How was the Warren Commission allowed to change testimony?

[Gerry Down]

The Warren Commission had some mechanism in place that allowed them to change or omit lines from the testimony that witnesses gave. We see this in the testimony of Mrs Kennedy in which they removed some of the more graphic details of Kennedys head wound as well as some unflattering statements from her such as her stating that Connally squealing like a stuck pig.

Another notable example, according to Malcolm Blunts analysis of Allen Dulles handwriting, is that Allen Dulles crossed out some of FBI agent James Cadigans testimony in which Cadigan had said that the FBI took significant quantities of the evidence off the DPD on the weekend of the assassination. Allen Dulles apparently didnt want that going in the public record as it may have looked like the FBI might have been trying to control the evidence - a big problem considering there was a rumor that Oswald was an FBI informant. Here is the relevant Cadigan alteration:

 

Two questions:

1. What mechanism was in place that allowed the Warren Commission to do this? (i.e. Was there a stipulation in writing somewhere in the charter of the Warren Commission that specifically said they could change lines of testimony?)
2. Were the witnesses consulted regarding the changes that were being made to the testimonies? I presume they were consulted and agreed to the changes. 

[Joe Bauer]

Did Jackie Kennedy actually say to the Warren Commission that " John Connally squealed like a pig?"

What I noticed was a pattern of asking questions of many witnesses that seemed almost a purposeful diversion from more important ones in the context of exposing incriminating evidence that in any way suggested the possibility of a conspiracy.

Also, the complete dismissing of reputable news journalist Seth Kantor's Warren Commission testimony about Jack Ruby confronting Kantor and engaging him in conversation while they both were at Parkland Hospital during JFK's treatment there on 11,22,1963.

They actually stated in their final report that Kantor must have misremembered the incident, possibly due to something like hysteria exhaustion ( my words ) and therefore, they accepted Jack Ruby's meandering, disjointed testimony that he was never at Parkland that afternoon.

If Jack Ruby was at Parkland that afternoon as Kantor testified, that fact would have destroyed Ruby's testimony credibility regards his true actions that day.

Edited March 6, 2023 by Joe Bauer

[Pat Speer]

38 minutes ago, Joe Bauer said:

Did Jackie Kennedy actually say to the Warren Commission that " John Connally squealed like a pig?"

What I noticed was a pattern of asking questions of many witnesses that seemed almost a purposeful diversion from more important ones in the context of exposing incriminating evidence that in any way suggested the possibility of a conspiracy.

Also, the complete dismissing of reputable news journalist Seth Kantor's Warren Commission testimony about Jack Ruby confronting Kantor and engaging him in conversation while they both were at Parkland Hospital during JFK's treatment there on 11,22,1963.

They actually stated in their final report that Kantor must have misremembered the incident, possibly due to something like hysteria exhaustion ( my words ) and therefore, they accepted Jack Ruby's meandering, disjointed testimony that he was never at Parkland that afternoon.

If Jack Ruby was at Parkland that afternoon as Kantor testified, that fact would have destroyed Ruby's testimony credibility regards his true actions that day.

I discuss this on my website. They changed certain testimony for reasons of taste. More problematic, IMO, is that the FBI's experts testified on behalf the FBI, and not as individuals. As a result unnamed higher-ups were allowed to change anything they thought might be a problem, without leaving a paper trail. 

[Benjamin Cole]

Not only did the WC change or alter testimony, in internal memos they must have altered content. 

For example, in testimony before the WC, the HSCA, and many public appearances, Gov. Connally stated he heard a rifle shot, was worried about JFK, tried to look over his right shoulder and saw nothing, then began to face forward when he (Connally) was struck in the back and pushed forward.

In internal memos after meeting privately with Connally, the WC said Connally said he (Connally) was shot, and only then turned to look over his right shoulder...the SBT in action.

Of course, the WC version is crazy, as it posits that Connally was shot through the chest and then turned around to look and see what happened....Connally said after being shot he was pushed forward and fell into his wife's lap...a much more plausible version, and verified by the Z film....

I plan a post on this....

