ae pace: 6/14/39} JFK ASSASSINATION SYSTEM IDENTIFICATION FORM AGENCY INFORMATION AGENCY : CIA RECORD NUMBER : 104-10009-10022 RECORD SERIES : JFK AGENCY FILE NUMBER : 201-289248 DOCUMENT INFORMATION ORIGINATOR : CIA FROM: CHIEF, (CA STAFF) "TO : CHIEF, CERTAIN STATIONS AND BASES TITLE : COUNTERING CRITICISM OF THE WARREN REPORT. DATE : 01/04/67 PAGES : 53 SUBJECTS : CRITICISM WC REPORT DOCUMENT TYPE : PAPER, ‘TEXTUAL DOCUMENT CLASSIFICATION : SECRET RESTRICTIONS : OPEN IN FULL. CURRENT STATUS : OPEN DATE OF LAST REVIEW : 06/18/93 : OPENING CRITERTA : COMMENTS : OSW14:VS4 1993.06.18.17:49:53:180000 (R] - ITEM TS RESPRTCTEDassorean > et I oocne neque sesame Document Number 035-960 fm aoc woexne for FOIA Review on SEP 1876 Wn wat Pulkeo Top re? Ay WED BENIEL OL CALSTA, (ne Cacje Com aeveren wirH 61 far Sea ipl os «57 2 pe THEMES, OF THE Sevnce ATRIAL, faeriefTe PIawEE [He THEMES, ea Pacccicten gemem ss! "ERPERTILE. a THE CASE « THE ice i GRATE ag CRT TTB By Ben ETT ° Our Concern. From the day of President Kennedy's assassination on, at se thore has been speculstion about the responsibility for his murder. Although *” (¥ this vas stemed for a time by the Warren Commission report (which appeared et the end of Septenber 1964), various writers have now had time to scan the Commission's published report and documents for nev pretexts for questioning, and there hes been a new wave of books and articles criticizing the Commission's findings. In most cases the critics have speculated as to the existence of come Kind of conspiracy, and often they have implied that the Commission itself ves involved. Presumably as a result of the increasing challenge to the Werren Comnission's Report, a public opinion poll recently indicated that 6% of the fmerican putlic didnot think that Oswald acted alone, vbile more than helt of those polled thought that the Conmission had left some questions unresolved. Doubtless polls abroad would show similar, or possibly nore edverse, results. 2. This trend of opinion ie a matter of concern to the U.S. government, including our organization. The members of the Warren Commission were naturally chosen for their integrity, experience, end prominence. They represented both major parties, and they and their staff vere deliberately drewn from all sections of the country, Just because of the standing of the Commissioners, efforts to impugn their rectitude and wisdom tend to cast doubt on the whole leadership of Anericen society. Moreover, there seems to be an increasing tendency to hint that President Johnson hinself, as the one person vho night be said to have Yenefited, vas in some way responsible for the assassination. Innuendo of such seriousness affects not only the individual concerned, but alo the vhole reputation of the American government. Our organization itself is directly involved: among other facts, ve contributed information to the investigation. Conspiracy theories have frequently thrown suspicion on our organization, for example by falsely alleging that Lee Harvey Oswald worked for us. The aim of this dispatch is to provide material for countering and discrediting the clgime of the conspiracy theorists, so as to inhibit the circulation of such clains in other countries. Background Information is supplied in a classified section and in a number of unclassified attachnents . 3. Action, We do not recommend thet discussion of the assassination ques tigh be initiated where it is nct already taking place. Where discussion is Se Fey i —_egensy Bel AIIDHS. FCS oe 9 abtachnents h/w BD 5847 w/Aler = eatin Te ee a - sere SG, DESTROY WHEN NO LONGER 8 - Unclassified i NEEDEDoa . TaSaREATION 1 ETAT ATONE | BD 5847 "> CONTINUATION OF DISPATCH. a. To discuss the publicity probles with liaison end friendly elite contacts (especially politiciens and editors), pointing out that the Warren Comission «made es thorough an investigation as hunanly possible, that the charges of the critics are without serious foundation, and thet further speculative discussion only plays into the hands of the opposition. Point out also that parts of the conspiracy talk appear to be deliberstely generated by Communist propagandists. Urge then to use their influence to discourage unfounded and irresponsible speculation. b. To employ propaganda assets to answer and refute the attacks of the critics. Book reviews and feature articles are particulerly appropriate for i this purpose. The unclassified attachents to this guidsnce should provide useful background material for passage to assets. Our play should point out, as applicable, that the critics are (i) wedded to theories adopted before the evidence vas in, (ii) politically interested, (iii) financially interested, (iv) hasty end inaccurate in their research, or (v) infetuated with their on theories. In the course of discussions of the whole phenomenon of criticism, a useful strategy may be to single out Epstein's theory for attack, using the attached Fletcher Knebel article and Spectator piece for background. (Alshough Mark Lane's book is much less convincing than Epstein's and comes off badly where contested by knowledgeable critics, it is also much more difficult to answer as a vhole, as one becomes lost in a morace of unrelated details. ) 4,.-Tn private or media discussion not directed at eny particular writer, or in attacking publications which may be yet forthconing, the following argunents should be useful: a. No significant new evidence has emerged vhich the Commission did not consider. The assassination is sometimes compared (e.g., by Joachim Joesten and Bertrand Russell) with the Dreyfus case; however, unlike that case, the attacks on the Warren Commission have produced no new evidence, no new culprits have been convincingly identified, and there is no egreenent among the critics. (A better parallel, though an imperfect one, might te with the Reichstag fire of 1933, which some competent historians (Fritz Tobias, A.J.P. Taylor, D.C. Watt) now believe was set by Van der Lube on his ovn initiative, vithout acting for either Nazis or Communists; the Nazis tried to pin the blame cn the Communists, ‘out the letter Have been much more successful in convincing the world that the Nazis vere to blaie.) b. Critics usually overvalue particwlar itons and ignore others. They tend to place more emphasis on the recollections of individual eyewitnesses (wnich are less reliable and nore divergent ~~ and hence offer nore hand-holds for Sritioin) and less on ballistic, autopsy, and photographic evidence. A close exemination of the Commission's records will usually show that the conflicting eyewitness accoute are quoted out of context, or vere discarded by the Comis- sion for good and sufficient reason. e. Conspiracy on the lerge scale often suggested vould be impossible to con~ ceel in the United States, esp. since informants could expect to receive large royalties, ete. ote that Robert Kennedy, Attorney General at the tine and John F. Kennedy's brother, vould be the last men to overlook or conceal any conspiracy. And es one reviewer pointed out, Congressman Gerald R. Ford woul hardly have hela ‘his tongue for the sake of the Denceratic administration, ant Senator Fussell would have had every political interest in exposing any misdecds on the part of Chief Justice Warren. A conspirator moreover would hardly choose a location for a shooting vere so much depended on conditions beyond his con~ trol: the route, the epeed of the cars, the noving target, the risk that the assassin would be discovered. A group of wealthy conspirators could have arranged wuch more secure conditions. @. Critics have often been enticed by a form of intellectual pride: they Light on come theory and fell in love with it; they also scoff at the Commis- sion because it did not elweys answer every question with a flat decision one way or the other. Actuelly, the make-up of the Commission and ite staff was an excellent safeguard-egainst over-commitment to any one theory, or against [arise Shc | ete |CONTINUATION OF CLASSIFICATION ‘DISPATCH SYMBOL AND WUMOER 1 DISPATCH ap 587 Commission's Report itself. Open-ninded foreign readers should still be Ampressed ty the care, thorougtness, objectivity end speed with which the Com- mission vorked, Reviewers of other books might be encouraged to add to their account the idea thet, checking back with the Report itself, they found it far superior to the work of its critics. ©. Oswald would not have been any sensible person's choice for @ co- conspirator. He was a "loner," mixed-up, of questionable reliability and an unknown quantity to any professional intelligence service. f. Ae to charges thet the Commission's report was a rush job, it emerged ‘three months after the deadline originally set. But to the degree that ‘the Commission tied to speed up its reporting, this was lergely due to ‘the pressure of irresponsible epeculation already appearing, in some ceses coming from the same critics vio, refusing to admit their errors, are now putting out nev riticisns. g@. Such vague accusations as that "nore than ten people have died mysteri- ously" can always be expleined in some nore netural way: ¢.g-, the indi- viduals concerned have for the most part died of netural causes; the Com- mission staff questioned 416 vitnesses (the FBI interviewed far sore people, conducting 25,000 intervieve and reinterviews), and in ouch a large group, a certain number of deaths are to be expected. (When Penn Jones, one of the originators of the "ten mysterious deaths" line, ap- peared on television, it emerged that tvo of the deaths on his list vere fron heart attacks, one from cancer, one was from a head-on collision on. '& bridge, and one occurred when a driver drifted into « bridge abutment.) 5. Where possible, counter speculetion ty encoureging reference to the Aal- 2942YG SE" 530 ‘va rmevious gomnon. errr ‘THREE al. 7s spac 4 January 1967 Background Survey of Books Concerning the Assassination of President Kennedy 1. (Except where otherwise indicated, the factual data given in paregraphs 1-9 is unclassified.) Some of the authors of recent books on ‘the assassination of President Kennedy (e.g., Joachim Joesten, Osveld: Assascin or Fell Guy; Mark Lane, Rusk to Judment; Leo Sauvage, Tae Oswald W Affeir: An Examination of the Contradictions and Omissions of the Warren Report) hed publicly asserted that e conspiracy existed before the Warren Connission finished its investigation. Not surprisingly, they innediately bestirred thenselves to show that they vere right and thet the Commission was Wrong. Thanks to the mountain of material published by the Commission, sone of it conflicting or misleading when read out of context, they have had little difficulty in uncovering items to substantiate their ovn theories. They have also in some eases obtained new and divergent testimony from wit- hesses. And they have usually failed to discuss the refutations of their early cleims in the Commission's Report, Appendix XII ("Speculations and Rumors"). This Appendix is sti11 « good place to look for material comter- ing the theorists. 2. Some writers appear to have been predisposed to criticism by anti- WW American, far-left, or Communist sympathies. The British "who Killed Kennedy Committee” includes sone of the most persistent end vocal English critics of the United States, e.g., Michael Foot, Kingsley Martin, Kenneth ‘Tynan, and Bertrand Fussell. Joachim Joesten has been publicly revealed as a onetime member of the German Communist Party (KPD); a Gestapo docunent of 8 Novenber 1937 enong the German Foreign Ministry files microfilmed in England end now returned to West German custody shows thet his party book was numbered 532315 and dated 12 May 1932. (The originals of these files are now available at the West German Foreign Ministry in Bonn; the copy in ‘the U.S. National Archives may be found under the reference 1-120, Serial 4918, frames E256482-4. The British Public Records Office should also have # cory.) Joesten's American publisher, Carl Merzani, was ouce sentenced to Jail by « federal jury for concealing his Communist Party (CPUSA) membership in order to hold a government job. Available information indicates that Mark Lane was elected Vice Chairman of the New York Council to Abolish the House Un-American Activities Committee on 28 May 1963; he also attended the ®th Congress of the International Association of Denocratic Lewyers (an inter- national Communist front organization) in Budapest from 31 March to 5 April 1964, where he expounded his (pre-Report) views on the Kennedy assassination. Za his acknowledguents in his book, Lane expresses special thanks to Ralph Behoenman of London "who participated in end supported the work"; Schoennan is of course the expatriate American who has been influencing the aged Bertrand Russell in recent years. (See also para. 10 below on Comunist efforts to replay speculation on the assassination.) 3. Another factor has been the financial reward obtainable for sen- sational books. Mark Lane's Rush to Judguent, published on 13 August 1966, had sold 65,000 copies by early November and the publishers had ey Rei Sos Ta HELE SE 1942 ‘ cas eso an ugar os coy, m a “Dole. pad (Cont. )sferer UNO, 000 copies by that date, in anticipation of sales to come. The 1 January 1967 New York Times Book Review reported the book as at the ‘top of the General category of the best seller list, having been in top position for seven weeks and on the list for 17 weeks. Lane has re- portedly appeared on about 175 television and radio prograns, and has aleo given numerous public lectures, all of which cerves for advertise— nent. He hes also put together « TV film, and is peddling it to European telecasters; the BEC has purchased rights for a record $45,000. While neither Abrehan Zepruder nor Willian Manchester should be classed with the critics of the Comission we ere discussing tere, suns paid for the Zepruder film of the assassination ($25,000) and for nagatine rights to Menchester's Death of a President ($568,000) indicate the money available for material related to the assassination. Sone newspapernen (¢.g., Sylvan” Fox, The Unanswered Questions About President Kennedy's Assascination{ Leo Sevenge The Geese ReEaTD) bave pub Shed SBT shed navounes sasha ‘cashing in on their Journalistic expertise. 