Return to Main Page
Chairman Tunheim - "I call to order of this Open Meeting of the Assassination Records Review Board. Do we have the tape recorder going?"
Ms. Olsen - "I did not bring it in. I'm hoping I don't need it. You think I might need it? Are there going to be any long resolutions?"
Judge Tunheim - "Is it required?"
Ms. Olsen - "Well, no, it's not required. I just started doing it recently."
Judge Tunheim - "Well, if it's not required then that's fine."
Ms. Olsen - "Okay."
Judge Tunheim - "The first item on our agenda is a review of the minutes of our last Open Meeting of August 26, 1998. They were prepared by Jerry Olsen. Is there a motion to approve?"
Dr. Anna Nelson - "So moved."
Judge Tunheim - "Is there a second?"
Dr. William Joyce - "Second."
Judge Tunheim - "All in favor say, `Aye."
All - "Aye."
Judge Tunheim - "The minutes from August 26th are approved. I should note for the record that Dr. Graff is unable to be here today, a preexisting obligation that he had but we do have a quorum of four members of the Board here. All right, would you like to kick off the discussion here?
Laura Denk - "I would like to. The staff has been working since the last open meeting on creating this binder that you see which is the draft Final Report of the [Assassination Records] Review Board. You all have been reading it in the last day and a half.
"The two items that I think are the most appropriate for the Board to discuss today during this open meeting are first, what should be included in the executive summary of the Review Board's report, since the report itself attempts to be fairly comprehensive, what should we distill from the report as part of the executive summary? So, we need to talk about those items. And then also, Dr. Joyce has been working on the Board's chapter and the recommendations. Jerry prepared for us all today a distillation of each one of these recommendations and then we can go through each one of those and talk about the wording and how to structure those recommendations. I think this will lead to productive areas of discussions."
Judge Tunheim - "Sounds good. Thoughts on the Executive Summary?"
Dr. Anna Nelson - "Some of the chapters have concluding paragraphs, which, well I think the first thing we need to decide is the length of it. Somewhere between 5 and 10 pages? Nothing more than 10. Is 5 too long? 7 too long? We don't want people to have to read too much. So I think the length is a good question."
Judge Tunheim - "Well, the length may be determined by the type of information.
Dr. Anna Nelson - "Yeah well, that's why I was going 5 to 10."
Judge Tunheim - "Certainly in a document that may be, totally, how many pages?"
Laura Denk - "So far, 225 pages."
Judge Tunheim - "A lengthy document. Say if we went up to 15 pages for an executive summary that's too much for a document of that size."
Dr. Anna Nelson - "Well, originally, someone had suggested 2 pages. I thought that was inadequate."
Judge Tunheim - "That could be the Executive Executive Summary."
(laughter)
Laura Denk - "It is also known as a preface."
Dr. Anna Nelson - "It is also known as, `I don't know how to read."
Dr. William Joyce - "It's up to 225 type written pages?"
Laura Denk - "Yes, single spaced, except for paragraph separation."
Dr. Anna Nelson - "It will probably be edited down somewhat. You usually do when you edit."
Dr. William Joyce - "I am reminded of the professorial answer to the question how long should my paper be. The answer is long enough to cover the subject."
Laura Denk - "And as we have said some of the chapters, the longer chapters are necessarily encyclopedic. They hit the subjects that we hit."
Dr. William Joyce - "I think it would be a mistake to put people off to curl up with this." (some laughter of the thought of this as bedtime reading.)
Dr. Anna Nelson - "It seems to me that somewhere we ought to have, we ought to open with this, the idea of secrecy, just throughout the chapters, perhaps we could have a congressional quote on the matter, we should have some mention on the delayed start up, the definition of an `assassination record', the task of reviewing documents, standards for a `common law' or whatever that is required, that part of it, the search for additional records without the kind of detail that is in the chapter that asks for an example, and the mention of public outreach. I'm sure that somewhere there is additional material. But, that would cover the subject matter. I lay that out for discussion."
Dr. Kermit Hall - "No, I think that's good. I would just add a couple of things onto it. It seems to me that there are three elements that really show up to allow an operation of independence. There are two statutory provisions. One is presumption of disclosure and clear and convincing evidence as a standard. I think those need to be asserted-"
Dr. Anna Nelson - "Up front."
Dr. Kermit Hall - "Up front, yeah."
Dr. William Joyce - "I think compliance is important."
Dr. Anna Nelson - "You're quite right, compliance is important."
