The ARRB Panel

Late Saturday afternoon there was a panel at the COPA conference called "Records Review Board: Accomplishments and Unfinished Work." The comments of former Board Chair John Tunheim, Jim Lesar, John Newman, and Jim DiEugenio will be presented here.

Most of Judge Tunheim's remarks were general in nature, and due to my own time constraints I am not going to go into them in any great detail. For some of his more interesting comments, please see the conclusion of the item on the Paine Panel, and the article "Dan Rather, Yet Again."

Tunheim began that Saturday by saying the ARRB was as "interactive" with the American public as it could be, but that many of its meetings were held behind closed doors, given that much of the material they dealt with was, at least before they released it, still classified.

He thanked assassination researchers for their input over the years of the Board's existence. "We did appreciate very much, and took very seriously, the interest the public has --- the research community in particular was a great ally for the Review Board. And I want to say that now."

Judge Tunheim

The Judge noted that the Board never took sides on an issue, and indeed does not take a position, in their Final Report, as to whether there was a conspiracy in the assassination of President Kennedy. "When we started, I felt that we had started looking at a giant jigsaw puzzle that had a lot of pieces missing. I think through the work of the Review Board, we have filled in some of those pieces. But I do think, unfortunately, some of the other pieces that are no longer there are lost to history, and I'm not sure we'll ever find them, although the effort will continue to find records of any sort related to the assassination."

The Board dealt with twenty-seven government agencies during its work, Tunheim said. "The agency that I felt we had the most difficult time with was the Secret Service, which was part of the Department of the Treasury. Obviously we were sensitive to the fact that the assassination of President Kennedy was the darkest day in the history of the Secret Service. But at the same time, one interesting reaction there is that kind of tells you a little bit about how the agency approached this information.

"They sought protection of a wide range of documents --- one particular set of documents. Our response was to do some research, and figure out that all of these records had already been released at an earlier time, along with some of the early House Select Committee records.

"Now, most agencies, their reaction to that would be, 'Okay, well we'll give up, it's already been released, we're not going to try to protect them.' Well the Secret Service's reaction was, 'Well, we have to draw those other records back, and establish protection over that.' And that was really the attitude that they had throughout the process.

"There's a lot of Secret Service records that were released because we ordered them released. They were also the only agency that I'm aware of that destroyed records while we were in operation --- records that were directly relevant to the assassination. I don't think, in the end, that anything significant was lost, because one of the factors [sic] of federal record keeping is that if there is a record in one agency file, you're likely to find that record in two or three other agency files, because a lot of that information was shared."

The Review Board's work resulted in what Tunheim described as the "camera original" Zapruder film being "taken, so that it will be in the hands of the American public forever. I think a good argument can be made that when Congress passed the Records Collection Act in 1992, the film was effectively taken by that act. But we decided to take our own action, just to make sure." The issue was then turned over to the Justice Department, Tunheim said, and negotiations began with the Zapruder family over what would be paid for the film. "Our concern was to make sure that the film that is at the National Archives today remains there, and it is not taken out and somehow further damaged, or sold to collectors."

The effort continues, Tunheim said, to get records from the former KGB, and some have been obtained already. And the Board worked hard on autopsy and other medical evidence, he said. "I'm not sure we were able to conclusively solve anything, other than to perhaps create more questions about all that --- and it is a particularly sad chapter of the assassination story, in my view."

One achievement Tunheim expressed pride in was getting autopsy photographs now at the National Archives "digitalized," which he said should be a help to future researchers.

Echoing some of his comments at the start of his talk, Tunheim said that many authors who have written on the Kennedy assassination were generous with sharing their records with the Board. "One person we had trouble with, we couldn't get him to agree to release any of his material, was the author William Manchester. He wrote the book Death of a President --- as many of you know, one of the early studies of the assassination. He did a lot of interviews at the same time the Warren Commission was doing interviews, and we tried very hard to convince him to release his material, which he controls, still, today. And in the end, he was not willing to do that. He feared that he would be criticized, and that's why he was not going to release it. And our argument was that any professional historian should be interested in sharing their materials for others, so that others can learn from it, and try to make sense of it all." Tunheim expressed confidence that eventually Mancester's material would be released, noting that the Board did not have the authority to force him to do so.

