How was the Warren Commission allowed to change testimony?

Leslie Sharp · March 7, 2023

18 hours ago, Tom Gram said:

This is a bit off topic but worth mentioning. Paul Bentley went directly from the Tippit murder scene, where he collected fingerprints from Tippit’s cruiser, to the Texas Theater where he was directly involved in the arrest of Oswald.

According to Bentley’s report on the arrest, he went straight to the balcony and ordered the lights turned on, then headed downstairs just in time to assist McDonald in subduing Oswald before any other officers got there. Bentley subsequently sat right next to Oswald in the back seat of the cruiser on the ride back to City Hall, and was the first law enforcement official to look through Oswald’s wallet. Bentley also 1) initialed the revolver before it was turned over to homicide, even though he never officially handled the gun; 2) told the press on Saturday the exact same story that was later adopted by McDonald about preventing a misfire with his hand - and even claimed that he got a bruised hand from it; and 3) claimed that he personally turned over Oswald’s identification to Lt. Baker in homicide. Bentley was also the head of the DPD polygraph division.

The WC got away with pretending Bentley didn’t even exist, despite his gigantic initials P.B. appearing on the butt of the revolver. He was never deposed, his key role in the arrest and chain of custody of the revolver was never acknowledged, and his story about the alleged misfire was never investigated, even after the WC heard expert FBI testimony that could’ve corroborated Bentley’s story about getting a hand injury.

I’m falling asleep, but my point is that if the WC failed to depose guys like Bentley, not to mention some of the closest witnesses to the assassination in Dealey Plaza, is it really that surprising that they never called Bardwell Odum?

I agree, Tom. Bentley is another example.

Odum is of particular concern as he is the primary candidate for "caretaker" identified in the 1963 datebook maintained by Pierre Lafitte.

Lawrence Schnapf · March 8, 2023

@Leslie Sharp ethically, it is more problematic for an attorney to suborn perjury which is what many of the WC staff attorneys effectively did.

Leslie Sharp · March 8, 2023

17 hours ago, Lawrence Schnapf said:

@Leslie Sharp ethically, it is more problematic for an attorney to suborn perjury which is what many of the WC staff attorneys effectively did.

I happen to be reviewing last year's thread related to the Robert Adams' phone calls to the Paine household and her subsequent WC testimony. It seems to me that in some instances it wasn't necessary to alter the record of the testimony but rather, as Jenner did, simply botch the entire line of questioning.

Micah Mileto · March 10, 2023

On 3/6/2023 at 7:39 AM, Paul Cummings said:

Might be as long as the WR itself.

3 days late, sorry.

The Warren Commission did not attempt to make a full list of every person who reportedly witnessed the wounds in Kennedy’s body. Neither would the House Select Committee on Assassinations.

Almost none of the Parkland staff, in their Warren Commission testimonies, were asked on the record whether they desired to bring legal representation. Only Dr. Robert Shaw, who treated Governor Connally, was asked on the record in his second testimony on 4/21/1964, “Do you desire an attorney to be with you?”, to which he declined (W C Vol. 4, pp . 10 1-11 7 [text]).

Most of the witnesses did not gave a full list of their interactions with the news media or other private entities. Nurse Diana Bowron acknowledged her appearance in 3 newspaper articles, copies of which became Warren Commission exhibits printed in the volumes (The Observer, 11/23/1963, British nurse there [link]; Daily Mail, 11/23/1963, British girl for Kennedy by Sydney Brennan [link]; The Mirror, 11/23/1963, Thirty minutes Diana will never forget [link]; WC Vol. 6, pp. 134-139, 3/24/1964 testimony of Diana Bowron [text]). Bowron was asked in her 3/24/1964 testimony “...does that constitute all the stories which appeared about your participation in this event?”, to which she replied “Yes” (WC Vol. 6, p p . 13 4-13 9 [text]). Indeed, there does not appear to have been any more public information on JFK’s wounds from Nurse Bowron at that time. Dr. Kemp Clark acknowledged participating in five press conferences (WC Vol. 6, p p . 1 8-30, 3/21/1964 testimony of Dr. Clark [text]), and Perry acknowledged participating in at least two conferences (WC Vol. 6, p p . 7-18, 3/25/1964 testimony of Dr. Malcolm Perry [text]; WC Vol. 3, p p . 35 7-366, 3/30/1964 testimony of Dr. Charles Carrico [tex t]; WC Vol. 3, p p . 36 6-390, 3/30/1964 testimony of Dr. Malcolm Perry [text]). Perry didn’t mention some of his other interactions with other private entities, such as shown in the 11/24/1963 article in the New York Herald Tribune, A Death in Emergency Room One by Jimmy Breslin (Link [link 2]), or the 11/24/1963 Boston Globe article, Doctor Eating... Then Came Call by Herbert Black (Link). At least 2 other reporters claimed to have interviewed Perry at the time – Connie Kritzberg (JFK: Secrets from the Sixth Floor Window by Connie Kritzberg, 1995; Dealey Plaza Echo, Vol. 1, Issue 3, Nov. 1999, pp. 10-17, A Personal Story: Report the Death of a President, by Connie Kritzberg [link 2] [link 3]; The Men Who Killed Kennedy, episode 7, The Smoking Guns, 2003, 6:18 [link 2]) and Martin J. Steadman Eve's Magazine, 2013, 50 Years from that Fateful Day in Dallas... by Martin J. Steadman). Kritzberg also claimed to have interviewed Dr. Clark (JFK: Secrets from the Sixth Floor Window by Connie Kritzberg, 1995; Dealey Plaza Echo, Vol. 1, Issue 3, Nov. 1999, pp. 10-17, A Personal Story: Report the Death of a President, by Connie Kritzberg [link 2] [link 3]; The Men Who Killed Kennedy, episode 7, The Smoking Guns, 2003, 6:18 [link 2]). Dr. Adolph Giesecke was asked in his testimony on 3/25/1964 “Now, you mentioned a few minutes ago that you talked about this matter with a number of people–whom have you talked to, Dr. Giesecke?”, to which he replied “Well, of course, we discussed it with Dr. Jenkins and various members of the anesthesia staff. We have discussed it with--I've forgotten that gentleman's name, but he was from the American Medical Association, as a historian. We discussed it with Dr. Mike Bush, who then reported it in the Anesthesiology Newsletter, which is a publication of the American Society of Anesthesiologists, and then discussed it with the Secretary of- may I retract that. That's about it--that's the extent of the discussion, except with other members of the surgical staff and the anesthesia staff and these people”. The news media didn’t appear to have any more information from Giesecke at the time. Dr. Charles Carrico was asked in his 3/30/1964 testimony “Have you been interviewed by the press and, if so, when?”, to which Carrico replied “I think I have talked to the press twice. Mr. Burrus, a reporter for the Dallas Times Herald, talked to me about 5 minutes, probably 3 or 4 days after the President's death, and then a reporter from Time called about 3 or 4 weeks after the President's death, and I talked to him for a very few minutes” (WC Vol. 3, p p . 35 7-366 [tex t]). No other descriptions from Crarrico seem to have been in the news.

George Govus · March 11, 2023

Worth the wait, Micah, thanks, bookmarked.

Micah Mileto · March 11, 2023

On 3/11/2023 at 4:42 AM, George Govus said:

Thanks!

Edited March 13, 2023 by Micah Mileto

Sign In

How was the Warren Commission allowed to change testimony?

Recommended Posts

Leslie Sharp

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Lawrence Schnapf

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Leslie Sharp

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Micah Mileto

Link to comment

Share on other sites

George Govus

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Micah Mileto

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

Announcements

Browse

Activity

Support

Store