FBI agent James Sibert talks about JFK's wounds and the autopsy

[David Lifton]

On 2/11/2021 at 8:18 PM, Micah Mileto said:

In Jenkins' original HSCA and Lifton interviews, there is no record of him mentioning anything about seeing a brain in the cranium, or the story about the pre-cut brainstem.

That is correct.  When I first interviewed Jenkins by phone (fall, 1980), he had no recollection of any such details, just as you have stated.  Then, I interviewed him on camera; the result was the same.  Keep in mind the chronology:  I interviewed Paul O'Connor, on film, in late August 1980.  In late Sept (or early October) I interviewed James Jenkins --who was distantly related to Paul O'Connor.  James Jenkins had nothing specific to offer, except a feeling that things 'weren't right' that night.  I remember asking him why, if he felt that way, he didn't communicate with someone at the Department of Justice, or even write a letter directly to Attorney General Robert Kennedy.   He had no answer.  I questioned him vigorously, to such an extent that his wife, Jackie, who was present, took me aside during a brief pause (when we were changing film reels) and mildly scolded  me for treating  her husband that way.  i explained that I was only trying to elicit the information he seemed to indicate he might have, but could not (for whatever reason) articulate.

 When the footage was edited, Paul O'Connor's account  played a major role.  He was forthright, and extremely credible; I called him the "John Wayne" of the film.

 Best Evidence was published in mid-January 1981; and then I went on a national book tour, showing excerpts from my filmed O'Connor interview in cities all over the country. 

Now "Flashforward" to many years later: At some point in time, along came William Law, who sought my assistance in contacting one of the B. E. witnesses.   At some point in time --and I don't know the details-- Law met Jenkins who, I came to understand (because of a conversation with O'Connor) --was rather envious of the publicity (and, to some extent) the notoriety that Paul had received.   At this point, Jenkins' recollections seem to have blossomed, and that's about all I know.  

I would remind readers that in the law, its the "earliest recollection" that is viewed as the "better" evidence.  Paul O'Connor was forthright, and what he had to say was put on the record.  I have no idea as to why, if Jenkins had significant information, he did not volunteer it, when I first interviewed him, by phone; or the following year, when i spent a good hour with him, on camera.

DSL (3/8/21; 2:30 AM PST) 

Edited March 8, 2021 by David Lifton

[David Lifton]

On 2/11/2021 at 8:18 PM, Micah Mileto said:

In Jenkins' original HSCA and Lifton interviews, there is no record of him mentioning anything about seeing a brain in the cranium, or the story about the pre-cut brainstem.

My first (and only) telephone interview with James Jenkins (the Bethesda med tech) occurred in late September 1979 (I am doing this from memory).  The main point I would like to make (about Jenkins) is that -- in Sept. 1979 --he didn't remember very much --if anything--that was relevant.  I didn't think of this as being sinister. 

Jenkins just didn't remember. When I had arranged for funding for filmed interviews, I put Jenkins (who lived north of San Antonio) on the list.   I flew to Canyon Lake[s], Texas, and that's where I interviewed Jenkins, on camera, around midnight, at his lakeside residence.

 Just about everything I asked was met with the response that he didn't remember.  His wife, Jackie, was present, and very understanding.  During a brief intermission (pauses that occurred when we were changing film reels --each of which took an 11 minute cartridge) she took me aside and asked (basically): "Why are you treating James this way?"  My response was that I wasn't trying to be impolite, just trying to question him as firmly as possibly, and elicit whatever he remembered. And yet here he was--in effect, answering "I don't remember" ---to just about everything (except his name).  It was only years later, under the "tutelage" (quotes deliberate) of William Law, that his recollections (supposedly) blossomed.

One other matter: during my question implied  that he knew things "weren't right."   I specifically asked him: if that was the case, then why didn't he go to the DOJ, or write Robert Kennedy a letter?

IMHO: the whole thing (the Law and Jenkins "recovered memory" show, or however may wish to describe it) results in a totally unreliable version of what happened on the night of 11/22/63, at the Bethesda morgue.  If this were a legal proceeding, and anyone tried to introduce Jenkins' so-called "recollections" this many years after the fact, they would be laughed out of court.   I say this because it is so obvious that there is a "prior recollection" --the phone record (that I made) and the filmed record that I made establishes that.

All this pains me because I see many well meaning people on the London Forum addressing serious questions to Jenkins, not knowing of this history.  IMHO: the essence of what is going on here is this: I interviewed Paul O'Connor, first by phone, and then on camera.  PKO (I always called him that in my research notes) was a strong witness; and he became the "John Wayne" of the film.   

Then, in January 1981, B.E. was published, and I was on my national book tour, airing the O'Connor footage on numerous occasions. At some point, Jenkins --possibly because of envy of O'Connor (to whom he is distantly related) --and, years later,  possibly egged on (or "stimulated") by William Law ) -- "found" his memories.  Voila!.  William Law (via Jenkins) was then able to launch his career as a JFK researcher. 