Tunheim said that under the JFK Act, agencies are still required to identify assassination related records, and turn them over to the National Archives. "We want to make sure that continues to work, even though the independent Review Board is no longer there."

In a question-and-answer session that followed the ARRB panel, Tunheim was asked how the release process will continue in the Board's absence. "How does the work go on?" Tunheim asked, rhetorically. "The statute --- the Records Collection Act --- is still in force. And we secured, in our final month, statements --- essentially memoranda of understanding --- with the agencies where most of the records have been, that they will continue in this agreement. They will continue to search for assassination records, review them under the standards set by the Board, and turn them over to the National Archives.

"Obviously, there's some element of faith here. But, the Congress is well aware of these memoranda of understanding, and they're intent on keeping oversight over the agencies to make sure that they continue to do what they said that they were going to do.

"The National Archives is also very interested in keeping the process going, and going well. The Board members are all going to do their best to try to oversee all this. Because we know what's supposed to be done within the agencies. We don't have a staff and a budget now, but our sponsoring organizations who recommended us in the first place are very interested in keeping this effort going as well.

"And if there ever becomes a need for additional Congressional legislation, I think we're well-positioned to try to push that."

Tunheim concluded his talk by saying that no smoking gun was ever located by the Board. "All mysteries about the assassination, I don't think, are going to be solved. I think we'll inch closer to the truth as time goes along. But it's just too many years after the fact, I think."

Jim Lesar, President of the Assassinaton Archives and Research Center, spoke next. "The Review Board has been an exceptionally important continuation of a process that began with the enactment in 1966 of the Freedom of Information Act. The twentieth century, perhaps more than any other, has experienced the horrors of authoritarian regimes, and the impediments to public knowledge by bureacracies in countries that were not authoritarian.

"And, it is really --- I view it as one of the most important innovations in the theory and practice of democracy, and a uniquely American contribution. The Review Board is a continuation of that process of trying to democratize information."

The Review Board has set a very important precedent, Lesar said; he forecast that it could, like the FOIA, become an example for other countries to follow.

The Board was not, of course, without problems. "There are loose ends dangling out there," Lesar commented, in noting that the Board did not get full cooperation from all government agencies. "How easy it will be, or how difficult it will be, now that the Review Board is out of existence, to get any implementation of the divulgence of those records, remains to be seen."

Author John Newman, whose books include JFK and Vietnam and Oswald and the CIA, was next on the podium. "I wish I had about two hours," he said at the outset, noting the importance of his topic. As for me --- the person preparing this article --- I wish I had about two more weeks to work on all this stuff, but I don't. I'm going to try to hit Newman's most important, or at least interesting, items, but I am very pressed for time.

Newman said he has been a longtime supporter of the Board and its work. "But I feel compelled to focus now on those things that are missing, [and] where the obfuscations occurred."

He said there are various FBI issues remaining that are very important, including "one which I stood down on and did not put [in] my book, which I'm going to tell you about right now, as briefly as I can.

"There was a sworn affidavit by an FBI agent. In fact, the story really goes like this: the FBI Director, Hoover, punishing many people ... James Hosty, as you know, was banished to Kansas City, to the stolen motorcycle unit for his sterling performance in trailing Oswald, and so on.

"In any event," Newman continued, "there came a point, in my own work in the files, where I discovered a sworn affidavit by an FBI agent who was out there, in Kansas City with Hosty. And this man was put under oath by the House Select Committee. And he swore that Hosty said that Oswald had been an FBI informant.

"I found this man. I called him up, and I cannot tell you the horror in his voice, as I told him what I had found. Now also, it turns out --- you know, 'I have a family, I have children,' he told me. 'I don't want to get into this.' I mean, he was very very scared.

"There was also a time, later --- not too much later --- where he had denied all this. So there are two versions of this.

"So what I did, I gave this to the Board, and hoped to see what would come of it. Now, I don't know what's come of it. But I'm going to just put that on the table, because it goes to an issue that is fundamentally important to all of us. And that is to whether or not Oswald was an informant, or if he was, what kind of informant was he?

