallace Milam found Jean Hills little white dog?) the motorcade( Incredibly, this is overlooked too. I found a different DCA film and showed it at A.S.K.'93. Almost all color footage of the motorcade prior to Dealey Plaza comes from the DCA film) Dealey Plaza between 12 and 5pm., the rush to the hospital, and at Parkland itself.
Dick Russell includes some interesting documents on Nagel in his written submissions.
Mr. Evica points out in more detail what should be looked for in relation to the Texas School Book Depository, "All the records of ownership and transfer of ownership, all the records of management, on all floors. All the records especially for the first, second, fifth, and sixth floors: for example the Dallas Police Department's Special Services Division examined the second floor carefully, even taking out all the ceiling panels in an apparent effort to find a possibly concealed weapon; treasury Agent Frank Ellsworth still maintains that he was present when a rifle was discovered on the fifth floor of the depository."
Mr. Evica then went on to something I want all the information I can get from everyone in the research community. "Lee Harvey Oswald may have been an asset of U. S. intelligence officers associated with Senator Thomas Dodd's subcommittees investigating juvenile delinquency and gun control. One of the weapon groups which Dodd was interested in was the Manlicher-Carcano, and, indeed, Dodd was also interested in Klein's of Chicago as a source for those rifles. The staff of Dodd's subcommittees or the intelligence officers working with those staff may have ordered weapons in the name of Lee Harvey Oswald or in the name of an easily traceable cover name. If Oswald was indeed being used by Dodd-associated persons, the proliferation of weapons, especially various versions of the Manlicher-Carcano might be explained." I have been hearing snipets of this story and I want all the juicy details. I really want to know what the hell this story is.
Mr. Tatro also added some detail to his testimony in his written submission.
Dorothy Matlack, assistant director of the office of the Army, until 1974 claimed George DeMohrenschildt attempted to meet LBJ in April, 1963 via Walter Jenkins and Howard Burris. They did meet on May 20, 1963. Apparently a "Maviserv" (?)
document and some Church Committee documents make this allegation.
Apparently there is a CIA memo to the HSCA which states that DeMohrenschildt met with (name blacked out) on April 20, 1963 in Washington, D.C. Tatro guesses it is Walter Jenkins, LBJ or Howard Burris.
Mr. Tatro would like all files related to Dorothy Matlack, especially her relationships with Haiti's Clemard Charles, LBJ, and DeMohrenschildt released.
TTAF Form 20 Training Record (U.S. Air Force origin) exists which places Oswald "Attached to: I and I 1st Armamphco USMC Broad Avenue, Gulfport, Miss."
(?) The U.S. Navy denies he was ever there.
Mr. Tatro has three letters between Hoover and Raikin. They are censored.
A 1953 letter from Dimitri DeMohrenschildt, George's brother to Dulles exists, possibly more?
Any and all criminal, as well as, military intelligence records on Charles Harrelson should be released.
Is William Weld, present Governor of Massachusetts the author of the DOJ five page final report on the HSCA's recommendation for further study of the Bronson film and dismissal of the HSCA's acoustical evidence?
Remember when I spoke of words that may haunt Chairman Tunheim? Well, the Board held a secret meeting. Actually, it wasn't all that secret. In the minutes, note this is not a transcript, of the January 25th meeting of the Board on page 9 there is a subsection, "Scheduling of proposed "experts" conference. "Mr. Marwell submitted a preliminary proposal for an "experts' conference" to be sponsored by the Review Board. The proposed conference would comprise both informal meetings of staff members (and interested Review Board members) and outside individuals with special expertise in locating and analyzing major categories of assassination records, and public hearings before the Review Board addressing matters of broader policy. The members of the Review Board expressed agreement that such a conference was a sound concept. The Review Board directed the staff to formulate a more concrete proposal and explore tentative dates for the Review Board's consideration. No motions were proposed or votes taken during this portion of the meeting." Tunheim spoke of this at the Boston hearing, on p. 38 of the Boston transcript, "You can expect that the Board will be having a public hearing at some point, probably in Washington, a hearing at which we will bring in people who were investigators with prior investigations into the assassination of President Kennedy to gather their input on what records we should be looking for. We hope to organize that hearing relatively soon." This was largely Director Marwell's baby. On May 16th, in Washington a meeting occurred. At this meeting were G. Robert Blakey, David Garrow, (whom I believe is David J. Garrow, author of "The FBI and Martin Luther King Jr." and "Bearing the Cross") Jim Lesar, David Lifton, John Newman and David Slawson. I believe Paul Hoch was also present. This was described as an "Expert's conference". I wrote to the Board to see if anything was going on with this idea. I thought this was a good idea. As the Chairman was apparently considering this a public hearing I wanted to attend. I wrote them on April 12, 1995. In my April 12 letter I pointed out that they had the power to create Advisory committees under ARCA Section 8 (d).
I received a reply dated April 13, "Arrangements have been made for a small number of experts to meet with Board members and staff for a working session on Tuesday, May 16th. Depending on the effectiveness of this meeting, the Board is leaving the option open for additional experts meetings in the future."21
I wrote and sent a fax April 20th asking for more information. I received a reply April 24th. "There is no formal Advisory Committee, nor is there any hierarchy to the small number of experts who will attend a working session on May 16th in Washington, D.C. This experts meeting is simply being tried as another vehicle to assist the Board in fulling its mandate, in addition to public hearings, public meetings, correspondence and other communication with knowledgeable parties."
The letter went on to say that the meeting is being limited to the individuals I mentioned, "along with members of the Board and staff, to allow for a fruitful dialogue and exchange of ideas."22
They politely refused to allow me to attend this conference saying, "Clear;y there are members of the research community who have valuable information for the Review Board. Many, including yourself, have shared information freely with the Board and staff. This cooperation has been very helpful and we look forward to it continuing in the future."
After part 1 of this was published Mr. Dennis Effle phoned me and told me of this "secret meeting". He did not like that it was secret and without notice to the public. I didn't either but I did like the basic idea of these conferences. I would loved to have seen how Blakey and Lifton got along.
Lastly, on May 3rd the Board held a meeting in Washington, D.C. to finalize their guidance on "assassination records". They gave me a grand total of 4 days notice. I tried to find out what the Final version was. They refused to tell me. I called Samoluk on the phone. His response was that if they gave it out there would be people criticizing and wanting changes and the process would never end. I went round and round with him but got nowhere on the phone with him. I was really mad at his attitude. I called Jim Lesar and John Judge. They tried to find out what the final version was too but the Board was not telling them either. I faxed them a letter criticizing this policy. I then drove down to Washington, D.C. and attended this "public" hearing. No member of the public was allowed to speak.
This was an internal discussion we were allowed to watch. The only non-Board employee to speak was Mary Ronan speaking on behalf of the absent Steve Tilley.
At this hearing Sheryl Walter, the Board's general counsel, mentioned that the initial guidance was published in the Federal Register at volume 60 page 7506 on February 8th, 1995. The Board then held a 30 day comment period for input from agencies affected and from the public. There was then a meeting held on March 7th dealing primarily on the initial guidance. Then she said something that was not true. "The Review Board also heard testimony at public hearings (notice that plural!) on aspects of the proposed regulations." No, there was only the one hearing March 7th on the initial guidance regulations. Now follow me here, since they were published February 8th any public hearing on them has to be after February 8th. The only hearing that I know of that took place after Feb. 8 and before May 3, when they voted on the final guidance, was the one in Boston, March 27, which was not a hearing specifically on the initial guidance regulations. Mr. Tunheim briefly mentioned that the Board was in the process of adopting what an assassination record is. However, in it he said , "our focus today is to gather input on where assassination records are." Ms. Walters mentions the December 14th hearing, "on the question of including artifacts in the scope of the term assassination." This was covered in detail by me in part one of this article. This meeting cannot be considered part of hearings on the initial guidance as it took place before they were published. There was only one public hearing on the guidance.