Dr. Kermit Hall - "And compliance, I think we need to remind everyone up front, as the report does now and it is nicely done but we have a continuing problem as we go out of existence there needs to be some means of ensuring that the common law standards that we adopted are in fact used to treat whatever else is found in the same way that we treated it, at least as a floor."
Dr. William Joyce - "Somewhere between an aspiration and an expectation."
Dr. Kermit Hall - "What we have done is to establish a floor beneath which no one else should go in dealing with these documents whatever else is found out there. But they are welcome to raise the ceiling as high as they want in the spirit of openness."
Judge Tunheim - "There does need to be some brief description of the volume of the final result."
Dr. Anna Nelson - "Oh, good point, good point."
Judge Tunheim - "Certainly not to the extent it is described in the document part, but that would be a part that people are looking for."
Dr. Anna Nelson - "I think that when we do that we need to point out the the Act has released x number. Our part of it was a part of that number and we released so much. There are so many more documents that we never looked at."
Judge Tunheim - "There is a lot that was released not as a direct activity of ours but really as a result."
Dr. Anna Nelson - "Oh yes, but there were some that were released just under the Act. And, oh I think in terms of, I would always mention the fact that once we set the guidelines, we have that in the chapter actually, records went out."
Dr. Kermit Hall - "In some ways the statute presents a lot of the outline. And one of the other pieces in here is the whole business of foreign records or non-US records."
Dr. Anna Nelson - "I think what we have to decide is how much of some of this belongs in the Executive Summary. A mention of it certainly does but when we talk about that and the search for additional records we are going to have to be very terse, or it will be just a repetition of the chapter."
Dr. Kermit Hall - "Yes, I think that's quite right. My point would be in two sentences that it was very frustrating process."
Dr. Anna Nelson - " (laughs) Yes. A masterpiece of understatement!"
Dr. Kermit Hall- "We made some progress comma and that we hope our heirs and successors will be able to achieve even more."
Judge Tunheim - "Additional thoughts on the Executive Summary?"
Dr. Anna Nelson - "It does [help you] as you read through the chapters. And I think that probably there are two parts to this that people will read, that and the end of it maybe.
Judge Tunheim - "Well, I think there is a question about whether recommendations should go in the Executive Summary."
Dr. Anna Nelson - "I think so too. That is something we should discuss."
Dr. Kermit Hall - "An Executive Summary without the recommendations."
Laura Denk - "What do you all think of mentioning in the Executive Summary this idea that different chapters may appeal to different audiences?"
Dr. Anna Nelson - "It might belong in the Preface."
Judge Tunheim - "OK, any other thoughts. Can we turn to Recommendations?"
Dr. William Joyce - "One comment if I may, there are several places in the report where it refers to " The Board recommends..." and I wonder whether, one of them has to do with changing the law to (too unclear, I can't decipher it.)
Laura Denk - "There may be one in another processed chapter, another key phrase."
Judge Tunheim - "Something about the electronic identification aides."
Laura Denk - "about the electronic identification aides."
Dr. Kermit Hall - "Standardizing."
Dr. Anna Nelson - "The IRS documents have been subject to, Bill probably knows more about this than I do, they have been the subject of dispute, the tax records, not the tax forms, subject to dispute with the National Archives. I can't remember whether they have gone to Court, or not."
Dr. William Joyce - "I believe they have."
Dr. Anna Nelson - "I thought they had, too. Because of the question of (?) and the Archives came to the defense of the (living?)
Laura Denk - "Bill, would you suggest printing those out?"
Dr. William Joyce - "Well, I hadn't, they both seem to me to be very particular. I have tried to draft these in such a way to extend the work of the Board itself in some way. Those are very particular applications. There are some more particular recommendations I suppose that could be cycled in, but I suppose that's a questions mark. I guess in this case I raise it more as a question."
Judge Tunheim - "If there is a recommendation section in the document, and these recommendations appear elsewhere I think for practical purposes they will be lost-"
Dr. William Joyce - "Right."
Judge Tunheim - "except for those that are very interested-
Dr. William Joyce - " That's my point. That's why I'm drawing attention to it If they should be there, they should be there."
Judge Tunheim - "I think that at a minimum they should be repeated here. Perhaps just as a chapter 3 the Board recommends...If you put them in one, one number where you say the Board has recommended other courses of action to deal with particular problems raised by the Act they are....then They are discussed more fully in another chapter."
Dr. Anna Nelson - "What do you mean by restricts the number of categories by which documents might be possibly withheld? Secret? Top Secret?"
Dr. William Joyce - "Actually, I was thinking of the FOIA categories [of] restrictions."