"And this is a sworn affidavit by an FBI agent. So, I leave that piece on the table, because of course, what the FBI knew in that summer, New Orleans, fall --- about Oswald's movements is very important."

Newman said that Army Counter-Intelligence files are another important area. "I think we need to get down into the bowels of Army Counter-Intelligence here," he said, to a smattering of applause. "If for no other reason, you know that one of the things we found, in the summer of '63, was the Army was tailing Oswald! When he was running around New Orleans, handing out these FPCC filers, there's Army Counter-Intelligence, picking them up off the floor and sending copies back to Army Intelligence back in Washington. Now, what's that about?"

Newman turned next to Mexico City, "still one of the hottest areas of the case." Specifically, he discussed the impersonation of Oswald there, "and the fact that the CIA lied about this, made up a big story afterwords that they destroyed the tapes so we couldn't listen to them" He said the Review Board did some very good work on Mexico City, "but the jewels are still, quote, 'under review,' unquote."

He showed a blow-up of a transcript of a phone conversation between J. Edgar Hoover and Lyndon Johnson the day after the assassination. "Hoover's telling the President, Hey, we got the guy, we got the gun, everything's under control here. And then, LBJ knows how to ask this question the next morning --- the President says, What happened? Any new stuff about this visit to the Soviet Embassy in September? And how Johnson even knows how to ask it is interesting.

"But here's Hoover's response: 'No. That's one angle that's very confusing, and for this reason' --- and imagine Hoover being confused about something --- 'We have up here the tape.' Okay? Not, 'Down there' --- 'Up here' --- in Washington --- 'We've got the tape up here, and it's not Oswald's voice.' Okay? You see that? 'In fact, it appears there's a second person who's at the Soviet Embassy.'

"This is the FBI Director telling the President of the United States that Oswald had been impersonated in Mexico City, the morning after the assassination."

Newman's next slide showed something he said he just plain missed when he was preparing his book on Oswald: an addendum to an annex in the back of the Lopez report: "Hard documentary evidence of high-level FBI memos written the morning after the assassination, talking about --- what? 'Special Agents of this bureau who have conversed with Oswald' --- and there aren't very many, how many do you think there are? Fain and Hosty we know of. There may be others, but at least them --- 'have observed photographs, yadda-da-da" --- he skipped down to the key phrase and paused for dramatic effect --- "and have listened to a recording of his voice. These Special Agents are of the opinion that it's not Oswald."

After another similar example, Newman said, "As far as I'm concerned, this is game, set and match, as far as the cover story that was erected. You see, because the FBI eventually went along with this story. The FBI, you know, went along, said Okay, yeah, there's --- we didn't listen to any tapes ... they had to go eat their words! You've got all these memos here. You've got Hoover calling the President ... all these high-level internal memos ... all that stuff's gotta go away, in the wake of the assassination, and what the CIA's doing with this cover story.

"So what the Review Board has done for us is to put to bed something very fundamental. And that is, the moment those shots rang out in Dealey Plaza, there's a lot of high-level people in Washington sitting down and listening to tapes, and talking to each other about whose voice was on those tapes. And guess what? It wasn't Lee Harvey Oswald, and that is really something to think about."

To wrap up the ARRB panel, CTKA Chairman and Probe editor Jim DiEugenio stood up. He said the main thing he wanted to talk about was the New Orleans aspect of the case.

He reminded everyone that the Reily Coffee Company was the place Oswald worked in the summer of 1963. "As early as 1949, the CIA is expressing a strong interest in using Reily Coffee Company as a way of running agents."

DiEugenio also reminded the audience that Clay Shaw had a covert security clearance. "The whole idea that he was only working out of Domestic Contacts Division is just not true. And as Bill Davy said [in a presentation earlier that day], when he showed this document to Victor Marchetti, he basically said you don't need covert security approval to work Domestic Contacts. And then he went on and said it looked like he was actually working in Domestic Operations, which was headed by Tracy Barnes and E. Howard Hunt." Hunt, DiEugenio said, had the same security clearance as Clay Shaw. There are indications, he went on, that the CIA was going to modify Hunt's 201 file to cover up his contacts with the Director of Operations by making it appear he was working out of Domestic Contacts. "That probably could have been used with the case of Clay Shaw also," he speculated.

