The Exhumation of Lee Harvey Oswald and the Norton Report
Part Two-Paul Groody
By W.
Tracy Parnell © 2003
Paul Groody
In January 1982 at halftime
of a
Much of what researchers
know about the 1981 exhumation and identification of Lee Harvey Oswald apparently
comes from a brief segment in the documentary The Men Who Killed Kennedy
(hereafter TMWKK) that originally aired on the Arts and Entertainment network
(A&E) and is rebroadcast annually by the History Channel. The blurb
features mortician Groody, a former employee of the Miller Funeral Home where
Oswald’s body was prepared for burial in 1963 and who was also present at the
exhumation and forensic identification. Alan Baumgardner assisted Groody both
in ’63 and at the time of the exhumation.
In 1988, Groody appeared in
TMWKK and his story became widely known. It was also featured in Jim Marrs’
1989 book Crossfire and was repeated by conspiracy theorists in numerous
articles and other publications. The story and its implications were largely
accepted as fact and remained unchallenged until the 1992 Internet publication
of an article by M.
History
of the Groody Allegations
In an interview with this
writer, Jack White recalled his first meeting with Groody, “I had previously
known Paul Groody because he had asked our ad agency to submit an ad proposal
for his business a year or so previous to the exhumation, which if I remember
was 1981.” White continued, “… Groody spotted me in the stands, and came over
and told me the same basic story which is well-known.” [5]
Groody’s story concerned
what he saw during the exhumation and later in the examination room at
The first sign of trouble
from Groody’s perspective came when the burial vault of Oswald was brought to
the surface. Groody made the following observation in his now famous TMWKK
segment, “At the time of the '63 burial time, I put Lee Harvey Oswald in a
steel reinforced concrete vault. That vault was hermetically sealed. The vault
is guaranteed not to break, crack, or go to pieces-it's heavy concrete with steel
in it with an asphalt lining. And when I opened the grave in '81 and found that
that vault had been broken and the bottom of the vault was the part that was
broken-the top was still intact-I noticed at that time that the casket had been
disturbed-I questioned in my own mind what had been going on.” [8]
After the vault was opened,
Groody and other graveside observers also noticed damage to the casket. The top
of the casket just above and behind the head was damaged and a section
approximately 18 by 3-4 inches was missing. The opening was large enough so the
observers could actually see the remains of the alleged assassin. [9]
Following the transfer of the remains to Baylor, Groody identified the body
before the exam and he and Baumgardner took care of the remains afterward. Both
men had a chance to get a brief but close-up look at the body during their
activities. Groody called Marina Oswald sometime later and told her that
everything had been above board at the exhumation in his view. [10]
“When I opened that casket the first time”, he recalled several years later, “I
sent my wife Virginia to
But several days later the
men had a change of heart. Gary Mack recalls, “Baumgardner and Groody were
having lunch or something when he suddenly remembered the craniotomy and asked
Groody if it should have been noticeable at the exhumation. That was the first time either man thought of
it.” As Groody explains, “When an autopsy is done and the skull is cut in order
to remove the cap in order to remove the brain, there is a distinctive line of
where all the fissures and all of the skull has been parted. Now, it's going to
cause a bit of a mark no matter what you try and do-it's going to show. And
knowing that I handled the body originally and there was an autopsy on that
head and now to see that there was no autopsy on the head made it, in my mind,
pretty clear that something had transpired that had caused this.” [12]
Groody provided an explanation
for what he had seen, “I feel as though someone had gone to the cemetery...off
hours, had taken the head of really of Lee Harvey Oswald that now was dead-how
he got that way I don't know but at least it was the head-and had brought the
vault to the surface as best they could being a heavy item as it is-a tripod
lifting that body lifting the body and the vault out of the grave. In the
process, the bottom of the vault fell, breaking the vault-causing the casket to
deteriorate to a degree. Then of course, removed the head of the one that was
there that had been autopsied and put this head in its place so that we would
find the teeth of Lee Harvey Oswald-that's my theory-this is what I think
happened. Whoever caused that is the same faction that caused the assassination
in the first place. In my mind, a cover-up had taken place.” [13]
After hearing the story at
