AN AFTERWORD BY DOUG HORNE:
Horne corresponded with me via email and pointed out a few
1.) I prepared the initial list of draft questions for each
of the 10 ARRB depositions related to JFK's autopsy; Gunn would
then review the list of questions, restructure it, and sometimes
add a few questions. However, ultimately it was he and he alone
who had control over which questions were asked or not asked.
Only Gunn could speak to the witness during the depositions.
There are many questions that were asked which I know he would
not have pursued had I not pressed certain issues (such as questions
about the cranial x-rays related to the work of David Mantik);
similarly, there are many follow-up questions I wanted asked
(and so indicated by furiously writing notes to Gunn during the
depositions) that he did NOT ask. Some were crucial, and constitute
what I call critical failures in questioning. (I could have been
much more critical of him at JFK Lancer than I was, but I decided
to offer what I considered "minimal" criticism of Gunn...and
time did not permit me to go into the kind of detail I would
have to have gone into in order to explain further criticisms.
But all of these additional details will be in my book.)
2.) The Cuba records I worked with do not really illuminate
the Missile Crisis or Anti-Castro plots, but they DO ILLUMINATE
the following: U.S. Military pretexts for overt invasion of Cuba
with U.S. forces, U.S. Military contingency plans for a coup
in Cuba, and U.S. Military attempts to foment (create) a military
"coup" in Cuba which, combined with pretexts ("incidents"),
might have justified a 1963 or 1964 invasion of Cuba---in short,
evidence of the U.S. Military's repeated attempts during the
JFK administration to MAKE NATIONAL POLICY over Cuba. [The ARRB
releases prove, in my view, that the Pentagon was not a disinterested
party simply carrying out the administration's policy decisions
re: Cuba.] See Northwoods
Document and JFK Says No To Northwoods also Order
the Military Documents
And yes, we reverified Newman's hypothesis about a planned withdrawal
from Spring 1963-Fall 1963, and immediate escalation of the Vietnam
War after JFK's death.
3.) I worked not only with Oswald's IRS Tax Records, but also
concentrated on his employment history and earnings records (at
the repeated request of Armstrong and Hewitt letters sent to
the ARRB in 1996 and 1997). Better late than never. Armstrong
and Hewitt were very unhappy at the JFK Lancer Conference with
my massive memo on the subject, because the documents I examined
showed Armstrong's theories about fake W-2 forms of a double
Oswald to be unsubstantiated." (Memo dated Sept 1998.) Horne
Tax Records Memo
4.) Reason it's important to note that temporal bone meets
the occipital bone (I forgot to mention) is because Baxter, on
11/22/63, described the head wound as "temporal-occipital."
[This still means back of the head behind right ear.]
5.) About his moment of epiphany -- Although Gunn told me
he agreed with my hypothesis [on the two brain exams] when I
explained it to him, he failed to ask Humes or Boswell a direct
question about this...was there, or wasn't there? VERY DISAPPOINTING.
He blew it. Nor did he aggressively pursue the S[ibert] &
O['Neill] report with them after they denied seeing any evidence
of head surgery. I begged him to during the Humes deposition.,
and he wouldn't even read the S. & O. report to Humes, or
have Humes read it and comment on it. I couldn't believe it.
6.) There were other people in the room during the depositions,
but they rotated. Jeremy and I were were the only two people
present at ALL 10 autopsy-related depos, and the only 2 people
involved in their preparation and execution.
7.) Due to lack of time [at Lancer], I forgot to mention the
most IMPORTANT observation of Finck in the Blumberg Report, other
than the dates of exam # 2: Finck says the brain looked different
than it did at autopsy (!!!!!!!!), but benignly (or stupidly--or
cowardly) interprets this as a "fixation artifact."
8.) Joe---great article. You might want to add comments from
Saturday morning's presentation, such as the fact that I was
frozen out of, and consciously excluded from, the Dallas Doctors'
deposition(s) by Gunn, who was suffering from a bad case of sour
grapes ("not invented here" syndrome, i.e., "poor
loser"), and by the new, last ditch, 11th hour upper management
at the ARRB, who either didn't believe in doing the deposition
at all (read: Laura Denk and Tracy Shycoff), or who simply didn't
care one way or another who was present (read: Jack Tunheim),
and copped-out and deferred to Laura Denk on this matter, who
in turn was deferring to Jeremy Gunn. Everyone I mentioned above
played "Ostrich" (with head in the sand). Thus, preps
(and invitations and logistic setup or lack thereof) were left
to Ron Haron, our third and final General Counsel, who was not
at all versed in the complexities of the medical evidence, in
the sensitivities of the Kennedy family and Burke Marshall, and
who was working directly with Gunn (his former boss), and was
essentially ignoring my recommendations re: priorities (Kemp
Clark), and re: getting the doctors to come to Washington at
all costs (even if subpoenas were necessary).
