What is a JFK Assassination Record and why does its definition matter?

[Roger Odisio]

It's an important question.  When the 1992 JFK Act created the JFK Record Collection to be housed in the National Archives, Congress intended the Collection to be a place where interested parties from all over the world could come to study  what happened that day. 

 

As written, the JFK Act defined a JFK record as information possessed by a  government agency whose release would enhance the public's understanding of the assassination's history.  But that was just a working definition for the purposes of the legislation.  Congress also empowered the ARRB to determine the final definition to be used if the Collection was to satisfy its intended purpose.  Congress realized they needed the expertise of the Board to do that.

 

The ARRB fundamentally changed the definition.  They quickly realized that to meet Congress's intent, the definition of record must be considerably broadened.  They did not want to exclude any information that could enhance understanding of the murder and its circumstances.  They held hearings, sought public participation, issued a preliminary definition, and on June 28,1995 published the final definition in the Federal Register.  The effort was thorough and it took fully 32 months after the Act was passed, which left them only 37 months to identify and pursue records before they closed.

 

A JFK record, the ARRB concluded, was *any* information that could enhance understanding of the event.  IOW, it is the content of the information that defined it as a record, regardless of who currently possessed it or the form it took.  Whether it is currently in the possession of the CIA or your grandmother.

 

Yet much of what you read today reads as if this, the official definition of "record",  doesn't exist. As if the only information left to be learned is that being hidden by the CIA and FBI.  It should be obvious to anyone here there is a lot more to it than that.

 

It is not clear what, if anything, NARA has done to update the Collection in the last 24 years since the Board closed. A few months ago I emailed NARA to ask  what mechanism they had to "determine whether or not newly available records would be declared 'assassination records"'.   They said that issue was "under consideration by the team in Special Access/FOIA reviewing the Collection".  I assume this was part of NARA's review Biden ordered last year when he postponed again the release of some documents.

 

A few weeks ago I followed that up by asking NARA two questions: (1) what have you been doing since 1998 to update the Collection and (2) do you accept recommendations of records to be added to the Collection?  They answered yes to the second question.  Last week at the suggestion of a NARA staffer, I emailed NARA's General CounseI to recommend that the originals of the Darnell and Wiegman films be added to the Collection as JFK Records.

 

It's now important for the MFF lawsuit to press NARA on its responsibility to update the Collection with information that has emerged in the last 24 years, beyond what is known to exist with the federal agencies, and make it available for public scrutiny.  In its email to me NARA has admitted it has such a responsibility:  "If an agency locates assassination records that should have been transferred to the ARRB, it must transfer them to NARA.  If you believe that there may be records outside the custody of NARA that belong in our holdings, we ask that you provide the details to NARA's General Counsel." 

 

Look at that last sentence again.  It's time to think about other JFKA information that belongs in the Collection and ask NARA to include it.

[Lawrence Schnapf]

I sent a letter to the Archivist and its General Counsel in February of this year requesting status of outstanding record search requests of the ARRB, other missing records and other matters. see attached

The MFF complaint includes a count addressing the outstanding record search requests as well as requesting a new search of assassination records. 

Ferriero Letter.pdf

[Roger Odisio]

On 11/24/2022 at 1:07 AM, Lawrence Schnapf said:

I sent a letter to the Archivist and its General Counsel in February of this year requesting status of outstanding record search requests of the ARRB, other missing records and other matters. see attached

The MFF complaint includes a count addressing the outstanding record search requests as well as requesting a new search of assassination records. 

Ferriero Letter.pdf 645.1 kB · 2 downloads

But your NARA letter of Feb 25 is written entirely in terms of records held by government agencies, except for the mention of the Carlos Marcelo tapes.  You cite Chapter 8 of the ARRB final report summarizing the the ARRB's efforts to get records from government agencies, and particularly outstanding requests remaining with those agencies after the ARRB closed its doors. 

But you do not mention Chapter 7 which details the ARRB's short-lived and haphazard pursuit of records from  nongovernental  sources in the 3 years after the ARRB defined the term "record" and it ceased to exist. 