the basketball game, White approached Mack who contacted Groody. He declined to
go public and urged Mack to find someone to investigate the matter. Mack, then
employed at Dallas NBC affiliate KXAS-TV, asked the station to look into the
matter. Mack, Groody and Baumgardner met with that station’s top investigative
reporter and the men repeated their concerns. Mack explains, "They freely
admitted their recollection may have been in error and they did not want any
publicity - they only wanted to let someone know about their uncertainty after
remembering the craniotomy. Groody explained that, in his experience with
exhumations, the skull cap almost always falls off when so many years have
elapsed." However, KXAS was unable to investigate the story further and, when the Norton Report was
published, lost interest. [14] In February 1982, Mack contacted Dr. Linda Norton who
had headed the team of physicians at the exam. Norton told Mack (through an
assistant) that the team’s report would be forthcoming and no specifics would
be released before that time, hopefully two to three months. [15]
By the summer of ’82, the
report had still not been released and all involved were still concerned by the
mystery. Mack and White turned to journalist and author Jim Marrs [16]
who later wrote the book Crossfire. Marrs contacted Dr. Norton directly
by phone and quizzed her about the craniotomy. Norton stated that it was indeed
present and noted for the record. The men were still puzzled by her answer
since Groody and Baumgardner could not recall any cranial incision. [17]
Mack wanted to go directly to Marina Oswald [18]
in an attempt to clear up the matter. However,
Cullins now told Mack that
he could gain access to a videotape of the examination made with
Analysis
of the Groody Allegations
It is worthwhile before
beginning to discuss what Groody’s role was on the day of the exhumation. Jack
White’s description of his duties at the gravesite seems to be the one most
repeated. White stated, “According to state regulations, the original mortician
is in charge of exhumation if possible. Groody was in charge of opening the
grave. Groody was in charge of removing the casket from the ground. Groody
traveled to the hospital with the casket. Groody was in charge of opening the
casket/removing corpse.”
Although it is clear White’s
last sentence is an overstatement (since no one removed the corpse at the
examination), Gary Mack’s excellent series of articles on the exhumation
provides the following confirmation, “Both (Groody and Baumgardner) were
present for the exhumation and part of the later examination because
exhumations must be legally handled by an officer of the state.” [23]
Once the body arrived at
Baylor, it seems clear that Groody’s role became twofold:
1. To identify the remains
as those that he worked with in 1963.
2. To return to the
examination room at the conclusion of the exam and place the body in a new
casket for transport and reburial at Rose Hill where he again would oversee the
process.
Groody was not a part of the
examination team or the examination process in any way other than to simply
identify the body. The record is clear that he left the examination room
shortly after identifying the body. Now, let’s see how Groody’s TMWKK
statements compare with the record.
Note: In this section for the purpose of clarity, all
quotes appear in Blue.
Paul Groody:
“At the time
of the '63 burial time, I put Lee Harvey Oswald in a steel reinforced concrete
vault. That vault was hermetically sealed. The vault is guaranteed not to
break, crack, or go to pieces-it's heavy concrete with steel in it with an
asphalt lining. And when I opened the grave in '81 and found that that vault
had been broken and the bottom of the vault was the part that was broken-the top
was still intact-I noticed at that time that the casket had been disturbed-I
questioned in my own mind what had been going on.”
Similarly, researcher Greg
Burnham claimed in a recent TV documentary:
“There’s no earthquakes of course, in
Greg Burnham
But Gary Mack disagrees with
Burnham:
“According to
the numerous records and studies,
Indeed, the idea of a burial
vault being any sort of safe haven for the deceased seems to be coming under
fire. Darryl J. Roberts is a 30-year veteran of the “death care industry” who
has written a whistle-blowing book that features allegations of serious price
gouging by funeral homes. [26]
Roberts’ book, Profits of Death, exposes many myths about death and
dying. On page 50-51 Roberts writes:
“No vault is impervious to eventual
disintegration, and there is very little chance of placing anything underground
and having it remain waterproof. I have personally witnessed as many as forty
disinterments from vaults (even those made by the leading manufacturers) that
were guaranteed waterproof from which water had to be drained before they could
be moved. Often, they were full of water.”
