Abstract

ABSTRACT: The investigations surrounding the assassination of President John F. Kennedy and the subsequent killing of Lee Harvey Oswald resulted in many theories concerning what really happened in November 1963. One theory postulated the substitution of a Russian agent for Oswald; another that his grave was actually empty. This report documents the historical background, legal proceedings, preparations and actual exhumation, examination, and identification of the remains of Lee Harvey Oswald. The pertinent findings of a cracked vault, deteriorated casket, decomposed remains, two rings, a mastoidectomy defect, and the details of the positive dental identification are presented. Additional items covered include team formation, security measures, site selection, financial considerations, the news media, and selection of authorized witnesses. KEYWORDS: pathology and biology, odontology, Lee Harvey Oswald. human identification, dentition Historical Background and Legal Proceedings Lee Harvey Oswald was born on 18 Oct. 1939 in New Orleans, LA On 22 Nov. 1963, President John F. Kennedy was assassinated in Dallas, TX. Oswald was arrested in connection with the assassination and two days later, was fatally shot by Jack Ruby while being transferred to a vehicle at the Dallas County Jail. An autopsy was performed by Dallas County Coroner Dr. Earl Rose. Although Oswald's identity was not in question at the time, a single thumbprint was taken that was positively compared with military records. Fourteen Meanwhile, while awaiting appeal, attorneys for Eddowes approached Dr. Linda Norton, then Medical Examiner for Dallas County, suggesting that the Dallas County Medical Examiner's Office resume their original jurisdiction over the case and exhume the body. After consulting with Dr. Charles Petty, Dallas County Chief Medical Examiner, Dr. Norton obtained a copy of Oswald's medical and dental records including dental interproximal ("bitewing") radiographs from the Military Personnel Records Center in St. Louis, MO. These records would be useful for a forensic science identification because they were dated before Oswald's defection to the USSR and thus contained identity data of the "real" Lee Harvey Oswald. Dr. Petty subsequently requested that the pathology resident who had recently replaced the deceased Dr. Gwozdz as Tarrant County Medical Examiner exhume the body "buried in Rosehill Cemetery under the name of Lee Harvey Oswald" under Article 49.25 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure and send the remains to the Dallas County Medical Examiner's Office for autopsy. A jurisdictional battle ensued as legal opinions regarding Article 49.25 varied considerably as to which county, if any, had jurisdiction over a person killed in one county but subsequently buried in another. The conflict appeared to be resolved some six months later when Tart'ant County officials withdrew their active opposition to the exhumation, clearing the way for Dallas County to proceed; however, the Dallas County Chief Medical Examiner then also withdrew stating that he no longer felt the exhumation was necessary. At this point, all legal actions had been completed and all involved parties were quiet for several months. NORTON ET AL 9 LEE HARVEY OSWALD 21 Eddowes then directed his attention to Marina Oswald Porter, Oswald's legal next of kin, and obtained her signature oll a consent for Dr. Petty to perform the autopsy at the Dallas County Medical Examiner's Office as a "private case." Eddowes was to pay all expenses. News of the preparation for exhumation prompted Oswald's brother, Robert, to request a temporary restraining order (TRO) which was granted by the aforementioned 141st District Court. In his original petition, Robert Oswald named Petty, Eddowes, Marina Oswald Porter, Rosehill Cemetery, and the Dallas County Commissioner's Court Judge. By amended pleadings, Robert dismissed all but Petty, Eddowes, and Rosehill Cemetery. The court denied the injunction against Rosehill Cemetery, granted Petty the right to be sued in the county of his residence, rather than Tarrant County (thus, effectively severing him from the suit), and granted Robert's injunction against Michael Eddowes. Petty failed to comply to a subpoena to appear for the hearing (because of miscommunication) and Robert's attorneys filed a motion for contempt. Meanwhile, the Dallas County Commissioners, stirred by what they considered "adverse publicity" for Dallas County, openly opposed the use of any county facility for the examination, justifying their position by stating that a "private" autopsy should not be performed using county property. During the next year, while awaiting Eddowes' appeal of the injunction, numerous negotiation attempts, motions, and counter motions kept attorneys for all sides occupied. Finally. on 19 Aug. 1981, Marina, tiring of the harassment and believing that the grave was in fact empty, filed suit against Robert. By remarkable coincidence the ease became "randomly" assigned to the 141st District Court. On 17 Sept. 1981, slightly over a year after the lower court's decision to grant Robert Oswald an injunction against Eddowes, the Court of Appeals heard the case. Again, they reversed the 141st District Court citing Article 49.05 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure. The court found that Robert had no "justiciable" interest in the exhumation of the remains of his brother given the fact that there was a surviving spouse and children. Marina Oswald Porter was now considered by the Court of Appeals as an "indispensible party" because of her statutory rights under Article 49.05. By dissolving the injunction, the court effectively allowed Marina to pursue her lawsuit against Robert. Despite the higher court's decision, a week later the 141st District Court again granted Robert a temporary restraining order against Marina; however, Robert and his attorneys capitulated citing emotional and financial burdens as the reason. Thus, the temporary restraining order was allowed to run its ten-day course and expire at midnight, 