The Board has scheduled a meeting for New Orleans in June.
I will review the May 3rd hearing and the changes in the guidance from the initial to the final along with the New Orleans hearing in the next installment, "Reviewing the Review Board". Hopefully, I will have something on the May 16th "secret" hearing. Audiotapes of the May 7th and March 24 hearings are available from me upon request .
Footnotes
![[Image: fp.gif]](http://spot.acorn.net/JFKplace/09/fp.back_issues/15th_Issue/fp.gif)
Return to Main Page
March Madness at the ARRB Part II
by
Joseph Backes
Copyright © 1995
Note: This article was written shortly after the ARRB public hearing in Boston, March 24, 1995 and was never published. As it has been nearly two years since the event the reader is advised to read my previous articles that are more contemporaneaous with March of 1995. My article "March Madness at the ARRB" in "The Fourth Decade" would be a good start.)
This article is a review of the Review Board's meeting in Boston. However, I want to pick up on some items I mentioned in the last article (March Madness at the ARRB). I am still concerned about the agreement between the Smithsonian and the Archives relevant to exchanging items. I got the impression from the Board that no JFK material went to the Smithsonian. Ms. Anna Nelson shook her head as if to say of course that didn't happen at me at the March 7th, 1995 hearing in Washington, D.C. However, I would still like that whole story clarified.
There is still a need to be concerned about "artifacts". Ms. Marian Nesbit in the December 14th, 1994 meeting of the Board told Chairman Tunheim that a catalogue of material that the archives considers to be artifacts exists and that it would be provided to the Board. I asked for a copy of this. As of April 18, 1995, "we have not yet been provided with a catalogue of artifacts from the National Archives."1 Mary Ronan, an archivist at NARA, cited Nichols vs. United States, 325 F. Supp. 130, 135, (D. Kan 1971) as one of her reasons for her belief that artifacts are not records.
This was an interesting case. Please forgive me now for what may strike you as a digression from the main point of this article, namely reviewing the Boston hearing, but I feel this is important. "Nichols" is the late Dr. John Nichols.
Dr. Wecht spoke of Prof. John Nichols at A.S.K. `91. "I had a colleague, now dead, Prof. John Nichols, he can be named, a professor of pathology, University of Kansas Medical School, excellent man, he repeated the experiments of the shooting clandestinely. He got human cadavers, he got animal carcasses, he got a Manlicher-Carcano, he got 6.5mm lead core, copper jacketed, military type ammunition and he shot, in his backyard. And I have seen those pictures and I have reviewed them over and over with John Nichols and they were even more destructive of the single bullet theory than was the Edgewood Army Arsenal experiment, and yet John could never get anyone to look at those, nobody in the government."
Prof. Nichols "sought to require production of various materials relating to the assassination of President Kennedy....namely rifle belonging to Lee Harvey Oswald, coat and shirt worn by President Kennedy at moment of his assassination, and various bullets and fragments thereof."2 The court ruled that these materials were not classifiable as "records" within Federal Public Records Act. If they were government agencies would have to make them available upon request.
There was no mention of Section 5 of Public Law 89-318 in the courts decision. The court instead went to a dictionary for a definition of "record". "Since no better definition of term "record" within Federal Public Records Act is provided by legislative enactment, executive order or controlling judicial determination, reliance may be placed on a dictionary...for a reasonably accurate meaning of word."3
On p. 131 under heading 4 Records 1 "A record is intended to serve as evidence of something written, said or done and is not kept to gratify the curious or suspicious."4 Nice little insult. What are records for then if not for the curious who want to learn?
Under paragraph 7 on page 131 it sounds like all evidence is controlled by the Kennedy family. "Government could justify its refusal to produce for examination items relating to the assassination of President Kennedy on ground that items were in possession of Archivist Division of General Services Administration pursuant to a letter agreement with executors of the Kennedy Estate, notwithstanding claim that donor did not have full title to items, since statutes governing archival depository do not require that items of property deposited with archivist be owned by donor if they fall within description of those things which may be deposited, and, under provision of letter agreement, no examination of material could be permitted without permission of a Kennedy family representative.5 "
They are referring to an agreement made with the archives by the Kennedy family on some of the evidence. This agreement is still in effect and the evidence is controlled by Burke Marshall. This is nothing new to the research community. However, the agreement is on the personal effects of President Kennedy and does not extend to all of the evidence. The New York times on Saturday, January 6. 1968 published the entire letter from Burke Marshall to Lawson B. Knott, Jr., then the administrator of the General Services Administration. The letter is prefaced with a brief explanation by the Times, "Following is the text of a letter on the personal effects of President Kennedy gathered as evidence after his assassination and deposited by the Kennedy family in the Archives of the United States."6
Notice how the Kansas District court made it sound like all of the evidence that was not presently being considered a "record" was controlled by Burke Marshall. This is not the case. Burke Marshall did not then, nor does he now control the bullet, bullet fragments or the rifle. Notice how the word that described these pieces of evidence was "items".
In paragraph 8 on page 131 of 325 Federal Supplement mention is made of Public Law 89-318. "Proceedings taken by government for purpose of acquiring and preserving certain items of evidence pertaining to assassination of President Kennedy were valid. Act of Nov. 2, 1965, 79 Stat. 1185; 44 U.S. C. A. § 2108." 7 However, there is no mention of section 5 of that act, "All items acquired by the United States pursuant to section 2 of this act shall be deemed to be personal property and records of the United States for the purposes of laws relating to the custody, administration, and protection of personal property and records of the United States , including, but not limited to,sections 2071 and 2112 of title 18 of the United States Code.
There it is in plain English, "items" shall be deemed to be "records".
Apparently this judge from Kansas could not count to five so this part of the Act of November 2, 1965 was totally missed.
Maybe this is the fault of Prof. Nichols because he sought action under the Federal Public Records Law. If Prof. Nichols pointed out Section 5 of Public Law 89-318 first, and therefore sought action under the Federal Public Records Law, maybe it would have been different, maybe.
The General Services Administration questioned the Court's jurisdiction claiming that Nichol's demands, "do not constitute requests for any "identifiable records".
Well, the court was not falling for that one. Nichols could not be more clear. The reason why the GSA took the stance they did was because under the Freedom of Information Act "...each agency, on request for identifiable records made in accordance with published rules stating the time, place, fees to the extent authorized by statute, and procedure to be followed, shall make the records promptly available to any person."
The term "record" was not defined under FOIA. The GSA came up with its own definition in C.F.R. 105-60-104(a): Records. The term `records' mean all books, papers, maps, photographs, or other documentary material, regardless of physical form or characteristic, made or received by GSA in pursuance of Federal law or in connection with the transaction of public business and preserved or appropriate for preservation as evidence of the organization, functions, policies, decisions, procedures, operations, or other activities of GSA or because of the informational value of data contained therein."8
Also, the GSA was allowed to define what is excluded from the term "record".
The court went to great lengths to find a definition of the term "record" without once referring to Section 5 of the Act of November 2, 1965 (Public Law 89-318).