My own reaction to all of this (and particularly, my advice to anyone studying the medical evidence in this case):  Beware, at this late date, of anything coming from James Jenkins, via William Law.  True history is not -- or ought not to be --"staged theater."  Take into account what I have written here, and be skeptical of anything Jenkins now "remembers".  IMHO: These are not reliable recollections; they are some mangled mish-mash of "recovered memory", plus a desire to appear important in history--as important as Paul O'Connor, to whom he is distantly related, and with whom -- and for whatever reason --he feels "competitive".  

I post these remarks with some regret.  I am pleased to see a "new generation" involved in JFK research.  I would advise caution in taking seriously anything that emerges decades later, especially launched under the guidance of a third party. 

DSL (3/8/2021)

Edited October 7, 2021 by David Lifton

[Joe Bauer]

8 hours ago, David Lifton said:

My first (and only) telephone interview with Jenkins occurred in late September 1979 (I am doing this from memory).  The main point I would like to make (about Jenkins) is that he didn't remember very much --if anything--that was relevant.  I didn't think of this as being sinister. 

Jenkins just didn't remember. When I had arranged for funding for filmed interviews, I put Jenkins on the list.   I flew to Canyon Lake[s], Texas, and that's where I interviewed Jenkins, on camera, around midnight, at his lakeside residence.

 Just about everything I asked was met with the response that he didn't remember.  His wife, Jackie, was present, and very understanding.  During a brief intermission (pauses that occurred when we were changing film reels --each of which took an 11 minute cartridge) she took me aside and asked (basically): "Why are you treating James this way?"  My response was that I wasn't trying to be impolite, just trying to question him as firmly as possibly, and elicit whatever he remembered. And yet here he was--in effect, answering "I don't remember" ---to just about everything (except his name).  It was only years later, under the "tutelage" (quotes deliberate) of William Law, that his recollections (supposedly) blossomed.

One other matter: during my questionin  seemed to imply that he knew things "weren't right."   I specifically asked him: if that was the case, then why didn't he go to the DOJ, or wrote Robert Kennedy a letter.

IMHO: the whole thing (the Law and Jenkins "recovered memory" show, or however may wish to describe it) results in a totally unreliable version of what happened on the night of 11/22/63, at the Bethesda morgue.  If this were a legal proceeding, and anyone tried to introduce Jenkins' so-called "recollections" this many years "after the fact," they would be laughed out of court.   I say this because it is so obvious that there is a "prior recollection" --the phone record and filmed record that I made establishes that.

All this pains me because I see many well meaning people on the London Forum addressing serious questions to Jenkins, not knowing of this history.  IMHO: the essence of what is going on here is this: I interviewed Paul O'Connor, first by phone, and then on camera.  PKO (I always called him that in my research notes) was a strong witness; and he became the "John Wayne" of the film.   

Then, inJanuary 1981, B.E. was published, and I was on my national book tour, airing the O'Connor footage on numerous occasions. At some point, Jenkins --possibly because of envy of O'Connor (to whom he is distantly related) --and, years later,  possibly egged on (or "stimulated") by Law ) -- "found" his memories.  Voila!.  William law (via Jenkins) was then able to launch his career as a JFK researcher. 

My own reaction to all of this, and particularly, my advice to anyone studying the medical evidence in this case:  Beware, at this late date, of anything coming from Jenkins, via William Law.  Take into account what I have written here, and be skeptical of anything Jenkins now "remembers".  IMHO: These are not reliable recollections; they are some mangled mish-mash of "recovered memory", plus a desire to appear important in history--as important as Paul O'Connor, to whom he is distantly related (and with whom --for whatever reason --he feels rather "competitive").  

I post these remarks with some regret.  I am pleased to see a "new generation" involved in JFK research.  I would advise caution in taking seriously anything that emerges decades later, especially launched under the guidance of a third party. 

 

DSL (3/8/2021)

I have watched many interviews of interesting historical figures ( notorious and not ) conducted by Patrick Bet-David and found them very compelling.

I found his interview of James Jenkins compelling as well, yet I also sensed just enough discrepancies on the part of Jenkins recollections regarding his participation and observations in the Bethesda Naval morgue to consider them with important questions. 

Not the least of which were ones that differed from his fellow Navy corpsman Paul O'Conner's accounts.

Jenkins mentions ( at least in one account) that he kind of thought the brain he was handed ( supposedly JFK's ) seemed smaller than normal. He even states he had at least a fleeting thought that maybe the brain he was handed might not have been JFK's?

Jenkins mentioned a severed brain stem, cut on both sides? As if this was a suspicious anomaly?