The FBI knew, DiEugenio said, that one of Clay Shaw's aliases was Clay Bertrand. And in a memorandum from the Garrison investigation, "It turns out that a friend of Guy Banister's, Bill Nitzke [spelling?], recalled Banister instructing Cuban exiles on how to acquire firearms, through --- of all distributors --- Kleins, okay? the place where Oswald allegedly ordered his Mannlicher Carcano."

Next, DiEugenio invoked the name of Gerald Posner, and how he said that no witnesses could link Ferrie and Oswald, and Ferrie and Shaw --- "Until, of course, they turned up the photograph of both, Ferrie with Oswald. Well we now have at least eight witnesses who connect Oswald with Ferrie, in these files. And there's at least nine of them that put Oswald at 544 Camp Street. There's ten sources, now --- at least ten --- that Shaw used the alias of 'Bertrand.' And there's at least ten or eleven that connect Shaw with Ferrie. These have all been collated by Bill Davy, and they'll be in his upcoming book, at least, in a couple of months."

DiEugenio revealed some interesting information about Sergio Arcacha Smith, obtained thanks to the Review Board. Smith headed an anti-Castro group with offices at the 544 Camp building. During the Garrison investigation, Smith fled New Orleans for Dallas, where he was protected from extradition.

"Sergio Arcacha Smith and his family were flown out of Cuba from Guantanamo in 1959 in two Navy fighter jets that landed in New Orleans," DiEugenio said. "We know that because of interviews that the House Select Committee did.

"It looks like in 1960 and '61, Gordon Novel was working with Sergio Arcacha Smith to put on some sort of benefit, a telethon in New Orleans, to begin to rack up sympathy for the Cuban exiles. And it looks like one of the people they were working with was David Phillips. Because Novel describes a 'Mr. Phillips' working out of Guy Banister's office, who came down there to give them the lowdown on what this whole project was going to be. The description, which Gordon uses, fits the description of David Phillips. And he was --- he seemed to be an expert in propaganda, which of course was David Phillips' whole thing."

DiEugenio also said that Jim Garrison had a document concerning the first interview Richard Case Nagell did with his office, Nagell "talks about a tape he has in which there's two Cuban exiles in the summer of 1963 talking about setting up Oswald for the assassination. And one of them is Sergio Arcacha Smith."

DiEugenio said that documents now show that HSCA investigators confirmed the story Rose Cheramie, who was thrown from a moving vehicle in Louisiana, and when hospitalized expressed foreknowledge of the assassination. "But what they didn't say is that they also ID'd the two guys in the car. One is Emelio Santana, the other is Sergio Arcacha Smith." DiEugenio added, "And that's very solid, with these new documents, that she did predict the assassination."

He then added the astonishing detail that according to the HSCA testimony of Francis Fruge, the officer who found Cheramie along the road and was later detailed to the Garrison investigation, Dallas police found a map of the Dealey Plaza sewer system in the apartment of Sergio Arcacha Smith. "He just throws that away, like, 'You guys didn't know that?' And of course, there's no followup to that."

DiEugenio concluded his talk thusly: "One of the things that Kermit Hall and Judge Tunheim have said is that these things were all filed away for national security. And maybe there's some truth to that. But I fail to see how the public not knowing how James Phelan and Hugh Aynesworth are informants --- how that seriously compromises national security. Or Wesley Liebeler trying to seduce Silvia Odio, how that is tied into --- I don't know, maybe the KGB dropped an aphrodesiac into his drink, I don't know --- how that is national security --- I don't really think you can take that all the way down the line. I think these intelligence agencies have gotten to the point where whatever they say is national security.

"And it turns out that it's security for themselves, and not the citizens of this country." This comment drew an enthusiastic round of applause.

Return to Conferences Page

Return to Main Page

* * *