The court ruled, "The following items requested by plaintiff for examination by plaintiff for examination, inspection and study, described in paragraph 5 of plaintiff's complaint may not be classified as a "record" within the meaning of the Act (FOIA) to wit:
(a) The 6.5mm Manlicher-Carcano rifle, C2766, formerly the property of the late Lee Harvey Oswald. This was designated Exhibit CE 139 in the Warren Report.
(b) A live 6.5mm round manufactured by Western Cartridge Company and found in the chamber of Oswald's rifle, C2766. Warren Report Exhibit CE 141.
© The coat worn by President Kennedy at the moment of his assassination believed to contain trace metals from bullet CE 399. The coat is Warren Report Exhibit CE 393.
(d) The shirt worn by President Kennedy at the moment of his assassination believed to contain trace metals from the bullet that penetrated the fabric. Warren Report Exhibit CE 344
(e) [As a Monty Python character named Bruce would say] There is no subparagraph (e).
(f) The 6.5mm bullet found on the floor of Parkland Memorial Hospital in Dallas, Texas on November 22, 1963, where the late President and Governor Connally received medical treatment, believed to be the bullet that traversed the President's neck and on through the body of Connally. Warren Report Exhibit CE 399.
(g) Three empty 6.5mm Cartridge cases manufactured by Western Cartridge Company and found on the floor of the room on the 6th floor of the Texas School Book Depository in Dallas, Texas. Warren Report Exhibit CE 543, CE 544, and CE 545.
(h) Bullet recovered from the wall of the home of General Edwin A. Walker in Dallas, Texas. Warren Report Exhibit CE 573.
(i) The clip presumably from the magazine of the Oswald Rifle, CE 2766. Warren Report Exhibit CE 575.
(j) The two or three metal fragments removed from the wrist of Governor Connally. Warren Report Exhibit CE 842.
(k) Fragments of metal removed from the brain of the late President at autopsy. Warren Report Exhibit CE 843
(l) A mutilated bullet recovered by United States personnel after firing through a cadavers wrist for the purpose of weighing it. Warren Report Exhibit CE 856.
The loss suffered by Prof. Nichols has an impact today, for what the GSA defined as "record" is now the law of the land, 44 §3301 is the verbatim definition the GSA used, which brings us to the December 14, 1994 hearing before the ARRB where Ms. Mirian Nesbit stated that, "Very briefly, the position of the National Archives has been and remains that objects or artifacts are not records within the meaning of the various records laws."
The Board decided to include "artifacts" within their guidelines but like "records" in the FOIA the term is not defined. I shudder to think what will happen if NARA gets to define "artifacts" like they did "records".
And now for the review of the Boston hearing. Chairman Tunheim mentioned that there would be a Public hearing in Boston at the March 7th hearing. I found out that Priscilla Johnson McMillan was to speak at the Boston hearing. I sent faxes to everyone I could find that had a fax number in the A.S.K. `93 Program Guide. I sent faxes to Prof. Peter Dale Scott, Dr. Gary Aquilar, Jonathen Cohen, Wallace Milam, Dr. Cyril Wecht and Walt Brown. To date I have not heard any reply from any of them that they sent a letter to the ARRB criticizing Priscilla Johnson McMillan or that they sent anything to the ARRB about her at all.
I drove over to Boston. It was a cold overcast day and snowed at times. I managed to find Beacon Street and park the car in a lot and arrive just as the hearing was about to start. I saw John Judge and Dan Alcorn. Dan was doing an interview with a camera crew. There was a good amount of press there.
Henry Graff was absent.
Chairman Tunheim opened the hearing. He gave a brief opening statement.
This was mainly for the press. He did mention that the Board met with members of the library staff of the JFK Library. No details were given as to what was discussed
or what records were looked at, if any. Mr. Tunheim mentioned that the Board is due to expire on October 1, 1997. He said he thought that the Board would be done with its work by that time. He then said, "I don't think the American public wants a many-years effort to try to further uncover records on the assassination of President Kennedy."
However long it takes we want everything open.
The Chairman then said some words that I hope will haunt him, "Many of the prior official actions that have been taken by our government related to the assassination of President Kennedy have been very secretive, and Congress wanted to change that , and we are very mindful of that fact..." More on this later.
The Chairman then said words that cannot be over emphasized, "If you have information or have ideas, particularly on where there are records that we should be hunting for, we would like to hear about that, and please let us know, and you can pick up our address and telephone numbers here today."
Assassination Records Review Board
600 E Street NW, 2nd Floor
Washington, D.C. 20530
Phone: (202) 724-0088
Fax: (202) 724-0457
Tunheim mentioned that the Board now has a staff in place. They have the necessary security clearances and the process of reviewing records is about to begin.
First up was Mr. Steve Tilley. Tilley then made a small gaff, referring to Warren Commission documents being transferred to NARA and their slow release in the years following the transfer "Unfortunately, I guess, or perhaps fortunately for our purposes here today, the criticism of the Warren Report was not stilled, as we all know,..."9 .
Tilley explained that the JFK database consists of the forms that were created by the agencies during their review of closed documents. Only the RIF forms exist in the database, not the documents themselves. Only the identification forms on documents that were closed prior to December 10th, 1992 are in the database. Any document that was open prior to December 10, 1992 is not in the database.
This database is not a list of all the open documents at NARA relating to the assassination of President Kennedy.
Also on that day NARA, "distributed data collection system information, such as a training program showing agencies how to enter data into the database, data disks, and other information to allow them to conduct the work necessary to create the database."10 However, as of March 7th, 1995 some agencies are having "processing difficulties" as the FBI did according to Mr. O'Connor.
The database is not available for use by researchers. Only the staff of NARA.
(This has since changed as is available over the internet.)
Tilley gave an overview and update of released documents. At the time a release from the FBI was eminent. This material was released since this hearing.
Material on Gus Alex, Sam Giancana, and Operation:Solo has been released. In fact, the ARRB issued a press release on this particular release of documents, praising the FBI. "JFK ASSASSINATION RECORDS BOARD PRAISES FBI RELEASE OF RECORDS ON QUESTION OF OSWALD INVOLVEMENT WITH CUBAN OR SOVIET GOVERNMENTS"11
However, Mr. Tilley mentioned 149 or 150 pages from the Lee Harvey Oswald file that I do not believe was released. I did not see any press on these pages from the LHO file as I did the other three subjects. In a response from Director Marwell, Mr. Tilley said, "...there are no major groups of records that are pending in the near future to be transferred from any agencies."12 I find this annoying and alarming. Why are there no releases from any agencies coming up? There has been nothing from the military agencies, very little from the NSA. Are they just waiting us out?
Chairman Tunheim then mentioned that the Review Board will soon issue its final regulation on guidance to agencies on what constitutes an assassination record. More on this later.
Chairman Tunheim also mentioned, "a public hearing at some point, probably in Washington, a hearing at which we will bring in people who were investigators with prior investigations into the assassination of President Kennedy to gather their input on what records we should be looking for."13 This was an important announcement. More on this later as well.
"Our staff will be working within agencies to help agencies go through records that they have."14 Boy, would I like to be a fly on the wall there! "...our own review process of postponed records will start shortly. We have already seen some records and started a preliminary review. Staff has been reviewing records, particularly House Select Committee records and Warren Commission records,... that review process will result in an order from the Board which will either be a release order--that release order, if an agency does not agree with us, can be appealed to the President in, I think , a 30 day period. Once that period of time is elapsed, then that record will be fully available to the public if there has been no decision to reverse the decision of the Board."15
The first witness to speak was Mr. Philip Melanson, author of "Spy Saga: Lee Harvey Oswald and U.S. Intelligence". Mr. Melanson stressed the need to release documents pertaining to Lee Harvey Oswald prior to the assassination. He gave a brief history of Oswald. On p. 41 line 24 there is a deletion. It should read, "...proximity to a U-2 spy plane, defected or fake defected to Russia, came back,"
or fake defected was deleted from the transcript. I made an audiotape of the hearing, which I will be glad to share, which proves Mr. Melanson said "or fake defected".