Roberts continues:
“It’s frequently necessary, when
disinterring one of these vaults, to knock drainage holes in the bottom before
it can be moved. Only then can the vault-still with the hole in the bottom-and
casket be reinterred in another location.”
So it would seem that another long
standing myth-that Oswald’s broken vault suggests tampering-is laid to rest (so
to speak). [27]
Paul Groody:
“I noticed at
that time that the casket had been disturbed-I questioned in my own mind what
had been going on.”
By saying that the “casket had
been disturbed”, Groody implies that he saw something sinister. The only thing
unusual about the coffin (other than the rotting that had taken place because
of water damage) was a missing piece near the head area about 18 inches long
and 3 or four inches wide. Part 2 of the Coverups! series offers an
explanation:
“Perhaps it
had been somehow damaged when the coffin and vault were lowered into the grave
and someone kept it as a souvenir.”
Of course, another
explanation is that the piece became dislodged from the weakened casket and
simply dropped into the vault sometime during the exhumation process.
Paul Groody:
“And then we
did go to Baylor-there was an examination by a medical person who was this
forensic pathologist. And she determined that yes, these were the teeth of Lee
Harvey Oswald but it took two years for her to make that determination before
the report was actually done.”
The mysterious “delay”
between the exhumation and the release of the determination that the teeth
matched Oswald is one of the more enduring criticisms leveled by theorists. The
matching of the teeth of the corpse and Oswald in fact occurred that very day.
At a press conference held at about 3:00 p.m. CT on October 4, 1981, Linda
Norton stated:
“The findings
of the team are as follows:
We
independently and as a team have concluded beyond any doubt, and I mean beyond
any doubt, that the individual buried under the name of Lee Harvey Oswald in
So the determination that this
was the body of Oswald was made immediately the day of the exhumation. What did
take 27 months to complete was the full report on the examination. That was
published in the Journal of Forensic Sciences in January 1984. Still,
some critics say that is an abnormally long time and seem suspicious about the
“delay”. Dr Vincent Di Maio, who was one
of the four members of the Norton team, told the author:
“The critics are
unfamiliar with medical publications. It usually takes a year or two from
submission to publication. It often takes months to write the article such that
everyone is in agreement with the manuscript.” [29]
However, consider the
possibility that viewers of TMWKK thought that it really had taken two years
for Norton to make any comment whatsoever. Where would they get an idea like
that? Maybe from the program itself. Right after Groody says: it took two years for her to make that determination before
the report was actually done, the program makes a quick cut to
Norton’s statement. To the uninitiated, this could make it appear that Norton
was giving her press conference at the time the report was released in 1984
rather than on the day of the exam in 1981. Perhaps TMWKK is as much to blame
for the “mysterious delay” issue as anyone. [30]
Paul Groody:
“Of course, I
was the one that had to handle the body in the morgue at Baylor. And as we
removed the body from the casket...”
But Groody did not handle
the body or remove it from the casket-no one did. The Norton Report states:
“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.”
Dr. Di Maio agreed, saying, “No, just the head”, when
asked if the body was removed.
Groody seems to realize in
mid-sentence that he has overstated his involvement and he does a little
backpedaling by adding the qualifying phrase:
“…or at least
worked with the body, ...”
Groody continues:
“... I could
recognize that this clothing was the clothing that I had put on that body. And
yet when I saw the head of this body and it was removed from the casket and
removed from the body in order that they might x-ray it and take pictures, I
could see that there was no autopsy on that head.”
Again there are problems.
