Subj: JFK - COPA controversy? Section: JFK Debate To: Ed Dolan, 74030,3022 Saturday, September 17, 1994 7:46:07 PM From: Gary L. Aguilar, 73653,2623 #239091 Dear all, As an example of the abstracts that are being put together, I'd like to put out one by D. Bradley Kizzia, who is representing Charles Crenshaw, MD, author of "Conspiracy of Silence" in a just legal action as you can read for yourselves: <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< ABSTRACT>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Disturbing Revelations Uncovered in the Suit brought by Charles Crenshaw,MD against the AMA/JAMA, The Dallas Morning News, David Belin, George D. Lundberg, MD, et al. by D. Bradley Kizzia, J.D. Recent information uncovered during the lawsuit brought by Charles Crenshaw, MD, author of Conspiracy of Silence, against The American Medical Association (AMA), The Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), The Dallas Morning News, JAMA editor, George D. Lundberg, MD, JAMA staff writer, Dennis Breo and David Belin, reveals the surprising depths to which some Warren Commission loyalists were willing to descend to quell opposition to the official 'truth' of the Warren Commission. Among the troubling revelations it has emerged that: 1) While Dennis Breos AMA/JAMA articles were described as "objective", and "peer reviewed" by JAMA editor, Lundberg, they were neither. Lundberg acted as instigator, supervisor and consultant in the preparation of Breo's interview articles. As he is a personal friend of controversial interviewees, James, H. Humes, MD and J. Thornton Boswell, MD, he could hardly be considered objective. As he has admitted that he is not knowledgeable on the JFK subject, Lundberg's interpretations are not authoritative. Moreover, Lundberg, a much published authority on the subject of scientific "peer review" , directed that Breo's articles be 'peer reviewed' by himself, AMA attorney Betty Jane Anderson, and JAMA employee, Richard Glass, MD. Not one of these individuals was even moderately knowledgeable on the subject of JFK's death; nor for that matter was author Breo. Lundberg has thus mocked the very standards of peer review scientific journalism he himself has labored to establish and defend - authoritative factual content and objective, knowledgeable prepublication review and certification. 2) Lundberg coordinated and planned the splashy AMA-sponsored New York news conference that announced the publication of Dennis Breos seriously factually flawed and defamatory AMA/JAMA articles. He sent Breo to New York on 5/18/92 to prepare for the 5/20/92 news conference/media blitz. He later misleadingly claimed in sworn depositions that he was merely invited by the AMA to give a news conference, when in fact, the news conference was instigated by him and driven by him. 3) Lundberg sought to impugn Crenshaw's book describing it as "a sad fabrication based on unsubstantiated allegations" for Crenshaw's descriptions of JFK's wounds which suggested a shot from the front. Parkland physician witnesses were presented in JAMA to refute Crenshaw's conspiracy-supporting wound descriptions. JAMA failed to acknowledge, however, that the very witnesses Breo used to disprove Crenshaw's assertions, Drs. Perry, Baxter, McClelland and Jenkins gave eerily similar wound descriptions to those of Crenshaw in 1963 and 1964 - when, presumably, their recollections were fresher and more reliable, and, when they were not being pressured by the AMA/JAMA to give the 'correct' wound descriptions. 4) The AMA/JAMA falsely suggested that Crenshaw's observations were worthless as he was not even in JFK's trauma room. That Crenshaw was present was sworn to by two of JAMA's own interviewees, Drs. Baxter and McClelland, before the Warren Commission, and is also confirmed by the Warren testimonies of three other witnesses (6H32, 40, 60, 80 & 131). AMA/JAMA interviewee Robert McClelland, MD even told Breo that Crenshaw was in JFK's trauma room, yet JAMA printed the false slander anyhow, and apparently without further pursuing the easily found truth. Had a legitimate "peer reviewer" been used by JAMA this error, and myriad others, would have never appeared on its pages. The AMA/JAMA's libelous error against AMA-member, Crenshaw, was critically noted on the pages of the New York Times on 5/20/92 and again on 5/27/92, and, it has been learned, these issues were immediately available, and seen, in the offices of AMA/JAMA. No correction or retraction was printed. Discovery during the suit has also uncovered the fact that Breo and Lundberg even researched and confirmed that the New York Times criticisms were valid on the slanderous errors about Crenshaw and still printed no retraction or correction. AMA/JAMA even reprinted and distributed the false slanders well after the truth was well known to Breo and Lundberg. Crenshaw sent JAMA an article to correct the scientific record and defend his name. JAMA refused to publish it, but suggested he write a letter to the editor of no longer than 500 words. Crenshaw wrote the letter, and JAMA also refused to publish it. It is now 2 1/2 years since these slanderous errors appeared and JAMA has not printed a correction, even if only for the factual, scientific record. In depositions neither Breo nor Lundberg could identify a single other article published in JAMA where any other physician was attacked and treated in a manner similar to that perpetrated against Crenshaw in Breo's articles. 5) The Dallas Morning News and AMA/JAMA derided Crenshaw's claim that he'd picked up a call from LBJ while caring for the mortally wounded Oswald. The New York Times pointed out, however, that Charles R. Baxter, MD, the JAMA-cited physician who denied Crenshaw's claim, was not even in the operating room when the call he disputed came in. Moreover, The New York Times also noted that another Parkland physician who was there, Philip Williams, MD, did remember such a call and had mentioned it to others for years. Moreover the former chief Parkland hospital operator claimed in a letter to the Dallas Morning News that she clearly recalled LBJ's call. The News refused to publish her letter and no retraction or correction of this error was ever made by either the Dallas Morning News or AMA/JAMA. For some journalists loyal to the Warren Commission it seems that to achieve the goal of convicting Oswald of JFK's murder in the eyes of the public, no slander, deception or misrepresentation is too much - even for the medical-scientific literature. While it is easy to condemn the writer, certainly the editor bears far greater responsibility. As Arthur Plotnik has observed, "The best editors become troubleshooters not to hold on to their jobs, however, but because they are decent human beings who don't want to hurt people by publishing false and damaging material...". (emphasis in original and added) "One hopes...that no editor would sink so low, even to attack the most universally despised public figure. Editors are morally bound...to take every precaution imaginable in verifying facts to assure that truth is being served when any member of society is being publicly kicked in the pants." (emphasis added) It would appear that by Plotnik's reckoning, the editors of both JAMA and The Dallas Morning News have sunk quite low. It is also clear that they had little interest giving the truth to their readers when that truth was embarrassing or inconvenient. How ironic it is that the last sentence of Breo's JAMA article reads, "This special report is our attempt to confront the defamers of the truth." <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>> While this of interest to me, there are others just as interesting, and virtually all areas of interest will be covered. Gary