Mr. Melanson also pointed out that when Oswald came back from Russia he was involved with groups that were the most heavily targeted domestic political groups of the era, the Fair Play for Cuba Committee, The Communist Party USA, the Socialist Workers Party, and the infamous American Civil Liberties Union. "Files of these groups should be looked at carefully", said Mr. Melanson, "the key to how they treated or thought of Oswald may lie in those files."16
Mr. Melanson gave a brief list of those agencies that should have records on Oswald prior to the assassination, namely, the Marine Corps, the State Department, Selective Service, FBI, CIA, probably National Security Agency, Army and Navy Intelligence.
Mr. Melanson also stressed that, "the research community would like to see special attention paid to the National Security Agency and to Army Intelligence, which has a very poor history of responsiveness, to be charitable, in this case...Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms is another agency.
On page 45 there is another deletion, after the word "found" on page 11 should be, "your experts, outside experts, and your own expertise, and staff, I don't mean to discount staff expertise clearly."
Mr. Melanson pointed out that some local agencies have mandates that require them to be in contact with Federal agencies and thus will lead to Federal agency files. An example of this is the Dallas Police Criminal Intelligence unit.
Mr. Melanson requested the Board to ask the agencies about what they should have been giving over the decades and what they should have preserved but did not.
Mr. Melanson was interested in the Mexico City photo of Oswald. "Where did it go when it left the private safe of the Mexico City (CIA) station chief?"17
Mr. Melanson asked is there really no audiotape or any written record of any part of the 48 hour interrogation of Lee Harvey Oswald?
Mr. Melanson asked the Board to hold the agencies accountable for the evidence, evidence that is open, withheld, and especially missing. Yes, I agree hold them accountable. See my discussion on missing evidence in part 1 of this article.
Mr. Melanson mentioned Alpha-66. This was a terrorist group created by the CIA. It hated JFK. It was in Dallas. It was well armed, illegally. CIA case officers were at meetings of this group. This group was never reported to the Secret Service. The leader of this group was mistaken for Lee Harvey Oswald on two, reported occasions, one by the FBI, one by the Dallas police. When the Rockefeller Commission asked the agency to investigate Alpha-66 they said they could not find them in the Dallas phone book and that the street in which they had their meetings could not be found on a Dallas city map. Alpha-66 is still active. They attempted to assassinate Castro in 1983. They still exist in Miami.
Mr. Melanson offered to prepare a memorandum of insights from his experiences of filing FOIA requests and submit that to the Board.
Dr. Hall asked a great question of Mr. Melanson, "...do you have ...leads... for us relative to the assassination of the President beyond the materials associated with the 112 at Fort Sam Houston, and , do you have or would you suggest any names to us of individuals coming out of the military intelligence operation whose personnel files and/or other military records may be of value to us to search?"
Mr. Melanson responded that that was not something that he was prepared to do this morning but that he did have queues to other files and that he would prepare a list of individuals that relate to those files that he could submit to the board.
If you think you can answer this question or provide any help please write to the Board on this topic.
Dr. Hall was looking for names of people associated with military intelligence, specifically the Army, saying it would be of great value to the Board, since names can provide one route by which to begin a hunt.
I found that little exchange extremely interesting.
Mr. Melanson was asked to comment on that which has been released. "I think it's a fascinating mix of the useless and the absolutely essential. What has been released has been the minimalist definition of what the agencies wanted to release or what we knew to pursue, and I think our feeling in the research community is that the really good stuff, the best of the stuff, is there and is forthcoming." Mr. Melanson hoped that the files yet to be released will make "Spy Saga" look like a Cliff Note version of its thesis.
Amen.
Chairman Tunheim pointed out that the Board is working with people within agencies or taskforces, or compartments, or other entities within agencies today who are not aware of the filing systems of 30 years ago,. He asked Mr. Melanson if he had any thoughts on how the CIA and perhaps other agencies were organized back during that era.
In response to that I have sent a video of John Newman's presentation at
A.S. K. `94 wherein he plotted out the entire, or most, of the CIA's Western Hemisphere Division. I hope you don't mind my stating that Mr. Newman but this is information the Board needs to have and it will help us all.
The next witness was Priscilla Johnson McMillan. She opened with the statement, "I know that you are trying to redress the harm and the wound that was done to the American spirit in 1963 and the confusions that have arisen since...". She is largely responsible for disseminating those confusions. She then went on to list some of the records that she would like. She would like to see the draft chapter on Oswald's personality written by Wesley Liebler, Oswald's Marine Corps Record, the Marine inquest into the death of Private Martin Schrand. This last item was of interest to her because, "it might have helped to establish Oswald's ability and propensity to kill prior to the episodes that occurred later."
The death of Private Martin Schrand cannot be attributed to Lee Harvey Oswald. It is outrageous that Ms. McMillan would even imply it. In Warren Commission volume VIII on p. 316 there is an affidavit from Donald Peter Camarata in which he states, "I heard a rumor to the effect that Oswald had been in some way responsible for the death of Martin Schrand." In Warren Commission volume XXV on pgs. 862-867 there is Commission Exhibit 2586. It is described as the official Marine Corps report of investigation of circumstances surrounding the death of Pvt. Martin Schrand on January 8, 1958. The description also cites CD 492 pgs 2-12.
This report is incomplete. The report calls the incident an accident. Lt. Cmdr. C.B. Walbridge theorized that Schrand was performing the manual of arms with a loaded rifle which discharged when the butt of the rifle hit the ground. Actually, the Warren Commission reprinted only Lt. Miller's summary of the investigation and one of the ten enclosures to Miller's report, the report by Walbridge. Where are the other nine? Where is the autopsy report? Where is the real investigation of Schrand's death instead of the investigation of "circumstances surrounding"? Dr. Jerry Rose wrote an article on the Schrand death in "The Third/Fourth Decade" Volume 4, #2 pgs. 15-19. from which I quote, "After all, how much stock can be put in Marine scuttlebutt or "rumor" of an Oswald connection to Schrand's death? A well stocked imagination may have dreamed up such a connection and then retailed it for its attention -getting value in everyday gossip. Apart from such sensationalism, why suspect Oswald more than any of the other hundreds of Marines who must have been stationed in the Philippines at the time?" It could also have been the work of a Philippine guerrilla.
I would like to see the documents Ms. McMillan wants released too, but not to suggest Oswald's propensity to violence, I believe they will show that he had nothing to do with it.
Ms. McMillan pointed out that RFK's desk diaries for 1963 are missing, telephone messages for `62 and `63 are missing, as are logs of Robert Kennedy's telephone conversations. I believe John Newman pointed this out at the organizational meeting for C.O.P.A in April of 1994.
Ms. McMillan wanted the Board to ask President Clinton when he goes to Moscow on May 9th, 1995 to ask for Yeltsin's assistance in obtaining records in the former Soviet Union. The presidential archive would contain important documents that were collected for Khrushchev. They would contain information on Oswald and Yosenko. Also, the Central Committee's Otdel Administrativnikh Organov has files that are sealed right now. According to McMillan, only Yeltsin himself can get those materials open. There are also KGB files and files of the Foreign Intelligence Service. The Byelorussian Republic had a security service of its own that may have tracked Oswald.