3 Oct. 1981, permitting Marina without judicial intervention, to proceed with the exhumation on 4 Oct. Preparations for Exhumation and Examination As litigation progressed and it became apparent that the exhumation would ultimately take place, practical issues were addressed by attorneys for both Eddowes and Marina. The choice of Dr. Norton as the chief forensic pathologist for the examination was based on the fact that: (1) she was familiar to the attorneys; (2) she had escaped involvement in any of the litigation; and (3) she had possession of the critical medical and dental records and radiographs. Because of the legal implications of the case, a team approach was elected, with the desired goal to keep the team as small as possible. A total of two forensic pathologists and two forensic odontologists was felt to be sufficient. The selection of an examination site was more difficult. The county commissioners had earlier denied the use of the Dallas Institute of Forensic Science, and Mrs. Marina Oswald Potter refused to allow the remains to be transported out of the Dallas-Fort Worth area. Therefore, a search was conducted for a local facility that: (1) could be effectively secured and (2) whose personnel were willing to accept the certain disruption of routine and possible controversy to be expected in a case of this nature. Dr. George Race, Chairman of the Department of Pathology at Baylor Hospital in Dallas, was approached and, with the consent of Baylor Hospital ad- JOURNAL OF FORENSIC SCIENCES ministrators, agreed to the use of his facility. Dr. Cottone, team member and forensic odontologist at the University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, with the permission of health science center administrators, supplied the necessary equipment for the dental examination. Mr. Eddowes was responsible for all expenses. The examination team worked for expenses only because of the controversial nature of the case; Baylor accepted a very nominal fee; and at least one attorney, to date, has received no remuneration. The autopsy facility at Baylor satisfied all requirements for a secure examination. Once access to the autopsy area was achieved, minimal security was necessary to prevent any trespass caused by a single door entry Other persons allowed to be present during the examination were determined largely by the various attorneys. The examination team was assisted by one pathology technician and one dental radiology technician. Dr. Race and his chief associate alternated to help maximize the use of their equipment and facility; a court recorder noted all proceedings; and attorneys representing Eddowes, Marina Porter, Robert Oswald, and Rosehill Cemetery, were also present. The mortician who closed Mr. Oswald's casket remained in the room until the casket was reopened. Members of the news media were totally excluded from the proceedings with the exception of one United Press International (UPI) reporter who, upon agreement with at least one of the attorneys, was allowed into a morgue anteroom. A single public press conference was held at the conclusion of the examination, coincidental with the body being transported back to Rosehill Cemetery for reinterment in a new casket and vault. The Exhumation A small crowd gathered at Rosehill Cemetery during the predawn hours of Sunday, 4 Oct. 1981 A wooden platform was lowered into the trench and the casket was gently slid onto it. A cardboard lid, designed to fit over the casket, was in place before lifting the platform from the grave and placing it in a hearse. The entire operation was completed by 9:00 a.m. (Central Daylight Savings Time [CDT]), by which time, a large crowd of spectators and news media representatives had gathered. The hearse, heading toward Dallas, lent further credance to the assumption that the examination was to take place at the Dallas Institute of Forensic Science. Thus, most of the news media went to that office which facilitated the rapid transport of the casket into the Baylor autopsy area External Examination The remains were received in a moderately rotting wood coffin measuring 203 em (80 in.) in length with a depth of 61 cm (24 in.) and an estimated width of 61 cm (24 in. ) with the thickness of the casket sides being approximately 2.5 cm (1 in.). 5 The exterior aspects of the coffin showed moisure softening of the wood and a diffuse dark brown-black splotchy discoloration with several markedly tarnished apparent metallic ornaments noted about the sides. The above measurements do not include the wooden top of the casket which dismembered upon removal from the casket itself. The interior of the casket showed similar splotchy brown-black discoloration and moisturesoftening of the wood texture. A portion of fabric mesh material, representing remnants of the fabric lining of the top of the casket, had fallen upon the decomposed remains covering the anterior torso area. This was removed to reveal a clothed markedly decomposed body lying on its back upon the casket floor, lower extremities extended and straight with the upper extremities flexed at the elbow and with the hands resting upon the anterior abdomen at the approximate level of the waist. The skull faced anteriorly. The body rested upon a straw mat bedding material, markedly rotten, which currently possessed a thickness of approximately 2.5 cm (1 in.). The clothing upon the body showed variable degrees of disintegration caused by postmortem change. The clothing was in normal position upon the remains with the outer layer of clothing consisting of relatively intact coarse-woven dark (dark-brown) suit coat and matching trousers secured about the waist by elastic band rather than belt. Few remnants of a disintegrated lightcolored shirt were identified and a relatively intact black standard necktie was in usual position within the anterior torso midline and about the neck. A relatively intact pair of white with green diamond pattern boxer undershorts were also in position upon the body in addition to dark socks upon the feet; shoes or remnants thereof were not identified