[Lawrence Schnapf]

The preface to volume 1 contains the disclaimer that obviously coule be used for substantive changes.

There were many ways that testimony was influenced. For example,

• Pre-deposition interviews to review testimony where WC attorneys told witnesses their recollection was wrong.
• Tellling witnesses they risked federal perjury charges if they testified differently than their altered 302 reports
• Giving the autopsy report to Parkland doctors before their testimony thus poisoning their memories or at least causing them to question their memories and align with the autopsy report 
• going off the record during deposition when witness veered off the preferred path
• ignoring inconvenient responses 
• asking doctors to answer hypotheticals containing facts WC wants to be affirmed 
• asking the black witnesses if they had ever been in trouble with law enforcement

[Joe Bauer]

11 minutes ago, Lawrence Schnapf said:

The preface to volume 1 contains the disclaimer that obviously coule be used for substantive changes.

There were many ways that testimony was influenced. For example,

• Pre-deposition interviews to review testimony where WC attorneys told witnesses their recollection was wrong.
• Tellling witnesses they risked federal perjury charges if they testified differently than their altered 302 reports
• Giving the autopsy report to Parkland doctors before their testimony thus poisoning their memories or at least causing them to question their memories and align with the autopsy report 
•  
• going off the record during deposition when witness veered off the preferred path *****
•  
• ignoring inconvenient responses 
• asking doctors to answer hypotheticals containing facts WC wants to be affirmed 
• asking the black witnesses if they had ever been in trouble with law enforcement

All the above.

[Gerry Down]

7 hours ago, Lawrence Schnapf said:

The preface to volume 1 contains the disclaimer that obviously coule be used for substantive changes.

There were many ways that testimony was influenced. For example,

• Pre-deposition interviews to review testimony where WC attorneys told witnesses their recollection was wrong.
• Tellling witnesses they risked federal perjury charges if they testified differently than their altered 302 reports
• Giving the autopsy report to Parkland doctors before their testimony thus poisoning their memories or at least causing them to question their memories and align with the autopsy report 
• going off the record during deposition when witness veered off the preferred path
• ignoring inconvenient responses 
• asking doctors to answer hypotheticals containing facts WC wants to be affirmed 
• asking the black witnesses if they had ever been in trouble with law enforcement

Thanks Larry. For anyone interested, the text in volume 1 of the Warren Commissions 26 volumes is as follows:

SOURCE: https://aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh1/html/WC_Vol1_0003a.htm

From this I infer that when Allen Dulles made the changes to the Cadigan testimony, he knew that a record would be kept of those changes in the Warren Commissions files, but that those files would not be released for 75 years. 

So at the time the WC report was released in Sept 1964 and the 26 volumes around two months later, Dulles was of the belief his changes would not surface for 75 years. However the 75 year rule was scrapped shortly after all this. Here is how Wikipedia explains the scrapping of the 75 year rule:

In November 1964, two months after the publication of its 888-page report, the Commission published twenty-six volumes of supporting documents, including the testimony or depositions of 552 witnesses and more than 3,100 exhibits ^[21] making a total of more than 16,000 pages.

.....

All of the commission's records were then transferred on November 23 to the National Archives. The unpublished portion of those records was initially sealed for 75 years (to 2039) under a general National Archives policy that applied to all federal investigations by the executive branch of government,^[23] a period "intended to serve as protection for innocent persons who could otherwise be damaged because of their relationship with participants in the case."^[24]

The 75-year rule no longer exists, supplanted by the Freedom of Information Act of 1966 and the JFK Records Act of 1992. By 1992, 98 percent of the Warren Commission records had been released to the public.^[25] Six years later, after the Assassination Records Review Board's work, all Warren Commission records, except those records that contained tax return information, were available to the public with redactions.^[26]

The remaining Kennedy assassination-related documents were partly released to the public on October 26, 2017,^[27] twenty-five years after the passage of the JFK Records Act. President Donald Trump, as directed by the FBI and the CIA,^[28] took action on that date to withhold certain remaining files, delaying the release until April 26, 2018,^[28] then on April 26, 2018, took action to further withhold the records "until 2021".^[29][30][31]

SOURCE: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_Commission 

Does anyone know what year we got access to the changes made in testimonies by the Warren Commission? For example, when did the changes made to Mrs Kennedys testimony and that of Cadigan become available to the public?

Was it as a result of the 1966 FOI Act or the 1992 JFK Records Act?

[Micah Mileto]

9 hours ago, Lawrence Schnapf said:

• Tellling witnesses they risked federal perjury charges if they testified differently than their altered 302 reports

Remember any examples off the top of your head?

[Micah Mileto]

Today I will post my own survey of problems in medical witness wc testimonies.

Edited March 6, 2023 by Micah Mileto

[Paul Cummings]

6 minutes ago, Micah Mileto said:

Today I will post my own survey of problems in medical witness wc testimonies.

Might be as long as the WR itself.

[Joe Bauer]

Did Jackie Kennedy state in her WC testimony that John Connally "squealed like a pig." ?

[Pat Speer]

9 hours ago, Gerry Down said:

Thanks Larry. For anyone interested, the text in volume 1 of the Warren Commissions 26 volumes is as follows:

SOURCE: https://aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh1/html/WC_Vol1_0003a.htm

From this I infer that when Allen Dulles made the changes to the Cadigan testimony, he knew that a record would be kept of those changes in the Warren Commissions files, but that those files would not be released for 75 years. 

So at the time the WC report was released in Sept 1964 and the 26 volumes around two months later, Dulles was of the belief his changes would not surface for 75 years. However the 75 year rule was scrapped shortly after all this. Here is how Wikipedia explains the scrapping of the 75 year rule:

In November 1964, two months after the publication of its 888-page report, the Commission published twenty-six volumes of supporting documents, including the testimony or depositions of 552 witnesses and more than 3,100 exhibits ^[21] making a total of more than 16,000 pages.

.....

All of the commission's records were then transferred on November 23 to the National Archives. The unpublished portion of those records was initially sealed for 75 years (to 2039) under a general National Archives policy that applied to all federal investigations by the executive branch of government,^[23] a period "intended to serve as protection for innocent persons who could otherwise be damaged because of their relationship with participants in the case."^[24]

The 75-year rule no longer exists, supplanted by the Freedom of Information Act of 1966 and the JFK Records Act of 1992. By 1992, 98 percent of the Warren Commission records had been released to the public.^[25] Six years later, after the Assassination Records Review Board's work, all Warren Commission records, except those records that contained tax return information, were available to the public with redactions.^[26]

The remaining Kennedy assassination-related documents were partly released to the public on October 26, 2017,^[27] twenty-five years after the passage of the JFK Records Act. President Donald Trump, as directed by the FBI and the CIA,^[28] took action on that date to withhold certain remaining files, delaying the release until April 26, 2018,^[28] then on April 26, 2018, took action to further withhold the records "until 2021".^[29][30][31]

SOURCE: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_Commission 

Does anyone know what year we got access to the changes made in testimonies by the Warren Commission? For example, when did the changes made to Mrs Kennedys testimony and that of Cadigan become available to the public?

Was it as a result of the 1966 FOI Act or the 1992 JFK Records Act?

Most of the WC documents released post 1964 came through the efforts of Harold Weisberg. He read Jackie's testimony and saw things like "reference to wounds delated" and said "I think we have a right to know what she said." So he sued the government. He won case after case, round after round, with Jim LeSar as his attorney. 

