Jump to content
The Education Forum

John Tunheim Interview


Gerry Down

Recommended Posts

Robbie Robertson has just conducted an interview of Judge John Tunheim of the ARRB as part of his "Out Of The Blank" show. Here are some points that stood out for me:

  • 20 minutes (and 41 minutes): Tunheim says that while the Secret Service destroyed documents while the ARRB were in existence, the ARRB already had copies of these documents and therefore nothing was lost when the Secret Service did this destruction. I had not heard this before and had always been led to believe that we would never know what was on the documents the Secret Service destroyed. 
  • 21 minutes: Tunheim says both CIA and FBI were listening in on LHOs phone conversations. He says both FBI and CIA had bugged the embassies separately? I had never heard this before. Does this mean the FBI have their own separate copies of the Oswald tapes from Mexico City? 
  • 28 minutes: Tunheim says FBI were following LHO as they were investigating him for the Walker shooting? Is Tunheim simply mixing stuff up here or has he inadvertently revealed key information that is on documents yet to be released - that the FBI suspected LHO for the Walker shooting before the JFK assassination?
  • 42 minutes: Tuinheim saw George Joannides personnel file and there was nothing on it Tunheim thought relevant. Tunheim says at 44 minutes that “his file” is still protected and should be released in full. This sounds like Joannides personnel file will be a big disappointment when it is released. 
  • 43 minutes: Tunheim says Joannides was in charge of training some of the anti-castro Cubans as part of the BOP operation. Never heard this before. Again, is he simply mixing stuff up and confusing this with Joannides work with the DRE?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Gerry Down said:

Does this mean the FBI have their own separate copies of the Oswald tapes from Mexico City? 

That would totally make sense, especially when thinking about Hoover's comment to LBJ

"We have up here the tape and the photograph of the man who was at the Soviet Embassy, using Oswald's name. The picture and the tape do not correspond to this man's voice"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting. Gotta check it out! Didn't Tunheim make a statement a while back, that he looked through the files and  there was "no smoking gun?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

Interesting. Gotta check it out! Didn't Tunheim make a statement a while back, that he looked through the files and  there was "no smoking gun?"

Yes. He's made that point over the years.

I've seen other interviews he gives and he has a tendency to mix up points in the JFK case. He obviously has a busy work schedule and cant be expected to stay on top of a complicated case like the JFK assassination. The result though is that I have a feeling he mixes stuff up. Perhaps others on here have worked more closely with Tunheim over the years and can vouch for some of the key points Tunheim made in the video and which i've outlined above in my opening post. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The part where he said two things of why they might be keeping documents 

1. if a name is included and has not been cleared for release but In this case everyone is practically dead. So he said that wouldn’t be the case

2. whatever they were using back then is still used in intelligence operations now so not to expose the secrets of these agencies to foreign adversaries 

Edited by Robbie Robertson
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Color me very skeptical in regard to his points 1, 3, 4 and 5..   as far as the FBI and CIA both involved in access to conversations from the embassies, we have known that for a long time....in simple terms the CIA had the agreements to tap and tape the conversations including a relationship with the Mexican president and his security people.  It appears the FBI took a simpler, non-equipment approach involving bribes and personal relationships to gain access.  Jeff Morley goes into a lot of detail on this in his book on Mexico City and so does Simpich in his monograph on Mexico City. 

As to Tunheim, what I hate to see are sensational, general statements like the ones he gave without the details that would substantiate them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Judge Tunheim from Minnesota oversaw a series of federal level product liability trials back in 2006 to 2007 or 08.

The Johnson & Johnson drug company was being sued be many hundreds of individuals who claimed they were severely injured by their antibiotic drug Levaquin.

Several large law firms all across the country handled many individual cases each.

I was a client of one of those law firms.

The first trial decided by jury found Johnson & Johnson liable and awarded the injured victim quite a large amount of damages.

From there, everything fell apart for the rest of trials and injured parties.

Every jury after the first trial ( six in all ) found Johnson & Johnson not liable for the physical injury damages to those who were prescribed and took this drug Levaquin. Even though they acknowledged this drug caused their injuries!

It's a long story.

Soon after the last of the sixth trial ... my law firm and all the others dropped out of the law-suit effort after all these other juries decided in favor of Johnson & Johnson over injured parties who took this drug and claimed it severely injured them.

Basically, there were members of every jury who decided the claimants should have known of the injury potential of Levaquin as it was stated in their information packets accompanying the drug bottles.

However, in my case ( and in thousands of others ) we were all just prescribed and administered this drug in ER situations without any ability to see and even know of these warning information papers.

