William Pitzer

[Albert Doyle]

You didn't answer the questions Mr Phipps. This is like a civil case. The standard of strict evidence is much lower in cases of government criminality. In this case the testimonies of Dennis David and Dan Marvin is evidence.

[Drew Phipps]

1. What I always ask persons who make the argument you do is what exactly was the head of the Bethesda AV department doing that evening when he was called in to do the most important job of his career?

I wasn't there. Niether as the wife, or Mr. David.

The most important autopsy ever done at Bethesda?

Not really a question.

What happened to the films Pitzer took that night?

What films?

Pray tell Drew, what documentation would you expect to exist from a CIA-guarded covert autopsy designed to cover up a coup d'etat?

None at all.

The standard of strict evidence is much lower in cases of government criminality.

Using your "Standard of evidence" requires one to assume the ultimate fact (government criminality) as opposed to waiting to hear the evidence that would prove it, or not.

[Albert Doyle]

It's very incriminating that Pitzer was called in that night as his wife said but there is no record of his activities. Martin Hay and Eaglesham use this lack of record to deny Pitzer but a more inquisitive approach would realize it is incriminating that the head of the A/V department would get a special call-in that evening but have no record of what he actually did. Hay and Eaglesham try to force their theories by taking the denialist approach and suggesting Pitzer needs to prove what he did before they'll accept anything. I think a more honest and sensible approach would allow that since there's no record of exactly what Pitzer did that night that perhaps those who needed to benefit from a lack of accounting for his activities kept his doings off the record just like they kept other doings like the covert pre-autopsy off the record. In fact, if you look at Dan Marvin's claim there's evidence that CIA was actively trying to keep Pitzer's doings off the record.

No, the evidence here calls for more than sophist game playing. The fact Pitzer was not included on the attendance roles strongly suggests that he was up in his office remotely filming, or perhaps he was deliberately omitted in order to remove any reminder that he recorded evidence that might be retrieved later for analysis. Anyone honestly looking in to this and not just seeking to satisfy the first quick defense lawyer-like excuse would admit that there's serious evidence CIA sought to subvert or even destroy other photographic evidence from the autopsy so there really is no strong argument that this wasn't similarly done with Pitzer. Just like they kept Brugioni's film record off the record. If we look at the overall pattern surrounding Pitzer everything conforms to it and nothing really refutes it. Of all things involved the question still remains, what was Pitzer doing after being called in to JFK's autopsy and working late into the night as his wife said? If you look at Pitzer it was said that he had the remote filming equipment installed because he found that autopsies could get crowded and it was best to remove the photographers from the autopsy room in order to reduce interference with the procedures. If you look at Bethesda that night the autopsy room was said to be crowded with overseeing military and other observers. If anything, this was the situation the remote filming equipment was designed for and since Pitzer was not on the roles of those in attendance it makes the likelihood he was filming remotely greater.

Let's look at what doubters of Pitzer's story are indirectly claiming without having to account for it directly. They are claiming that Dennis David is a zany guy who decided to grab his 15 minutes of fame by fabricating a bizarre story of film evidence of the otherwise known true wounds. However is it likely that if David was inventing a fabricated tale that he would include details like Pitzer excitedly emerging in to the hallway to drag him in to see the film clips? If Pitzer had filmed evidence of alternate wounds how would he react? Would he drag a friend in to his office to witness this incredible evidence of scandal?

Doubters are also claiming that although Dan Marvin showed signs of personal valor and volunteering for dangerous Green Beret service, that otherwise exhibits signs of a person with honorable character, that he then decided to also get his 15 minutes worth of fame and invent a totally fabricated story about being asked to assassinate Pitzer. That even though Vanek was later located and identified, his service record being denied by the army is not meaningful and not incriminating and is just another understandable coincidence that doesn't conform to his doings being covered up.

