CIA presence on 11/22/63

[Gene Kelly]

The 1967 oeral interview for the JFK Librarry also has this comment by Burkley:

When the President was on the Air Force One returning to Washington, Mrs. Kennedy, as has been noted, sat in the rear of the plane, next to the coffin bearing the President’s remains. During the flight I contacted her, and stated that an autopsy would be necessary, and that I was perfectly willing to arrange to have it done at any place that she felt it should be done. She said, “Well, it doesn’t have to be done.” I said, “Yes, it is mandatory that we have an autopsy. I can do it at the Army hospital at Walter Reed or at the Navy hospital at Bethesda, or any civilian hospital that you would designate.” However, I felt that it should be a military hospital, in that he had been President of the United States and was, therefore, the Commander in Chief of the Military. After some consideration she stated that she would like to have the President taken to Bethesda. This was arranged by telephone from the plane, and it was accomplished. 

Burkley accompanied the President in the ambulance going to Bethesda, and also accompanied him to the area where the autopsy was performed. He later stated that:

"I supervised the autopsy and kept in constant contact with Mrs. Kennedy and the members of her party who were on the seventeenth floor in the suite at that level. I made trips back and forth. I delivered to her personally the ring from the President’s finger and talked to her on a number of occasions. I also directed that the X-rays be taken for future reference and had complete knowledge of everything that was done. The records are also in possession of members of the family.

There were photographs taken at various stages, and they are also in the possession of the family. And the only regret I have that I did not ask to have a photograph taken when he had been restored to his near normal appearance. And I may mention here that he was very lifelike in his appearance and there would have been no question of his having been viewed." 

In JFK Revisited, Jim DiEugenio points out that:

1. Sibert and O'Neill state that the autopsy report was false. The back wound was not where the Commission said it was, and there was a hole in the rear of JFK's head. (and Arlen Specter kept their testimony out of the record).
2. George Burkley agreed with the placement of that back wound-twice. Once in the official death certificate and once on the face sheet, though his name is erased from the latter (Specter kept him out of the record also).
3. In his 1967 oral interview for the JFK Library, Burkley’s conclusion in regard to the cause of death was the bullet wound which "involved the skull":

The discussion as to whether a previous bullet also enters into it, but as far as the cause of death, the immediate cause was unquestionably the bullet which shattered the brain and the calvarium.

When asked whether he agreed with the Warren Report on the number of bullets that entered the President’s body, he famously stated: "I would not care to be quoted on that”.

Gene

 

[Benjamin Cole]

7 minutes ago, Gene Kelly said:

The 1967 oeral interview for the JFK Librarry also has this comment by Burkley:

When the President was on the Air Force One returning to Washington, Mrs. Kennedy, as has been noted, sat in the rear of the plane, next to the coffin bearing the President’s remains. During the flight I contacted her, and stated that an autopsy would be necessary, and that I was perfectly willing to arrange to have it done at any place that she felt it should be done. She said, “Well, it doesn’t have to be done.” I said, “Yes, it is mandatory that we have an autopsy. I can do it at the Army hospital at Walter Reed or at the Navy hospital at Bethesda, or any civilian hospital that you would designate.” However, I felt that it should be a military hospital, in that he had been President of the United States and was, therefore, the Commander in Chief of the Military. After some consideration she stated that she would like to have the President taken to Bethesda. This was arranged by telephone from the plane, and it was accomplished. 

Burkley accompanied the President in the ambulance going to Bethesda, and also accompanied him to the area where the autopsy was performed. He later stated that:

"I supervised the autopsy and kept in constant contact with Mrs. Kennedy and the members of her party who were on the seventeenth floor in the suite at that level. I made trips back and forth. I delivered to her personally the ring from the President’s finger and talked to her on a number of occasions. I also directed that the X-rays be taken for future reference and had complete knowledge of everything that was done. The records are also in possession of members of the family.

There were photographs taken at various stages, and they are also in the possession of the family. And the only regret I have that I did not ask to have a photograph taken when he had been restored to his near normal appearance. And I may mention here that he was very lifelike in his appearance and there would have been no question of his having been viewed." 

In JFK Revisited, Jim DiEugenio points out that:

1. Sibert and O'Neill state that the autopsy report was false. The back wound was not where the Commission said it was, and there was a hole in the rear of JFK's head. (and Arlen Specter kept their testimony out of the record).
2. George Burkley agreed with the placement of that back wound-twice. Once in the official death certificate and once on the face sheet, though his name is erased from the latter (Specter kept him out of the record also).
3. In his 1967 oral interview for the JFK Library, Burkley’s conclusion in regard to the cause of death was the bullet wound which "involved the skull":

The discussion as to whether a previous bullet also enters into it, but as far as the cause of death, the immediate cause was unquestionably the bullet which shattered the brain and the calvarium.