Dr. Anna Nelson - "So, those are, they won't go...
Dr. William Joyce - "exemptions?"
Dr. Anna Nelson - "exemptions, the numbered exemptions. And in separating out the recommendations, I know Kermit's motive was different than this, but are we saying that we go with the text but the recommendations within the text are clearer?
I'm not positive, or do we take out some of the text? I'm not clear."
Dr. Kermit Hall - "My point was real simple, if we have recommendations they ought to recommend something,-"
Dr. Anna Nelson - "Well, yeah."
Dr. Kermit Hall - " and some of them don't recommend anything, they are set up as commentary. And so my thought is, actually I think many of them have recommendations implicit in them or within another discussion. And we can always ask Jerry to to that. (rewrite it?)
Dr. Anna Nelson - "I understand that but I mean, you're not saying we won't have it, the rest of this chapter?"
Dr. Kermit Hall - "Oh no, no, no, the rest of the chapter-"
Dr. Anna Nelson - "I'm with you."
Dr. Kermit Hall - "-It's just that each area where we have a recommendation-
Dr. Anna Nelson - "It would be written differently."
Dr. Kermit Hall - "for future declassification, or say we recommend future declassification efforts involving controversial matters rests on the generalized concept of-
Dr. Anna Nelson - "No, I thought I understood it correctly, I just wanted to straighten it out in general."
Judge Tunheim - "I think, Kermit, you had a thought earlier about a professional board?"
Dr. Kermit Hall - "Yes, actually I wanted to raise that if I could."
Dr. Anna Nelson - "a what?"
Judge Tunheim - "The professional boards that recommended us."
Dr. Anna Nelson - "Oh yes, oh yes."
Dr. Kermit Hall - "I think that one of the continuing problems we are going to have is having some group that would provide principled oversight of the execution of the JFK Act and the implementation of the `common law' principles that we have established, obviously it cannot exist as a legal body but it can be a group that would have the force of public authority behind it and to that extent what we might think of doing is asking the organizations that sponsored us, The American Bar Association, the Society of American Archivists, AHA, the Organization of American Historians, to form a committee, the purpose of which I would assume to act as a liaison with the National Archives which will have the responsibility for in essence, I think, overseeing, I mean they have got to take the records and make sure they are provided [to the public] and I can see this going to 2017. I doubt that any of us will be as active then. But, I do, as we talked about this morning, we have an obligation, I don't know if it's moral, but maybe it's an ethical one actually when you think about it to make sure that we don't walk away from this, in the sense that we assume that others are going to do the job, so I think we can get ourselves together-
Dr. Anna Nelson - "I think that the conclusion we had this morning is that pressure will come from the public, it won't come from, the public has to oversee it, this is a good way, this is how our discussion began-
Dr. Kermit Hall - "It would mean if the groups thought that we were probative and competent to the task, at least for this critical 18-24 month period when the CIA and others are still delivering to us some goods.....
Dr. William Joyce - "One of the concerns that I have is there is no advocacy built into the process after we leave, that is the force of authority kind of settles back to the agencies, and I worry about that a great deal. Maybe a group could be proposed, maybe to `extend' us for a few weeks, provide some oversight, so our successors can claim some responsibility whether they seek the responsibility to make claims on our behalf, as an entity we won't exist but we have go to see to it that those principles [the Board's `common law'] are sustained.
Dr. Kermit Hall - "It would have been interesting, kind of a watchdog group."
Dr. William Joyce - "Yeah."
Judge Tunheim - "The alternative to that is just flat out the process is not working, and somebody has to go to Congress and say we need another group to watch over this."
Dr. Anna Nelson - "It is also that the organizations that Kermit mentioned often do join with public litigation people to sue, and I think in that sense the public is probably going to be out there and watching, an example of that is a lot of pressure was put on, by of all people (German historians?) who wanted some records from World War II, waited patiently for 50 years, boy it got to be 49 and a half years, they really started to campaign, and they got the documents. I mean, it was enough public pressure, and that is part of what we have to count on."
Dr. Kermit Hall - "Well, to the extent that we remember some of our board action, and the extent, it's too bad in a way that there isn't a kind of continuing group, like the State Department advisory group or, just on a continuing basis to work, to keep our security classifications so that the discussions could be a little bit more of an honest one, because even with the mode that I am suggesting the trump card is always going to be, well, you can't understand we can't explain it to you [the old game of you're not cleared to know why it's classified and why it's going to remain classified.] all of which we have been able to dispose of because we have been able to have those discussions, anyway I think we could address that.