Nor do you cite Appendix D of the ARRB report which defines record to include "all records, public and private, regardless of how labelled or identified" reasonably related to the JFKA. (36 CFR Section 1400.1 (a))  Or Section 1400.3 (g) which explains sources as "persons, including individuals and corporations, who have themselves created or have obtained such records from sources other than those identified in paragraphs (a) through (e) of this section" (mainly government agencies).   

That language pretty much covers the waterfront of information NARA is supposed to collect.  I'm concerned that your lawsuit and the letter that preceded it does not. They appear to be written with the record definition in the JFK Act in mind as to what you are seeking, rather than the expanded, and official, ARRB definition.

Fortunately, NARA has clarified this situation.  They emailed me saying "If you believe that there may be records outside the custody of NARA that belong in our holdings, we ask that you provide the details to NARA's General Counsel."  That is not a personal invitation to me; it's a statement of policy showing that NARA understands what a record is. It's an invitation to you to insist in your lawsuit that NARA pursue all relevant information for inclusion in the Collection, beyond that currently thought to be held by government agencies.

You do mention the Marcelo tapes as nongovernment information to be pursued.  But If your lawsuit is to be relevant to researchers with all kinds of opinions about what happened--other than the mafia did it--you must seek records far beyond that.  Much has been learned in the last 24 years that needs to be made available to researchers.

[Lawrence Schnapf]

Roger- we are asking the court to order the kind of searches and you have suggested.  I cannot get into legal strategy with you on a public forum but can assure you we are on top of theses issues. we have a team of very experienced lawyers who not only know the subject matter intimately but have also examined the law in more ways than you can imagine. You can read the complaint at the MFF website. 

The letter to Ferriero was seeking certain information. Again, I cannot discuss publicly why the letter was drafted in a certain way but the most important and most relevant citations were included. As you can also see, the letter was also sent to the NARA general counsel so he clearly knew well before he responded to your letter that there are assassination records that were held in custody of non-NARA bodies such as the RFK Family trust which represent records seized by RFK within an hour of the assassination, sealed records, records located in Mexico City, etc.       

[George Govus]

9 hours ago, Lawrence Schnapf said:

assassination records that were held in custody of non-NARA bodies such as the RFK Family trust which represent records seized by RFK within an hour of the assassination, sealed records, records located in Mexico City, etc.

Very encouraging response in toto, Lawrence!

First I have heard about the RFK Family trust, and now I wonder what Bobby scooped up.

[Roger Odisio]

14 hours ago, Lawrence Schnapf said:

Roger- we are asking the court to order the kind of searches and you have suggested.  I cannot get into legal strategy with you on a public forum but can assure you we are on top of theses issues. we have a team of very experienced lawyers who not only know the subject matter intimately but have also examined the law in more ways than you can imagine. You can read the complaint at the MFF website. 

The letter to Ferriero was seeking certain information. Again, I cannot discuss publicly why the letter was drafted in a certain way but the most important and most relevant citations were included. As you can also see, the letter was also sent to the NARA general counsel so he clearly knew well before he responded to your letter that there are assassination records that were held in custody of non-NARA bodies such as the RFK Family trust which represent records seized by RFK within an hour of the assassination, sealed records, records located in Mexico City, etc.       

Thanks for your response, Larry.  I have been concerned that in your pursuit of additional JFK records, nongovernmental sources--like those discussed in Chapter 7 of the ARRB final report and Darnell and Wiegman--would not be an important part.

 

Here you say I am mistaken.  You “are asking the court to order the kind of searches and you have suggested (sic).  I cannot get into legal strategy with you on a public forum but can assure you we are on top of theses issues”

 

That is all I can ask.  I understand the enormity of your task.  Good luck. 

 

If somehow I am successful in my request to include Darnell and Wiegman in the JFK Collection, perhaps you can use that in your case.  If NARA has agreed to accept record requests from anonymous members of the public--which I read as an open invitation to you to file requests--it seems a short step for the Court to order them to do their own searches as well to satisfy the intent of the JFK Act.