When asked whether he agreed with the Warren Report on the number of bullets that entered the President’s body, he famously stated: "I would not care to be quoted on that”.

Gene

 

add on:

AGENCY: HSCA
ORIGINATOR: HSCA
FROM: RICHARD SPRAGUE
TO: FILE

MEMORANDUM

March 18, 1977

TO : FILE

FROM : RICHARD A. SPRAGUE

William F. Illig, an attorney from Erie, Pa., contacted me in Philadelphia this
date, advising me that he represents Dr. George G. Burkley, Vice Admiral, U.S.
Navy retired, who had been the personal physician for presidents Kennedy and
Johnson.

Mr. Illig stated that he had a luncheon meeting with his client, Dr. Burkley,
this date to take up some tax matters. Dr. Burkley advised him that although he,
Burkley, had signed the death certificate of President Kennedy in Dallas, he had
never been interviewed and that he has information in the Kennedy assassination
indicating that others besides Oswald must have participated.

Illig advised me that his client is a very quiet, unassuming person, not wanting
any publicity whatsoever, but he, Illig, was calling me with his client's
consent and that his client would talk to me in Washington.

 

[Larry Hancock]

Paul,  there are other interviews by Burkley that are not quite so structured but certainly even in this one his wording is that he did not view any legal strictures that would have required not taking Jackie and the body back to DC and he expressed the desire not not to put Jackie though anything further. 

This is the sort of thing that encourages me to cease commenting here,  there is just such a strong drive to find mystery and evildoing in every detail that its become a drain.  Its about time I left everyone to their own directions..

 -- signing off,  Larry

 

 

 

[Roger Odisio]

5 hours ago, Larry Hancock said:

No, I don't recall it even being a question for the WC.  Dr. Burkley's remarks were independent of that, as far as the WC was concerned it was focused on security for the motorcade, the SS itself focused on Lawson's report in regard to security.  The only related inquiries had to do with the Cellar visit, some aspects of the hotel security in Fort Worth and of course the action of the agents during the motorcade and the shooting.

Burkley also expressed in one oral history that his view was that there was no legal justification for an immediate postmortem in Dallas as that would need to be authorized by the family (which is was at Bethesda) or by the Court. 

...........................

BURKLEY: There again it is not entered by any of the Dallas people, and I came back
to Mrs. Kennedy and said, “The President is dead.” And we went over to
the President and we said the prayers for the dead and various other things
which have been recorded elsewhere, I believe.
McHUGH: Did the doctors there at that time then attempt to perform a postmortem?
BURKLEY: The coroner attempted to have the body retained there for a postmortem
and investigation of the assassination. That was perfectly understandable,
in that this condition existed. However, the people involved were not just
anyone, it was the President of the United States. Mrs. Kennedy was going to stay just where she was and travel with the President at any time. It was felt advisable to return the President to the Washington area as
soon as possible because of the uncertainty as to what else was happening in Dallas.
McHUGH: Did any of the doctors there at that time then attempt to begin
postmortem procedures?
BURKLEY: Of course not. First place, postmortem would have to be either authorized
by a member of the family or ordered by the court.
McHUGH: This was not normally a procedure that they would automatically perform?
BURKLEY: In no way.

https://www.jfklibrary.org/sites/default/files/archives/JFKOH/Burkley%2C George G/JFKOH-GGB-01/JFKOH-GGB-01-TR.pdf

 

True, as far as I know, the family or a court needed to approve a post mortem.  But there was no doubt about who had jurisdiction to perform the post mortem.  The local coroner had jurisdiction over it.  He told the Secret Service that and Burkley knew it.  Murder was not a federal crime at the time. 

 

When the local coroner resisted the taking of the body, as he did, which voice do you suppose had greater sway to get him out of the way.  Dr Burkley with perhaps some help from some SS agents,but essentially one doctor to another, or being told the body was to be moved on the orders of the President of the United States?

 

A couple of facts need to be introduced here.  We know that Johnson ordered the body to be sent to the plane. It's not conjecture.  How does that fit into your Burkley scenario? 

 

The planners of the murder knew any legitimate autopsy would expose their fraud.  What the coroner would find would not match the story they were already telling about Oswald from the 6th floor window. They couldn't allow that.

 

That's why the body was taken.  To control the autopsy at Bethesda.  I assume no one is claiming Burkley was one of the planners and part of the coverup?

 

It's understandable that Burkley would have wanted to take the body for the reasons you say, and would have suggested that. But the decision was not his.