Pitzer must have filmed Horne's covert autopsy because Dennis David spoke of two wounds that could only be seen at that autopsy. One was the entry wound to the right temple that was removed by the surgical "V" notch spoken of by Humes, and the other was the rear exit wound spoken of by the Parkland witnesses. It was the purpose of that covert pre-autopsy to conceal those wounds. I think CIA did a royal fuck-up when they rushed Kennedy in for that spook alteration, not taking in to account the fact Pitzer had remote filming equipment installed in the room. Pitzer being up his office then silently and unknowingly recorded evidence of CIA and the military altering Kennedy's wounds. He probably thought he was recording the normal autopsy. It wasn't until he reviewed his films later that it dawned on him that what he captured was different from what the Warren Report was telling the public. This is similar to Sgt Vinson and his experience. The actors were so busy doing their duty in the conspiracy that they didn't bother check who was doing what.

When the government kills to remove evidence the "evidence" then becomes the record of this killing and its purpose. Calling for the actual film evidence in this case is putting the burden on the victim which I find totally immoral and counter to the purpose of deep political inquiry. The truth of this can be unlocked by examining the record of Pitzer and his doings that night. There's an unaccountable void that begs explanation and is inexcusably incriminating.

This is a simple matter of straight witnessing. Dennis David saw the film and we now have no record of it. Dan Marvin explained why. I always say to doubters that I would like to be there when they accuse Dennis David to his face of lying.

[Drew Phipps]

Even Mr. David doesn't know if Pitzer was murdered or not, let alone if his death was related to the alleged autopsy film. Mr. David did wait until 1975 to come forward with his tale. That was 6 years AFTER the nationally known and publicized Shaw trial, surely the best time for a dedicated public servant to step forward with vital information.

[Gordon Gray]

Even Mr. David doesn't know if Pitzer was murdered or not, let alone if his death was related to the alleged autopsy film. Mr. David did wait until 1975 to come forward with his tale. That was 6 years AFTER the nationally known and publicized Shaw trial, surely the best time for a dedicated public servant to step forward with vital information.

In defense of Mr. David at the time of the Garrison trial he was still bound to the secrecy oath on threat of prosecution. That wasn't lifted until the HSCA.

[Martin White]

I remember seeing Dan Marvin on one of the later TMWKK programmes. I think one of the most telling aspect of Marvin's story is the fact that his friend (can't remember his name right now) disappeared and who the military deny ever existed, despite Marvin having a copy of orders with his name and serial number on. I don't believe that this was simply an administrative error.

That would be an interesting path to investigate, right there.

[Drew Phipps]

You're referring to Mr. Vanek. He's not Marvin's friend, he's the guy that supposedly got the job offer to kill Pitzer after Marvin refused it. Vanek is apparently still alive. He denied getting a offer or an order to kill Pitzer.

And IIRC the paper that Marvin has wasn't a copy of orders but a list of folks that entered a program Marvin attended (at which he supposedly was asked to kill Pitzer).

[Magda Hassan]

Vanek is apparently still alive. He denied getting a offer or an order to kill Pitzer.

Well, he would say that wouldn't he...?

[Albert Doyle]

With all this evidence the suggestion that there was no film is a weak one at best. Again, I would love to film a researcher going up to Dennis David and saying there are people who doubt there was any film...

[Drew Phipps]

Even Mr. David doesn't know if Pitzer was murdered or not, let alone if his death was related to the alleged autopsy film. Mr. David did wait until 1975 to come forward with his tale. That was 6 years AFTER the nationally known and publicized Shaw trial, surely the best time for a dedicated public servant to step forward with vital information.

In defense of Mr. David at the time of the Garrison trial he was still bound to the secrecy oath on threat of prosecution. That wasn't lifted until the HSCA.

Mr. David's "anonymous" report to a newspaper guy was in 1975. That's the year BEFORE the HSCA started its business (1976). So secrecy oath considerations didn't enter Mr. David's calculations about his 1975 disclosure.