KENNEDY. ASSASSINATION STILL UNS OLVED MYSTERY
Hugh Trevor—Roper, Regius professor of Modern History at. Oxford, utilizing the findings published by the Warren Commission, has come’ to the considered..conclusion that the murder of President Kennedy: ‘still.remains an unsolved mystery. Ina copyrighted article in the December 13 issue of the London Sunday Times, the distinguished historian said of the "summary," the "full report” and the twenty-six volumes of testimony compiled by the Warren Commission:
. "Tt convinces me that: the Commission, for whatever reasons, simply: has not done its work, or, rather, it has done half its work. It has reassured the American people by its findings but it has not reassured the world by its methods; it has not established the facts; behind a smokescreen of often irrelevant material it has accepted impermissible axioms, constructed invalid arguments, and failed to ask elementary: and essential questions, " i
Trevor-Roper concentrates on a few central facts which in his opinion render the "whole report suspect, "
: First of all he considers the attempted arrest of Oswald by © Patrolman Tippet. “According to the report, the Dallas police issued the order which led to this attempted arrest before any evidence had been found which pointed personally to Oswald.
‘The question at once arises, “on what evidence did they issue these orders?"
To "fill the gap," the report mentions a witness, Howard Brennan, who claimed to have seen the shots fired from the sixth-floor window and who made a statement to the police "within minutes." "This statement, says the report, was 'most probably! the basis of the police description radioed (among others) to Tippett."
The statement of "most probably" evades a chain of events of “the greatest importance," .
Brennan's view of the man in the window could have ‘furnished enough information for only a vague description. But his. particular description of the window must have been precise. .;-'Why then, we naturally ask, did the police broadcast the vague description of the man, but ‘make’ no immediate attempt to search the precisely identified roont : ; =.
» The room.was- searched only later during a "peneral search of the whole building,"
‘On the other hand, if the description which the police broad~ cast was not based on Brennan! s description, "it follows that the police uged- other evidence which they t have not revealed to: the Com=mission. Soy :
Either of these consequences raises’ a whole series of. ques=- . tions of "great importance." By using-the comfortable phrase "most. probably," the. Commission evaded asking. these questions,
This strange pattern is repeated after Oswalals., arrest... Oswald, according to the report, was warned by Captain Fritz of the Dallas police that. any statement he made could be-used against him, After that he was interrogated for twelve hours by the.FBI and the . police, mainly by Captain Fritz. "And yet, we are told. Fritz ‘kept. no notes and there were no stenographic or tape recordings.! This, I do not hesitate to say, cannot possibly be. true. How could any statement made by Oswald be used against him if his statements were | unrecorded?" pyttty Hobe
The Oxford historian points out that even in the most trivial cases in the United States such records are carefully kept, "If no record was available to the Commission, there can be only.one oxplanation. The record was destroyed by the F.B.I. or the police, | and,,the Commission, with culpable indifference, has not troubled to. ask why."
_.. Analyzing the evidence further, Trevor-Roper notes the "same . ‘pattern of suppression" :in relation to the medical evidence:
"On medical evidence alone, the doctor who examined the President concluded that he had been shot from the front, and all police investigations were at first based on that assumption, This meant -that the President -- if indeed he was shot from the book
~l4—
depository -- must have been shot either as his car approached the building or, if the building had been passed, at a moment when he . ~ had turned his head towards it. When both. these conditions were — ~ ruled out by photographs, the police concluded that the shots must have come from behind, and. the doctor was persuaded to adjust his medical report to this external police evidence."
When the Commission came to reassess the evidence, it found an unexpected difficulty: "Unfortunately it could not do so: the purely medical evidence was no longer available. The chief. pathologist concerned, Dr. Humes, signed an affidavit that he had burned — ali his original notes and had: kept no copy."
The Commission aia not ask “why, or on whose authority, the. original notes were destroyed, Police evidence withheld, police . evidence destroyed, medical evidence destroyed, and no questions asked, | This is an odd record in-so important a case, but: it is not the end,
-A specially constructed paper bag was said to have been found in the. ‘room'from: which Oswald! allegedly fired the shots. In the opinion of the Commission, Oswald carried :-the fatal weapon into the © building in this bag. Trevor-Roper then observes, “it seems strange that the police should have to admit that the bag, too, has since been. destroyed, It was,.we are told, 'discolored during various . laboratory examinations! and so ta replica’ ‘bag! ‘was: manufactured under police orders 'for valid identification by witnesses,!' -In other words, the police destroyed the real evidence and substituted their own: fabrication,"
; “AS a. ‘final point "to complete this record of suppressién and’ ne destruction, there is the destruction of the most important living witness ; Oswald himself, " ;
— On. Ruby's entrance into police headquarters on his: allegedly | personally assigned mission to kill Oswald, Trevor-Roper notes a strange discrepancy. The details are of the “ereatest importance. ~~ but the police are unable or unwilling to say, and the Commission is unwilling to press them, All that we are told is that, after his arrest, Ruby refused to discuss his means of entry: he was interro= ” gated in vain, But then, suddenly three policemen came forward and’ °° said that, within half .an:hour of his arrest, Ruby had admitted to them that.-he had entered by the main street ramp just before’ shooting Oswald =-- after which Ruby himself adopted this explanation of his entry. These three policeman, we are told, did not report this important piece of evidence to their superiors, who had been vainly interrogating Ruby on precisely this point, ‘until some days later,'" What were the circumstances under which “Ruby made this admission? The . Commission. is. mot interested. .
7 ;
Much. ‘more: ‘gould be said, in 1 Prevor-Roper's opinion, but. the above is sufficient to prove that the "vast and slovenly report has
1B
no more authority.than the. tendentious and defective polioe reports out of ‘which it is compiled. uo ce "Where ‘then does the Warren. Report leave the problem of Presi~ dent ‘Kennedy's assassination?" asks the historian. "My own belief is that the problem remains a mystery. Nothing in the Warren Report can be taken on trust. There is no evidence that Oswald took the gun Lnto ‘the book depository, nor that he fired it. He may have done so, ‘put it still to be proved, The evidence laboriously presented by the F,B.I. and the Dallas police against Oswald is no stronger than the evidence incidentally admitted against themselves by their sup-= pression ‘and destruction of vital testimony. The best that can be said of the Warren Conmission is that it has given publicity to the prosecutor's case. The case for the defence has not been heard << and: until it is heard, no. valid» judgment can. be given. We,
AD