Ms. McMillan offered to give her own material, recorded interviews, etc. to the National Archive if the Board wished. (Did this happen? I haven't heard that it did.)
In a response to a question Chairman Tunheim asked about any information that Marina might have Ms. McMillan, responded, "We used to discover things unwittingly, in cookbooks and other unlikely places."
This reminded me of Mark Lane's presentation at A.S. K. `91. Mark Lane mentioned that Senator Richard Russell and Senator Sherman Cooper were asking questions about Mexico City because it didn't look right to them. They were both lawyers and trial judges. Suddenly Priscilla decides to visit where Marina was kept in a hotel. "And no one could see Marina, her lawyer could not see her, no one could see her, because as the Warren Commission said, `We don't want anyone to taint her by giving her any information.' And Priscilla was there talking to her for a short period of time, and then she said, Priscilla said, "Marina, look at this! This new magazine, what is this?' Marina said, `I don't know I never saw it before.' `Oh it's in Spanish. Look at the date. It's a TV guide from Mexico City, just the time Lee was down there, so Lee must have brought this back and kept it all of these months. Look at the inside. This appears to be a bus ticket stub. Let's call the Warren Commission and tell them what you found Marina.'
"Which they did. This is September of 1964. The printing press is starting to roll off the Warren Commission report, but the two former judges, Cooper and Russell, are having some difficulty with it. Hold the presses! This is September (the same month that the Warren Commission Report is released) and there is a special meeting of the Warren Commission held. And they bring Marina in and Marina is really interesting, the last session before the Warren Commission came out. And Russell and Cooper do not believe the story. And they start to question Marina.
"You said he couldn't speak Spanish. Why would he bring back something in Spanish? Even if he could, why would he bring it back, an old, outdated TV guide, can you explain it?"
Well, they were doubtful but in the interest of National Security Russell and Cooper signed the Report. And each of them before they died said that was a major mistake. They did not believe the report."18
Dr. Joyce, bless him, did ask, "Ms. McMillan, there have been several statements to the effect that you might have had a connection to the Central Intelligence Agency. I was wondering if you might elucidate the nature of them and whether you might have had any conversations with the CIA concerning Oswald in connection with the Soviet Union or Cuba." Ms. McMillan responded that her entire government service was for 30 days as a translator in Moscow in the winter of 1956 when she was a translator for the Joint Press Reading Service. A job she apparently lost because she did not have a security clearance. Does anyone believe this? She went on to state, "My conversations with CIA officials about Oswald came only following the assassination. I think it was the FBI who came to see me over the weekend of November 22-23. I'm not sure if I ever did talk to CIA people about Oswald after the assassination."
I did not believe any of Ms. McMillan's statements in answer to Dr. Joyce's question. I have sent copies of all of the articles Peter Whitmey wrote about Ms. McMillan in The Third/Fourth Decade to the Review Board. I would love for Peter to write another one on Ms. McMillan's performance at this hearing.
On p. 67 line 25, "I was writing about the Stalinization and Soviet painters and writers." The words "the Stalinization and" were deleted from the transcript.
Ms. McMillan did not explain how but apparently she got another job because she, "was returning to the Soviet Union after covering Khrushchev's visit to President Eisenhower in the fall of `59."
Speaking of people she knew in the Soviet Union, "I, of course, knew people in the American Embassy, the British Embassy, the French Embassy, and the Israeli Embassy, but I only saw them--contacts about things I was particularly interested in." Ms. McMillan said she went to the American Embassy to gain knowledge about agriculture and economy.
The transcript says it is Dr. Joyce but I believe this to be an error, I believe it was Director Marwell who noticed that in Ms. McMillan's written statement she wanted the Board to seek out the files of the U.S. Communist Party and also the records of John Abt. Ms. McMillan thought that, "Oswald's choice of Abt for a lawyer was very telling." Mr. Edgar Tatro waited for Ms. McMillan to finish and interjected, "Mr. Chairman, can I answer that question about Abt?". Instead the transcript has Mr. Tatro saying, "Mr. Chairman, can I ask another question about Abt." Quite a difference really.
The next witness was Mr. Richard Trask. Nearly every photographer named by Mr. Trask was misspelled in the transcript. Mr. Trask called for the release of, "photos and films, studies of these materials as prepared by the government or subcontractors, and all supporting documentation in the way of FBI or Secret Service field and lab reports...the National Photographic Interpretation Center and CIA records relating to the study of the Zapruder and possible other films and photos, as well as records relating to the Justice department's pursuit or lack thereof in regards to the Charles Bronson film which the HSCA had requested the further study of. All other records relating to photographs and photography acquired or generated by the Warren Commission, Rockefeller Commission, Church Committee, and HSCA. Also...all records and photos relating to several persons whose films or photos are not now available or for which information about them is quite incomplete. This includes the so-called Babushka lady, Norman Similas, James Hankin, Gary Field, Jack Weaver, and James Powell. In Powell's case, files from the Army Intelligence Corps should be examined relating to his activities in and around the TSBD.
Mr. Trask mentioned that photographs and documentation on photographs is in the the Dick Sprague Collection at Western New England College, in Springfield, Massachusetts, and at the Dallas Municipal Archives and Record Center.
Mr. Trask also mentioned that Dave Powers took film of the motorcade in Dallas on November 22, 1963 which has never been seen by the government or the public. (This film has recently been released to the Board and given to select media, not the general public. Supposedly it's in the National Archives. Mr. Powers retained a copyright.)
A large category of photos and film exists among the four television stations in the Dallas-Fort Worth area, the NBC and CBS networks and the Sherman Greenberg Film Library, obviously CBS has film out-takes from many significant interviews. Newspapers such as the Dallas Morning News, Fort Worth Star Telegram, and the Dallas Times Herald have important large numbers of negatives. The Sixth Floor Museum and the Dallas Public Library, which has the Dallas Times-Herald collection are also important. Time-Warner, Inc. has a large collection of material, as does UPI, and the AP.
Mr. Trask suggested that the Board and the National Archives actively solicit
known and unknown photographs. I agree. I hope they place an ad in several newspapers, especially in the state of Texas.
Mr. Trask closed with a great statement, when speaking of the photographers and the possibile difficulty in obtaining some photographs he said, "The importance of their documentation of that event transcends monetary or personnel considerations."
Dr. Hall wanted to know if the Board should have any responsibility to determine if any photographs are fakes. Mr. Trask would like the Board to do that.
Asked to prioritize Mr. Trask wanted to know about James Powell, special agent for the Army Intelligence Corp. Why is there only one photograph? There are a lot of questions to ask about Powell.
The next witness to speak was Dick Russell. Mr. Russell wants the Board to subpoena Richard Case Nagel. Throughout the transcript Nagel is spelled Nagal.
Mr. Russell mentioned a place that hold records on Nagel that might be of interest to other researchers for different areas of research, the Army Records Intelligence Repository Center in Fort Holabird, Maryland.
Mr. Russell also mentioned that there is a file at the JFK Library on Cuban exiles that has never been released to the public. Mr. Russell mentioned that the first assassination plots against Kennedy originated in Mexico City, which was news to me. CIA material on the Hotel Luna, its proprietor and, in particular, a head waiter named Franz Waehauf would be important in that regard, according to Russell. Russell also wanted the autobiographical manuscript of former CIA station Chief, Winston Scott.