"Everyone in this room needs to understand that there are two things that have happened here, one is that a lot of work has gone into this on Bill's part to get us to the point where-
Dr. Anna Nelson - "Oh heavens, yes."
Dr. Kermit Hall - "-and I would deign to say heroic, but I would tell you this is a tremendous amount of work in the last two weeks since we met to take what was an ambitious effort on the part of the staff but to turn it into something that you can actually sit down and-"
Dr. William Joyce - "work with"
Dr. Kermit Hall - "to work with, and to make some suggestions back-
Dr. Anna Nelson - "I think the really remarkable thing about this document is, as far as anyone can tell is absolutely factually complete and correct, and that meant the Board staff had documentation that was so orderly and so organized that they took could really produce it, for those people who are interested in reading every bit of a particular chapter, it will all be there. it is very, very complete."
Dr. William Joyce - "Why don't I just redirect the discussion a little bit? I would like to ask in terms of the recommendations whether there is agreement about the range, scope, and content of those I don't know if we have had a discussion about
Dr. Kermit Hall - "I would like to go back to number 9 if i could-"
Dr. William Joyce - "Number 9?"
Dr. Kermit Hall - "If that would be suitable to you. We had a discussion last time, I think you modified some of this, perhaps in response."
Dr. William Joyce - "Right."
Dr. Anna Nelson - "I didn't really have a conversation with Bill, I didn't really have a chance. I was showing Kermit a copy of the Executive Order, I didn't bring it to the table here, and yesterday we had an opportunity to talk, but you are differentiating between releasing and redacting, and I know exactly where you were looking at, you were looking at the systematic review section, but the previous section is all under declassification."
Dr. William Joyce - "Yes, and that doesn't really get to what I mean, what I was referring to is the provision in the Executive Order that agency heads can withheld material when they believe it will cause harm to their agency under one of the exempt categories and there is no provision for review of the agency heads decisions, and that's what i was getting at."
Dr. Anna Nelson - "Well, isn't it, ISCAP has the legal, I will go along with you, there is no review
Dr. William Joyce - "And how old is ISCAP?-
Dr. Anna Nelson - "There is no review so we need to rewrite that-"
Dr. William Joyce - "So I need to make that more clear as to what that refers to, but I think there had been some discussion about whether it had ever been appropriate to address the question of FOIA and the Executive order in our recommendations. And let me just say that the reason I included that was that it seems to me that our recommendations make more sense if you see them as part of a continuing activity in the area of declassification. And it was a disservice to us I think if we present these in isolation of other activities that is ongoing. I think we have to be able to contextualize them to make them really meaningful. And that's why I put them in there, but I understand there may not be complete agreement upon the wisdom of doing so. So, I wanted to raise that in this forum for you to comment upon.
Dr. Anna Nelson - "Well, it makes sense considering in that we have in one of the chapters a comparisons of the provisions of FOIA and our Act. And I actually think that we need another sentence there, that the Freedom of Information Act and the Executive Order, the current ones need to be implemented properly and they are not, particularly in the Executive Order."
Judge Tunheim - "Well, the Freedom of Information Act has been `interpreted' for what, 25 years? Are you saying it should be implemented differently?"
Dr. Anna Nelson - "No, no what I was saying was the Executive Order, if an agency like the CIA can say we are going to exempt all operations then the Executive Order is not being implemented [properly.]
Dr. William Joyce - "And the FBI-"
Dr. Anna Nelson - "That's right, the FBI has a huge, it is also [totally] exempt-"
Dr. William Joyce - "Has a 5 year treaty with the President, it seems to me-"
Dr. Anna Nelson - "Don't you think that line somewhere...the current ones, strengthen the implement."
Dr. William Joyce - "Well, I think perhaps to talk about the categories, the categories need to be clarified, or refined, or narrowed."
Dr. Anna Nelson - "Category is an odd word for that."
Dr. William Joyce - "Exemptions."
Dr. Anna Nelson - "Exemptions."
Dr. Kermit Hall - "My question is why don't we recommend-"
Dr. William Joyce - "Number 9?"
Dr. Kermit Hall - "Yes, what is the purpose of this recommendation? `We recommend that FOIA, and the Executive Order be strengthened'."
Dr. William Joyce - "Yes. And you are asking why?"
Dr. Kermit Hall - "No, no, I just wanted, that's the recommendation."
Dr. William Joyce - "Yes."
