The Assassination Records Review Board (ARRB) lasted four years, and Douglas Horne was a part of it for three of those years. We have discussed his time inside the ARRB in one of our most recent articles. The now-author had quite the tenure. He started as a Senior Analyst but was soon promoted to the position of Chief Analyst on the Military Records Team.
Below is a summary of Horne’s perspective of the ARRB culture.
The ARRB's Limited Familiarity
Douglas Horne described a sense of "future shock" when he started his service in Washington. Except for Jack Tunheim, the board members displayed limited familiarity with the intricate details of the assassination of John F. Kennedy case.
Horne’s Attempts to Educate the Board
After recognizing this knowledge gap, Horne suggested a series of briefings to educate the ARRB members about the complexities of the JFK assassination. However, Chief Counsel Jeremy Gunn dissuaded such an initiative.
Gunn said that the board had little interest in the conflicting evidence surrounding the case. He also said that the ARRB did not subscribe to the notion that a conspiracy had been orchestrated to assassinate President John F. Kennedy.
The ARRB vs. The Public Opinion
In his book Inside the Assassination Records Review Board findingsAssassination Records Review Board findings, Horne estimated that up to two-thirds of the ARRB staff adhered to the conclusions of the Warren Commission. This was particularly surprising since the ARRB was established in the aftermath of the widespread public commotion spurred by Oliver Stone's film that strongly suggested a conspiracy.
During that period, public opinion polls indicated that over 75% of the population believed in a conspiracy. The ARRB did not reflect the public opinion.
Strong Bias and Resistance to Dissent
Within the ARRB staff and among independent researchers who questioned the findings of warren commission, a strong bias prevailed. Anyone who expressed skepticism about its verdict encountered resistance.
The bias even extended to David Marwell, the staff director. Marwell's appointment may have been influenced by his alignment with the prevailing views of the board.
The ARRB’s Final Report
To cap it all, the ARRB's Final Report included a phrase asserting that Oliver Stone's JFK was "largely fictional." This particular statement has raised eyebrows among those who closely scrutinized the evidence.
In numerous instances, a detailed examination of the film compared to the documents opened by the Review Board revealed that Stone's portrayal often corroborated the available evidence.
The comment in the report is either the result of a lack of objectivity or influenced by a preexisting bias. It serves as a parting shot directed at the creators of the film and those who continue to question the official narrative.
Kennedys and King is one of those whose dissenting voices the ARRB would have shot down had it existed today. Every claim on our platform is supported by concrete evidence, something you’ll see as soon as you open our first article. Support our cause to bring the truth behind JFK assassination to light.
Contact us to learn how you can be a part of our authors’ panel.