Russell mentioned the odd story of Harry L. Power who left a Manlicher-Carcano rifle in an Indiana hotel.19
Mr. Russell also offered to turn over to the Board a collection of private papers from the H. L. Hunt family which reveal that they conducted an ongoing investigation into what Jim Garrison was doing in 1967.
Russell wants John Thomas Mason and Larry Schmidt to be looked at and called to testify.
On page 99 Atsugi is misspelled Otsugi, Bill Alexander is misspelled Bo Alexander.
On p. 101, line 5 Mr. Russell started with, "I know I have never seen..." but I know was deleted.
On p. 102, line 24, he would have is missing.
Dr. Hall asked if a grant of immunity should be given to Nagel. Russell said he thinks Nagel should be given immunity, yes.
On p. 104, line 21, Rolando Cuebela a.k.a. AM/Lash is misspelled Orlando Corvella. Also the program "FRONTLINE" is misspelled front-line on p. 105 line 8.
Mr. George Michael Evica was a surprise guest. Carl Ogelsby had dropped out. Mr. Evica pointed out that if the Board gets professional videotape, 2 inch, an inch and a half, from the `60's the Board may not have the machines today to run them.
Mr. Evica suggested that Dealey Plaza may have been a "security test", a covert test of the President's security, including a simulated attack justifying actual security stripping as part of the situation. I read something similar to this in Vince Palamara's "The Third Alternative".
On page 109, line 5 Dallas police officer Jack Revill is misspelled Reynolds.
Mr. Evica pointed out that records from Austin, Texas, the Johnson-Connally office and the Austin Secret Service would be vital in understanding how the motorcade route was planned. All documents relating to the motorcade route associated with, sent to, created by, or sent by Mr. Bill Moyers, the White House representative in Austin in the later part of November, 1963 are paramount. I would include his still secret HSCA Executive testimony.
On p. 110, line 23, it should be Austin, not Boston.
Mr. Evica referenced the SIFAR documents. These documents are crucial in understanding the rifle allegedly used in the assassination. The SIFAR documents are the Italian armed forces intelligence service documents that identify the rifle as a 7.35 rifle rebarrelled to 6.5mm. A fuller discussion of the SIFAR documents takes place in Mr. Evica's book, "And We Are All Mortal". Mr. Evica wants all the SIFAR documents in their original Italian, including those documents generated by SIFAR but not shared with U.S. Intelligence agencies, all SIFAR documents received by the FBI, the CIA, the Treasury Department from SIFAR directly or indirectly transmitted.
Mr. Evica mentioned that FBI Special Agent Robert Frazier is still available and would be happy to talk about ballistics and about the rifle. Apparently Mr. Frazier worked with SIFAR documents. SIFAR documents are not in Warren Commission records. Mr. Evica pointed out that the Warren Commission seriously doubted the FBI's ballistic argument.
Mr. Evica pointed out that the Spectroscopic and Neutron Activation Analysis documents are now missing from the National Archives, however he has them and hopefully would be willing to give them to the Board.
Mr. Evica also mentioned that Parkland Memorial Hospital is a teaching hospital and, "no one has looked yet for the teaching institution records. Almost all of the doctors at Parkland and at Bethesda, many of them, had teaching institution connections, and some of them made reports to their teaching institutions; that is as part of an internship, residency, et. cetera."
Mr. Evica also referenced a discrepancy in the Bethesda medical record. The last time he interviewed former FBI agent Francis X. O'Neill, O'Neill said he left about midnight, where he saw in the morgue room a fully-clothed body, presumably of John F. Kennedy, in the coffin and the work of the autopsists and the cosmeticists had been completed. Yet, we know that at least two Secret Service agents saw an apparently naked John F. Kennedy lying on his face and they were asked to verify a bullet hole in his back.
Mr. Edgar Tatro was the last to speak. He mentioned that John Abt worked with Harold Weisberg years ago and he (I believe Mr. Tatro meant Mr. Weisberg) has files on Abt. Mr. Tatro also offered to hook the Board up with people involved with monitoring FBI abuses. He also mentioned that Harold Issacs worked at MIT, there are FBI documents that link him with Oswald's aunt Lillian Dorothy Murat. One of the rifles came through St. Albans, Vermont, and he wrote an 8,000 page article on the bullets. I would like to see that article.
Tatro spoke of the four scandals that were surrounding LBJ, Bobby Baker; Billy Sol Estes; The TFX jet fighter scandal; and LBJ's connections to Jack Halfen a mafia guy working for Carlos Marcello. All documents relating to these scandals
should be looked into. Tatro mentioned that George DeMohrenschildt was contacting Lyndon Baines Johnson and George Bush.
Tatro spoke of a document that he got from Emory Brown (Emily Brown in the transcript) who got it from the Air Force that placed Lee Harvey Oswald in Gulf Port, Mississippi. He mentioned he has numerous denials from the Navy Department on this.
Tatro believes that the military intelligence files on Oswald do exist somewhere.
Mr. Tatro said he has a letter form the Canadian government that they destroyed files on Lee Harvey Oswald as recently as 1990.
Tatro spoke of Spas T. Raikin, spelled with an m in the transcript. Raikin was the president of the anti-Bolsheviks nation. Mr. Tatro says he has documents that prove correspondence between Raikin and Hoover in 1959.
Tatro mentioned that there were at least five witnesses who saw a hole in the windshield and that issue has never been resolved. He think someone should look into the possibility of a windshield switch.
Tatro also mentioned the bullet scar that was removed from the sidewalk in Dealey Plaza. Like Livingstone, Tatro believes it was stolen by Earl Golz. Like Livingstone, Tatro believes it fits a bullet miss from the other knoll. He claimed he had a photo that showed a human-like figure with a rifle.
According to Tatro, "Oswald, allegedly was at the Monterey School of Languages in the Army, by one of the Warren Commission members in January of 1964.", "in the Army" somehow becomes "in Miami" in the transcript. For those of you who will read this transcript and be confused, it's on p. 121 of the transcript, lines 4-5. Mr. Tatro means that the allegation that Oswald was at the Monterey school was made in 1964 not that Oswald was in the school in 1964. Obviously, Oswald is dead by 1964. Also, the school is in California, not Miami, Florida. I believe we are dealing with a totally incompetent transcriber and a lazy staff at the Review Board that is ignorant of the case, and worse, unwilling or unable to proofread the transcripts for the most basic things, like misspellings and grammatical errors.
Tatro mentioned, "There are no records. Its called the Defense Language Institute now." He found it hard to believe there are no records. It is likely there were none where he was searching. They may be locked away in HSCA files now.
Tatro also mentioned that Allen Dulles' mistress, Mary Bancroft, who was also a CIA agent, was a friend of Michael Paines' mother. He would like to know what the relationship was between Allen Dulles, Ruth Paine, Mary Bancroft, and the Oswalds'
Tatro remembered from the HSCA days that 37 documents were missing from Oswald's 201 file. Tatro might be surprised to find out that according to Anna Marie Kuhns Walko (Anna, write to me please!!!!) Oswald has 3, count them 3, 201 files.
Tatro believed that there were microphones in the Bethesda morgue that night.
Lastly, Tatro mentioned that the FBI fingerprinted the boxes that Oswald supposedly used as a sniper's perch, there were 28 prints, 24 belonged to the 2 FBI agents, 3 belonged to Oswald, 1 remains unidentified. If the public had a copy of that print maybe they could find out who owned it, and maybe its a bad guy.