Dr. Kermit Hall - "Okay, again recommendations, the longer they get the more lost they become in my mind-"
Dr. William Joyce - "Yeah, yeah, yeah, I see, strengthen FOIA and the Executive Order-"
Dr. Anna Nelson - "Or, or, something about implementation. What we are saying, we're trying to say it in words, our experiences have shown that we don't need all of these exemptions, and that you can strengthen FOIA-"
Dr. Kermit Hall - "What I am looking for here is, excuse me-
Dr. Anna Nelson - "And so I agree with you."
Dr. Kermit Hall - "I'm looking for bullets, I'm looking for bullets that the press and the media can take away from this and say, `Listen the Assassination Records Review Board worked for four years and what they have concluded is FOIA and the Executive Order need to be strengthened whatever exegesis comes after."
Dr. William Joyce - "And this is exegesis."
Dr. Anna Nelson - "How about the two should be, back to your strengthened by further restricting the number of exemptions, that's what we are really saying. When we say strengthened what do we mean by strengthened?"
Laura Denk - "Based on the standards of the evidence?"
Dr. William Joyce - "To increase the volume of declassification."
Dr. Anna Nelson - "But you do that by limiting the exemptions."
Dr. Kermit Hall - "One of the, actually I have some questions about whether we should make this as a recommendation in any case but if we do then it needs to be a recommendation based on our experience and what does our experience tell us, it certainly tells us that lots of exemptions are not the way to go but it also tells us that the standard that is applied, presumption of openness and clear and convincing evidence are pretty important at getting at material, so when it comes to strengthening I do think that the exemptions are critical. It seems to me that there are other pieces of it and the other pieces need to get hammered out rather well."
Dr. Anna Nelson - "Yeah, but you have a long exemption, right here you are talking about further declassification-"
Judge Tunheim - "Well, perhaps Bill can take a look at that and stream line it."
Dr. Anna Nelson - "Yeah."
Judge Tunheim - "My view on it is, and I like the substance of it, I think you did very well on it, but I think we might be better advised in terms of the influence of them to perhaps shorten them [the recommendations] a bit, make them a little bit more direct, begin each one with `The Review Board recommends that...' so that when it gets repeated in full as it will by those who wish to use these as part of the language of each one of the recommendations, I think that it might have over time greater weight, and it has some advantage of parallelisms to, when we look at-"
(some more discussion but it's very hard to make it out.)
Dr. Kermit Hall - "but in the end, however, we come up with these there will be an executive summary-
Dr. Anna Nelson - "I think there will have to be."
Judge Tunheim - "A hip pocket version."
Dr. Anna Nelson - "What can be extracted."
Dr. Kermit Hall - "It is interesting too, what are our findings, or conclusions?"
Dr. Anna Nelson - "That we did a good job!"
Dr. Kermit Hall - "Well, that's certainly an answer, one to which I would subscribe, do we find that existing federal information policy is inadequate?"
Dr. Anna Nelson - "Well we find the part we looked at [is] inadequate."
Dr. Kermit Hall - "That there is overclassification of documents? And much of what we have reviewed should have been released years ago?"
Judge Tunheim - "Do we get into the debate over whether that's part of our role to be issuing that type of conclusion?
Dr. Kermit Hall - "Yeah, that's what I'm saying-"
Judge Tunheim - "...assassination records. I think it's warranted to make recommendations based on our experiences whether we reach conclusions that are unrelated, and then I guess the question is do we wind up making conclusions about the assassination too."
Dr. William Joyce - "I started to skirt with the concept of information policy and started to pull back because i think it's just a little bit-
Dr. Anna Nelson - "to broad."
Dr. William Joyce - "beyond our reach and weakens our credibility, one of the problems here is how far to go before you begin to over reach and maybe weaken the credibility of the whole thing."
Dr. Kermit Hall - "So do we need to say anything there that, again conducting our business without subscribing to any theory about the assassination?"
Dr. Anna Nelson - "It wasn't out job."
Dr. William Joyce - "Yeah, I mean Congress went out of their way to tell us to concentrate on records."
Dr. Kermit Hall - "No, no, no, I understand that-"
Dr. Anna Nelson - "That's in the report."
Dr. William Joyce - "That's in the report in several places."
Dr. Kermit Hall - "Well, I mean the definition that we adopted of an assassination record is one with sufficient protein to try to look beyond Lee Harvey Oswald and I think that's been important part of what we do, because if we had subscribed to what Lee Harvey Oswald [allegedly] did we would have many fewer records."
Dr. William Joyce - "I see what you mean and to say something to the effect that our request for records was designed to be capacious because of the nature of the things that are out there, that in this way we tried to cover as much as possible."
Dr. Anna Nelson - "Is this going in one of the recommendations?"