I was given 4 doses of Levaquin in a 6 to 7 hour time period after fainting from electrolyte imbalance brought on by a body flu and being dehydrated from this. I had hit the floor head on with concussion and smashed nose and mouth head injuries and was so out of it when I went to our local hospital at night I couldn't even talk or think straight.

The ER doctor ordered the Levaquin pills ( 2 at a time ) because ( he said) he saw beginning symptoms of bronchitis.

I was discharged from our hospital right around 12:pm because the hospital was full ( Christmas night I believe ) and against my pleading begging to not be discharged as I had so many traumatic head injuries along with being incredibly weak from the flu and dehydration as well!

Sorry, hit the road Jack!

3 to 4 minutes after my wife drove me away from the ER and less than 10 minutes after being given my first two Levaquin pills, I fainted in my wife's car. I was revived back at the hospital. They said it was probably a vasovagal episode.

I found out later by calling the Johnson & Johnson information hot line that they felt I should not have been prescribed two Levaquin tablets so soon after being diagnosed with an electrolyte imbalance.

My system was just too weakened by the electrolyte imbalance to handle such a powerful drug.

Levaquin ( same as Cipro and in a class of antibiotics called "fluoroquinolones" ) was known as a very powerful new drug. Too powerful for many. Doctors called it ..."The Big Gun" of antibiotics.

Some have said the administration of Cipro to Gulf War personnel because of the anthrax scare was the cause of the Gulf War syndrome...with serious adverse reactions to thousands.

Many doctors will not prescribe Levaquin or Cipro at all anymore after years of severe injuries being reported by thousands of patients administered this.

Edited by Joe Bauer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you, Joe, for your first-hand story about this complex case heard by Judge Tunheim.  I am glad to learn about Cipro that not too long ago was prescribed for me by my urologist to take for two times a day for three days prior to a minor medical examination.

Judge Tunheim has served as a judge for 27 years. He has presided over or participated in a judicial capacity in hundreds of cases, many of which were complex as that described by Joe. Any case involves at least two parties and many times multiple parties. Lawyers argue to case. Evidence is introduced and evaluated by the judge and a jury is one is sitting. My point here is that Judge Tunheim has led an extremely active life. His position required continuous mental acuity, not physical labor. Think of all that his brain and mind has had to process over the 27 years. It is little wonder if now he might occasionally "mix up points in the JFK case" for work that he did over four decades ago for the ARRB.

The life of an active person who routinely is forced to make decisions countless times each day should be taken into account by researchers.

John R. Tunheim - Wikipedia

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tunheim's claims:

#1 NO SS documents were really destroyed.  NOT TRUE Compare this claim to ARRB's Final Report:

Congress passed the JFK Act of 1992. One month later, the Secret Service began its compliance efforts. However, in January 1995, the Secret Service destroyed presidential protection survey reports for some of President Kennedy's trips in the fall of 1963. The Review Board learned of the destruction approximately one week after the Secret Service destroyed them, when the Board was drafting its request for additional information. The Board believed that the Secret Service files on the President's travel in the weeks preceding his murder would be relevant.

The Review Board requested the Secret Service to explain the circumstances surrounding the destruction, after passage of the JFK Act. The Secret Service formally explained the circumstances of this destruction in correspondence and an oral briefing to the Review Board.

The Review Board also sought to account for certain additional record categories that might relate to the Kennedy assassination. For example, the Review Board sought information regarding a protective intelligence file on the Fair Play for Cuba Committee (FPCC) and regarding protective intelligence files relating to threats to President Kennedy in the Dallas area (the Dallas-related files were disclosed to the Warren Commission). The FPCC and Dallas-related files apparently were destroyed, and the Review Board sought any information regarding the destruction. As of this writing, the Service was unable to provide any specific information regarding the disposition of these files.

The Secret Service submitted its Final Declaration of Compliance dated September 18, 1998, but did not execute it under oath. The Review Board asked the Service to re-submit its Final Declaration.

#2 Tunheim says both CIA and FBI were listening in on LHOs phone conversations in Mexico City. He says both FBI and CIA had bugged the embassies separately. TRUE.

The FBI had its own separate tap of the phone line(s).  See FBI Director Clarence Kelly's book "Kelly: The Story of an FBI Director." 

#3 - FBI were following LHO as they were investigating him for the Walker shooting. - FALSE.  LHO was never a suspect in the Gen. Walker shooting until well after the assassination of JFK.  DPD records contemporaneous with the Walker shooting detail the actual bullet in this shooting was never copper jacketed, and was, in fact, steel jacketed.  These records exist, I have them.  When the WC needed to address the motive for the crime and Oswald's seeming to be confused, shall we say, about his own personal, political ideology they decided he didn't have one and was an equal opportunity lone gunman. The target's political ideology didn't matter to him. See, he tried to kill Gen. Walker.  So, therefore despite an assassination being a political crime JFK's was not a political assassination. That's why Walker's shooting is thrown in here.   