[Ron Bulman]

On 1/6/2024 at 2:44 PM, Vince Palamara said:

 

Going back to Vince's original find.  I don't think a CIA agent at Parkland would have been at the level of Tracy Barnes, nor the level of Dallas agent in charge G A Moore.  No body that high up would have appeared in person/taken the chance of being identified.  But either one might well have placed a lower level agent at the scene to confirm the results of the operation ASAP, possibly at the direction of others further up the chain of command.  Helms, Angleton, Dulles?  In any case it seems there was an identified CIA agent at Parkland. 

[Benjamin Cole]

5 hours ago, Larry Hancock said:

Paul,  there are other interviews by Burkley that are not quite so structured but certainly even in this one his wording is that he did not view any legal strictures that would have required not taking Jackie and the body back to DC and he expressed the desire not not to put Jackie though anything further. 

This is the sort of thing that encourages me to cease commenting here,  there is just such a strong drive to find mystery and evildoing in every detail that its become a drain.  Its about time I left everyone to their own directions..

 -- signing off,  Larry

 

 

 

Ulterior sinister motives, clandestine murk, secretive sabotage. 

 

[Gerry Down]

6 hours ago, Larry Hancock said:

Paul,  there are other interviews by Burkley that are not quite so structured but certainly even in this one his wording is that he did not view any legal strictures that would have required not taking Jackie and the body back to DC and he expressed the desire not not to put Jackie though anything further. 

This is the sort of thing that encourages me to cease commenting here,  there is just such a strong drive to find mystery and evildoing in every detail that its become a drain.  Its about time I left everyone to their own directions..

 -- signing off,  Larry

 

 

 

We need your knowledge on this forum Larry. I'm convinced that when the JFK assassination is finally solved, your books and input on this forum will have played a key role in getting to the truth. 

[Gerry Down]

3 hours ago, Ron Bulman said:

Going back to Vince's original find.  I don't think a CIA agent at Parkland would have been at the level of Tracy Barnes, nor the level of Dallas agent in charge G A Moore.  No body that high up would have appeared in person/taken the chance of being identified.  But either one might well have placed a lower level agent at the scene to confirm the results of the operation ASAP, possibly at the direction of others further up the chain of command.  Helms, Angleton, Dulles?  In any case it seems there was an identified CIA agent at Parkland. 

Do you think Moore hid his identity of being with the CIA field office? For some strange reason GDM did not seem to know Moore was CIA and referred to him as the head FBI guy in Dallas. Moore was indeed a former FBI agent, but his current role was with that of CIA. And there is no indication that GDM would have known Moore as far back as the days when Moore was with the FBI. So GDM seemed to identify Moore as being with his old employer of FBI rather than his new employer of CIA. Weird. 

I don't know why Moore would hide his identity in such a way because the phone number of the Dallas CIA field office was in the phone book. So its not like that field office was a secret or anything. 

[Tom Gram]

4 hours ago, Gerry Down said:

We need your knowledge on this forum Larry. I'm convinced that when the JFK assassination is finally solved, your books and input on this forum will have played a key role in getting to the truth. 

Seconded. We need reasonable voices here so the forum doesn’t deteriorate into full-blown Alex Jonestown, and as Larry points out it’s already getting close. 

[Larry Hancock]

Thanks Gerry and Tom, I think the thing is that my views have evolved to be somewhat contrarian in respect to much of the dialog here and I don't want  become more of a curmudgeon than I already am....  And to be honest I don't have the energy to attempt to recover and post everything I've encountered over the last three decades in order to support an observation. 

On your question, given De Mohrenschildt's history with Moore, going back several years when he was providing information on his activities in Yugoslavia, I would imagine he was just using the vernacular in describing him as a government man since Moore had been both FBI and CIA.  When  you compare De Mohrenschild't statements to the WC vs. his later writings in I Am a Patsy you find that he did become unhappy whith his WC remarks and felt he had been manipulated in his testimony and regretted it.  I recommend reading I Am a Patsy for reference but also the HSCA synopsis on him which is quite detailed.:

https://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol12/pdf/HSCA_Vol12_deMohren.pdf

http://22november1963.org.uk/george-de-mohrenschildt-i-am-a-patsy

 

 

[Jonathan Cohen]

1 hour ago, Larry Hancock said:

I think the thing is that my views have evolved to be somewhat contrarian in respect to much of the dialog here and I don't want  become more of a curmudgeon than I already am.

Larry - I urge you to be as contrarian and curmudgeonly as you like! Your critical eye is sorely needed here to help weed out the total nonsense peddled by far too many.

[Paul Brancato]

14 hours ago, Larry Hancock said:

Paul,  there are other interviews by Burkley that are not quite so structured but certainly even in this one his wording is that he did not view any legal strictures that would have required not taking Jackie and the body back to DC and he expressed the desire not not to put Jackie though anything further. 