Dr. Kermit Hall - "No."
Dr. William Joyce - "No, but in some place."
Dr. Anna Nelson - "May belong in some place, in the preface chapter."
Dr. Kermit Hall - "All I'm saying is to raise the issue, I'm not trying to put it in the recommendations."
Dr. Anna Nelson - "Actually, Kermit it belongs in the first chapter."
Dr. Kermit Hall - "I agree."
Dr. William Joyce - "Well, if you will excuse me, at the risk of beating this to death, the chapter title, conclusions and recommendations, it does raise the point whether the narrative is sufficiently conclusive-"
Judge Tunheim - "Whether the writing supports the recommendations."
Dr. William Joyce - "Yeah."
Dr. Kermit Hall - "I saw what you did, I thought you did a pretty good job as providing a context for recommendations as opposed to providing findings or conclusions."
Dr. William Joyce - "So, maybe that's just the way to do it. Pithy."
Dr. Kermit Hall - "Pithy. We have a scribe here, I'm sure the scribe could tell us that having it simple and direct is better than (he knocks on the table.)
Dr. Anna Nelson - " (humorously) some of those present don't care to read too much do they. You know some people like that.
"Well if it's not bullets it's at least-"
Judge Tunheim - " (humorously) or ballistics, or something like that."
Dr. Anna Nelson - "Yeah, ballistics, there you go Jack. Well, I mean language that is the equivalent to bullets, direct language, language that is forceful."
Judge Tunheim - "Well, I was just going to say any more thoughts on this subject or any others today?"
Dr. Anna Nelson - "How is it all going to get done by the time we have to finish?"
Judge Tunheim - "Well, I think we are hopeful that when we next gather, next week, we will have close to a final draft if not the final draft for us all to review and work on."
Dr. Kermit Hall - "Has Laura worn her hand out? Wearing a Band-Aid on her thumb? Excessive writing friction?"
Laura Denk - "Something like that."
Dr. William Joyce - "As long as you don't get repetitive stress injury."
Dr. Kermit Hall - "Another piece that we talked about yesterday and I think it will be helpful when we get this final draft, we talked about having some exemplary documents."
Dr. Anna Nelson - "Yes."
Dr. Kermit Hall - "That would be framed in such a way to-"
Dr. Anna Nelson - "To illustrate
Dr. Kermit Hall - "Yes, the various parts."
Dr. Anna Nelson - "And I think we decided on a CIA document, and we would have arrows, this is what this means, and this is what that means, and an FBI document, one that would be a before and after, maybe a split page?"
Dr. Kermit Hall - "Yeah, some of those before and after documents are pretty dramatic."
Dr. Anna Nelson - "They really are, they really are."
Dr. Kermit Hall - "You mean you can't open any of this, and then-"
Judge Tunheim - "The Swiss FBI documents, I think they are the best before and after."
Dr. Anna Nelson - "And I think there were some in the Lopez report, but I don't think we have time, and then what would be very good I don't know if we have time or if we have a spot for this but if we could get a document that was released under FOIA and put it next to a document that we released. That would illustrate very clearly-"
Dr. Kermit Hall - "And make that ninth recommendation-"
Dr. Anna Nelson - "These would be scattered throughout, I presume."
Dr. William Joyce - "Just in case you were looking for some pictures."
Judge Tunheim - "Well, anything else for today's meeting?
(no response)
"Okay, is there a motion to adjourn?"
Dr. William Joyce - "So moved."
Judge Tunheim - "Second? Discussion? All in favor say, `Aye"
All - "Aye."
Judge Tunheim - "Opposed? Meeting is adjourned. Thank you."
(I asked if I could ask some questions before they all got up and left the room. I wanted information on these newly discovered autopsy photographs. I had informed Ms. Debra Reichmann about this and she kindly showed up for the open meeting. She was also interested in this as a possible story, and was interested in other matters related to the Board's work. I had momentarily turned off my audio recorder as I did not know whether they would allow me to ask some questions.)
Joseph Backes - "...because that came from the Burke Marshall materials that
are part of your exemption does that mean that the public will have to
go to Burke Marshall to see them? You digitized them, I believe, I'm
wondering how that plays out with the restrictions that Burke Marshall
had, there was some language about not making copies and if you
digitized them, you did, indeed, make a copy. And you transferred either
the original photographs of that, what was thought to have been exposed
film, and or the digitized copy to the National Archives. Does that mean
any of this is an assassination record? And just the general issue of
public access, will the public be able to see them? What's the status of
that?"