4, Aside from political and financial motives, some people have sp- perently published accounts simply beceuse they vere burning to give the Vy Sorld their theory, e.g., Harold Weisberg, in his Whitewash TT, Penn Jones, Ur., in Forgive My Grief, and George C. Thonson in The Quest for Truth. Weisberg's book vas first published privately, though it is now finally attaining the dignity of conmerciel publication. Jones volume ves pub- Lishea by the small-tovn Texes nevspaper of which he is the editor, and Thomson's booklet by hie own engineering firm. The impact of these books will probably be relatively slight, since their vriters will appeer to readers to be hysterical or paranoid. 5. A common technique enong many of the writers is to raise as many questions as possible, vhile not bothering to work out all the consequences. Herbert Mitgang hes written a parody of this approech (his questions actually refer to Lincoln's assassination) in "A New Inquiry is Needed," New York Times Magazine, 25 Decenber 1966, Mark Lane in particular (vho represents himsel? as Osvala's lavyer) adopts the classic defense attorney's approach of throwing in unrelated details so as to create in the Jury's mind = sum of "reasonable doubt." His tendency to wander off into minor details led one observer to conment that whereas a good trial lewyer should heve a sure instinct for the jugular vein, Lane's instinct was for the capilleries. His tactics and aleo his nerve vere typified on the occasion when, after getting the Commission to pay his travel expenses back from England, he recounted to thet body e sensational (end incredible) story of a Ruby plot, while refus- ing to name his source. Chief Justice Warren told Lane, "We have every reason to doubt the truthfulness of what you have heretofore told us" the otendards of legal etiquette, a very stiff rebuke for an attormey. by 6. Te should be recognized, however, thet another kind of criticism has recently emerged, represented ty Hivard Jey fpstein's Inquest. Epstein V adopts a scholarly tone, and to the casual reader, he presents what appeers to te a nore coherent, reasoned case then the writers described above. 2 $ ifr ET (Survey Cont.). SECRET as Commission attorney Arlen Specter remarked, "Why not make it three Oswalds? Why stop at two?" Nevertheless, aside fron his ook, Popkin has been able to publish a summary of his views in The New York Review of Hooks, and there has been replay in the French Nouvel Qbservateur, in Moscow's New Times, end in Baku's Vyshka. Popkin nekes a sensational accusation indirectly, saying that "Western European critics” see Kennedy's assassination as part of a subtle conspiracy at- tributable to "perhaps even (in rumors I have heard) Kennedy's successor." One Barbara Garson has made the same point in another way by her parody of Shakespeare's "Macbeth" entitled "MacBird," with what is obviously President Kennedy (Ken 0 Dunc) in the role of Duncan, and President dohnson (MacBird) in the role of Macbeth. Miss Garson makes no effort to prove her point; she merely insinuates it. Probably the indirect forn of accusation is due to fear of a libel suit. 9. Other books are yet to appear. William Manchester's not-yet~ published he Death of a President is at this writing being purged of material personally objectionable to Mrs. Kennedy. There are hopeful signe: Jacob Cohen is writing @ book vhich will appear in 1967 under the title Honest Verdict, defending the Commission report, and one of the Com- ‘ mission attorneys, Wesley J. Licbeler, is also reportedly writing « book, setting forth both sides. But further criticism will no doubt appears as the Weshington Post has pointed out editorially, the recent death of Jack Fuby will probably lead to speculation thet he was "silenced! by a con- spiracy. ca 10. The likelihood of further criticiom is enhanced by the circun— stance that Communist propazandists seem recently to have stepped up their own campaign to discredit the Warren Comission. As already noted, Moscow's New ‘Mmes reprinted parts of an article by Richard Popkin (21 and 28 Sep Vember 1966 issues), and it also gave the Swiss edition of Joesten's latest work en extended, laudatory review in its number for 26 October. Izvestiya has also publicized Joesten's book in articles of 18 and 21 October. (In view of this publicity and the Communist background of Joesten and his Jmerican publisher, together with Joesten's insistence on pinning the blame on such favorite Communist targets as H. L. Hunt, the FBI and CIA, there seens reason to suspect that Joesten's book and its exploitation are part of a planned Soviet propaganda operation.) Tass, reporting on 5 November on the deposit of autopsy photograplis in the Netional Archives, said that ‘the refusal to give vide public access to them, the disappearance of a nunber of documents, and the mysterious death of more than 10 people, all make many Americans believe Kennedy vas killed es the result of a con- spiracy. ‘The radio transmitters of Prague and Warsaw used the anniversary of the assessinetion to attack the Warren report. The Bulgarian press con- @ucted a cempaign on the subject in the second half of October; a Greek Communist newspaper, Avgi:; placed the blane on CIA on 20 lovember. Signi- ficantly, the start of this stepped-up campaign coincided with a Soviet vepace (Survey Cont. }demand that the U.S. Enbassy in Moscow stop distributing the Russian- language edition of the Warren report; Newsweek commented (12 September) thet the Soviets apparently “aid not want mere facts to get in their way." (SECRET: A curious aftermath was that a known Soviet intelligence officer in a Far Fastern country called a U.S, diplomat six times during the week of 20 November, including after voriing hours, in an effort to obtain a copy of the Russian-lenguage edition, It is not clear whether he wanted it for propaganda work, or to satisfy his own curiosity as to vhat really happened. End SECRET.) , or a9 asd EERET (Survey)Janvary 1967 The Theories of Mr. Epstein by Spectator A recent critic of the Werren Commission Report, Edward Jay Epstein, has attracted widespread attention by contesting the Report's conclusion that, “although it is not necessary to any essential findings of the Com. mission," President Kennedy and Governor Connally were probably hit succes- sively ty the same bullet, the second of three shots fired. In his book, Inquest, Epstein maintains (1) that if the two men were not hit by the sane bullet, there must have been two assassins, and (2) thet there is evidence which strongly suggests that the tvo men were not hit by the same bullet. He suggests thet the Commission's conclusions must te viewed as “expressions of political truth," implying that they are not in fact true, but are only a sort of Pablun for the public. Epstein's argument that the tvo men must either have been shot by one bullet or by two assassins rests on a comparison of the minimum time re~ quired to operate the bolt on Lee Harvey Oswald's rifle -- 2.3 seconds’ —, with the timing of the shots ac deduced fron a movie of the shooting tekea by an aneteur photographer, Abraham Zapruder. The franes of the movie serve to time the events in the shocting. The film (along vith a slow-notion re- enactment of the shooting made on 24 May 1964 on the basis of the filn and other pictures an¢ evidence) ténds to show that the President was probably not shot before frane 207, "hen he cane out from beneath the cover of on oak tree, and that the Governor was hit not later than frame 240, If this is correct, then the tvo men yould not have teen hit Longer than 1.8 sec~ onds apart, since Zapruder's film was taken et a speed of 18.3 frames per second, Since Osveld's rifle could not have fired a second shot within 1,8 seconds, Epstein concludes that the victims must have been shot by separate weapons -- and hence prestmably by separate assassin -- unless they were hit by the sane bullet, Epstein then argues that there is evidence vhich contradicts the pos- sibility of a shooting by a single bullet. In his book he refers to Fed- eral Bureau of Investigation reports stemming fron FBI men present at the Bethesda autopsy on President Kennedy, according to which there vas a wound in the back vith no point of exit; this means thet the bullet which entered Kennedy's back could not later have hit Connally. This information, Epstein notes, flatly contradicts the official autopsy report accepted by the Commission, according to which the bullet presumably entered Kennedy's body just below the neck and exited through the throat. Epstein slso pub- lishes photograpis of the backs of Kennedy's shirt and coat, shoving bullet holes about six inches below the top of the collar, as well as o rough sketch made at the time of the autopsy; these pictures suggest thet the entrance wound in the back ves too low to be Linked to an exit wound in the throst. In his book, Epstein says that if the FBI statements are cor— rect ~~ and he indicates his belief that they are -~ then the “autopsy rind- inge must have been changed after January 13 [Januery 13, 1964; the date of &S copy (Cont .) BA BD-S8Y7 ol 2.97248the last FBI report stating that the. bullet penetrated Keanedy's back for less than a finger-length.]." In short, he implies that the Commis— sion warped and even forged evidence so as to conceal the fact of a conspiracy. Following the appearance of Epstein's Inquest, it was poiated out that on the morning (November 23rd) after the Bethesda outopsy attended by FBI and Secret Service men, the autopsy doctors learned that a neck wound, obliterated by an emergency tracheostomy perforned in Dalles, hed been seen by the Dallas doctors. (The tracheostomy had been part of the effort to save Kennedy's lite.) The FBI men who had only attended the eutopsy on the evening of November 22 naturally aia not knov about this information from Dallas, which led the eutopsy doctors to change their conclusions, finally signed vy them on Noventer 24. Also, the Treasury Department (which runs the Secret Service) reported that the autopsy re- port was only forvarded by the Secret Service to the FBI on December 23, 1963. But ina recent article in Esquire, Epstein notes thet the final FBI report was still iscued efter the Secret Service had sent the FBI the official autopsy, and he claims that the explanation that the FSI was un— fnformed “begs the question of how a wound below the shoulder became a wound in the back of the neck." He presses for making the autopsy picturés available, a step which the late President's trother has so far steadfastly resisted on grounds of taste, though they have been made available to quali- fied official investigators. Let us consider Epstein's arguments in the light of information now available: 1. Epstoin'e thesis that if the President and the Governor wore not hit by the sane bullet, there mst have been two assassins: a. Feeling in the Commission was that the tvo men were probably hit by the seme bullet; however, some members evidently felt that the evi- dence was not conclusive enough to exclude completely the Governor's belief that he and the President vere hit seperately. After all, Connally was one of the most important living witnesses. While not likely, it was possible that President Kennedy could have been hit more than 2.3 seconds before Connally. As Arlen Specter, a Comnis~ sion attorney and « principal adherent of the "one-bullet theory," says, the Zapruder film is tvo~dimensional ané one cannot say exactly when Connally, let alone the President, was Mit. ‘The film does not show the President during a crucial period (from about frames 20h to 225) when a sign blocked the view fron Zapruder's camera, and before that the figures are distant end rether indistinct. (When Life naga~ zine first’ published franes from the Zapruder film in its special 1963 Assassination Issue, it telieved that the pictures showed Kennedy first hit Th frames before Governor Connally ves struck.) The "eerli- est possible time" used ty Epstein is based on the belief thet, for an interval before thet time, the view of the car from the Book Depository 2 (heories Cont.)window vas probably blocked by the foliage of an oak tree (from frame 166 to frame 207, vith a brief glimpse through the leaves at frame 186). In the vords of the Commission's Report, "it is unlikely that the assassin would deliberately have shot at [Presi- dent Kennedy] with a view obstructed by the ok tree when he vas about to have « clear opportunity"; unlikely, but not impossible. Since Epstein is fond of logical terminology, it might be pointed out that he made an illicit transition from probability to certainty in et least one of his premises. b, Although Governor Connally believed that he and the President were hit separately, he did not testify that he cav the President hit before he vas hit himself; he testified that ne heard a first shot and started to turn to see what had happened. His testinony (as the Commission's report says) ean therefore be reconciled with ‘the supposition that the first shot missed and the second shot hit both men. However, the Commission did not pretend that the tvo mon could not possibly have been hit separately. ce. The Commission elso concluded that all the shote were fired - from the sixth floor window of the Depository. The location of ‘the wounds is one mejor basis for this conclusion. In the room behind the Depository window, Osvald's rifle and three cartridge cases were found, and all of the cartridge cases were identified by experts as heving-been fired by that rifle; no other weapon or cartridge cases were found, and the consensus of the witnesses from the plaza was that there vere three shots. If there were other assassins, whet happened to their weapons end cartridge cases? How did they escape? Epstein points out thet one wonan, a Mrs. Walther, not en expert on weapons, thought she sav two men, one with e machine gun, in the window, and that one other witness ‘thought he sav someone else on the sixth floor; this does not sound very convincing, especially when conpared with photographs and other witnesses who sew nothing of the kind. a. The very fact that the Commission did not absolutely rule out the possibility that the victims were shot separately shows thet its conclusions were not determined ty a preconceived theory. Now, Epstein's thesis ic not just his own discovery; he relates ‘that one of the Commission lawyers volunteered to him: "To say that they vere hit by separate bullets is synonymous with eaying that there were two assassins." This thesis was evidently consid~ ered ty the Commission. If the thesis were completely valid, and if the Connissioners -— as Epstein charges —~ had only been inter— ested in finding "political truth," then the Commission should have flatly adopted the "one-bullet theory," completely rejecting any pos- sibility that the men were hit separetely. But while Epstein and others have a veakness for theorizing, the seven experienced lawyers 3 (Theories Cont.)on the Commission were not committed beforehand to finding either a conspiracy or the absence of one, and they wieely refused to erect @ whole logical structure on the slender foundation of a few debatable pieces of evidence. 