This is the sort of thing that encourages me to cease commenting here,  there is just such a strong drive to find mystery and evildoing in every detail that its become a drain.  Its about time I left everyone to their own directions..

 -- signing off,  Larry

 

 

 

But surely it was not Burkley’s decision to make. H wasn’t calling the shots. Is that, in your view, a farfetched statement? 

[Paul Brancato]

15 hours ago, Gene Kelly said:

The 1967 oeral interview for the JFK Librarry also has this comment by Burkley:

When the President was on the Air Force One returning to Washington, Mrs. Kennedy, as has been noted, sat in the rear of the plane, next to the coffin bearing the President’s remains. During the flight I contacted her, and stated that an autopsy would be necessary, and that I was perfectly willing to arrange to have it done at any place that she felt it should be done. She said, “Well, it doesn’t have to be done.” I said, “Yes, it is mandatory that we have an autopsy. I can do it at the Army hospital at Walter Reed or at the Navy hospital at Bethesda, or any civilian hospital that you would designate.” However, I felt that it should be a military hospital, in that he had been President of the United States and was, therefore, the Commander in Chief of the Military. After some consideration she stated that she would like to have the President taken to Bethesda. This was arranged by telephone from the plane, and it was accomplished. 

Burkley accompanied the President in the ambulance going to Bethesda, and also accompanied him to the area where the autopsy was performed. He later stated that:

"I supervised the autopsy and kept in constant contact with Mrs. Kennedy and the members of her party who were on the seventeenth floor in the suite at that level. I made trips back and forth. I delivered to her personally the ring from the President’s finger and talked to her on a number of occasions. I also directed that the X-rays be taken for future reference and had complete knowledge of everything that was done. The records are also in possession of members of the family.

There were photographs taken at various stages, and they are also in the possession of the family. And the only regret I have that I did not ask to have a photograph taken when he had been restored to his near normal appearance. And I may mention here that he was very lifelike in his appearance and there would have been no question of his having been viewed." 

In JFK Revisited, Jim DiEugenio points out that:

1. Sibert and O'Neill state that the autopsy report was false. The back wound was not where the Commission said it was, and there was a hole in the rear of JFK's head. (and Arlen Specter kept their testimony out of the record).
2. George Burkley agreed with the placement of that back wound-twice. Once in the official death certificate and once on the face sheet, though his name is erased from the latter (Specter kept him out of the record also).
3. In his 1967 oral interview for the JFK Library, Burkley’s conclusion in regard to the cause of death was the bullet wound which "involved the skull":

The discussion as to whether a previous bullet also enters into it, but as far as the cause of death, the immediate cause was unquestionably the bullet which shattered the brain and the calvarium.

When asked whether he agreed with the Warren Report on the number of bullets that entered the President’s body, he famously stated: "I would not care to be quoted on that”.

Gene

 

Hi Gene - thanks for the post. I read through the link you quote from which Larry posted. Plus you added a few more points from Jim D. I do wonder what Burkley kept to himself about the number of bullets etc. He must have been under enormous pressure that day, and surely saddened by the death of JFK. Do you know if his private papers are in a collection somewhere? 

[Larry Hancock]

Paul, I can be specific on this one because we know from the work of the ARRB that they tried to recover his papers in respect to his outreach about knowledge indicating a conspiracy and his daughter refused to release them.  If they still exist to some extent they are with his family.

In regard to Burkley at Parkland, I don't think he specifically made a decision or gave an order; I do think he related to the SS agents that Jackie was greatly stressed and distraught and that she was refusing to leave the body, if it stayed in Dallas she would stay and it would be more trauma for her. At that point the agents, stressed, feeling guilty and unhappy with all things Texan (and likely not trusting anything local in regard to security) acted at their own initiative and situationally, in their own emotional state.

Edited January 9 by Larry Hancock

[Gene Kelly]

Paul

I dont know about any of Burkley's private papers. His daughter refused ARRB access to his lawyer's files. 

Being sensitive to Larry's post, I do not believe that he was in on the plotting or any surrepticious transfer of the body from Parkland to DC.  His duty was to attend to the President (both JFK and LBJ) and to Mrs. Kennedy. He had perhaps the unique perspective on the post-mortem procedures - and he was a ranking naval officer - so he could easily have been legitimately following orders throughout. To his credit, he signed an accurate death certificate and body trace, expressed  reservations about WC conclusions, and appears to have taken the initiative to initilally reach out to Richard Sprague and the HSCA ... but that opportunity was buried with Sprague's removal. 

 I know that some have painted a more complicit characterization of his involvement, but that would be speculative at this point. 

Gene