Judge Tunheim - "The digitalized copies of the autopsy photographs were made with the express permission of Professor Marshall with the understanding that they would be a part of the same collection as the official photographs because they are indeed the same images as the official photographs. So they are at the National Archives and subject to the same restrictions that the original photographs are because of the provisions of our Act that..."
Joseph Backes - "Right. It falls under you exemption."
Judge Tunheim - "...falls under our exemption as autopsy material."
Ms. Debra Reichmann (Associated Press reporter) - "Where did these photos come from though?"
Dr. Anna Nelson - " X-rays of the autopsy." (note: this is
incorrect)
Ms. Debra Reichmann - "X-rays?"
Joseph Backes - "They are all X-rays? Or were there..."
(Both of us are surprised as Dr. Nelson seems to be stating that new X-rays were found as well.)
Dr. Anna Nelson - "No, no, no."
Tunheim - "The photographs are digitalized versions of the original color
photographs that reside at the National Archives."
Joseph Backes - "But this is new, isn't it?"
Tunheim - "No. The roll of film was a, that looked to be either unexposed
or overexposed--whatever."
Joseph Backes - "Right."
Judge Tunheim - "No images were available on it, it was part of the collection
at the National Archives..."
Joseph Backes - "Right."
Judge Tunheim - "...we just took it and..."
Joseph Backes - "But now you found that there are indeed images there."
Judge Tunheim - "There are indeed images there, so it was part of the original
collection it just wasn't viewable before because of the exposure."
Ms. Debra Reichmann - "So are you hopeful that you can see them?"
Joseph Backes - "Do we have any idea what..."
Debra Reichmann - "What's on them?"
Joseph Backes - "...what they show? Or will we have to go through Professor
Marshall and basically beg?"
Judge Tunheim - "Well, they are there for qualified researchers who can convince Professor Marshall of the need to see them. And it was our attempt to
try to clarify the evidence as much as we possibly could in that area."
Dr. Kermit Hall - "Which is a substantial contribution in its own right, quite apart from public access."
Joseph Backes - "Oh, very much so."
John Tunheim - "But the access, he has granted access through the years.
Joseph Backes - "Yes, to few and far between."
Judge Tunheim - "to researchers..."
Dr. Anna Nelson - "Pathologists."
Judge Tunheim - "...and medical professionals and it will be available to those
in the same fashion."
Ms. Debra Reichmann - "What kind of photographs are they though? Or X-rays
themselves?"
Judge Tunheim - "No, they are photographs taken during the autopsy."
Ms. Debra Reichmann - "Does this have anything to do with the second group of photographs that we thought might exist?"
Joseph Backes - "From Saundra Spencer?"
Ms. Debra Reichmann - "We still don't know?"
Judge Tunheim - "Where those might be... "
Ms. Debra Reichmann - "That is totally different then..."
Judge Tunheim - "Well, it's the same subject, it's just that those involve
photographs that our depositions have established are missing."
Ms. Debra Reichmann - "Right. Okay, and who took the ones that are thought to be exposed and that now have been digitized so that somebody could look at
them? Who took those?"
Judge Tunheim - "I'm not sure who took those. I don't know if we know. Do we
know?" (asks Doug Horne, a member of the ARRB staff. )
Doug Horne - "There are three images, Chairman Tunheim and I don't think
they reveal anything new."
Joseph Backes - "There are only three?
Doug Horne - "Only three."
Ms. Debra Reichmann - "Like three frames on a roll?"
Doug Horne - "Three frames and that's it."
Ms. Debra Reichmann - "And who took them? Do you know?"
Doug Horne - "We don't know."
Ms. Debra Reichmann - "Oh, okay."
Doug Horne - "Because the format of the film..."
Dr. Anna Nelson - "But there is nothing... "
Joseph Backes - "Are they color or black & white? Or can you say?"
Dr. Anna Nelson - (repeats to Horne) "Are they color or black & white?"
Doug Horne - "They are color. It appears to be a roll of film that is very much
underexposed. So you really have to blast a lot of light through it. They look black to the naked eye until you put it in front of a bright light and that's what Kodak did. They filtered out some of the noise. So they are very grainy and very dark, as though the flash wasn't in sync or something."
Ms. Debra Reichmann - "So those aren't helpful? They are not helpful?"
Judge Tunheim - "It's really up to, I think, and we've taken the position that
researchers who are qualified to look at these photographs will make their conclusions as to whether they are helpful or not. Our contribution was to try to do our best to get a sharper, clearer image of..."