2. Epetein's thests that either the FBI's reports (that the bullet ontoring the Preetdent's back did not exit) were wrong, or the official autopsy report vas falsified. a. Epstein prefers to believe that the PRI reports are accurate (otherwise, he says, “doubt is cast on the accuracy of the FBI's entire investigation") and that the officiel autopsy report was falsified. Now, as noted above, it hes energed since Inquest vas written thet the FBI vitnesses to the eutopsy did not Know about the information of a throat wound, obtained from Dalles, and thet the doctors’ autopsy report was rot forwarded to the FBT until December 23, 1963. True, this dete preceded the date of the FBI's Supplemental Report, January 13, 1964, and that Supplemental Report did not refer to the doctors' report, following instead the version of the earlier FBI reports. But on November 25, 1966, FBI Director J. Ragar Hoover explained that vhen the FBI sutmitted its Janaary 13 report, it knew that the Commission hed the doctor's report, and ‘therefore did not mention it. In other vords, the FBI reports were essentially reports of FBI information. This seems natural; the FBI knew that the Commission would veigh its evidence together with that of other agencies, and it vas not incumbent on the FBI to argue the nerits of its own version as opposed to that of the doctors. When writing reports for outside use, experienced officials are always cautious about criticizing or even discussing the products of other egencies. (If one is skeptical about this explanation, it would still be uch easier to believe that the author(s) of the Supple- nental Report had somehow overlooked or not received the autopsy report than to suppose that that report was falsified months after the event. Epstein thinks the Commission staff overlooked Mrs. Walther's report mentioned above, yet he does not consider the pos~ sibility that the doctors’ eutopsy report did not actually reach the desk of the individuals who prepared the Supplemental Report until after they had written ~~ perhaps well before January 13 -- the draft of page 2 of that report. Guch en occurrence would by no means justify @ general distrust of the FBI's "entire investiga. tion.") >. With regard to the holes in shirt end coat, their location can be readily explained ty supposing that the President was waving to the crowd, an act which would automatically raise the back of his clothing. And in fact, photographs show that the President was wav- ing just before he was shot. c. As to the location of the hole in the President's back or shoulder, the autopsy filne have recently beon placed in the National Archives, and were viewed in November 1966 by two of the eutopsy doctors, who 4 (theories Cont.)stated afterwards that the pictures confirm that the vound vas high enough for a bullet entering there to exit through the throat. Com mander Boswell, who drev the rough sketch used by Epetein to shov that the wound was several inches down the back, stated that his sketch had been mistaken, or rather inaccurate, in marking the spot waere the bullet entered; he pointed out, hovever, thet the measure- ments written on the sketch at the time are correct. They place the wound 1M centineters from the right shoulder joint and 1 centi- meters delow the tip of the right mastoid process -~ the medical term for the bony point behind the ear. Thus the location of the wound was easily high enough to permit a bullet entering there to exit through the neck. (It is interesting to note that, whether deliberately or not, the reproduction of Car. Bosvell's sketch in Inquest is too poor for the vriting to be readily legible, vhile the reporduction accompanying Epstein's Esquire article has part of the weiting lopped off. If ve are charitable, and assume that Epstein hinself could not read this writing, or could not translate the medi- cal termology, then we must still note that he apparently overlooked the plain printed reference to the location of the wound contained + in the Conmission's Report (p.86), which also translates the medical, term into layman's languege; this should have clarified for him the writing on the sketch.) Tt is worth considering come of the implications of Hpstein's accusation: a. There was a conspitacy of two or more persons. Yet despite all the evidence found incriminating Ooweld, no evidence hae been found incrimingting any other identifiable person. Osveld vould hardly have been the choice of any careful conspirator. A conspiratorial group ~~ especially a Texan one -- could easily have found a cafer and more reliable vay of Killing the President. >. ‘The charge that the autopsy document was falsified incriminates at the least = large number of government officials and independent lavyers, ag vell as the three autopsy doctors. Tt would presumably involve the seven Commission members, vho vary in political background and outlook, but share the attribute of having steked their reputations on the report. Ts it really possible that such an awful secret, shared by so many, coula be Kept? A clerk who was vitting of such a scandal could expect to sell his story for a figure running into at least six digits. It appears thet, to put the matter at its lowest, Epstein hes jumped to a. conclusion on the basis of incomplete, inadequate research in a rush to Judgment. (Theories) ol-2942A9 GDecewbor 15, 1966 _ Legal Ignorance |And False Logic A. L, COODMART, Q.c. “Te m1 Warren Co llowed Mr. Lane (0 contest Aheir ev dence hefore judgment, there would have been no need of his book." So writes Professor Hugh Trevor-Roper of Oxford University Jn an introduction to Mark Lane's | ‘Ruste te Judgment i Mr. Lane, a New York lawyer, had. dlaimed to act 48 counsel for Os- wwald before the Commission, having been rained by Oswald's mother. “The Commission, ng his ap- wsized that it was an 0 that the adv vision had} investig, sary sytem of | would not be sui | In suppore of his claim to repre. i sent the dead Oswald, Mr. Lane in his bool. cites the English law. After saying chat the “denial of counsel tw the eeceased was am act both une precedented and unfait,” he writ “in England the auie of Jaw | perhaps better understood and the tole of counsel beticr appreciated. A Royil Commission engaged in | Mearings to determine the innocence ‘or guilt of one deceased as a matter ‘of comne provides that counsel for . the funily may participate fully and without reservations, and such coun- sel would not be heard to disclaim his function as an advocate.” ‘This statement is both utter non- sense and completely Prever has been sueh at Jthere, never Inas heen such a fpointment. \p SUSMLAK QuastION diel satise in England in 1962, when st wibt wal was appointed a Tnnals of Inquiry ( 1921, to hear the Vas deck in the Admiralty, had convicted of spying for the Russians, aad here were many Ak s+} > (a Gaitskel Hcially itt rey at he, igh mors conccming the favois was said to have received from Admiralty officials. After the matier $ Report i mn, the Prime Minister (Mr. | Thad been raised Mr. Gaitkell, th Opposit Macmillan) 2a ment of 3 tel feliffe ay chairman, saying that the low of rumor had long passed the at of tolerance When the heuings began, Mr [Gerald Gardiner, .C. (now Lord Parliament by Leader of the! }iChancellor), applied dat legal rep- presentation to" tke put in all ses sions should be accorded to Mr. imilarly Lord Carvington, First Lord of the Adnitalty, applied for full represcatation as’ he was impliedly one of the accused. oth ications were refused by Lord who pointed out that this jwas an investigation at which the applicants could give evidence, but that they could not claim the right to crossexamine the other witnesses. This was obviously good sense be- Jcause otherwise all the other wit. Inesses would be entitled to ask for the sme representation; the result would be claws. ‘The ruling that Mr, Lane had no right to represent the dead Os Isat and erosesamine al the oxher witnesses did not, of course, prevent 1 from presenting to the Comiis- n any evidence he wished, espe: | ral co the existence of alleged conspivacy on whiels the ole of his book is based. He did his introduc ‘Trevor Roper says: that we Lack confidence in the evidence submited 10 a sion and the Commis of it" Others may ED-sgy) Soe view when they compare Lane's ‘saements inthis book with the and the transcript of the The Commission conelnded thet ent was killed by tyro bul red from a sixstory window in Jing the motorcade hal just passed. The assassin was Lee Harvey Oswald, who an hour later) killed Police Officer Tippit, who was pa- trolling the streets in a car in search| fof anyoné resembling the descrip | tion of the assassin that swag bi broadcast by the police. Two ‘ans after his arvest Oswald was shot dead by Jack Ruby, but there was ho evi- Jdesice that the latter acted with any jocker person in the killing. Me. Lane disputes, all thete con: Jciusions. There is, he says, compel- ing evidence that the President was swvack by two bullets, one fired! from the building, which hie him inthe back of his head, and another fired from + knoll in the opposite eivee- tion a hundred yards away, whieh ‘entere | the front of his official autopsy, which sail that botly bullet. entered! from the ul bbeen intentionally falsiicd, The kill er in he building was not Oswald, but sone unidentified man who had been slaced there by unidentified | conspirators with the connivince of tle D: las police. The man who shot Tipit sas some unidentified man! acting for the Dallas police, who were i fraid that he might disclose! some i lverse evidlenee, ‘TreorRoper says that | “there! is no cvidence at all wo explain how cr why the Dallas. ps stantly pouniced on Oswald,” bute he fails co state that the police radio alert had described the assissin as being“ about 165. pow tall, and in his ext Fhe Pre Tets‘was at almost exact description of informant Mr; Line refused to give ‘Oswald, Finally Mr. Lane suggests .it, as he had promised hin not to that Fuby killed Oswald 10 38 t0 disclose it. He st prevent him from giving, evidence would uy to obtai {o prose his own innocence 1ias soon 2s possible. Noting Further The question of confidence on|ihappened for nearly four months, which Professor Trevor-Roper right-|!although the Comimission sent te- ly insists can be best answered by|| peated requests to him. scribed. Mr, Lane sas that “The Government (sic] seems 10 have been reluctant to let Raby testife. Wh he did, it was manifestly 1 to question him... referring to three major points deale| with by Mr, Lane in his book, and| compat'ing his presentation with the wanscript of the evidence published by the Commission. | iE FIRST POINT concerns Mr, Lane's own evidence in regard to the alleged eonspiracy. On March 4, 1964, when Mr. Lane first appeared, he said: “I would like to request that this portion of the hearing, it any event, be opened to the public’ ‘The Chiet Justice answered that he! ‘Then, as the work of the Com mission was drawing to an end, Mr. Lane left for Kughand because “T felt it important that somehow This statement & literally tu implication that the Co mission was trying w@ hide sone ‘ching is completely fale. Every the American people be informed |competent Iyer kmows that wh about what is taking place, and T)/an accused person Fax been arrested |, found that practically the omy way |Iie must not be askad any questions to inform the American people is!'the answers to whic might tend to to speak in Europe.” The Commis: incriminate him, Chiet Justice War- jon was, however, so anxious to} ren, therefore, went eut of his way have him testify that it offered to not to press Ruby for an mswer pay for his return passage. He ac-_jecause. as he said, I know you do cepted this, bue when he appeared liiave this case whida is not yet fi before the Commission in June he, lished, and T wouldn't jeopartize | had the samme right “as any witness | would have to request that.” (Of the 552 witnesses who gave evidence, he ‘was the only one who asked for thi form ol publicity.) ; Mr. Lane began with a lengthy complaint concerning a photograph which he said had been doctored by some newspapers, although this did not concern the Commission. He then requested the Commission to investigate a “series of most unvsur coincidences,” the suggestion bs that the Dallas police were respon:| ber of ses, tw of thems i again refused to give jon by trying to insist that, "The Chief Jostce then sad “We | Cead i dhe esas count Have every reinon todoubr the rath. Ruby: haa been found guile, of lines of whee. sou hive hereto Oswakl ant al been fore told us, Tf you can tell us sentenced to death, but his new acho gave you that information, lawyer Was Uying wo prove that fe imyy tat ther veracly, Ruby. war guilty only. ot wea tien you have’ perforaied a service, sluglucr as eared. wlthoes to this Commission. But unl you ‘| premeditation tender serateloe ive cone nothing but fag emotion. Ie teas thay Raby Mr Lane replied dhs tepewel again nd agin 1e was prepared to give “informs | MY. wes Mat le should ut not has sues, TH we heen crezamined iy the be the first time in Commission, which failed w |civiet ostce ef th he proper elforte™ Tle ‘the mest egrasious omission af all, | telling an uncruth, a : [pertips, is thet he [Ruy] ere ot (xe row given further! fel whether he ey er [iwtornion in ths Wook, He. rst sasstanee in catria the semen | Heard of the tnceting fivsn + four! of the Dallas Pelee. aihionoe| sls who had obtained is iferie-:. November 2 i | sible for the murder of an potential wit |Californi He then i ‘ toanea Sat | [Norelbrts seemed onset | cl that “te reporters from foreign countries” head been reprised that the airports hd not be closed, roadblocks placed on} streets, and all trains stepped andl searched afier the assisination. What much a complete embango on all movement. would have. accom plished whe no-one knew whit to Search for was noe explained. tion from a “widely respected” visi tor to Ruby's club. The visitor went there frequently because dancers was his git) friend, She) | Became pregnant. As he was a yy Tradl answevest this in the tive he would have rat he hal taken part icy. The question could " | ried man he did not wish his visite Te was noe until nearly the end i | at " to attract autent of his “testimony” that Mas Lanes yy "Lane felt in honor bound so that he Imad been informed a week belore the assassination {Paccohnan ‘Tipit and a rightwing from New York who later pub: ws insuleings advertisement ing, the Presi morning of th I dhe Ghiet Ju 8 the recent Supreme , Court cues concerming the protee- tion of accused ersen voluntary interrogan quially misleacling, is Matement dat Raby SH he told all he knew to the shes even though ue to the iend sed made before the Cou! England Mr. Lane woul!!! nave been sent to prison if he haet refused the Commission's demanst Kon thE for any ansicer, assusination, had . see Raby ae his Carnet Ch, sacovs nacre uvcent"-Commoton Be wld Hone Bi We hen asked for the name of i =-fin the Dallas jail” is tine that Nien Ba for theme of Ws Teta Wty day that he ent fasehis life in Dal that he was Uilking about the diteaty le by the Jolin Birds Society After saying dat bi ibe killed. he nt of Ruby's testi- anission was iiselt divided ow dus eracial The Cam shots Ww wedy and wounded Gove nally were fired by Lee Haver Ov: fianings of the Com st which failed ws notice this ext idence because its wary DY no meat event horonagh Mr. Epseit, who i earch student much i poychology, tas an ingenious ex- nation for what he considers to anission (0 determine ji hit Governor Connally | ‘The majority of the Gammivio thought 1 ‘more Tikely that, was the san the! was tht he wanted to go to Washington to be given a Tiede- nission's unsutistactory report. There was, he says, a dualian. tector test which Woukl prove that! Mt purpose when the Commission he hud told the eruth when he said, was appointed. “IE the explicit pur tf pose Of the Commission Was 10 as: Thadiieertain ant expose the facts, the President, while the mivorite the gun in miy right hip pocker,jimplicic purpose was 10 provect’ thought ¢ nd imply if dhat is dhe correct the i it was word here, T saw him, andl that is ruin group held that the ather i all T can say. And I didn’t eave what!) This is obvious because, as M rhe. We was a cioice between wi | [append to me.” Ruby ssems to!) Macuillaw said whe ug possibilities, The 1 neste: "ave been « better knwyer than Mr.) the Vassall Tribunal, which Mr. Rovere says dhat Mi Eps Lane, hhure the Ne, stein “brought to light here for the “But Mx, Epstein then ages a second fist tim eres, © uy, sano Test of confulence can step whieh vitiates his entire book. Jn his be found in Mr. Lane's chapter He says that “the Commission's im- The Testimony of Nancy Perrin plicit parpore would dictace that the Rich,” which hie regards as the “more Tumor be dispelled regardless of the ccling andl inpontin” ‘hat fact that it was wae” He there: Tauly, who had been Ruiry’s former f0F€ says that “the conclusions of Doar, testifies that se aul her tien husband attended aw dinaerijas expiessions of political wath.” ven by ant aunianied colonel, They iy 4 “political truth" he ame 4 lf O40 ve pilot al Galsehvod which i told in che sup sauning boat x6 Guba, but there | pose! interest of the pu sone Datel” about dhe ny “This is paychology nun seul “Phe viving. suggestion that the Chiet Justice of Ac that moment Ray entered the f de United States saul the Wx wen Jroam, Ue had a bulge “where his} bers of his Commission would de- . Ibveast pocket would be.” ‘The colo- | libeately falsify dhe record's sal |nct and he went into another room} issue a misleading report so as Jand when they came out the bulge! save the American public fran [was gone, verybody secmed to be, shock is incredible, Ht is not su Happy, “se it vas any inipresion.” prising that. bused on this. fabe Mis. Rich said, “Raby” bvoushe! jemie, Me ytcin's interpret money 1 Of the evidence is alment av (vista vat of ies Lanse, abl ey ce with ach other Oh miest Rovere, ‘books pays hat ‘most of the published attacks on it were transparently malicious oF ignorumt” There seems to be no reason why the preseat books should twat be included in she same catego she Warten Report must be viewed } Me. Lame feels tha this testimony't [showed Ruby's “involvement itt Hermational polities” He is bisterly | points Fovitical of the Commission becae| “The most iaportant smatter dis Hie “did not publish one word of the! exsied in Mx, Epstein's book i the (estimony.” Most of Mr. Lane's !eritieal question whether « Sule Fother eviticiams in his book sve of hatler cowl have atic bork the ita catiber. President and Governor Gonualls Vite sags dase “there way evideme rows 1 Kdlward Jay daliay all bac preduded the posi n's book, Duguest, we linet | ity thet both men teat been hit agrees with the Commision : be the same bullet." but il thee duit Oswwlel shor the President, but,, was such evidence whieh escaped the he holy diat "very subsiuntial evie, novice of dhe Coamnission and dence indicuted the prescuce of st sill, it is not inelded itt this bows seveid sasasin” who sas probably a the intioduedin. Ma Richard “loner” ike Oswald. FheComission Rovere sits dua “the Warien GoSR/October 22, 1966 JFK IN DALLAS ‘The Warren Report and lis Crities | iN By ARNOLD L. $ THE war against the Waren j Commission ‘escalates, it is time to teke stock. It time to inguio | nto the supposed deficiencies of the / Commission, its investigation, and its Re- port, It is time alto to inquire into the possible deficiencies of the critics, their Squires, and theie conclusions, We deal There not with a political campaign or a newspaper repott,, where ligense in speech andi reporting is, unfostunately, too often the rule. We deal rather with the assassination of a great and gallant | young man, the President of the United Staies, We deal also with the killing of a confused and bewildered man, his ale Jeged assassin, both within the sight and enhot of an unbclioving world, The awesome responsibilities of the Commission required that it adhere t0 Armol L. Fein is judge in the Civil Court of the City of New Yerk and former special tved Crine tn Inersate Commerce. the highest standards of whieh mon ato” capable, to mako an ebjestive and tore ‘uigh inquiry, and to render a fair and fmpartial judgment, without passion, fear, 0 favor. Perlaps the erities are not obliged to ‘conform to the samo standards, But at minimum should they not be requied to state the facts as they are, to report the truth, to aveid the dissemination of ‘unsupported rumors, and to refrain from, charzeter assasination and unfounded mputations of improper motives? A dee ceent respect for the opinions of man kind and for thie subject matter of the inquiry demands no less, Did the Commission adequately meet its burdens? Leaving aside for the mo- ‘ment comment on the specifics of the investigation and Report, and the exit ques, itis Faip to sogygest that there is justifcation for many of the general criticisms of the Commission.” Mark BU BD-sey7 {ployed full- ane aid Edward Epstein in partion lar have faisly and credibly made some ofthe point. It is now reasonably leat that the Commission should "have em- ne, independent, non gocermmental investigators and more fll-tine, independant, nougoveramont- al lawyers. The members of the Com- nission probebly'should lave devoted rere tie to thee task and should have heard more of the testimony in full dress formal hearings. The entire Yestigation should ave been further extended in timo and saope. The nature af the inguiry required expedition, bat not atthe expense of adequacy. Speedy justice is essential, but often the only rent of instant justice may bg ft imme mmediacy. ‘The time required suvst be measured by the eomplesily ofthe prob Jom. Whatever the mosts of the dispute Deeween the Gomassion wd a for Marguerite Oswald, Nar Laney it i maifest that he and other ities" ate ex sound greatnd in Sg Uist a techie sh nelversiy ciusel, with the right-of emsseximne ition. Tt ie apparent ala tht soime clues should have been snore dhowus Jy followed and that contain sdditional fiwestes shold have been heard andl re 10 it iv evident that a Tore complete investigation:of and ro- pwt-on the inconsistencies in the evi- Aeicehetrd andthe official reposts submitted to the Commission were 1e- quired. Conceding the validity of these ms, however, does net meces> sully "ese ejection of the ‘On the other hand, did. the evitics meet the minimal standards required of them? Te ie Fale to suggest that dn many respects they failed to do so, Perhaps the greatest obstace to an mdersianding of the investigation and the Report i= the widespreid public misconception about the nature of eximival tials and investigations. This underlies and in- fects much of the approach in_ these Dooks, although itis expressly articuls CS cory, © investigation=< wild have A ed only by Léo Sauvage, who read ‘The writer of dewetive stories who wands to Keep his readers never Tets inane anal snexplained cee worde “The End." One veonld think the pabe would be #0 Tess demanding when enofrouted: not boy Beten buat by a real life hvesins tion, vd above all when the witia Is Ae President of the United Sater. If i is true, as this passage suggests, that life must conform to fiction inerder ve be credible, the Warren Commission was deficient. "It did nat answer all the {questions nor did i explain all the elves, The Heport s0 states at many pons. Dace this mean that wer mnt Fefeet. te Report and the widerlyings aud accent the aliemative theories of those erties who not only disieree with e' the Commision but with each other? ‘Only rarely docs a tral, inqqiy, or of eriminal=preseit a tidy package fit for television dramas, lowe often. than not there are lose nde, Guilt beyond a reasonable doubt oes not mean beyond all doubt, and fo eriminal juries must be instnicted ‘The porfect care i usually the franc Tet one Tt wis obvious from the outset that there wore zo many conlieting clues and repars it would be impossible t9 recone eile them all. But this does not seem to Aster our authors, Seizing these. gaps ft contradictions, some of which were inevitable and many of which the Come 1 could have avoided or explained, each of these cities Tas vmched attack on the motives of the Commis varying in intensity from the pre fessortal tone of Falward Jay Epstein in Inquest to the stacexto” drumbeat of Harold Weisberg in Whitewas, Evch implies or states that the Gomunission assumed at the outset that Oswald alone swas guilly and then set out to dem Strate or prove it Perhaps this 50, bux thee gentlemen have not made the ease, 1 is moro easily demonstrable dt it is they who have sought to prove their Ra}~ 257248‘own predinpasitions Although Inquest is written in a sober and scholarly law-school style with a re- markable ecoamy of expression, the ‘book is patently tendeatious. Its essence is that the Commission was engaged net in the, pursuit of facts but of “political truth,” that ils “dominant parpase” was “to protest the national interest by die pelling rumors” about “conspiracy” and the cloud of doubts . . . over tations," because “the nae tion's prestige was at stake.” This “ine plicit purpose,” deduced by Epst fen newspaper reports and comments ‘aut of context, is compared with the Commission’ explicit purpose stated in the President's directive “to ascertain, ‘evaluate and report on the facts” includ Hingis ndings and conclusions.” + Epstein then argues: “These two parpenes were compatiile Mark Lane makes the same point in Rusk to judgment, although vot s0 pre- cisely. The others state it more eruulely. ‘Why? Is it naive to suggest that the the best way to dispol a rumor? ‘Whac rumor was so damaging to the nation that the truth could not be told? In The Second Onwald Richard H. Pop ‘kin suggests: | The Westra Buropean ents can only se Kor geaion pao fame of the Dalat Pee the the ehtving Iinaiefinge fn Dall, or perhaps even (in sama Ihave of Feard) ‘Kermed’s successor cvtig peated and undispelled by this Tatest circulator, without any suggestion of basisbe deait with or investigated? ‘The repetition eireulates, Tt neither jus- ies, explains, nor dispels, Mt. Epstein does not go so far. He takes up the alleged conspiracy involv ing the FEL, This evolved from rumors ‘that Oswald was either an FBI informe ant of in ite employ. Epstein concedes that “no evidence developed to sub- stantiate this possibility” and that even if true the relationship “might not be particularly relevant tothe assassination itself” Lane concurs. Lane and Epstein and the ether air thors make valid criticisms of how the Commission and ite staff handled this rumor, The Commission relied largely ‘on information furnished by the FBI it self for its judgment that the story was ‘without foundation, although the Com mission bad determined to make itsawn Troweven its to dispel the rumor whether true or nol, And yet this instance is the bass of Epstein second chapter, "The Dome nant Purpose,” in which he evolves his theory that finding fects was only the Commision’ rocondary purpose. In his anxiety to prove his point Epstein suc ceumbs to the device he avid the others £6 often charge against the Commissions moring the evidence, He writes, “No- where, not even in the ‘Speculations and Rumors" appendix, doce the Report men- tion the allegation that had so preocet- pied the. Commission ‘To put it mildly, this {s inaccurate. ‘As Mark Lane notes, Append XII (9 the Report, “Speculations and Rursor,” fn a subscetion entitled “Oswald and USS. Goverment Agencies,” discusses and rojeets es baseless the rumors and “pecnlations about Oswald’ alleged ae | sociation with te Fist, extended treatment is to be found Chapter VI of the Report proper, “In vestigation of Possible Conspiracy,” in a This paragraph is perhaps the best subsection entitled "Oswald Was Not on on Professor Fopkin’s theories