within the casket. The body, with the exception of the skull, as will be described, was not removed from the casket nor was it dislodged, therefore, the posterior aspects of the clothing and body were not examined. None of the clothing was incised or removed from the body. Upon entry into the casket a moderate malodor emanated from the decomposing body. As measured in the casket from superior skull to heel region on the left, a body length of 177 cm (691/2 in.) was obtained. A gold wedding band and a red stone ring were removed from the fifth digit of the left hand (subsequently identified by Mrs. Porter as representative of items placed upon the body at the time of initial burial). The head structures will be described below. The clothing present upon the anterior torso was displaced laterally revealing diffusely decomposed markedly shriveled and shrunken friable soft tissue which, where remaining, showed primarily saponification and adipocere formation with a pair of postmortem tissue disintegration defects noted within the bilateral pectoral chest areas measuring 15.25 cm (6 in.) on the left and 10.2 cm (4 in.) on the right. The remaining anterolateral ribs were markedly friable and crumbled with mild pressure. The majority of the soft tissue of the anteroabdominal wall was totally disintegrated and contained within the body cavity was a beige plastic bag measuring 69 by 50 cm (27 by 191/2 in.) with an approximate 28 cm (ll-in.) diameter which contained a minimal amount of pasty tan decomposed tissue estimated at 20 cm 3. The existing thoracoabdominal cavity was limited posteriorly by brown-black friable decomposed soft tissue as described for the anterior torso. Embalmer stuffing material filled the body cavity. The exposed feet showed partial skeletonizaSThe original measurements were made in inch-pound units. NORTON ET AL . LEE HARVEY OSWALD 25 tion. The skin covering the lower extremities was markedly shriveled with marked dissolution of subcutaneous soft tissue and muscle so that the present diameter of the lower extremities was estimated at approximately one third of the in life circumference. The intact skin upon the distal lower extremities had a friable consistency, was more dry than wet, shriveled, and parchmentlike. The length of the right tibia as the body existed within the casket was 38 cm (15 in.). (According to Trotter-Gleser data for white males, the estimated stature is 174 cm (5 ft 81/2 in.) The body as existed in the coffin showed no evidence of mutilation other than postmortem disintegration; the same statement applied to the remaining clothing. Patchy areas of variablecolored mold formation were also noted about the body exterior. The body was maintained in anatomic continuity by virtue of decomposed soft tissue. The remains and casket were devoid of maggots with few crawling insect forms noted. The head was removed from the remainder of the body by incision of the mummified soft tissue maintaining the skull, cervical and thoracic vertebral column in normal continuity. This incision was made at the approximate second cervical vertebral interspace. The skull was covered by patchy areas of both mummified soft tissue as well as adipocere formation. The calvarium for the most part was free of soft tissue, however, a few strands of approximate 10 cm (4 in.) in length straight dark brown-black scalp hair were noted embedded within mummified scalp soft tissue adjacent to the right frontal scalp. A previous autopsy saw cut in the usual fashion was present on the calvarium with an anterior inverted V-notch in the right frontal region. The calvarium was maintained in continuity with the remainder of the skull by virtue of decomposed mummified tissue. The previously sawed calvarium was not separated nor was it easily dislodged. The interior of the skull was not examined. The supraorbital ridges of the skull were male in character and the nasal aperture was slightly ovoid with a sharp inferior sill. The mastoid prominence of the left temporal bone revealed an irregularly ovoid 1.0-by 0.5-cm defect penetrating to the interior of the mastoid bone with the defect edges rounded and smooth No incisions upon the body were made except for that necessary for removal of the skull from the vertebral colunm and for subsequent disarticulation of the mandible and exposure of the dentition. Because of the friable condition of the body it was elected to remove the skull only from the casket with minimal disarticulation of the remains in accordance with the desires of next of kin. The above examination was performed with the remains within the casket and without removal. Only manual manipulation of the remains was used so as to afford the observations noted above. No histologic sections nor toxicologic specimens were retained. Dental Examination Initial cleansing of the teeth was followed by a series of radiographs and photographs to document the status of the dentition before any further disruption. After the mandible Dental Comparison It was necessary to answer two questions concerning the dental records prior to the disinterment. The first question was that of the date of the dental interproximal radiographs (Figs. 6 and 7) which Dr. Norton had obtained. From the list of Available Antemortem Dental Records The second question was whether or not all inconsistencies in the dental records could be explained and the records documented as being authentic. Charting errors are common, especially in a dental health record that has entries by many different practitioners as in the mili- tary. The Forensic Dental Examination Summary 1. Maxillary right third molar (No. 1, Universal System) Tooth noted as missing on several examinations and radiographs was actually unerupted and is not normally found in the radiographic view used. Occlusal-lingual metallic restoration incorrectly charted on 25 Oct. 1956 which was really occlusal caries as documented on radiographs of 27 March 1958. Occlusal-lingual metallic restoration also was confused with the same restoration in the adjacent tooth (maxillary right first molar). 3