It was Haron's idea to depose 5 at once (a disaster)---he sold
that to Gunn, over my objections. Anyway, the rest is history...without
the autopsy photos (the only reason to do the depo in the first
place), it was largely an empty gesture, and a public relations
exercise. It was Laura Denk who told me that the Board members
were more inclined on technical merit NOT to do the depos., but
decided to go ahead and do them because of the adverse publicity
if they didn't. (Not really a surprise that the Board was not
convinced on merit, since Gunn had not shown them my detailed
Feb 11, 1998 "memo of conscience" at all, and since
Denk supposedly presented my "pro" arguments to the
Board, but without me being present to ensure if the one-page
summary she had asked for was properly or effectively presented.)
You might want to mention that I still consider the ARRB's work
to be a glass that is about three-quarters full, and one-quarter
empty, in regard to the medical evidence. The glaring exceptions
are the Dallas Doctors depos. fiasco, and certain key questions
unasked, and not pursued, by Gunn, even after the depos as he
could have in writing.
There is a major file in the Archives on every step in this terrible
"Dallas Doctors" fiasco in my personal files (box #
2) which is a step-by- step, blow- by-blow, account of what did
and did not transpire, and the emotions I was feeling at the
time. It is a pretty ugly story---of spiteful revenge, and of
I wrote to Doug Horne with questions:
You discuss Robert Grossman's observations of JFK's wounds
as he saw them at Parkland. He describes a sort of flap of bone
in the right parietal area that Dr. Clark showed him. It was
not a hole, but like the total loss of bone and scalp in the
Now, arguably this could be the flap we see in the Z-film,
what Jackie saw--it is ascribed
to her that she closed this. If indeed it's real, and it's there, and closed
by Jackie, then that might be why several at Parkland do not see this at
all. Apparently, Clark lifts this flap and shows it to Grossman, though I
would think someone else would notice Clark doing this. However, my point
is could this be the flap we see in Lifton's BE as autopsy
#4 photograph? I think it might be. If so, we then have a
consistency with the Z film, Jackie, two doctors at Parkland,
people at Bethesda and an autopsy photograph. This could argue
for authenticity of the autopsy photograph, at least in regard
to the flap. I do think it's been monkeyed with to hide the wound
in the occipital region. And I do think there was body alteration.
I'm sort of playing devil's advocate here as Livingstone in his
book "Killing Kennedy" uses HSCA documents, the same
HSCA documents that were buried and show that Bethesda people
did see wounds similar to what was observed at Parkland, and
therefore there was no body alteration. I think he is wrong,
and ignoring a lot, but I want to be prepared to respond to such
questions. I think that can be done fairly easily. I'm just sharing
where I am at the moment.
If the flap is real and had to be lifted up like Clark did
to see it, then the Parkland doctors who did not see it are the
problem, not the autopsy photograph, at least in regard to the
There may be consistency with regard to location but size
and shape are probably different at Bethesda,. i.e., larger.
9. I completely agree with ALL of your points with regard
to the possible convergence between the Z-Film flap and the uplifted
parietal bone described by Grossman. Now, if you will check our
exhibit, as he drew it, it looks more posterior than the flap
in that autopsy photograph, but then that could be because of
a slightly imprecise memory of what he saw. I agree with you
that even if the side flap in the autopsy photo is real, the
back of the head has been "monkeyed up" somehow to
make it look intact---either by manipulation of real scalp, or
by manipulation of someone else's scalp. And like you, I do believe
the body was altered. I no longer believe the autopsy photos
were altered---I saw no evidence of that at Rochester.
10. The "Military Review" (of
the autopsy report) is a report dated January 26, 1967 that has
no official title; this is slang used by Lifton and I. The report
was signed by Humes, Boswell and Finck----and Finck was recalled
from Vietnam to participate in writing/signing it. It supposedly
relates the catalog or inventory of photos signed by Humes, Boswell,
Stringer and Ebersole on Nov 10, 1966 (only 1.5 months prior)
to the contents of the 1963 autopsy report. That's what the Justice
Department wanted...to relate the autopsy photos to the autopsy
report from 1963. It's a very strange document, for many reasons.