Agent for the U.S, Government.” Sonic and his book, What further commentary jof the books under review, inchding Iuband, By blull, persistence, is necessary about an inquiry which will |those by Laneand Epstein, make: forca: "e ‘he Com= mission's reasons. A. Similar but more does not mention the “allegation that Ind 50 precceupied. the Commission” ‘This unfounded chorge by Epstein has been picked up and repeated in aiticles relying on and lauding his book. Thus naw namor circulates, If Epstein fotends only a criticism of the failure of the Report to mention ‘Tesas Attomey General Waggoner Carr, Dallas District Attorney Henry Wade, newspaper reporter Alonzo. Hudkins, and Dallas Under Shoviff Allan Sweatt as tednsmitters of these rumors, this hardly sustains Epstein’ blanket charge that the Report decs not reler to or treat with the rumors, Moreover, it represenis a questionable eriticism of the way the, Report is written rather than @ demone Strtion of the Commission’ so-called “implicit” purpose, ‘This illustrates. an- ‘iher point to9, All too frequently Ep= stein and the others mix theie evticism of the way the Report was writen with, f eriicism of the investigation, Thus ‘even when they are satisfied with a pare ticular pliase of the investigation they ‘point their aitack at the fom of the Ree Dot. At other times, when the Report Seems adequately to deal with « probe Jem, they seize on the investigation 6s nate. cl at length on this mater beomse it is the dubions founda anission was mainly oncermed with “the dominant purpose" of producing “only political trath;" which wndleslics his tire analysis and provides the theoretical Iasi for hie more serious allegations, Wire ihe das ot Parkin Tas pital ascertained that the Present wae Indcod dead, the need for an awopsy ‘was evident, The Dalla hospital ofials insted that the law required i to bo performed there before the body was moved. This would of course take some ime, Federal intervention wes question- bl, the asassration of a President not then beinga fede crime, Novalis thebodybe taken ingion, lark eanely ing with hier of force OTS aided by peat without further explanation, ela [fal eae that the Commission's investi Sct Service Agent Moy Kellman and Ieation, or comment—ertieal o¢ athe |gation of thess mamors and spectlations ets, removed the body from the has. ‘wne=that comply bo seston [was inadequate Even if one agrees, and Pll, ook might be attributable to “perhaps eren (Gn rumors T have often heard) Kes nedy's successor"? leven if oue assumes the Ci ‘conclu thie rerpoct ‘netlier supports nor warrants Tale, thie Waiting for a Jocal autopsy. spstcin’s af How could or should the rumorre+ inseeurate ascertion that the Repost ese books is curiously revealing, to the airport, and caused it to Le flow to Washington ie use of this incident in some ofvage explores a in some detail as an event of “political signifcanea,” which ‘olablished a basis for federal juisdic- tion over the investigation of the assis- nT cites it a evidenes that tho ee Departmen legally auld avd iy. This is par of his rather ex fated and) marky argument thatthe Jnstice Department delayed interven tion oF avoided i in order not to en Varress the state of ‘Texas, contention that the Toxar off Aietemmined to establish Oswald's sole Bt clr ah fol atevenn, Why isnot apparent is geist to this mil Sauvage glides over the whole eamples question of federalstate relations and ignores the fact that the Justice Departments investigation did continuo and thatthe Warren Commis- sion isin facta species of federal inter- veution. Sylvan Fox at wo little Tough uses the incident to. demonstrate the pe ros and “hasty ineotitudes . played by the Dallas authoritics”™ Ganirast Wossberg’s description of it ss “on abuso of the Texas authorities” ‘This in-a paragraph in which he alo Aeelines to “embarrass” the “public serv- fants” who “Torebly romeved the Pres dent’ ory,” ut is ertial ofthe Report for fling to do so and for not noting cee © Tesi oficial was Savited to ve or partlciate in the autopsy. ie, however, quotes ODonnell 3 that Daas doctor “accom ¢ body and take charge of the Wenn acs onto defend se igs ! ef thestate a esas ths disespeced. Tie then mje that he the stopey Ion pesorned Tess "there might lave boon na questions uta few ies Inter he dicts that hat a Tosa dose toror efit been presen “ef dovbafal ithe rote woul have dilered™ ‘Tha those authors wee the same fuess infer wat they vil, however ‘Weisherg’s hints and speculations are the launching pad for his evtieism of the autepsy “reports and the doctors who performed the autopsy at the Nae tioual Naval Medical Center in Bethe esta, Maryland, the night of the asiar- sination. They were Commanders James J. Humes and J. Thoraton Boswell of the Navy Medical Corps and Licuten- sant Colonel Pierre Finck of the Amy Medical Cons. All emicede the expert qualifications of these military doctors, Tu addition to the medical personnel, FIL agents Francis X, O'Neill and James |W, Sibert anid Sceret Service agents Rov Koliorman, William B. Grees, Williaa OLesty, awd Clinton J, Till were ak Tegedly present during Sil or autopsy, which was apparently condvct= ced by Commander Humes. ‘The autopsy report, signed by the duce doctors, states that the President died “as a Fesult of two perforating sunshot wourds, fred from a point bee ind and somewhat above the level of the deceased.” ‘The fatal missile, the doctors found, entered the skull and nymented; then a portion exited, care with’ it sections of the brain, skull, and sealp. ‘Much ings been written in these books and elsewhere about the head wounds, their source and course, Obviously, the autopsy doctors were not at the scene fof the sssascination, nor at Parkland Hospital while the ‘doctors there ad~ ‘ministered to the President in the fruit. Toss effort to save him. The soureo of the autopsy doctors’ conclusion that the fatal missile came from “behind and somewhat above” wasnecessarly.a com Dination of hearsay and their own ob- servation of the wounds. “These books contain the not unimpres- sive argument that the head wounds ‘may have been eaused by a bullet com= from in fen! aed mt from “pind and somewlat above," asthe. Report states, or even by more than one ballet, and that the bullet or bullets were not and could not have been fired from Os- wwalds rifle nor by him. Mark Lanes presentation is particularly effective, Hiowever, it is fair to say that the eon |Micts and contradistions and ursupperi- ced speculations in these books and the athors theories on this aspeet of the inquiry produce no satisfactory altoma~ tive. Here the Cammission’s Report is themost convincing. Thelimitsofamage article do not permit a detailed is of the arguments, ‘Neverthe- Tess, on the basis ef numerous sevutinies of the Waren Report and its exhibits, well aseach ofthe books under discus sion and their rompectivo exhibits, plus articles in the pross and elsewhere, I am inclined ‘0 accept the Commission's fenclision that the shot which billed (he President was fied from the sixth floor of the Texas Scheol Bork De- posilory by Lee Harvey Oswald, wtiliz~ Mannlicher-Carcano rife. The I evidence points there and no- Where ese “The other wounds in the President's body present far more diffculties, diff- culties with the Commission's Report, als difficulties with the theories advanced in exch of those hooks. The autopsy feport signed by the autopsy doctors states: ‘The ether missle entered the right ipctor poser. thorax, shove’ the Seapula > aed mae is ext thea the anteioe surface of the eck This -cems to be saying that one bal- Jet, not the fatal one, entered the Presi- dent’ body just below and to the right ‘of the President's neck above the shoal. ‘der bone and exited through the front cf his neck. This would be cons with a wound from above and bel and with an anist’s schematic drawing made later under Commander Humes’: However, it is incomistent right after the sulopsy, ine ‘lower wound in the back and ‘a higher wound in the front of the throat, It is also inconsistent with the FBI reporss of the autopsy and certain newspaper reports, obviously founded ‘1 FDI leaks. ‘The autopsy report is undated. Com= ander Hames tested it was eomplet= cai-and forwarded to higher authority by (November 24, within Torty-igt ass of the antopay. Tunes’: supple. mental report was forwarded to. The] White House Physician on December 6 andl shortly thereafter wat twened over to the Secret Service. ‘Thus it appears in Deceuaber 1963 the Secret Si fce Ind the doctors" autopsy reports in Aicating. the President hud been shor rcar the base af the neck from behind and that the bullet nad. followed a downward course and exited through the lower portion of the front of the neck or throat. However, the FAL report tuned over to the Commission on December 9, 1963, states: Medical examination of the President’ Ioealy revealed thst one af the bullets Ina entered just below his shoulder to the right of the spinal column at aw ule of 45 to 60 dexrees downward, there wes no point of exit ane Unt the bullet war not i the boy. The FBI supplemental report, dated January 19, 1964, states: | ‘Medic examin Tedy: Isl seve which enter tondintance of le The supplemental report, also refers lence of "an exit hole for « projec of President Ke about one inch below the col “these FBI reports to the Commis appear to have been founded upon reports made and sigued by FBT agent+ Sibert avd O'Neil, che frst on Nevei™ on, Dang the atopy be aber bor 26,1968, the Secon em Noveer- tha atrachcctoy, hd been ported 2), 1085. ‘The agente Novaner 2th’ on the Paeaien at balan Topas report sites in part thit during the, ue atthe tin he had no way of Sees aitonsy Commnntler Hua ioetol a ing hata rroecle sod sete ee Inlet hole “below the shoulders and ofthe Freon vectra sed te the two inches to the right ofthe mile putt of hesecins Ease oy tse Tine of the spinal elunn’s tht probing, Ing of November 23,1903 fellowing bythe doctor tnePeted entry “"at'@ autopsy, he fled en the plone wih ! downward poiien of 45 to 60 dagreee” Di Nnienln'O: Pony, whe Tad er “nd that "the eistanee travaled by this fovmed ihe waghonery, nad kennel ‘alse was short inesmoch as dhe end the thront wate, which Usinaged the af the gpening could be fit with the techen and ether pertons sf the necks Fngon” The agents’ report notes that From this he concluded at the ballet the daetors “were ata fos 10 expin which entered the Prete from es wy they could ind no bile; "v0 ind atthe right ofthe base af thence complete bullet could be loated fn the of just hetow ie bad ented ran the Lody either by probing or Keay” atl front f the neck or thst "THe the Sho point of i found nt Tor that pve of the ‘le agents state a ttepbone call was suioney report whith Goseribes thee ‘made tothe FUL laboratory, which d= weunds, stating the Baek wend ne “vised tht a bullet fonrd on stretcher one of catance ad the teat sec inte emergency room at Farland os: went one 9 a + tal in Dalins fad been tured over to." ge hve id incomtont fhe Fit; tht Dy, Humes wa told of ® the FBT report, 1¢ aso ngonstent + dig the autopsy chat be mmedate- wiih newspaper reports aceon ers iy'std tis “necmmpled for no bule lec views th the Paslont deters we ing lested whieh bad entered the back ynth TV statements mde by them dee reyion and that since enteral cardte scribing the wenn inthe font ef the Inassigo ind cen perlonwed at Parks eck wa puncture wound, fdieatog a end Hospital it War ently posible wound of sperace. Does is mean tat {has dog sich movement the bullet the doctor autapay report eneest In worked ts way back ont oft pointer was flstfed te satin n Coons of eniry adhd fallen on theater” theary ot aten gl pon Gaal wir esansnatin af they, sd isimportant toremember et the sstop, Xone of pees of the stall braglt_ sy report war completed sil foswanted into the matopsy soon dvi the ate to Inge avert) by. Novembre topsy sued Defame, the agente 1060 whan fotiztt hoes afr fe Fehon cnn, tat one bullet “had asmnsnation wel Delve the Cone "of the sku and fad Son was appointed and betas say clas venizad rig 10 exit thems the themes ef haw thy aaaaion al top of the skull ana swotiey “nad eurved hal been fovmite Tt ented the “Tresdents "hack sant asa signed by all the of the mony ‘wre its Way out. hringestoral_ ctor who perform the step et tmoece™ the gpente Novem Helle ber 29 report explain nt the pice af ut nene ofthis prevents Ave of our Shull brought into the atesy ream: boon foul an the lor af the Presiden ca ane was taken to Washington another plane, at was the whole halle. fond at Parkland TTospial 11s obvious that these reports are the foundation for the FBI reports, Tis qually obvious that they measurably wwalerming the. elaborate” seealations expcunled jn the books shout the foal shots coming fom in However, there ie also an obvious in- consistency’ helweew these reports and {he wutopsy doctors" report stating that the balet which entered i the back, nent the base ofthe neck, ext tren he throat, despite the doctors’ earlier theorizing’ that this bullet Ind fallow Hanes provided an explara- ul authors--Mesers. Weisherg, Pephi Lane, and Epsicin—from launching more (oF less harsh altacks on Comin Humes and the doctors’ aopsy Wacks aie prembed on three rounels; First, that the report is datod—overleoling the fact that the re- ort form provides space only for the date and time of death aud date and time of the autopsy, both of which ave ndicated. Seen’, that Coinmnaniler Hlumes certified in wrtingzon November 24, 1953, that he had “destioyed. by Inuming certain preliminary drat nates. Third, that the sutopsy seport is neon sistent with the FBI reports, The last is particularly curious Heese th thors have all the FDT with respeet to this ad other aaspeets of the investigation: (hey have attack! the FIs eredibility and Finplicd that it wae te main sponsor, 3a addition £0 the Dallas police, of the theory that Oswald alone was guilty. Sauvage, in his addendw, “Ameriean Postscript.” uses the ineonsisiency to beth the FB and the Commie Weisberg slso seizcs on the alters Tions mad Hy Tamsin his daft of the repwrt and hie notes of hi talephone ‘iversacions with Dr, Perry as evidence ‘of deliberate falsication of the record. They all prove too much, Perhaps the ‘auopsy Feport is inaccurate or contains excessive specihtion. If we accept the FHE report wo