On March 23, the National Archives issued a press release announcing the release of 10,228 pages of investigative files from the FBI on Gus Alex and Sam Giancana that were reviewed by the HSCA. This is the first FBI transfer of materials. In addition, the FBI transferred assassination related material from the SOLO operation that focused on the activities of the Communist Party, USA. One copy of the 149 page Operation:SOLO document was given to media representatives at the downtown Archives building on Penn. Ave. for free. Did anyone in D.C., like John Judge, or Jim Lesar or anyone grap this? I got this notice after the fact so I couldn't get it.
The Department of Justice issued a press release for March 30. The DOJ press release mentioned that the SOLO document is "from several of the FBI' s "core" assassination files. The FBI has now declassified the SOLO operation and code name in response to the Act." This release foreshadowed the release of CE 1359, a document John Newman has been talking about for some time. At A.S.K. `94 Newman said, " I want to see CE 1359. CE 1359 is a Top Secret FBI document. And it talks about a very sensitive FBI source that goes down to Cuba, and then it gets to the part where it says, "And Castro said," and then its all blacked out. Well we know its the SOLO source, the Childs' brothers and we know Castro is saying it so what's the source and method? We already know that, they are not protecting the source and method, they are protecting what he said, they are protecting the intelligence value, that's not fair. I want to know what the CIA knew that Castro said about what Oswald did inside that Embassy." Well that document has been released now. See the new "AARC Quarterly" for more details.
The FBI postponed parts of 3,326 of the 10,228 pages on Alex and Giancana.
119 pages were withheld in their entirety. The last page of the 2 page press release is great. "To date, the FBI has expended over $6 million in personnel costs to respond to the JFK Act." Well cry me a river.
There is some very disturbing news to report on the Board's activities. Chairman John Tunheim has been offered a Federal Judgeship. It has been said he has not taken the job offer. I do not believe this is true. I believe he has accepted. I base this on a phone call I received from Dennis Effle editor of CTKA's "Probe" newsletter. There is a blurb on the bottom of p. 12 of Volume 2 issue #3 that he has not taken the job offer, the source for that was Mr. Thomas Samoluk, the Board's press officer. It would be an enormous loss if the Board lost Mr. Tunheim and had to appoint a new Chairman and/or if a new Board member had to be appointed. He has been doing a great job so far in my opinion. Mr. Tunheim has reached out to the research community in an unprecedented manner.
Dr. Kermit Hall has made some comments to the Boston press following the hearing. I was told he said something like, "80% of the American public supported the Warren Commission before Oliver Stone's movie. Now 80% doubt the Warren Commission. That has to be corrected." I got this information from Mr. Effle who got it from the Boston Globe. If anyone has this Boston Globe article please send me a copy.
Mr. Effle has received a letter from Henry Graff in response to his article, "Henry Franklin Graff: Write or Wrong" that will be spotlighted in the next issue of "Probe" that will be very interesting.
On April 27, I received copies of the written submissions from those who testified at the Boston hearing. In his written statement, Mr. Melanson points out that European stations of American intelligence agencies that would handle Soviet matters should be checked for documents. Mr. Melanson's written statement is great reading, especially if you have an interest in the RFK and MLK assassinations as well. It should be noted that Mr. Melanson wrote two outstanding books, one on each case. "The Martin Luther King Assassination:New Revelations on the Conspiracy and Cover-up, 1968-1991", a trade size paperback and "The Robert F. Kennedy Assassination: New Revelations on the Conspiracy and Cover-up" a hardcover book.
Priscilla Johnson McMillan's written statements are interesting. She asks if the Board has done everything possible to get records from, the Soviet Embassy in Washington with which Oswald corresponded in 1963. I do wonder about the Soviet Embassy in Washington, D.C. and Oswald ever since my document discovery published in the Third Decade Vol. 9 #3. She also wonders about Oswald in Japan. There is a huge, huge, story here that has yet to be told. She also pointed out that records should be sought from Oswald's American employers,
Leslie Welding, Jaggers-Chiles-Stovall, Reilly Coffee company. Not mentioned by Priscilla were the New Orleans employers of Oswald, Gerald F. Tujague, J. R. Michael's and Pfisterer Dental Labs.20
According to Priscilla, James P.Hosty has written a manuscript describing circumstances in which he destroyed evidence shortly after the assassination.
I almost want to give Priscilla some credit for her detail of Russian authorities and their archives but she has spun such lies about this case I can't do it. She suggested that the Board talk directly to Nosenko.
Ms. McMillan in her written statement goes into the Walker shooting which she did not in her testimony to the Board. She claims Marina persuaded Lee to burn much of the evidence and throw the burned remains down the toilet. She claims that this destroyed, burned, flushed material that may not ever have existed is, "evidence but not proof that it was Oswald who shot at Walker." She tries to use this as a context for viewing the Schrand episode, despite the fact that the Walker shooting occurred years later.
Ms. McMillan mentioned that some material at the JFK Library has not been made available, Oral Histories with Nicholas Katzenbach, Douglas Dillon, Robert Kennedy, George Ball, McGeorge Bundy, Abram Chayes, who was the State Dept. liaison to the Warren Commission, Chester Clifton, Adam Yarmolinsky, who was the Dept. of Defense liaison to the Warren Commission and Roswell Gilpatric.
There are other Katzenbach materials unavailable, papers of Carmine Bellino and Walter Sheridan. I have already mentioned the gaps in the RFK materials.
Trask in his written statement called for the Board to seek photographic materials from Fort Worth, (I believe this would be of enormous help as this was the first motorcade of that day, a fact that is enormously overlooked.) Love Field, (also overlooked, remember how Wallace Milam found Jean Hills little white dog?) the motorcade( Incredibly, this is overlooked too. I found a different DCA film and showed it at A.S.K.'93. Almost all color footage of the motorcade prior to Dealey Plaza comes from the DCA film) Dealey Plaza between 12 and 5pm., the rush to the hospital, and at Parkland itself.
Dick Russell includes some interesting documents on Nagel in his written submissions.
Mr. Evica points out in more detail what should be looked for in relation to the Texas School Book Depository, "All the records of ownership and transfer of ownership, all the records of management, on all floors. All the records especially for the first, second, fifth, and sixth floors: for example the Dallas Police Department's Special Services Division examined the second floor carefully, even taking out all the ceiling panels in an apparent effort to find a possibly concealed weapon; treasury Agent Frank Ellsworth still maintains that he was present when a rifle was discovered on the fifth floor of the depository."
Mr. Evica then went on to something I want all the information I can get from everyone in the research community. "Lee Harvey Oswald may have been an asset of U. S. intelligence officers associated with Senator Thomas Dodd's subcommittees investigating juvenile delinquency and gun control. One of the weapon groups which Dodd was interested in was the Manlicher-Carcano, and, indeed, Dodd was also interested in Klein's of Chicago as a source for those rifles. The staff of Dodd's subcommittees or the intelligence officers working with those staff may have ordered weapons in the name of Lee Harvey Oswald or in the name of an easily traceable cover name. If Oswald was indeed being used by Dodd-associated persons, the proliferation of weapons, especially various versions of the Manlicher-Carcano might be explained." I have been hearing snipets of this story and I want all the juicy details. I really want to know what the hell this story is.
Mr. Tatro also added some detail to his testimony in his written submission.
Dorothy Matlack, assistant director of the office of the Army, until 1974 claimed George DeMohrenschildt attempted to meet LBJ in April, 1963 via Walter Jenkins and Howard Burris. They did meet on May 20, 1963. Apparently a "Maviserv" (?)
document and some Church Committee documents make this allegation.