Jenkins holds a model brain in his Patrick Bet-David interview and explains what part of JFK's was missing and how much of it was ( a little less than a third ) and says the rest of the brain looked somewhat normal?

In another interview didn't Jenkins mention Humes stating that JFK's brain just fell out of JFK's skull and into his ( Humes's ) hands? Didn't Jenkins also once describe how a brain could turn into mush if it had been internally obliterated by a through and through high powered bullet as JFK's had?

I don't think about or question Jenkin's personal character. Seems fine to me. 

However, he seems much less sure about his recollections than his fellow right there next to JFK's body corpsman Paul O'Conner who was stating his observations ( and never wavering from them or changing them ) for years from way back before Jenkins ever started to share his, Also, at a time when they would have been sharper and easier to recollect imo.

And O'Conner wasn't afraid to share his detailed recollections even under sworn oath!

The JFK brain testimony is all over the map. Humes states he didn't weigh the brain and Jenkins stated neither he nor Boswell did either. Humes didn't even have an answer as to why JFK's brain wasn't weighed. JFK's brain goes missing completely?

O'Conner stated JFK's brains were basically fully gone from the skull all during the observation room autopsy.

JFK's brain, it's handling, study, removal, weighing and storage record is simply so corrupted and even obliterated it renders the official autopsy finding totally useless.

And validates total suspicion of the entire procedure ... in spades.

 

 

 

Edited March 8, 2021 by Joe Bauer

[Micah Mileto]

On 3/8/2021 at 3:46 AM, David Lifton said:

 

Are you aware of this interesting bit from Gorge Michael Evica's 1992 video Research Vs Witness: Questioning The Facts

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yKp88UKvaP0&t=100m22s

 

George Michael Evica: I have never talked about forgeries, Francis X. O'Neill. Only you have talked about forgeries and doctored photographs.

 

O'Neill: Because I heard you say it, George.

 

George: Not on this show, Francis.

 

O'Neill: Probably not on this show.

 

George: Nor on any other show.

 

O'Neill: Probably- probably up in New Hampshire when we were discussing afterwards-

 

George: We talked about doctored photos- oh, I also-

 

Francis: Ohh...

 

George: Want to talk about afterwards, Francis? That you talked to six lawyer- interns at the Franklin Pierce Law Center and you admitted there was a decoy ambulance to them when I was standing next to you?

 

O'Neill: Did I say that?

 

George: Yes you did.

 

Francis: (inaudible)

 

George: But that was off camera, Francis.

 

O'Neill: Do you have it on record, George?

 

George: Do you have it on record, Francis?

 

O'Neill: No, I have nothing on record-

 

George: Now can I ask you the question again?

Edited August 31, 2021 by Micah Mileto

[David Lifton]

On 8/31/2021 at 11:18 AM, Micah Mileto said:

Are you aware of this interesting bit from Gorge Michael Evica's 1992 video Research Vs Witness: Questioning The Facts

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yKp88UKvaP0&t=100m22s

 

George Michael Evica: I have never talked about forgeries, Francis X. O'Neill. Only you have talked about forgeries and doctored photographs.

 

O'Neill: Because I heard you say it, George.

 

George: Not on this show, Francis.

 

O'Neill: Probably not on this show.

 

George: Nor on any other show.

 

O'Neill: Probably- probably up in New Hampshire when we were discussing afterwards-

 

George: We talked about doctored photos- oh, I also-

 

Francis: Ohh...

 

George: Want to talk about afterwards, Francis? That you talked to six lawyer- interns at the Franklin Pierce Law Center and you admitted there was a decoy ambulance to them when I was standing next to you?

 

O'Neill: Did I say that?

 

George: Yes you did.

 

Francis: (inaudible)

 

George: But that was off camera, Francis.

 

O'Neill: Do you have it on record, George?

 

George: Do you have it on record, Francis?

 

O'Neill: No, I have nothing on record-

 

George: Now can I ask you the question again?

DSL Note, 10/4/21- 5 p.m.   Sibert was always straightforward with me.  He lived up to my image of an honorable FBI agent.  He told the truth, as he perceived it.  O'Neill offered quite a contrast.  Resentful (of both me, and my book).  Wearing the "image of the FBI" on his sleeve.  Sibert was a witness to history; O'Neill seemed concerned about his own ego, and reputation.

Edited October 7, 2021 by David Lifton
Correcting an incorrect word.

[David Lifton]

53 minutes ago, David Lifton said:

DSL Note, 10/4/21- 5 p.m.   Sibert was always straightforward with me.  He lived up to my image of an honorable FBI agent -- right out of "The FBI Story."  Agent Sibert  told the truth, as he perceived it.  Francis X. O'Neill ("FXO") offered quite a contrast.  Resentful (of both me, and perhaps my book).  Wearing the "image of the FBI" on his sleeve.  Sibert was a witness to history; O'Neill seemed concerned about his own ego, and reputation.