must remember it was founded on Fiumes's prior speculation; it remains undemanstrated that the auc topsy report was falsified or altered at w Iter date to fit 2 Commission theory. ‘The real animus for the onslaught on Commander Humes is the fact that the aulopsy report cats the ground from ‘under the theories that the shots camo from in front, reaitons attack ismade by hed to his own satisfaction that the dominant purpose of the Commission was to dispel rumors and establish political truth, he. posts the theny that the FDI reports are aceue sale, that the doctom aulopsy report ‘wa allered more than to months alter the autopsy, and that the autensy report published in the Warren Report is not Ue eviginal one, edged with enough “is” ho ventures that this indiates the conchuione of the Report. “mst bo Miewed as expressions of politial truth is technique is interesting, Ho uses tha hve “purported to be the original” ‘when tlerting to the published repor, and ligesle i the "Comusision’s autopsy epwoa™ race tn the “autopsy doctors epi Like Sauvage, Eystein suggests thst the inconsistency presents die ws one hor of which ie ht th Fit distoned is report on this basle faet doubt is east on the entire, investi sation boenise the Comvutsionts faves: zat aval einehudny were prenied fai the accuracy of the FIT reports. icin ovens the fact sat ee hin Si has already spent @ chapter atiack= ing the redibitgy of the FDI, Ie els funnies the fact that the Commision secepted the docters autopsy report, vt the repert of the FIM, which Sv ‘ates that the Commission's condsions ‘ere n0| entvely premised on the FLL te Sauvage seer the ‘pont end both, Eten ike theotherauthers, choeses sept what the FBT and. Secret rice bystanders at dh autepsy report {ht they heard (obviously heaesay) butejects what the doctors who did the ‘stopsy wrote and have not denied, “The second hom of the dilemma, says Epsicin, is that if the FDI Reports are Accurate, the doctors” report must have been akered after Junary 13. Fe and Sauvage imply that the alteration was Aesined to bokter the Cammission’s thoory that the President and Covernor Jan ‘Connally were both hit by the saine bullet, and that i went through tho President's neck and was the bullet found at Parkland Hospital. Epstein ig notes the fact that, as he himself reposts, wos not nl March our on later, that the single-bulict thoory was Girt sdvenoad ‘nd that it we nover fally accepted. One might observe that is ine of argument, supported by in ruendoss such as “purported,” “pur tedly," and welksprinkled “ifs,” needs far greater demonstration, Lane 2d- ‘vances the same argument and concludes there was a belated alteration in the doctors’ report A. oF tse ooks excont The See ‘ond Oswald soem to ignore the fact that the FBI reports were based on the re- ports of Sibert and O'Neill, who were [presenta the autopsy; furthermore, that the doctors’ autopsy repors, which was «-tevised or written in final Form the next day, after the phono conversations with Dr. Perry at Parkland Hospital, was for- + warded to the Secret Service, not the FBL As Popkin notes, the FDI reports are phrased in the language of Sibert and O'Neil, rather than the technieal Ianguage of the doctors. Why is it necessary to assume falsif- cation and a plot? Why cannot the third possibility, the unmentioned possibilty =that Commander Humes's explanation 4s the truth—be accepted? It is not even discussed, except by Popkin. Tho al- ternatives proposed by the others in volve citer falsifeation by Humes oF distortion or woree by the FDL And although the FDI is theie favorite whip- ping boy on other aspects of the ease, here they point the finger at ITunes. They do s0, T sugest, because this fis more easily into their theories of eon spirney and plot. And if there war a plot 0 falsity the record, is it inat Dropriate to sek, "Why didn't somebody tell the FDI?" It's interesting to note Epsicin’s com mont that the FBI supplemental re ott implies that the woud fn the front of the neck was an exit wound, caused by a fragment from the ether bullet presumably the bullet which entered five head and fragmented. The FBT sup> plemental report does no such thing. Te relers to a wound of exit caused by a { projectile.” Since Epstein does not 20- vance the theory of shots from the front and wounds of entrance in front, he has o need to attack the FI reports, as do “the others. T have expanded on this entire area because I believe it is typical. It is demonstrable that these books use the same technique in dealing with such matters as the identifcation of the rifle, the proof that it belonged to Oswald, the identification of Oswald, the ques: ing. Oswald’. snarky ship, the descriptions of J. D. Tippit’s murder, the proof that Oswald was pits Killer, the source of the bullet found at the Parkland Tlospital, the jon of how many shots were fied, the sequence of the shots, the number of shots that hit Cavemar Connally, the souree of the shots-frent, rear, oF both=y how Ruby got into police hesdquarters, the alleged relationship Letween Os. wall and Tuby, ete. If one were 0 ‘catalogue the way each of these books troats each of these mattors and to list {he theories put forth by exch weiter as to what happened and who was guilty, it would quickly appear that the pattern fof teatnent reflects the theory ad- ed. This is perfectly proper if it does istertion and contradiction and the easy assumption that all who dis- agree ave either corrupt, dishonest, oF incredible. That is nonethicless the prac= tice. Only Weisberg. is consistent. He Finds malevolence everywhere. ‘Nor isthe Warren Commission without foult. With respect to the inconsistencies the doctors’ satopey reports, the FE ports and the FBL agents’ reports, the ommission had a clear duty. Its obliga- tion wos to inquire into the inconsiste cies, 0 question all who were invelved. Tehad a duty to report the facts and to finelade all of the reports in its own eport. Unlive that of a jury, the fane- tint of the Commission was not merely to render a verdict of “innocent” or silty.” Tis duty was to disclose the nets andl explain ite conclasione. It Ty, LIS leads tothe single-bullet theory “The autopsy doctors reported ti Dollet hac entored the President’ tho ba bove the shouldess and exited through theory is that the sane Goversor Counaly's body throug the baek, emerged it nipple, wont throw his rele sorist, and piovced his sgt thigh; ater Ie fell out, handing first on his streccher 5 anck subsequently on the Moor at Parke schere it was found sind | tothe FB | denco, expert and other- ireetjon, velocity, and iced by Humes’ ond | the face ofc clfect. First Diateh of 1964, # was a fie By: that tine exami then by an amateur named Abroham Zaprveloe ad indicated Governer Con | nally ws Gist it 18 seconds after Presi- dent Kennedy, Experiments with Os wall’s bolt action rifle showed it could, not e fred wits less than an interval of 2.3 sceunels between shots. Tho single-| inallet theory would reconcile this, ‘The | Commission and most of the staff lawyers) wove doubtful about i, as were all the doctors and ballistics experts. Governor insisted he amnust have been bik by a different bullet because he had heard a shot befove he felt the impact of the buller striking, Since a ballot travels faster than the speed of sound, | hhe reasoned he could Lave been hit only, by a second bullet. The:pridence was clear that Kennedy haed been hit by the Fist bullet, ‘According to Bpsteta, after the singde= bullet theory was thoroughly explored ‘dtested, the members of the Ceammnise sion were of divided opinion about it Epstein-reports thatt Commissioner Joli J. NeCloy, who accepted the hypothest and wanted a wanimans report argued | there war evidence bath wien had be struck by the same bullet b of other evidence, the Commission could ot conenr on the probability of this Representative Gerald R. Forel wanted) to say the evidence was “compelling.” Sonator Richard B. Russell, who was} Aoubtful, wished to say mercly that! there was only “credible” evidence) Commissioner MeCloy proposed that th sword “persuasive” be uscd, and this we agreed. The Report states: | yy ose nV findings of the Coramission to mine jst which shot hit Governor Gonmally, there fe very peraaive «ve lence fr the experts to Fedicate that the same bullet which pieverd_ the President's throat nko enuscl Gove | Although 1s rot necessary 12 mor Gonnally's weunde, Tenaiver, | Govemor Connall's testimony and Certain other factors have yoven tse (2 probly, hat thece i no questinn in iat y meralee of the Com ‘te slots dni’s and” Gover nally's weuncls were fice fom the sith {loce window of the Teaas Schl Book Devesitory| Hzed by moat men in all their d | follow the same practice is wieleat. Epstein and athers have 1 fof the fact that this paragraph repre Sents @ compromise in langtage and doce not completely accept the single bullet theory. Tt scems appropriate to ‘comment that rims any decisic port, oF epinion by a court, commission, fr commitiee made up of several inde pendent-minded men or women must wle mucis ter IV of Uie Commission's Repost sste ‘That methos! was dificult Ling forth the ease against Oswald, that of Marina Oswald, ator that of How ! be Epstein alo writes tht jthere could be ma adversary tis Commission counsel Wesley Licbeler, the sauce of much of Estein’s mater ho dishelioved Mrs, Markham, In this Connection itis wortiny of comment several of aur authors have sharply exit Ged both Lieketes und the Genta nthe ground that Liebeler’s exa tion of Mrs, Markham as a witness was {op weak and too friendly and designed nocessarly include compromise lan- ‘guoge winen there ave canfieting items {of evidence. Not until now had [ heard | that this was either wreng, unfair, oF | dishonest. T suuest that this parageaph | find others in the Reports conclusions | only to protect her and her story, Now tend to indicate fafmness rather than the | ws are old he did not believe her. Com- technique of a prosecutor's brief, 2s the mission counsel Norman Redlich, wo ‘commentators claim, | erate the final version of the chapter, i utilized the testimony of all three as “Tiss tings up the whote quertion of credibility of testimony. A theme that fers tea A of tee books fs Ut the testimony of many of the witnesses: relied on by the Commission must be Teheted beduse ison repre tt Mcente were lowered to be Hout oe ae. The stl do et Ett ihe same aaa be appl ce eee et oe open owe ey oly ati eee re Point, It is a general proposition of law, (r her testimony, bit is noe requ do so. The jary may reject so much as is false and aceopt so much as it finds eretlible. This is not a rule solely f Tegal faet-Rnders, but a rule of life, ut making. It is logical avd sensible. Why the Commission did not have a right to Jn this connection the Comm utilization of Holon Louiss Nad teximony kent ying Ona asthe murderer is of interest. There are vious difficulties with hee testimony particularly in the light of Mark Lane's altack on her credibility, However, the rrortios of th ocortled tc Jer, qnoted ly Lane and Siwy: rt support the connsenis by the Dy some of the others that she vs i fn her descriptions of the killer or tht La alecuately entice hielo his love eal Tle never tol Ber the plane tall was being tape-recorded or whom he presented, Both of these matters ave {he mai ases for the vielous attacks on ler exeibilty and on the Commission. “The Commission's Report ave her testi- mony only “probauive™ value. Epwein epotts that Counmission counsel Josep Bail sho, wwrote the fest eralt of support for its conclusion, Epstein malas a big point of this, as proof that the Commission relied on un- reliable witnesses. He ignores the sig- nificant fact that Ball and Liobeler, both of whom had doubts about these wit- nestor, did not disagree with the Com- inission’s conclusion that Oswald alone twas giilty, as shown by other evidence— the ulGmate concern in this. chapter. at every paragraph had to be written sand rewritten until st met the approval ofall seven Commissioners would seem towarrant Bpstein's commendation rath- er than his criticism, . Despite the attacks on thé Commis- sion and the evidence it relied on, there romaine adequate evidence that Oswald ‘vas guilty. If there was another assassin, he loft no trace, Popkia's euggestion of a second Os wald is sheer speculation. The allegar tions of conspiracy are equally tenuous. No. physical evidenes supports the theory that the shots were fied from the railroad overpass or the grassy knoll Tf the shots came frem in front, how does one explain Governor Connally’s wounds? If the FBI reposts are correct ‘concerning the President's back wound, as all of these writers except Popkin oom to accept, the shot must have come from behind, ‘The FBI report would ake indieate that the bullet found at Parkland Hospital fell out of the Pres dent's back daving cardiacmassage. This Dullet was clearly identified as having been fred {rom Oswald's rile, Topkin avoids this implication of Os sult by hinting that Ruby planted tho Daler at dhe, osp frfetched and unsupportable & conjecr tuve as could be imagined. ALLIG ascertainmaent of trath i not easy ‘The adverssey method is undoubedly superior, akhough it has weaknesses. 