Groody implies that he saw the head removed from the body. Indeed according to
Jack White, Groody said that the head was not attached to the body at all.
White said, “Groody and Baumgardner observed the
start of the Norton group's activities, during which time he noted that the
skull was ALREADY separated from the spine.” (Emphasis in original) [31]
But the head was indeed attached when the coffin was
opened. From the Norton Report:
“The head was
removed from the remainder of the body by incision of the mummified tissue
maintaining the skull, cervical and thoracic vertebral column in normal
continuity. The incision was made at the approximate second cervical vertebral
interspace.”
From Mack’s Closeups!
series based on the observations of John Cullins:
“Dr. Linda
Norton decided that comparison X-rays could not be taken unless the skull was
removed. In clear view of the closeup camera, nine snips to the rotted muscle
was all that was needed.”
Finally, Dr. Di Maio
confirmed, “... it was attached as it had to be cut
free.”
Another quote from Coverups!
(This time Part 2) reports on the duration of Groody’s stay in the
examination area:
“Although
Groody was close to the body for only a few seconds, and in the room for less
than a minute, he had enough time to notice that the skull was completely
intact.”
A quote from the Norton
Report confirms Groody’s brief stay:
“The mortician
who closed Mr. Oswald’s casket remained in the room until the casket was
reopened.”
Back to Groody’s TMWKK
observations and a new issue:
Paul Groody:
“And knowing
that I handled the body originally and there was an autopsy on that head and
now to see that there was no autopsy on the head made it, in my mind, pretty
clear that something had transpired that had caused this.”
The Norton Report states:
“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 report is clear there
was a craniotomy on the skull. This passage also offers an explanation for the
skull remaining intact in spite of alleged rough handling by the forensic
team-mummified tissue held it on. Photos of the skull from the examination show
what seems to be a great deal of tissue remaining on the skull just as the
report describes.
Indeed, Dr. Di Maio
confirmed, “... tissue in this instance was acting
like a glue.” The photos also show a horizontal line just above the
mastoid process that Dr. Di Maio confirmed is the craniotomy incision. [32]
So why did Groody and Baumgardner
say there was no craniotomy incision on the body? It is important to remember
that neither Groody nor Baumgardner reported anything unusual on the day of the
examination. In fact according to Coverups!, Groody called
“They knew
that the line of the craniotomy cut should have been visible to everyone who
saw the skull. And they knew that the skullcap should have fallen off in the
coffin before anyone touched it. Not only was the skull intact at Baylor,
almost all of the scalp had rotted away, leaving no visible mark.”
This passage is
revealing. It seems that their belief
there was no craniotomy is based more on what they didn't see (the skull cap
laying in the coffin) rather than what they actually saw. After all, if they
saw no incision, why not say so the same day? It was only later when thinking
about the “intact” skull that the men “remembered” there was no craniotomy.
Groody and Baumgardner are often quoted as saying that the skull was “intact”.
Two such separate quotes from the Coverups! series appear above. But it
is a different thing to say the skull was intact than to say there was no
craniotomy. The skull was “intact”; that is, the skull cap was secured
to the rest of the skull, apparently by mummified tissue. It is apparent from
the skull photos that the incision line is not that obvious-one would have to
study the skull in order to see it. And the evidence shows that neither Groody
nor Baumgardner “studied” the skull. They did their jobs and left, presumably
in an expeditious manner. Indeed, the men never even thought about the
craniotomy until days after the exhumation.
One final issue under the
heading of “JFK Urban Legends”:
Paul Groody:
“I feel as
though someone had gone to the cemetery...off hours, had taken the head of
really of Lee Harvey Oswald that now was dead-how he got that way I don’t know
but at least it was the head-and had brought the vault to the surface as best
they could being a heavy item as it is-a tripod lifting that body lifting the
body and the vault out of the grave. In the process the bottom of the vault
fell breaking the vault causing the casket to deteriorate to a degree. Then of
course, removed the head of the one that was there that had been autopsied and
put this head in its place so that we would find the teeth of Lee Harvey
Oswald-that’s my theory-this is what I think happened. Whoever caused that is
the same faction that caused the assassination in the first place. In my mind,
a cover-up had taken place.”
