Crenshaw Credibility Problems?
Russell J. McLean
concerning the phone call from LBJ during Oswald's surgery Sunday morning.
In an interview Brian Edwards and I conducted in the fall of 1996(full
text available in the JFK Deep Politics Quarterly), Dr. Paul Peters
confirmed that not only had the phone call been real, but there had been
federal agents in the OR attempting to obtain a "deathbed confession" from
Oswald.
Peters qualifies these statements by explaining that he was
returning home from Parkland that day when he saw Dr. George Shires whiz
by him on his way to the hospital. He followed and observed the operation.
He also stated that he was taking photographs with a borrowed camera from
the radiology department, and that his camera was seized and never
returned. Why? What would have been revealed by some pictures of an
operation of the half-dead Oswald?
Were the other doctors talking before? Yes. Charles Crenshaw was
the first, however, to be published on the subject. That was the silence
he was breaking. This is not the first time Dr. Crenshaw has been
attacked. The last to attempt that was the JAMA folks, and both Dr.
Crenshaw and J. Gary Shaw won a lawsuit for defamation of character. So
let's examine the whole of the subject first, and not be so quick to
dismiss.
gm...@jfk.org
"Russell J. McLean" <rj...@dhc.net> wrote:
> John McAdams has questioned Dr. Charles Crenshaw's credibility
> concerning the phone call from LBJ during Oswald's surgery Sunday morning.
> In an interview Brian Edwards and I conducted in the fall of 1996(full
> text available in the JFK Deep Politics Quarterly), Dr. Paul Peters
> confirmed that not only had the phone call been real, but there had been
> federal agents in the OR attempting to obtain a "deathbed confession" from
> Oswald.
Peters' claims are not new. It has always been known that there was a call
from Washington, but apparently not from LBJ as Crenshaw's book claims. My
own research, conducted at the request of KXAS-TV, the NBC affiliate in
Dallas, found that LBJ was in his limo at the very moment Crenshaw's book
indicates the call came in. There is no record of any such radiotelephone
call which, according to the procedures in place, would have to have been
routed to Dallas through the White House switchboard where all calls were
logged. Nor is there an account from any of the people in the car that LBJ
said "Excuse me, I have to call the hospital." And there would certainly be
no need to keep such an event, IF it happened, secret.
> Peters qualifies these statements by explaining that he was
> returning home from Parkland that day when he saw Dr. George Shires whiz
> by him on his way to the hospital. He followed and observed the operation.
> He also stated that he was taking photographs with a borrowed camera from
> the radiology department, and that his camera was seized and never
> returned. Why? What would have been revealed by some pictures of an
> operation of the half-dead Oswald?
> Were the other doctors talking before? Yes. Charles Crenshaw was
> the first, however, to be published on the subject.
Not true. Several of the Parkland doctors wrote a report for the January 1964
Texas State Journal of Medicine. Perry discussed some of the events on film
the day after the assassination for KXAS-TV.
> That was the silence
> he was breaking.
Dr. Charles Baxter and others have talked about this. There was an agreement
among the main doctors to never capitalize or benefit financially from their
roles in history. Crenshaw was not part of the agreement, so he wasn't
breaking their "silence." Furthermore, many of the doctors granted interviews
over the years, so it's difficult to understand what "silence" was broken.
> This is not the first time Dr. Crenshaw has been
> attacked. The last to attempt that was the JAMA folks, and both Dr.
> Crenshaw and J. Gary Shaw won a lawsuit for defamation of character.
Was the lawsuit won or was it settled? What were the results? Did JAMA, The
Dallas Morning News or Lawrence Sutherland pay?
> So
> let's examine the whole of the subject first, and not be so quick to
> dismiss.
>
>
--
Gary Mack
Archivist
The Sixth Floor Museum
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum
Sfz
>Subject: Re: Crenshaw Credibility Problems?