6 “The Conumision was appoint ue the img of Orval ent Te the ost ofcials in Texas bolieved, as they timated, that Oswald was the sole assissiu, they weald pursue the matter 1 furtiter, Llowerer there were obvious doubis, both ebaat Oswald's guile and {heperformanceet the Dalls police. An instigation seemed called for, Epstein sad others strew the political nature (f this Commision. Any Commission svould, I believs be subject to the saree criticism, ‘Tho Commision had to find the facts ‘At what point woul adversary counsel bbe appointed? Whom would he repre sont? And in what manser? Suppose the ‘Commission fomnd cvidence indicating someone ether tan Oswald was gilty® What procedure would it fellow? And nu would caunsel be appointed or permitted? [Even though Maris Lane's Tegal standing was dubious, since he represented] Oswaldls mother and not his svidow or hie edato, i might have boen Detter if he had been permitted to act as adversary comscl. How this could rave been handled in the light of the Commission's procediares is difficult to cctemnine. Newestheless, a technique should have been devised, The Commnis- sion not only had to be just; it had t0 appear to be just. For the samme reason, the Commission should have heard several other witnes- sesand given amore adequate explana- {ion in its Report of the reasons why it accepted certaia evidence aud rejected ther evidence. OF the conclusions por twlated, I believe the Commission's aro the most credible, and that it mado a caso against Oswald. Whether guilt be- youd a reasomble doubt could have been established in an adversary trial 4s another matter, Marina Oswald could rot have testified. Hearsay teximony ‘would not have been admissible, and advecsary counsel would have ‘been present. However, itis fair to say dhat riuch of the stuff in these bocks could not have been utilized either. ‘As T said at the outser, the extis slso have a duty. They have failed it, Each of them in one way or another suxsesis here was a conspiracy involved. Wels berg asserts, without any evilence in support, that the Commission, “exeul- pated” “Presidential assassins” Again Without eredille evidence Sauvare maintain Uist the the product of a rightavinge racist plot nd that Onwall was lille ay part of ‘Dallas police plet to prevent discoveryof the frst plot. Fos nds Oswald guilty, bt suggests, on the most tenuous basis, that there was a plot in which Ruby and Oswald were involved. Lane makes. a, strong defense of Oswald, points the fin- { ger af Ruby, also on a flimsy basis; and Iikewise suspects a conspiracy. Lane's is the strongest case for Ose wald, He makes some telling points, vvigorousiy an effectively. Rush to Jud: | ment, however, is marred in great meas- ‘ure By name-calling imputations of mo- tive, which remain undemonstrated, and 1y inconsistencies end contradictions in the attack, I have already noted the , forced conclusions he attempts to draw from his tape-recorded telephone con- ‘ersition with Mrs. Markham. Positing 1 second Oswald, engaged in a conspir= acy with the known Oswald to assassin- ate the President, Popkin holds that the second Oswald end a third mon were the real assossins, According to him, the Inown Oswald wasthe patsy; the second Oswald was on tho sixth floor of the ‘School Book Depository, where he fired some of the shots while the third man fired other shots from the grassy knell, Popkin concedes the known Oswald lulled Patrolman Tipit, All this theoriz- {ng atises from evidence that a man who looked like Oswald was engaged in sus- picious activity during the months be- fore the assassination, Because, at the times and places involved, Oswald could not physically heve been present, the Commission found that this activity, at- tributed by some to the known Oswald, ‘was that of some other unknown man, Epstein’s theory is that Oswald was i guily, but he implies a second essassin, ‘Th common theme of the books is con! spirsey and, in effect making it part of | the conspirsey, improper metivetion on | the part of the Commission, Repeated often enough, the charge may stick. ‘Those attempts to sot up doubt, without adequate basis, are dangerous and, on the evidence, unwarranted. Conspiracies havo an objective, What objective was sorved by tho assassination of President Kennedy? And what steps have been taken to carry it out? Nowhere in these books is there a suggestion of an answer. Finally, t should be noted that no fone iss yet been able to produce a seintilla of proof or minute rozson why the Commission would want to ex: spate the real assassin or assassin, if Oswald was even indeed innccent or not alone, Until some credible evidence of this forthcoming, itis inappropriate 60 to hintor assert. Or must we just assume that the Warren Coraruission wished to have the Presidential assassin of assas- sins on the loose? Aoj-2.¢9aF‘Autopsy & ~geon Says Photos. Sup ort , V/arren Report on Wound in Neck thers wata ligiaat contra cicion” “tetwoen Sine autor Nrepore and. we FDI. agent fort Ht erten aruta a viewing” the protograph the contradiction, fan bere solved nce and for il tunes Tm bis book, 3, Epstein cor tended that photogeaphs Imo bat report showed the bate] faice te Erengang: Neancey'd aenet ana shire 9 ches pee inches cic te" ena retgettvely. ‘He argued, these measured meets ‘were: MeviousyInceny stent with ‘the, wand ded Setved te tho utopey reports ike jase, he cals nt avd feecn "somehow. “raised rong tran ste Inches so the fucked hee. ‘could coincide witn wound at the nae of, the nee fot he asserted that “obviously k closed shrtcoliat could not inte butict tncor Rave eon ralsed x Inches ef “Faistheory nes that one tie nese | Hey iced eh bags bo Teas eer Megs tr ihe Treslients neck; F241 Autopsy sketch made dy Dr, J. ‘Thorton Boswell when [the EBA meseircmeia te "e “ove puta Hise anl|cxomiieg Preieat ennai’ body, ended natalon M5. Chen, eo {and then ‘weunced Cov. Jann | at right places o20 of tho bullet wounds at 14 centimeters |, begs osionert Verdlck (Bony et seas ithe from the sight acromlon proces (ip of ho gut eho | atone Warren Reon) ck chest west and Heh. | ‘for Joint) and 1A eenllmeters below the tly ofthe right [ord iets be piled net cary ‘wa Ntarfen vert sald Lner<| ‘mayo process (bony polnt behind tho eur). Dr. Borwelt[dtemutee Me, Bretein tn the cary the sbpie bullet theore “arf sA¥8 te notation Is correct but that the dot marking, /°e% tseue Of Frontier magazines, Radiat winds ececory to the wound was "unintentionally drawn "tno low (ra gouty noc e have Osea any Sreenual Rdinge™ a nonally ~ {mgit awoutd need to have been! Pee ental indinge ree EAPCIUE Twas sirlely a werkinisson Exhibit 385, whiciloniy “avout three inches” ” site eoginuon eld that Lee Shel, he sume as Tough work|shoxrs the dowmware path thel, According (0 VOlUTE 2 of thd Planer, Gowald stene, meses ling’ nates. You could sce hatter is tneuphe to have taken Warren Commision fecurenty: ated ine Percent: ting MEE iooking at ite Ie was Verytirough te resident's nesk/De, Hames reporiea that Xora} ‘including one probable mtss, £1) OttY- Jand they remain “sufficient to,and photorraphs had been madd Including ane prooable miss 1, eble purpose wag to infiluntrats the finding!” De Bor pefore anf during the AUlops7 We sont sopuratap cute dente for the autopay doctor well saa yeaterda Tie en the pnyetetna stay Hats SOME PERMEY: GUE Heh at, forty back—coinga] “Dre Dosweh moked that hin ng the “wound. in the lowed Hens of ming on te oeeclite "that THe. pholographo|dlagram,. whieh" elifers rom pesteror necke of tho’ Peal Have teen ratte 9y cries. Satie 365" Incleded Ns hands dent™ bad “enarsined earful “Be eawal sate yorerday he fenivan ‘notes ‘of the apecitc the. bony structutes tn this! eee fae el ee surgeons neve ety mensurements. These fixes tne vicinity as well az the Xerayo}, See frog Auton, uracons Reve Teb-[ispated wound ab. 1 cenle tn sec 1 Uiere wos any evidcned : ts nid; te accayeetutey me doubt tn out and meters, of €74 Inches, Crom ihe Of fracture or ot depesition of; Frey ot Tne actonsy teperd and eo” cea Ne watt lane eremlon proccss, the tipietaiic tragments" They saw! ee ae py ceca ten te eedent emnedyendloe tha nent meulacr int, angfoens, he al me Sreny-aa to the location of thelege De 24 centimeters below the tip ef| “President iGennedy’s, family! wound, a socvetextd Federat Buel NBME mastoid process Delturned over 14 Str, 29 Bla Sistas hs eegramy Germs, De Besvell sald Federal Bu-locey eine tmmediaely behindjand walle, negatives and talon HExiloit GUT, Dts Hoswellluced by the exitiee were “simply MS, Fm " n [foursineh=by- five inch eolot: sa, Bat cites af the Warreniwrong.* he FT agents pres, ty (Me Bowe Tuaiat” ulerastareas gp the National ‘Commision have elked In argusent “ung the autspey were| ward Jay Epstein tad clea they AMAT OW, et wereldiagram es indicating a wound], A letter vy Durke Marshal Ing that the wound was-farther}"aat (alned In mesic.” Relneher in feent. thas In back |tawyee for | the Prestden ldown the ark, He sald thls! es - Cosnccmen have ental ls fltst Viking Press ed.|cstate, provided for tmmea Rasty work shret,” mado dates Seat eam ney’, Saldlcon, ite, Epstein gave the textsacces! for all Federal inv 2A hed a Yalageamyetsatons Wat took pace auring an, PAL, RINMGEY Teper GOTT ETC ae vor eae werk ere er ne aymmramialdn Wat tok ples daria paced nthe nao arches gay OF Focue: ¥F te Feat Looe ace eee me, e aakonaye The Tepes, Ald ch said medial examination VE Jeats, WAetiial WvesiGad [Ure nates he eon the ear] feport, te bureau sate. "PSY Tnnd reported a bullet enteringy|LCrt Tay ie a a ae Soh Gd Ina i noeumeig | da, the Fepors the eurgeons/th2 President “Just helow hs/ipecie Consent of the Keancey, She Noel: ote, tet acer Revi sseken the ad rhoulders Bantam cation} EFeDatlan Nears Repaiied Ineptetha ecture|tureeens eansludey oat’ nap Prete aged rn POE] _ARGUTZS Gia te aA solt tissues and{ dullct had gone out through ajfepert that sald Dr. Mumes 1o~ Oe cticnattye J He Sete eee eae bn the Mosk whiekenaNfeAtcd. curIAg Une aUlopsy” an! ccorsta Democratic party, J, Th uleed ha eae uk tregoeen asliterated by "an. emors,aTPAreMt Bulet Role "below Uelnal™n. ccucgea peeshdent i 2 do Rat. ConchootvenngecReY.Bpesatlon shouivers” had’ "perounded Prestdent_ ee Wwalvely O56 Warren Commissten pub-| "The end of the opening could] Mi”? ANGEL PCE th 2 Fiseduahemate ane fet Shh the linger tn De oe eaney as ee as -cone vy a Navy medical Mjus-|Humer had offered aa opintenlnsiemea’ Dey Cd ay Tet ts Boks te etaute at the OuRe pony Byer aN EL AST AS mn " Fine Body uel zits Beat “way Con nents mnd verbal descriptions|ed Ms way out of the body durs| 6 ee icecndtee plat now ek ide rime Lack tals, Gwen Dien Dy the autopsy curhng external cardlae massage”) {inscaenae see Ceancdys Hae i pat this ZHVEN im ye antapsy our fing eater car 36 [to wale Georgia, snk age Ue ES. fk apy i fwisabeeausa’ of ia. poullea’ nthe current Eaquire maza-|tarmoll'c muswindlase line, “Biot MEaane a saan ermal, mmenindta we ny REFER ass : Te 2erays and photographs taker} . ‘Guring the xulopsy et eresicent| Kenedy verity’ the iceation of " cusaited. wound at the basc! the tack of his neck. But ¥y| ‘remselves they exnnet end the) ‘gument over 4 Bullets, path} ‘through his body 1 [ING was the opinten yester| laxy aC one autopsy” surgeen| lwite has acen’ the X-rays and Ipretographs, whieh were put} Tete the National Si. Ils also the lof twe ‘invesuipators for the Warren Commission. Tn a telephone interview from Bethesda, hd, DF. J, Tnoraton| Boswell'a.reiuted Navy. com Imander’ now tn private meclcal practice, ald he ard the hic Ritopsy’ “pathotegit, "Capt Hames J. Humes, agree the ple aren eaanst prove the to-sile|vaSic x0? Fost 1 * 20 Nveaber 1966 Dallas ‘Exposés’ Deflatedsporaressaq trina Ty Merriman Smith — Scotts at Monstrous ‘Plow’ Deas if the White House correspond sirous a aqda tort, Herriman Smith of Usted gate nat more bid Somes sore eae avalable for the VETTE YEH Oy ta rte tn ute unn he 2004 Puc i yy sy bok eating (the lat [Foes gelesen ely te gol Femagh ostrsnation kre years age csctnuing dcp intrest in and geat| On ls mov conference Now. Presi "wesday «+ * dent Johnson said he knew of no “new: ys senncan, and ciparaiy’ fF Ut Tao Sonne Ieee an spore JRO aN Anca nd epareniy, SI, Canter at hs dent have [evince in Os moto or ere he abst mystic beet that sere in, Combined fo create o elints Ideal for 16 SONOS Neuane tt was sight that imuch more to be told about the assas | TMOTDrecding, an atmosphere of sup tne esteral wmned over tothe Nations isnaton x Frssient Jobn B. Bennedy./ Port, for. challenging questions ined Arohives should not be displayed fn. (ahs beta hs bento by es iy! at the Warren Commissioa, slmest as Mrvy sewing citela” by People with Mnereasing ‘list of books, magazine ar- ‘if discrediting the investigation might! no serious purpose. . ficles, statements and lectures which! somehow undo the tragedy of Dallas. | (Prior to the President'f constient, challengy proceedings of the Warren, Many questions about the assacsina. |the Justico Depertmeat hid! announced | | Conamist on set up by President John-. oa and the resulting investigation are, |at the pletures and X-rays: Were x |on to investigate the slaying that took, ‘according to US. News & World Re-jamined by the two Nary ‘lectors who |place in Dallas Nov. 22, 1963." port, “nagging doubts reised by enter-|porticipated in the autopoy ond these From ‘is torrent of words spread, prising authors which seem to find an | physiclans sale they corroborated their | ftelbutark's of rumor: that President’ especally receptive audience abroad) testimony to the Warten Commission.) | Kennedy really is alive and the men! “Major Parisian newspapers azsigned top ia nod { jshotdm Dallas was a double; that Lee! men and many columns of space to the | Oswald Pinpoiuted i | Harvey Cwaid had conspirators, even’ subfect The Tins of London has called { FFE COALMISSION, se! up under Mr. | lone or more riflemen who fired at the, ‘for reopening of ie Commission ta-| LL Johnson's Exceutive Order Nov. 29, {same time he did; that Oswald was en| vestigation to exaralue xecently raised 1:03, uuder Chicf Justice Warren, was! |FBE map, a CIA ma, a Russian sny,|’points of criticism, At lesst one Con inteuded to avoid overlapping Ingulies | | Castro agent; that Jack Ruby was a] gressman, Tep. Theodore BR. Kupper! by state and local authorities while ar-| telggerm.n who, with) the bunbilng| man (ea¥), wants Congress to set up| riving at the ruth about the imurder Leip of the Dallas police, ellenceu|,a joint committee to determine whether’! of a President. Composed of men of Oswald, ind so on, into even wilder|'a full-scale legislative investigation of [unsesallable integrity end with the} | flights of speculation.» « | the Commission is warranted. There is|i Goveraments cntine investigative xe-| fu None this mlsture of theory_asd jou that ths willbe cone ij souess at ils command, the Commis Fite soe en a cies) eee emia Se [provable set bt that has wot stepped |The Cenovel Tudictment Aoage topo backou bp by ale talion {the etamoc. . | (:HuTICS OF the Warren Commission |words of supporting testimony and ex-| es {Clineine generally tothe theory tat |Bbite contained in 29 volumes. (A Profi ‘Motive « *. \iemmed seriously in concluding that;| ‘The Commission came to the conclu} ‘OME CRITICS of the Commission,| /Cswald ected aloue in Willing Kennedy; |sion that Mr. Kennedy was kiled by His procedures and findings aro| \that thore was insufficient study of the! {shots fired by Oswald from the Texas | | ite seria selotars whe have dredged | possiblity that others were involrod: [School Book Depository building in | j the ‘volunitous evidenee ¢o assemble |in a conspiracy; that eyen in the brief Dallas—and by these shols alone. [minor fis its what would spesr| prod beween the Kesnedy saying | ia ton mace a€ vor tnd son! to be ane of more larger errors. fad Oswald's ova death, Oswald was} |taking voluminous evidence’ from the other seltapoeinted authors on| deprived of proper counsel; thst reports |FBI, the Secret Service, the CUA and lene cease’ seem to bo cultight entr-| ‘By doctors who performed the autopsy other investigative persoauel of verlag. \preteurs seat on taking a profit from | 0a Mr. Kennedy were changed and pre-i Jutisdieuons the Corunssion could fla 2 sad cituiton, And there seems to be || liminary notes, in one ease, destrosed; ‘no evidence of aly eouspiracy “foreign ‘efit of 1 sert for Just about every || that FBI reports were altered ‘or domestic” Dody who lackles the subject tetweea | (Editors note: Questioning of the of | Afler reviewing the evidence, the book coves or from the lecture plat.) Skial autopsy findings as Tetewed Commission sad that “Oswald octed focm. this month when 63 plotagraphe and | slone”" Furthermoro, despite rumors to Part of this profiteble public accept-| X-rays of the autepsy were turned ever.!