Apparently there is a CIA memo to the HSCA which states that DeMohrenschildt met with (name blacked out) on April 20, 1963 in Washington, D.C. Tatro guesses it is Walter Jenkins, LBJ or Howard Burris.
Mr. Tatro would like all files related to Dorothy Matlack, especially her relationships with Haiti's Clemard Charles, LBJ, and DeMohrenschildt released.
TTAF Form 20 Training Record (U.S. Air Force origin) exists which places Oswald "Attached to: I and I 1st Armamphco USMC Broad Avenue, Gulfport, Miss."
(?) The U.S. Navy denies he was ever there.
Mr. Tatro has three letters between Hoover and Raikin. They are censored.
A 1953 letter from Dimitri DeMohrenschildt, George's brother to Dulles exists, possibly more?
Any and all criminal, as well as, military intelligence records on Charles Harrelson should be released.
Is William Weld, present Governor of Massachusetts the author of the DOJ five page final report on the HSCA's recommendation for further study of the Bronson film and dismissal of the HSCA's acoustical evidence?
Remember when I spoke of words that may haunt Chairman Tunheim? Well, the Board held a secret meeting. Actually, it wasn't all that secret. In the minutes, note this is not a transcript, of the January 25th meeting of the Board on page 9 there is a subsection, "Scheduling of proposed "experts" conference. "Mr. Marwell submitted a preliminary proposal for an "experts' conference" to be sponsored by the Review Board. The proposed conference would comprise both informal meetings of staff members (and interested Review Board members) and outside individuals with special expertise in locating and analyzing major categories of assassination records, and public hearings before the Review Board addressing matters of broader policy. The members of the Review Board expressed agreement that such a conference was a sound concept. The Review Board directed the staff to formulate a more concrete proposal and explore tentative dates for the Review Board's consideration. No motions were proposed or votes taken during this portion of the meeting." Tunheim spoke of this at the Boston hearing, on p. 38 of the Boston transcript, "You can expect that the Board will be having a public hearing at some point, probably in Washington, a hearing at which we will bring in people who were investigators with prior investigations into the assassination of President Kennedy to gather their input on what records we should be looking for. We hope to organize that hearing relatively soon." This was largely Director Marwell's baby. On May 16th, in Washington a meeting occurred. At this meeting were G. Robert Blakey, David Garrow, (whom I believe is David J. Garrow, author of "The FBI and Martin Luther King Jr." and "Bearing the Cross") Jim Lesar, David Lifton, John Newman and David Slawson. I believe Paul Hoch was also present. This was described as an "Expert's conference". I wrote to the Board to see if anything was going on with this idea. I thought this was a good idea. As the Chairman was apparently considering this a public hearing I wanted to attend. I wrote them on April 12, 1995. In my April 12 letter I pointed out that they had the power to create Advisory committees under ARCA Section 8 (d).
I received a reply dated April 13, "Arrangements have been made for a small number of experts to meet with Board members and staff for a working session on Tuesday, May 16th. Depending on the effectiveness of this meeting, the Board is leaving the option open for additional experts meetings in the future."21
I wrote and sent a fax April 20th asking for more information. I received a reply April 24th. "There is no formal Advisory Committee, nor is there any hierarchy to the small number of experts who will attend a working session on May 16th in Washington, D.C. This experts meeting is simply being tried as another vehicle to assist the Board in fulling its mandate, in addition to public hearings, public meetings, correspondence and other communication with knowledgeable parties."
The letter went on to say that the meeting is being limited to the individuals I mentioned, "along with members of the Board and staff, to allow for a fruitful dialogue and exchange of ideas."22
They politely refused to allow me to attend this conference saying, "Clear;y there are members of the research community who have valuable information for the Review Board. Many, including yourself, have shared information freely with the Board and staff. This cooperation has been very helpful and we look forward to it continuing in the future."
After part 1 of this was published Mr. Dennis Effle phoned me and told me of this "secret meeting". He did not like that it was secret and without notice to the public. I didn't either but I did like the basic idea of these conferences. I would loved to have seen how Blakey and Lifton got along.
Lastly, on May 3rd the Board held a meeting in Washington, D.C. to finalize their guidance on "assassination records". They gave me a grand total of 4 days notice. I tried to find out what the Final version was. They refused to tell me. I called Samoluk on the phone. His response was that if they gave it out there would be people criticizing and wanting changes and the process would never end. I went round and round with him but got nowhere on the phone with him. I was really mad at his attitude. I called Jim Lesar and John Judge. They tried to find out what the final version was too but the Board was not telling them either. I faxed them a letter criticizing this policy. I then drove down to Washington, D.C. and attended this "public" hearing. No member of the public was allowed to speak.
This was an internal discussion we were allowed to watch. The only non-Board employee to speak was Mary Ronan speaking on behalf of the absent Steve Tilley.
At this hearing Sheryl Walter, the Board's general counsel, mentioned that the initial guidance was published in the Federal Register at volume 60 page 7506 on February 8th, 1995. The Board then held a 30 day comment period for input from agencies affected and from the public. There was then a meeting held on March 7th dealing primarily on the initial guidance. Then she said something that was not true. "The Review Board also heard testimony at public hearings (notice that plural!) on aspects of the proposed regulations." No, there was only the one hearing March 7th on the initial guidance regulations. Now follow me here, since they were published February 8th any public hearing on them has to be after February 8th. The only hearing that I know of that took place after Feb. 8 and before May 3, when they voted on the final guidance, was the one in Boston, March 27, which was not a hearing specifically on the initial guidance regulations. Mr. Tunheim briefly mentioned that the Board was in the process of adopting what an assassination record is. However, in it he said , "our focus today is to gather input on where assassination records are." Ms. Walters mentions the December 14th hearing, "on the question of including artifacts in the scope of the term assassination." This was covered in detail by me in part one of this article. This meeting cannot be considered part of hearings on the initial guidance as it took place before they were published. There was only one public hearing on the guidance.
The Board has scheduled a meeting for New Orleans in June.
I will review the May 3rd hearing and the changes in the guidance from the initial to the final along with the New Orleans hearing in the next installment, "Reviewing the Review Board". Hopefully, I will have something on the May 16th "secret" hearing. Audiotapes of the May 7th and March 24 hearings are available from me upon request .
Footnotes
- Letter from Mr. Thomas Samoluk to author dated April 18, 1995
- John NICHOLS, Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES of America et al., Defendants. Civ. A. No. T-4761. United States District Court, D. Kansas. February 24, 1971. In 325 Federal Supplement 130-138
- IBID p. 130-131
- IBID
- IBID p. 131
- The New York Times, Saturday, January 6, 1968
- 325 Federal Supplement 131
- 325 Federal Supplement p. 134
- Transcript of ARRB Public Hearing, Massachusetts State House Room A-1, 1st Floor, Boston, Massachusetts, Friday, March 24, 1995 p. 11-12
- IBID p. 15
- ARRB Press release. dated March 30, 1995
- ARRB Boston Transcript, p. 31
- IBID p. 38
- IBID
- IBID p. 39
- IBID p. 42
- IBID p. 48
- Mark Lane at the A.S.K. `91 conference.
- See "The Indiana Rifle" by Sheldon Inkol, The Third Decade Vol. 9 # 5.
- See John Armstrong's presentation on Young Oswald at C.O.P.A.'s and A.S.K.'94 conferences
- ARRB letter to author dated April 13, 1995.
- ARRB letter to author dated April 24, 1995.
Return to Main Page
* * *