Groody’s statement became
the beginnings of what could be called “The Head in the Box Theory”. Jack White
described the theory at the JFK Research Forum this way:
“There was much
opposition to the exhumation by ROBERT OSWALD until MARGUERITE DIED. After her death, Robert suddenly dropped his
opposition. When MARGUERITE was BURIED
NEXT TO LEE, there were only a few inches of dirt separating the MARGUERITE
HOLE and the LEE CASKET. A mortuary tent
was placed over the site as is usual.
Then later, the exhumation occurred.
Several weeks after the exhumation, I received an anonymous phone
call. The caller would not give his name
because of violation of his secrecy oath.
He said he was a FORMER AIR FORCE INTELLIGENCE OFFICER who was stationed
at CAFB in
White attached the following
disclaimer to his yarn:
“I cannot vouch
for the veracity of this story. But I cannot say it is untrue either.”
Of course, the story is
untrue since the head was attached to the body on arrival at Baylor. There was
no switch at all and the evidence proves it. The Paul Groody story seems to represent
a microcosm of what is wrong with JFK assassination research at this late date.
Unfortunately, the umbrella man, the three tramps and the changed motorcade
route seem to be still with us. And this writer is under no illusion that
Groody’s story will be completely put to bed. But maybe researchers will think
twice before placing complete belief in it. That is all that one can ask.
Postscript
In 2002 Groody appeared in a
documentary entitled Infamous Grave Sites on the Travel Channel to
discuss his allegations. In Groody’s first quote he states, “Who was this man?
I don’t know and like I’ve always said, I don’t care-none of my business, I
only buried the guy.” Groody stayed with his basic story even when confronted
with photos of the head, “That head that was now on that body was not the head
that I embalmed. I know that the body had not been changed, because I
recognized various things about the body that I had done.” But Groody seemed to
offer no explanation for how a head switch could have occurred. When asked if a
conspirator could have been disguised as a policeman or security guard he
unequivocally stated, “No sir, no possible way that could have been done
because all the security was around it and there was no way that anybody could
carry a head in a sack or anything and do a head change at that time.”
So what are we to make of
Paul Groody and his possible motivations? Three possibilities come to mind:
- Groody is telling the truth and a vast
conspiracy somehow managed to switch the head of Lee Harvey Oswald despite
a great deal of evidence that it didn’t happen.
- Groody is lying for reasons known only to him.
- Groody is sincere about what he believes he saw
but simply mistaken.
This writer believes number one can be ruled out by the
evidence presented here. What about number two? Those who know him describe
Groody as a likeable and credible individual. Gary Mack stated, “He never
indicated he was telling the story to get anything. In fact, when he and Baumgardner met with me
and a reporter, they didn’t want any publicity, especially Baumgardner. They were hoping we could get some answers,
as they were concerned about their recollection and its implications.”
Similarly Jack White said,
“Embalming LHO was Groody's 15 minutes of fame. I found his story to be very
credible and consistent, and filled with interesting details. I think he is
very little different than most people who have some minor claim to fame...they
are anxious to tell people what they witnessed. Groody is very outgoing and
personable, not shy at all. For such a person, I found nothing highly unusual
about any of his
statements.” [33]
Indeed, Groody seems to have
a unique personality that includes the occasional use of self-deprecating
humor. Sometime in the eighties, he gave the following quote to the Dallas
Morning News discussing arrangements for Oswald’s funeral, "The Secret
Service wanted me to do it as secretly as I could and not put out any
information. We were scared because the President had already been shot and now
Oswald was shot. I didn't know if some other nut was going to shoot the dumb
undertaker."
It seems then that number
two can be ruled out as well. So place Paul Groody firmly in the third category
with the research of Elizabeth Loftus and others in mind.