|the contrary, it could find xo evidence ‘ance comics from the fact Uist ir. Ken-' to the National Archives by the Ken-'/of a link between Oswald and his ililer, redy cont nues to be a fascinating sub. ody family, Crile objected to the eon. Jack Ruby. Joot to millions of Amerlcans and may ditions aUacbed, which were that the "Mad Oswald lived instead of being more ove:seas. Some publishers ese photos and Xray records auld bemade guavied down by an unstable tenderloin 406 BD-SS47 eSc0Ry aj deta? | | |Character who ciipped Sato the pe station during on exeited, disorganized period, most of the current books prod- ably could not or would not have ‘existed. !Two Main Targets JNA YARIETY of toot and artists, authors have concentrated ehlelly on, what they regarded at two majer: areas of doubt Ossald was an experienced riflemsn {com his days in the Marine Corps. The distenee of the shots—from the sixth floot window of the building to the ‘Kenedy touring ear—would be almost ypoin -blank range for mary competeat eshoo-ers armed with 2 65 Tifle and a {eleszopic sight, Small boys at summer cams ean do equally well on their targ:t ranges using 22 rifles (much less ‘{powsrful than a 6.5) end no telescopic ‘© Credibility. of the Commission’a|‘sish's whatever. conduct of the tnvestigation and the| |. T erator, atch ofthe Ulerary fro validly of ss findings Commissin faiute to disprove thol pessblly of ens or acre confoderetes Having beet ewoctaud wien Osvaly [sfen toe pow of friny seme of tne! shot credited by ballistics experts to} loow i's 09 Nasnlichercareano rule pure ased under an essumed. name Haro 2 Cheago mall order house. ‘Woven around” and through these inain ‘ranches ef ertciim are Det | hes queslons and allegations bnsed fo gr-ntexien on doubis tat Oswald {2 tor aer Marine with a rifle rating of ‘nap tote, could hae been a8 ec crates ho was With an inexpensive ‘all dr rile ands telescopie sich uve bed verteusly Whe elie faving been either ctsstive or dis torte atthe time ofthe gssorsnaten “Autor hee fallowed either ia eling ‘ests mage during te Commis flan nvesigaion te prove” that the” four) ower telescopie sight on Oswald's | Fine vas aly out of line. i My serious amateur target shooter, mary ofthe questions raised about the Suse or cificlty of making the shots} Sti to Oswald are ignorant, ven! |Sity. Even sir to thousands of oe gus rigours is the matter of the sit |Get defective. Tt would have been a3 jopted miracte if the aight had been Cruly accurate ot tne time it was tested | many days after the assassination. | ‘As it wes, Government testers had to rrepaic the sient. Sighted It In HILE THE SIGHT to begin vith ‘was not of the dest quality, there] [Js evidence that Oswald sighted 1 in | Yefore the killing. Ths means that he| went out on a practice range and| | cheeised the voriabilities of the sight | under actual firing conditions "ALer the assassination, the weapon] presumably war thrown to the floor of ‘he 300k Deposiiory and Oswald sled Jn sibsequent investigation, the title oureed around in automobiles of po] Tiee investigators and was handed arou xd by dozens of men on the case Few high-quality sights could have s iver tals. treatment and malntained| thel: pinpoint accuracy. [aver whether Oswald could have mad 4 arksuian Himself AIUST 3¢ his point inject « personal ‘note. In audition to being a pro Kessional reporter assigned to the White House for more than 25 years, have been a hunter and target mazis, man for many years. T am net the world’s greatest shot by any means, ‘but there are some professional experts! ‘who regard mic as being competently familiar with many weapons and thelr Twehavior, 1 I was only a few hundred feet from {ihe dois and wnesner hls weapon nag Zo8” . Kennedy when he was shot ins the capability fs,.to put It charitably, unis formed. A Fantastic Linkage |rpvo BELIEVE come of the theories nut forth in the current wave of anti Commission wetlngs would be to belive that somehow the Chlef Justice of the United State, the FB, the Se- oret Service, leading members of, Con- eres: and. President Johnson himself ente'ed into a monstrous plct to Keep tis ith from the publismer that their iecuve efforts ts investigate the a5 [sassination amounted ¢o ¢0 much sli idity and lack of concera, |, Tt swt possible to deal with every.! thing that has been sald and written! about the Kennedy assassination end: the Investigations of It, but spaie Spe! sciles ean be commented ou. j, MInquest” by Edward Jay Epstein, « fatyearod New Yorker aow ‘wordng on his doctorate in American govern- iment a! Hlavord, is one of the more, [temperate books ‘of the current exop, concerned far more with Commission Tastfinding procedures than with It conelusions | “Inquest” is scholinty, but some, times querulous: The hock caries an, {introduction by magazine writer Rich-| || ard H. Rovere, a frequently pereeptive ‘essayist and ertie. Ke Jumps on Har. | son Salisbury of the Wew ‘York Times| for having written that in the Com-| mission report, *no material question | Femains untelved" ‘Then overe pein out that Epstein says that “at Least one} large question of incontestable mate-| sality=the number of site shotg fired at the presidential parly-—vas never re Solved, not even, astonishingly, to the sallefectlon of the commissioners Uiem- selves" ‘Thus we have a case within a case: Salisbury vs. Rovere and Epételn vs the Commission, While some witnesses reported as many as le choto, tae Com- tnission’s Best Judgment was that Os fwald fied only three times and on Voutier appateatiy went wide of the target. Dallas. I would swear that there were il ree shots and ony cree shots fred at i Bie motorcade. i |) ‘The car in which 1 rede os a press! | astociation reporter was net fa fram the presidential veblelo and in. clear Miew of & We were at the point of “coming OUT Of ai UndoRbasy when the first siot was fired. The sound wae not entirely erisp ond it seemed for a split second like a firecracker, a big one. As wwe cleared the underpass, thero cate; the sccond and third tots, ‘The shots were fired smoothly ond evenly. There was Bot the ellghtest oabt on the froat seat of cur eat that ‘the shots came from a rifle to our rear and the Book Depository at thia poiat ‘was directly (0 oar reas), We remarked about rifla fire before wo knew what had happened to Mr. Keanséy, although wwe had seen him glide from view in the rear of the epen White House ean ven before Mz. Kenuedy's body | reached the hosptal in a eilling, digi; speed dash, T reported from the ear by rasiotclephons tothe UPI Dallas | Dureau that three shots had Deen fired | at the Konnedy precession | KI Was There? { [TAJOE UNTIL we pulled up at the! [JN Paridand Hospital emergency ance a sereaming sila and 7 san | to the side of the Kennedy car did T' know for certain that he was badly) tutte | ‘When 1 baw Bt. Keanedy pitched! ‘over on the rear seat and bleod darken his coat, and Gov. dom Connally] |ot Texas slumped tace up on tho floor} ith brownish red foam seeping from} chest wound, not one hospital! ‘orveriy, doctor of nurse had reacted “the vehicle. Several careless authors ‘would have thelr readers believe fat medical attendants were on the scene t this point. They were not. T was there. ‘Clint HLM, te Secret Service agent ‘who raced from the followup eat to ‘he presidential vehiele to shield the fallen Ieader and hls. shocked wife (Jacqueline, ‘heard enly three. shots Malcolm Kitdutt of the Whita Toure7 press stuff, who was seated beside me {in the front seat of the pool ear, heard only three shots.'t heard only three ‘hols, Now, who knows more about st— Kaward Jay Epstein and Richard H, ‘Rovere or the trained, professioaal ob- iecrvers who were there? ‘Fo. disprove that moro than three lchots were fired would be impossible. INor would St be posable to prove moro [As oost of these books do, “The Secon Oswald” staris with a long intred:etion by a cheerieader for te author this time, New York journal. fst Mi rray Kempton. Kempton says ‘that tk » Commission's investigative and report: ig procestes have heen #0 dis- feredit:d that Its findings are “much Jess p ausible than Popkin's theory,” ‘which ie 40 say, “Two Oxwalds were| than three, beyond a shadow of doubt‘ togetlu r at the Texas Book Deposltory \Therefore the Commission had to set ilo for what the burden of evidence | jshowed—three shots, Yet here is a {point regarded by Epstein and Rovere jas unresolved, Tt is a classic example | lof the almost Puckish.impossibilities Jon which some of the current assassina- ‘tion books are built, ‘There are many other current yor jumes attacking the Commission, its ‘procedures aad findings. One of the} ‘more widely mentioned is “Whitewash ‘—The Report on the Warren Report.”| {and tit each played his part in the] setae ation” Far ‘opkin the philosopher to chat! enge tie Commission report as a docu- iment 1 one thing. For him to surmise certain things contrary to Commission eonduions also would scem fair fenough. But the Professor insists on becom ig « Dallisties authority: “Ite (Oswald had to fire a cheap rite with fs disto ted sight and old ammunition, ata roving target An minimal time, land stooting with extreondinary 2c} jurecy.” while the Cominlesion suppressed a Yast amount of material of paramount importance, there was enough da, the published evidence "to question, if not Overthrow, tie Commission's conclu sions.” \ Satisfying Foreigners | WE OF THE late Presidents close! elends spoke of the current rou! of books recently, asking that ho not te ented, He’dit not want to be coms embroiled én some of the ten. sions within the Kennedy famally con-| cerning stil another ook about the; sstassination, 2 so-called “authorized"| version by William Manchester. n any} ‘ase, this close friend of JFK. sald: | “Vly continue twisting this dagcer’ in the guts of America to satisty Jorge 1 the sensationalisis of other coun. ‘ries? The President was killed by Lee Harvey Oswald, This is the opinion of the Dest pollee experts we haves, Tt vould have been interesting historically fo have had Oswald on a witness stand, ‘The author ty Harold Weisberg, who} This simply is not fact, but_ the, but Were really is no evidence of whlch by his own description ts a Hyattstow, forinion of a college professor. Fact: I am aware that would have, changed ‘Md, “intelligence and political analyst TA weayon's price does not necessarily the basie facts of the matter 1s Well as “an expert en waterfowl indicate tis accuracy, Fact: There 1s n0 ~~ + For Weisberg to be taken seriously ‘evidenc> whatever that the sieht was by other writers isto demonstrate their '*distort:d" when Oswald fired at Mr. Sulek willingness to seize upon almost /ennecy. Fact: Ag to “old emmuni- any line of reasoning as long a3 it cup: {tion.” tie age of a rifle load does not Potts the idea of Commission error, {26eessa ily control its accuracy or omission or coverup. A saraple Wels: ‘berg eoneluston: “the President was shot from Doth front and back Nothing else makes sense, Nothing ol:o is possible, [God alone kcows how meny shots were ified by how many people from how imany weapons and from how many al- Inwetions, But one thing is now beyond |geoton: dere’ way not a singls at power. Not Qaite as Srill NOJHER HEAVILY éxploited and apvarently widely read book “Rush o Judgment” by Mark Lane, who, w th the encouragement of Os" wald’s inother, set himself up as “de- ense ecunsel” for the accused assassin I during the Commission proceedings. |; Bertr'nd Russell and Amold ‘Toyn- | Without depreciating from his puce| bee rea the manusernt and made svg pose aid fierce determination, Weis- Dery seems to ba more of a tealous | pamph steer than a melteious analy [ttisr acing that his beok has reesivd seriou: conssleration by other authors [On th itst-page, he is wrong about [the we ther on the day of the escassine| {ton ad wrong about the makeup ef ‘the Ke medy motorcade in Dallas. With this fer openers, it becomes aliftieut {o accipt some of Welsberg’s other ma- terials gospel. Philosopher's Sirmise NC CHER WIDELY istributed au- 4) vr who belioves that there were two assassins fs Dr. Richard Ht. ‘chairman of the department of phil eophy at the University of Call- fornia branch In San Diego, His book 45 call d “The Second Oswal gestions according to the author. Hugh 1°] oper, a professor. witose eauses Tare mat y in hie native England, wrote {the intr duction, in whieh he maintains {that te Commission case against Os- eald wes wrongly onesided and that Lane, a lawyer and lecturer, was to be commented for pressing, In tke took, his bolic that Oswald's side of the matter should algo be heard thorough. Jy and falrly, . “Whet both sides have been heard, and not before, posterity may Judge," says Troverttoper. ‘The Lane book is better than most fn that it is not quite as shrill as some of the others, Dut again, is technique Is to take tiny variations in evidence before the Commission and build 2 mountain of doubt, Lane believes that 3 | | | ey D0 |- 29 TAF!