Dr. Anna Nelson - "I think it was a sense that we thought we might be the last
chance."
Joseph Backes - "Yes."
Dr. Anna Nelson - "Even if, even, you know, even if there is nothing there, we are
talking about the fact that no other group had taken upon themselves to do this. And Burke Marshall agreed.
Ms. Debra Reichmann - "Can I ask a couple of other questions quickly? Do you know when you might be able to release the depositions from the Dallas group?
(Note: Mr. Backes talked with Ms. Reichmann after this meeting. It
appears the Board did depose Parkland personnel as they are awaiting
transcripts. Ms. Reichmann told Mr. Backes that Dr. Jeremy Gunn did the
depositions in a group session.)
Judge Tunheim - "We haven't seen transcripts yet, have we?
(unknown, but probably Laura Denk)- "I haven't received them."
Judge Tunheim - "We will release them shortly after we receive them and soon we will probably have to.
Dr. Kermit Hall - "No later than three weeks.
Dr. Anna Nelson - " (laughs) You can be sure of that!
( The ARRB goes out of existence October 1, 1998. )
-tape side ends, side B begins -
Ms. Debra Reichmann -(asked about the KGB Files) "When Clinton and a group went over there (Russia) this past week or two, whatever it was -- what
happened then, or did it come up?"
Judge Tunheim - "We have not gotten the report yet from the National Security
Council which apparently they are preparing now for us, but we have not
gotten that yet."
Debra Reichmann - "When do you expect to get that in?"
Judge Tunheim - "Soon, I hope."
Ms. Debra Reichmann - "Within three weeks?
(laughter)
Judge Tunheim - "Very soon, I hope."
Ms. Debra Reichmann - "Yes, now everything is going to come out at the same time, the report..."
Dr. Anna Nelson - "No, no, no, no. I think this will come out quicker than that.
Judge Tunheim - "The delegation, I think, just returned Sunday? This weekend
anyway. And Monday being the holiday and yesterday being the first
workday back, we just haven't heard back from them yet. We are expecting
a report."
Ms. Debra Reichmann - "Did it come up? Do you know if it came up?"
Judge Tunheim - "Don't know. I suspect that it did. The level at which it came
up on I'm not sure."
Ms. Debra Reichmann - "Okay."
Joseph Backes - "On the Zapruder film front, has any--something must have
happened by now? No? It is still in the courts? Any information would be
helpful. Of course, everyone is asking me."
Judge Tunheim - "Yes. It is not in the courts yet. It is still a subject that is
being handled by the Department of Justice. The issue of the compensation to the Zapruder family is really the issue right now. The taking has taken place. It was effective August 1st. So the film is essentially in government hands and the Zapruders have not yet been paid for it because an agreement on compensation has not yet been worked out."
Joseph Backes - "Any idea if that means there are going to be Congressional
hearings? "
Judge Tunheim - "I doubt it."
Ms. Debra Reichmann - "Has the Justice Dept. agreed to arbitrate this?"
Judge Tunheim - "They haven't reached an agreement with the Zapruders yet."
Ms. Debra Reichmann - "I know that was on the table."
Judge Tunheim - "Yes, it is certainly one of the options that's being pursued.
An agreement to arbitrate means that both sides have to agree to the conditions."
Ms. Debra Reichmann - "Right."
Judge Tunheim - "And until that's completed there is no agreement to arbitrate.
So both sides seem to be willing to approach it through arbitration but
the details have not yet been agreed upon."
Ms. Debra Reichmann - "So are they haggling about the copyright?"
Joseph Backes - "Does your impending demise as a Board put any pressure on either party to try to resolve this?"
Judge Tunheim - "I don't think so."
Joseph Backes - "I see this as a continuing fight over money long after you are
gone."
Judge Tunheim - "Well, we've done what we can which is to secure the film for
the American public, and it is secure, it is taken. I suppose Congress could give it back but I don't see that as being any likelihood at all. But it is within the Justice Dept.'s prerogative to try to work out the compensation for it. And that's really where it's at. And whether that is done within the next 6 weeks or the next 6 months, I'm not sure if that matters.
Joseph Backes - "One last question, the National Archives went to court over IRS records? Is this in relation to Lee Harvey Oswald? Or others? (This was something that Dr. Nelson was speaking about previously in this meeting and I was intrigued as to what this was.)
Dr. Anna Nelson - "No, no, no. It was totally separate."
Joseph Backes - "It had nothing to do with the Kennedy assassination? No? Oh Okay." (My question would be whose side were they on, to get something declassified, or kept closed?)
Return to Main Page
* * *