It is ARRB Exhibit "MD 14." I'm sure you have it. As
I pointed out Saturday morning at Lancer, it reverses certain
wound descriptions (photos 17, 18, 44 and 45) in the Nov 10,
1966 inventory from "entry" to "exit" !!!!!
Truly remarkable. It also contradicts Humes' sworn W.C. testimony
that there was no wound of exit in the margins of the large skull
defect. Boswell told us he thought Humes wrote it; Humes said,
under great duress, "I don't know who wrote this."
It sounds to me like it was written in legalese, by attorneys.
It wasn't signed until SIX DAYS after the 3 pathologists met
to write it. Most strange. I assume someone else weighed in on
Part Two b
DOUG HORNE, SENIOR STAFF
MEMBER OF THE ARRB
Prior to his duties at the Review Board, he was a Surface
Warfare Officer in the Navy for 10 years; and that was followed
by 10 more years working for the Department of the Navy as a
Federal civil servant.
Horne was stationed on three warships homeported out of Pearl
Harbor, Hawaii. During his naval service, he spent time overseas
in Saudi Arabia (in Jubail, on the Persian Gulf).
Doug is widely read and has an avid interest in history and
has a B.A. in History from Ohio State ('74). He has been reading
books about the Kennedy assassination since 1966. He also attended
three assassination symposia: ASK 93, in Dallas; and COPA 94
and 95 in Washington. In the fall of 1994, Doug attended the
first public ARRB hearing in Washington, at which time he met
David Marwell---then the newly-appointed ARRB Director---and
expressed an interest in working for the ARRB staff full time.
Shortly thereafter, Doug sent in his application, which was subsequently
In mid-1995, Doug resigned from his permanent "Federal
civilian" position with the Department of the Navy in Hawaii
and took a position with the Review Board staff as a Senior Analyst
on the Military Records Team. He worked with the Review Board
for over three years rising to a Supervisory Analyst position
and becoming Chief Analyst for Military Records. He had responsibilities
in a number of key areas:
Medical Evidence: Doug was present at all 10 depositions
of autopsy participants---including the three autopsy doctors
(Humes, Boswell, and Finck)---and in fact was the research assistant
for the preparation of those 10 depositions. He also made a trip
to Dallas in connection with interviewing some of the Dallas
medical personnel. Doug has seen the Bethesda autopsy photographs
and X-rays at the National Archives on about 15 occasions.
Records re US foreign policy: As Chief Analyst for military
records, Doug was deeply involved in formulating the search criteria
for and then implementing the acquisition and release of military
records on the formulation of US foreign policy re Cuba and Vietnam.
The former pertain to the various plans for the ouster of Castro;
the latter, to the escalation of the Vietnam War.
Zapruder film: Doug worked with Kodak in preparation
of a technical report on the Z film; and on the digitization
of the autopsy photographs. In carrying out those duties, Doug
went to Rochester and worked with various Kodak employees when
that work was done. He also had extensive liaison responsibilities
with the LMH company; and is one of the few individuals to see
the original Zapruder film as it was taken from archival storage
and photographed by the LMH company in preparation for its release
this past summer.
IRS. Doug had primary responsibility in the area of
working with the IRS and the Social Security Administration with
regard to the examination of Oswald's tax, earnings, and employment
history; and addressing various questions raised by those records.
Other: Doug wrote a variety of memos and analyses relating
to the chain of possession of the autopsy photographs, the planning
of the trip to Texas, and the Zapruder film.
He has a comprehensive "insider's view" as to how
the ARRB operated in its relationships with various government
agencies as well as with the Kennedy assassination research community.
FROM JFK LANCER: Debra Conway, Tom Jones,
and George Michael Evica, the 1998 Conference Chair, thank both
Doug Horne and Joe Backes for making this extremely important
*All referenced documents from Doug
Horne and on releases in 1998 by the ARRB are available from
JFK Lancer Resource
CDRoms. (except Horne's personal file on the Dallas Doctors
Links to more information on
the medical evidence:
10, 1998 Archive Photos Not of JFK's Brain, Says Assassinations
Board Report Staff Member; Concludes 2 Different Specimens Were
Examined, Article from the "Washington Post"
of John F. Kennedy, Warren Report Appendix IX - Autopsy Report
and Supplemental Report Clinical Record - Autopsy Protocol Date
11/22/63 1300 (CST)
Articles on the Lancer Web Site