| |
| James Humes, 2-13-96 |  (PDF: 12657 K) |
| J. Thorton Boswell, 2-26-96 | (PDF: 11444 K) |
| Pierre Finck, 5-24-96 | (PDF: 4525 K) |
| Robert Groden, 7-2-96 | (PDF: 12081 K) |
| John Stringer, 7-16-96 | (PDF: 6821 K) |
| Floyd Riebe, 5-7-97 | (PDF: 2633 K) |
| Saundra Kay Spencer, 6-5-97 | (PDF: 2196 K) |
| James Sibert, 9-11-97 | (PDF: 5436 K) |
| Francis O'Neill, 9-12-97 | (PDF: 7059 K) |
| Edward Reed, 10-21-97 | (PDF: 4055 K) |
| Jerrol Custer, 10-28-97 | (PDF: 6079 K) |
| Parkland Hospital Doctors, 8-27-98 | (PDF: 4502 K) |
Click on an entry to view the scanned pages of that document, or
select a PDF icon to view the Portable Document Format version.
Return to previous tables of contents via the Return to links.
Consult the library
guide for more information.
 |
Documents are available in
Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF). Get the free Adobe Acrobat
Reader here. |
|
|
| |
ARRB Medical Testimony
Because of the highly controversial and conflicted medical testimony
in the JFK assassination, and the lack of a chain-of-custody for so many important
evidentiary materials, the ARRB decided to conduct sworn depositions to "clarify the
medical evidence."
In 1996 through 1998, testimony was taken from nine persons present at Kennedy's
autopsy, two others who were involved in processing or disseminating photographs of
the autopsy, and five doctors who treated JFK in Parkland Hospital in Dallas. For
those familiar with the medical evidence in the case, these detailed interviews contain
a wealth of material and have fueled the debate over the nature of Kennedy's wounds
and the direction of shots which caused them.
Some of the testimony directly impugns the very authenticity of autopsy materials.
For instance, the ARRB interviewed Saundra Kay Spencer, who processed autopsy photographs
the weekend of the assassination, and testified that the photos now in the National
Archives are not the ones she developed. Similarly autopsy photographer John Stringer
disavowed the photos of the brain held in the Archives. These depositions are "must reading"
for those with an interest in the medical aspects of the case.
|
|
