TESTIMONY OF DR. KEMP CLARK RESUMED

The testimony of Dr. Kemp Clark was taken at 12:05 p.m., on March 25, 1964, at Parkland Memorial Hospital, Dallas, Tex., by Mr. Arlen Specter, assistant counsel of the President's Commission.

Mr. Specter. May the record show that Dr. Kemp Clark has returned to have a few additional questions asked of him following the deposition which was taken on March 21.

Dr. Clark, the purpose of this additional deposition is the same as the first one, except that I am going to ask you a few additional questions based upon a translation of an article which appeared in "L' Express", which has been provided to me since the deposition of last Saturday.

Would you please stand up again and raise your right hand?

Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you will give before the President's Commission in this deposition proceeding will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?

Dr. Clark. I do.

Mr. Specter. Dr. Clark, I have made available to you, have I not, what purports to be a translation from French of the "L' Express" issue of February 20, 1964?

Dr. Clark. Yes, sir.

Mr. Specter. And let me read for the record and for you this excerpt.

"On his part according to the New York Times of November 27, 'Dr. Kemp Clark, who signed the Kennedy death certificate, declared that a bullet hit him right where the knot of his necktie was.' He added," apparently referring to you, "'this bullet penetrated into his chest and did not come out'. The surgeon went on to say that the second wound of the President was 'tangential' and that it had been caused by a bullet which hit 'the right side of his head'".

Dr. Clark, my first question is—what, if anything, did you say to a New York Times representative or anyone, for that matter, with respect to whether a bullet hit the President where the knot of his necktie was.

Dr. Clark. I remember using the phrase to describe the location of a wound in the President's throat as being at the point of his knot of his necktie. I do not recall ever specifically stating that this was an entrance wound, as has been said before. I was not present when the President arrived and did not see this wound. If any statement regarding its entrance or exit was made by me, it was indicating that there was a small wound described there by the physicians who first saw the President.

A specific quotation regarding entrance or exit, I feel, is a partial quotation or incompletely quoted from me. The part pertaining to the bullet entering the President's chest rests on the reasons for the placing of the chest tubes which were being inserted when I arrived. It was the assumption, based on the previously described deviation of the trachea and the presence of blood in the strap muscles of the neck that a wound or missile wound might have entered the President's chest.

Mr. Specter. Well, what was there, Dr. Clark, in the deviation of the trachea and the presence of blood in the strap muscles of the neck which so indicated?

Dr. Clark. Assuming that a missile had entered the pleural space, if there had been bleeding into the pleural space, the trachea would have been deviated or had there been leakage of air into the pleural space, the trachea would have been deviated, as it is the main conduit of air to the two lungs. Collapse of a lung would have produced, or will produce deviation of the trachea. There being a wound in the throat, there being blood in the strap muscles and there being deviation of the trachea in the presence of a grievously wounded patient without opportunity for X-ray or other diagnostic measures, Dr. Perry assumed that the findings in the neck were due to penetration of the missile into the chest. For this reason, he requested chest tubes to be placed.

Mr. Specter. Well, is the deviation of the trachea and the presence of bleeding on the strap muscles of the neck and the other factors which you have recited equally consistent with a wound of exit on the neck?

Dr. Clark. Yes, sir. Furthermore, let me say that the presence of the deviation of the trachea, with blood in the strap muscles, are by no means diagnostic of penetration of the chest, and the placing of the chest tubes was prophylactic had such an eventuality occurred.

Mr. Specter. Was there any external indication that there was a missile in the chest?

Dr. Clark. No, sir.

Mr. Specter. Was it the preliminary thought that the missile might have been in the chest by virtue of the fact that this wound was noted on the neck?

Dr. Clark. Yes; with the other factors I have enumerated.

Mr. Specter. And at that time, not knowing what the angle might have been or any of the surrounding circumstances, then you proceeded to take precautionary measures as if there might have been a missile in the chest at some point?

Dr. Clark. That is correct. Measures were taken, assuming the worst had happened.

Mr. Specter. As the quotation appears in the issue of "L' Express," "This bullet penetrated into his chest and did not come out," would that then be an accurate quotation of something that you said, Dr. Clark?