(6-5-64 testimony before the Warren Commission, 5H178-181, with words deleted from the Warren Commission's transcript only to be re-discovered by Harold Weisberg and Mark Sobel presented in bold) “the car was very slow and there weren’t very many people around…I was looking to the left. I guess there was a noise, but it didn’t seem like any different noise really because there is so much noise, motorcycles and things. But then suddenly Governor Connally was yelling, “Oh, no, no, no”…I was looking this way, to the left, and I heard these terrible noises. You know. And my husband never made any sound. So I turned to the right. And all I remember is seeing my husband, he had this sort of quizzical look on his face, and his hand was up, it must have been his left hand. And just as I turned to look at him, I could see a piece of his skull sort of wedge-shaped, like that, and I remember that it was flesh colored with little ridges at the top. I remember thinking he just looked as if he had a slight headache. And I just remember seeing that. No blood or anything. And then he sort of did this (indicating), put his hand to his forehead and fell in my lap. And then I just remember falling on him and saying, “Oh no, no, no,” I mean, “Oh my God, they have shot my husband.” And “I love you, Jack,” I remember I was shouting. And just being down in the car with his head in my lap. And it just seemed an eternity. You know, then, there were pictures later on of me climbing out the back. But I don't remember that at all." (When asked if she remembered Secret Service Agent Clint Hill's climbing onto the limo after she climbed out the back.) "I don't remember anything. I was just down like that. And finally I remember a voice behind me, or something, and then I remember the people in the front seat, or somebody, finally knew something was wrong, and a voice yelling, which must have been Mr. Hill, "Get to the hospital," or maybe it was Mr. Kellerman, in the front seat. But someone yelling. I was just down and holding him. I was trying to hold his hair on. But from the front there was nothing. I suppose there must have been. But from the back you could see, you know, you were trying to hold his hair on, and his skull on.” (When asked how many shots were fired) “Well there must have been two because the one that made me turn around was Governor Connally yelling. And it used to confuse me because first I remembered there were three and I used to think my husband didn’t make any sound when he was shot. And Governor Connally screamed like a stuck pig. And then I read the other day that it was the same shot that hit them both. But I used to think if I only had been looking to the right I would have seen the first shot hit him, then I could have pulled him down, and then the second shot would not have hit him. But I heard Governor Connally yelling and that made me turn around, and as I turned to the right my husband was doing this (indicating with hand at neck). He was receiving a bullet. And those are the only two I remember.”

 

[Pat Speer]

5 hours ago, Joe Bauer said:

Did Jackie Kennedy state in her WC testimony that John Connally "squealed like a pig." ?

No. She said he screamed like a stuck pig

[Gerry Down]

25 minutes ago, Pat Speer said:

Most of the WC documents released post 1964 came through the efforts of Harold Weisberg. He read Jackie's testimony and saw things like "reference to wounds delated" and said "I think we have a right to know what she said." So he sued the government. He won case after case, round after round, with Jim LeSar as his attorney. 

Did Harold Weisberg write or give a chronology of documents he got released via the FOI mechanism in any of his books? I have only read one of his books - "Oswald In New Orleans". Its been a while since I read that book so I cant quiet remember if he mentioned his FOI work in that but since that book was released in 1967 his FOI work is likely to hardly be mentioned at all in it. Other books by him include:

• Whitewash 4 was released in 1972. 
• Post Mortem was released in 1975. 
• Never Again!: The Government Conspiracy in the JFK Assassination was released in 1995.

I guess "Never Again!" was probably Harold Weisbergs last book and the most likely to contain a synopsis of key documents he got released? Anyone read this book? Is "Never Again!" somewhat of an autobiography of his work on the JFK case?

 

[Pat Speer]

1 minute ago, Gerry Down said:

Did Harold Weisberg write or give a chronology of documents he got released via the FOI mechanism in any of his books? I have only read one of his books - "Oswald In New Orleans". Its been a while since I read that book so I cant quiet remember if he mentioned his FOI work in that but since that book was released in 1967 his FOI work is likely to hardly be mentioned at all in it. Other books by him include:

• Whitewash 4 was released in 1972. 
• Post Mortem was released in 1975. 
• Never Again!: The Government Conspiracy in the JFK Assassination was released in 1995.

I guess "Never Again!" was probably Harold Weisbergs last book and the most likely to contain a synopsis of key documents he got released? Anyone read this book? Is "Never Again!" somewhat of an autobiography of his work on the JFK case?

 

A lot of his correspondence re his FOIA cases are available at the Weisberg Archives website. I don't think they are in chronological order. But there's a heap of it. He does mention some of his FOIA cases in Post Mortem, mostly regarding bullet lead analysis.