O'Neill had an almost visceral dislike of me, and my book.  To maneuver around this, I accepted the offer of a graduate student who, for some reason, had "good chemistry" with O'Neill.  So this student was my proxy, when it came to questioning FXO.

Re Agent Frank O'Neill at the George Michael Evica event: No, I didn't learn about that event until some time later.  FWIW:  I did not know  Evica. One reason, I suppose, was that I was located in Los Angeles; he, in Connecticut. I wish I had visited him, on one of my trips "east," to visit my folks. (I ordered his book, but "very late in the game.")

Edited October 5, 2021 by David Lifton
Adding relevant details.

[Micah Mileto]

23 hours ago, David Lifton said:

O'Neill had an almost visceral dislike of me, and my book.  To maneuver around this, I accepted the offer of a graduate student who, for some reason, had "good chemistry" with O'Neill.  So this student was my proxy, when it came to questioning FXO.

Re Agent Frank O'Neill at the George Michael Evica event: No, I didn't learn about that event until some time later.  FWIW:  I did not know  Evica. One reason, I suppose, was that I was located in Los Angeles; he, in Connecticut. I wish I had visited him, on one of my trips "east," to visit my folks. (I ordered his book, but "very late in the game.")

O'Neill was almost certainly lying when he described staying at the autopsy long enough to see the restoration

 

https://www.rareddit.com/r/JFKsubmissions/comments/drvi5r/discussing_jfks_torso_wounds_part_24_oneills/

[David Lifton]

On 2/1/2021 at 7:23 AM, Pete Mellor said:

Did he witness the type of casket that JFK's body was in?

In David Lifton's 'Best Evidence' Sibert's report states:-"When the body was removed from the coffin and the wrapping taken off".

Did he ever describe the Dallas coffin or a shipping casket?

DSL: Didn't he write -- that the body was removed "from the casket in which it had been transported"?

 

 

[David Lifton]

On 10/5/2021 at 5:01 PM, Micah Mileto said:

O'Neill was almost certainly lying when he described staying at the autopsy long enough to see the restoration

 

https://www.rareddit.com/r/JFKsubmissions/comments/drvi5r/discussing_jfks_torso_wounds_part_24_oneills/

 

4 minutes ago, David Lifton said:

DSL: Didn't he write -- that the body was removed "from the casket in which it had been transported"?

DSL #2: I believe --but am not 100% certain --that O'Neill said they left shortly after midnight.  (Didn't I address this -- the "exit time" -- in B.E.? (Not sure).

 

 

[David Lifton]

On 2/3/2021 at 5:39 PM, Micah Mileto said:

What special does this clip come from?

I was either quoting from a document, or offering my own opinion.  (Nothing about any movie.)

[David Lifton]

On 2/4/2021 at 7:19 PM, Vince Palamara said:

David, I was very impressed with your appearance here. You did a brilliant job! Excellent!

David Lifton Project (Author, Researcher of "Best Evidence") - YouTube

Thanks!  DSL

[Micah Mileto]

9 hours ago, David Lifton said:

 

 

Yeah, Sibert and O'Neill couldn't have stayed any later than 12:00 AM, and we know the restoration of the body lasted until around 3:30 AM. O'Neill couldn't be telling the truth when he described seeing Kennedy laying in his casket fixed up to look like he was sleeping.

Edited October 7, 2021 by Micah Mileto

[Micah Mileto]

On 2/11/2021 at 3:39 PM, Pete Mellor said:

Transcription of presentation given by Bethesda witness Jim Jenkins with researcher William Law, given at the ‘November in Dallas’ ‘JFK Lancer’ conference at the Adolphus Hotel on Friday 22nd  November  2013. 

 

 

Thanks for posting! Is there a longer transcript?

[Pete Mellor]

On 3/11/2022 at 8:36 PM, Micah Mileto said:

Thanks for posting! Is there a longer transcript?

Micah, sorry for the long delay in replying, I've been in hibernation.  At the time (2013) at Lancer I recorded all of the presentations which I down loaded onto a laptop, which has since been replaced with updated machine.  I'll have to go back & double check but from memory I think that was the full transcript.  Jenkins & Law had run over time with their presentation & I seem to recall Debra Conway calling a halt to a Q. & A. session which occurred after Jim's controversial statement that he thought JFK's brain had been removed prior to autopsy!!

[Pete Mellor]

On 3/11/2022 at 8:36 PM, Micah Mileto said:

Thanks for posting! Is there a longer transcript?

No longer transcript.  Duig out the old Windows 7 laptop with the Jenkins recording.  I was pretty much correct that effectively Jim's presentation finished as per transcript above.  He just gave a brief overview of his Naval medical education qualifications & an attempted Q. & A. session was aborted due to time restrictions.