Dr. Clark. No, sir.

Mr. Specter. Dr. Clark, while you are here again, I would like to ask you a few additional questions.

Let the record show that since I have taken your deposition, I have taken the depositions of many additional witnesses and none has been transcribed, so I am not in a position to refer to a record to see what I asked you before or to frankly recollect precisely what I asked you before, so, to some extent these questions may be overlapping.

Did you observe the President's back at that time when he was in the emergency room?

Dr. Clark. No, sir.

Mr. Specter. What was the reason for your not looking at his back?

Dr. Clark. First, the duration of time that the President was alive in the emergency room was a brief duration. All efforts were bent toward saving his life rather than inspection for precise location of wounds. After his death it was not our position to try to evaluate all of the conceivable organs or areas of the body, knowing that an autopsy would be performed and that this would be far more meaningful than a cursory external examination here.

Mr. Specter. Was there any bleeding wound in the President's back?

Dr. Clark. In the back of his head.

Mr. Specter. But how about on the back of his body, was there any bleeding wound noted?

Dr. Clark. Since we did not turn the President over, I cannot answer that specifically. We saw none, as I previously stated.

Mr. Specter. Did you undertake any action to ascertain whether there had been a violation to a major extent of the back part of his body?

Dr. Clark. No, sir.

Mr. Specter. That is, none was taken by you personally?

Dr. Clark. That's correct.

Mr. Specter. Dr. Carrico testified earlier today, being the first doctor to reach him, that he felt the President's back to determine whether there was any major violation of that area.

Would that be a customary action to take to ascertain whether there was any major wound, by the doctor who first examined the patient?

Dr. Clark. Yes, sir.

Mr. Specter. Assuming that the President had a bullet wound of entry on the upper right posterior thorax, just above the upper border of the scapula, 14 cms. from the right acromion process, 14 cm. below the tip of the right mastoid process, would there have been a bloody type wound?

Dr. Clark. I'm sorry—your question?

Mr. Specter. Would such a wound of entry by a missile traveling approximately 2,000 feet per second, approximately 6.5 mm. in diameter, cause a bloody type of a wound?

Dr. Clark. No, sir. Such a wound could have easily been overlooked in the presence of the much larger wound in the right occipital region of the President's skull, from which considerable blood loss had occurred which stained the back of his head, neck and upper shoulders.

Mr. Specter. Dr. Clark, I want to ask you a question as it is raised here in "L' Express".

"How did the practitioner who signed the death certificate of the President fail to take the trouble to turn him over?"

Of course, that refers to you and will you give me your answer to that question, as the news media has posed it?

Dr. Clark. Quite simply, as I previously stated, the duration of time the President was alive was occupied by attempts to save his life. When these failed, further examination of the patient's body was not done, as it was felt that little could be gained or learned that would be helpful in deciding the course of events leading up to his assassination, that is, examination by me, as I knew an autopsy would be performed which would be far more meaningful and revealing than any cursory external examination conducted in the emergency room by me.

Mr. Specter. Now, was the action taken by you in signing the death certificate based upon the examination which you made in accordance with what you believed to be good medical practice?

Dr. Clark. Yes, sir.

Mr. Specter. So that the characterization here of "L' Express" that the failure to turn the President over would not constitute gross negligence in your professional judgment, as they have characterized it here.

Dr. Clark. No, sir. One other point, if I may here?

Mr. Specter. Yes.

Dr. Clark. In order to move the President's body to Bethesda where the autopsy was to be performed, a death certificate had to be filled out in conformance with Texas State law to allow the body to be transported. This is the second part of the signing of the death certificate.

Mr. Specter. Do you have anything to add, Dr. Clark, which you think might be helpful at all in the inquiry being made by the President's Commission?

Dr. Clark. No; I don't think so.

Mr. Specter. And did you and I chat for just a moment or two about the questions I would ask you on this supplemental deposition before it went on the record?

Dr. Clark. Yes, sir.

Mr. Specter. And have you talked to any representative of the Federal Government between the time I took your deposition last Saturday and this Wednesday morning?

Dr. Clark. No, sir.

Mr. Specter. Thank you very much, Dr. Clark.

Dr. Clark. All right.