#4 & #5 - George Joannides.  

The ARRB knew about George Joannides and the issues about him.  But, were unsuccessful in getting any good documents on him.  See RIF #104-10336-10020, for example.  Did Tunheim see the file? Probably.  Exactly what file(s) and what was in the file(s) when given to the ARRB is unknown.  I suspect some things were removed before given to the ARRB. The idea that Joannides trained any anti-Castro Cubans as part of the BOP is new to me and as far as I know and without foundation.

Joe

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

James Rothstein was a famed New York City police officer who at one time simultaneously worked as an investigator for the New York State Commission on Crime. In his autobiography, The Way It Was, he wrote:

 
"In the mid to late nineties Rothstein was at a meeting with John Tunheim, who reviewed the files of the House Assassination Hearings to determine what information could be relayed to the public. Rothstein asked Tunheim if he saw Marita's [ Lorenz] boxes of files that had been delivered to the hearings and the files of Frank Sturgis. Tunheim responded that Marita was such a beautiful, sweet grandma but there were no files from Marita or Sturgis. He said that it was not the files that were missing, but the blocks of files that they could not find that surprised him. Rothstein told Tunheim about his dealings with Marita and who she really was. Yes, she was a beautiful, sweet grandma, but she was also a stone killer and assassin. She was known as "My Little Assassin" in various writings."
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Douglas Caddy said:

 

James Rothstein was a famed New York City police officer who at one time simultaneously worked as an investigator for the New York State Commission on Crime. In his autobiography, The Way It Was, he wrote:

 
"In the mid to late nineties Rothstein was at a meeting with John Tunheim, who reviewed the files of the House Assassination Hearings to determine what information could be relayed to the public. Rothstein asked Tunheim if he saw Marita's [ Lorenz] boxes of files that had been delivered to the hearings and the files of Frank Sturgis. Tunheim responded that Marita was such a beautiful, sweet grandma but there were no files from Marita or Sturgis. He said that it was not the files that were missing, but the blocks of files that they could not find that surprised him. Rothstein told Tunheim about his dealings with Marita and who she really was. Yes, she was a beautiful, sweet grandma, but she was also a stone killer and assassin. She was known as "My Little Assassin" in various writings."

Fascinating.  

So Tunheim never saw any files from Marita Lorenz or any regarding Frank Sturgis?

Your New York detective friend James Rothstein personally saw the boxes of these in Marita Lorenz's apartment. He knew they existed. Did Rothstein smell a big fish in this missing file business?

If Tunheim was oblivious to those files...then he was presiding over a seriously truth stripped hearing investigation.

I sense that Tunheim was purposely kept from seeing much relevant evidence. Thus his final assessment that there was no conspiracy...imo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/2/2022 at 3:35 PM, Gerry Down said:

 

20 minutes (and 41 minutes): Tunheim says that while the Secret Service destroyed documents while the ARRB were in existence, the ARRB already had copies of these documents and therefore nothing was lost when the Secret Service did this destruction. 

I'm not sure that's true. Why weren't those records included in the ARRB releases, if the ARRB had copies of them?

42 minutes: Tunheim saw George Joannides personnel file and there was nothing on it Tunheim thought relevant.

I don't think Tunheim has enough knowledge about the case to make that call. There may well be things in that file that Tunheim did not realize were significant. I would trust John Newman to make that judgment, but not Tunheim.

Edited by Michael Griffith
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Joe Bauer said:

Fascinating.  

So Tunheim never saw any files from Marita Lorenz or any regarding Frank Sturgis?

Your New York detective friend James Rothstein personally saw the boxes of these in Marita Lorenz's apartment. He knew they existed. Did Rothstein smell a big fish in this missing file business?

If Tunheim was oblivious to those files...then he was presiding over a seriously truth stripped hearing investigation.

I sense that Tunheim was purposely kept from seeing much relevant evidence. Thus his final assessment that there was no conspiracy...imo.

A police officer colleague of Rothstein in a pink Cadillac drove the boxes of Marita's files to Washington and delivered them to the proper address. Marita accompanied the officer. 

Researchers sometimes fail to realize that documents they cite as evidence had been altered. Rothstein told me today on the phone that the log of the battleship Essex on which he served during the Bay of Pigs invasion was altered shortly after the invasion collapsed. He was told this by a friend on the ship who made the alterations upon an order from the captain. The logs of the other ships supporting the Essex in the invasion were also altered.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...