>From: gm...@jfk.org
>Date: 10 Sep 1998 10:15:25 -0500
>
>In article <01bddc73$fd1985e0$31a937cf@putz-puter>,
> "Russell J. McLean" <rj...@dhc.net> wrote:
>> John McAdams has questioned Dr. Charles Crenshaw's credibility
>> concerning the phone call from LBJ during Oswald's surgery Sunday morning.
>> In an interview Brian Edwards and I conducted in the fall of 1996(full
>> text available in the JFK Deep Politics Quarterly), Dr. Paul Peters
>> confirmed that not only had the phone call been real, but there had been
>> federal agents in the OR attempting to obtain a "deathbed confession" from
>> Oswald.
>
>Peters' claims are not new. It has always been known that there was a call
>from Washington, but apparently not from LBJ as Crenshaw's book claims. My
>own research, conducted at the request of KXAS-TV, the NBC affiliate in
>Dallas, found that LBJ was in his limo at the very moment Crenshaw's book
>indicates the call came in. There is no record of any such radiotelephone
>call which, according to the procedures in place, would have to have been
>routed to Dallas through the White House switchboard where all calls were
>logged. Nor is there an account from any of the people in the car that LBJ
>said "Excuse me, I have to call the hospital." And there would certainly be
>no need to keep such an event, IF it happened, secret.
So no one has claimed credit for or otherwise identified who called the
hospital at this point?
thanks
Steve Zeigler
gm...@jfk.org
Not to my knowledge. Since the FBI had an agent in the room in case
Oswald spoke, there should be a record of him. I recall one or two names
being possibilities. Perhaps someone else knows.
Pearl Gladstone
I believe Dr. Crenshaw!
He is far more credible than some of the posters here!
I wish more of the physicians (Humes, Boswell, Finck) would find it
suitable and personally valuable to be truthful finally....in whole
John McAdams
wrote:
> John McAdams has questioned Dr. Charles Crenshaw's credibility
>concerning the phone call from LBJ during Oswald's surgery Sunday morning.
>In an interview Brian Edwards and I conducted in the fall of 1996(full
>text available in the JFK Deep Politics Quarterly), Dr. Paul Peters
>confirmed that not only had the phone call been real, but there had been
>federal agents in the OR attempting to obtain a "deathbed confession" from
>Oswald.
What do you mean by "the call?"
Did Peters say that "some" call had come in? Or that LBJ had called
Crenshaw and demanded a confession from Oswald?
Please *do* give us a verbatum quote!
Same for "federal agents." I have no trouble believing that FBI, SS
(etc.) types rushed to Parkland. But was the "Oliver Hardy" figure
that Cranshaw describes there?
Look . . . Russ, it's common in conspiracy literature to say that some
crazy buff witness has been "corroborated" when something vaguely like
what the witness said is found to be true. Sort of like Roger Craig.
There really was a Rambler, and somebody ran and got into it, it's
just that it wasn't Oswald. Little detail there. Somebody called
"from the White House." LBJ called and demanded a confession. Little
detail.
> Peters qualifies these statements by explaining that he was
>returning home from Parkland that day when he saw Dr. George Shires whiz
>by him on his way to the hospital. He followed and observed the operation.
>He also stated that he was taking photographs with a borrowed camera from
>the radiology department, and that his camera was seized and never
>returned. Why? What would have been revealed by some pictures of an
>operation of the half-dead Oswald?
You tell me.
And you might particularly tell me what sinister thing was going on
that all the doctors would have concealed.
> Were the other doctors talking before? Yes. Charles Crenshaw was
>the first, however, to be published on the subject. That was the silence
>he was breaking. This is not the first time Dr. Crenshaw has been
>attacked. The last to attempt that was the JAMA folks, and both Dr.
>Crenshaw and J. Gary Shaw won a lawsuit for defamation of character. So
>let's examine the whole of the subject first, and not be so quick to
>dismiss.
>
I've "examined the whole of the subject." Crenshaw lacks credibility.
See:
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/crenshaw.htm
I would certainly welcome your reaction to the many other problems
with his testimony discussed on the page.
.John
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm