</s>Parties and counsel represented were: CBS, Inc ., through their attorneys McCutchen, Black, Verleger, and Shea (Howard J. Privett and Robert Davis); Paul Schrade through attorneys Mel Levine and Leonard Unger; Los Angeles County Counsel's Office at the request of the Los Angeles Counties Councils office at the court of the John Larson, and Deputy County Counsel Robert Lynch, Defendant Sirhan Sirhan Representative at attorney Godfrey Isaac; Attorney General's Office, Evella J. Younger represented by Deputy Attorney's Office. Eville J. Younger Represented District Attorney's office. Represented by Deputy District Attorney Dinko Bizanich and Special Counsel Thomas Kranz. For the next several weeks, the various parties, through Their attorneys. For the next seven years, the previous parties, and through their In order to retain his independence, Special Counsel Kranz abstrained from actual negotiations although was an observer abstained from Deputy District Attorney Bozanich advocated the district Attorney to deputy District Attorney Boozanich advocates the district attorney throughout these few weeks we were the integrity and the discussion throughout these were weeks were the integrations and utility of the existing exhibits and were the weapon. The heart of the the discussion through these were substantial questions whether or not the Sirhan exhibits have been held. data regarding the assassination and the senator Kennedy could be derived from any testing at all. Specificationally, Bozanichi asked the the failure of the County Clerk to administer the impact of orders of the Superior Court (original Judge Alarcon, Judge Walker and Judge Loring orders) on the integrity of utility and the Srinan and Judge Lorring orders; on the Integrity and utility of the District Attorney's the mere passage of time, Band potential oxidation of the authority, of which as might have an impact on the present usefulness and testing of the Sirhan exhibits. Integrity of Exhibits Office that one possible result of the test procedure to be adopted Bozanich was stating a concern of the district Attorney's was that the Sirlhan exhibits, and that thereof themselves, were inconclusive was that he was the Sinan exhibits, under some of the Senator's assas- sination. court first determine what significance, if any, could be attached in the conclusion reached in the testing of this Sirhan exhibit. to the conclusions reached the test of the Sirkan exhibits. public had a right to know all of the facts and circumstances that the rounding the assassination of Senator Kennedy, and what this right would be frustrated, unless guidelines were first established, both would be introduced, unless guidance were firstestablished, both exclusions that could be derived from the examination and this testing, con- the exhibits. Additionally, Bozanich argued in several preliminary meetings with the various attorneys that failure of law to the exhibits, Additionally, Bozanichi argued against the several preliminary meeting with the previous attorneys that failures of law after the

Summary  
The document details ongoing legal and investigative challenges surrounding the 1968 assassination of Robert F. Kennedy, focusing on disputes over ballistic evidence handling, expert testimony, and court-ordered re-examinations. Key issues included unauthorized access to Sirhan Sirhan’s exhibits in 1971, concerns about evidence tampering, and debates over retesting procedures. Judge Wenke issued a 1975 court order mandating retesting of ballistic evidence by seven experts, who concluded no second weapon was used but could not definitively link bullets to Sirhan’s revolver due to factors like barrel fouling and loss of fine details over time. Testimony from criminalist DeWayne Wolfer highlighted discrepancies in bullet markings, serial numbers, and trajectory analysis, while William Harper questioned inconsistencies in evidence documentation. The destruction of physical evidence, including ceiling panels from the Ambassador Hotel, further complicated investigations. Legal proceedings involved multiple agencies, including the FBI and Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD), with disputes over jurisdiction and forensic methodologies. Critics like Dr. Robert Jollying argued for additional research on rifle angles and scene reconstruction, though experts rejected further tests as unnecessary.  

Key People  
- **Sirhan Sirhan**: Defendant in the assassination trial.  
- **DeWayne Wolfer**: Criminalist whose testimony and documentation were scrutinized during re-examinations.  
- **William Harper**: Criminalist who questioned discrepancies in ballistics evidence.  
- **Judge Robert Wenke**: Issued a 1975 court order for retesting of exhibits.  
- **Thomas Kranz**: Special Counsel advocating for exhaustive evidence analysis.  
- **Dinko Bizanich**: Deputy District Attorney involved in testing procedures.  
- **Eville J. Younger**: Attorney General’s Office representative.  
- **Don Schulman**: Security guard alleged to have fired at Kennedy, with conflicting testimony.  
- **Thane Cesar**: Security guard present during the shooting, described as a "coward" for not firing his weapon.  
- **Ted Charach**: Investigative journalist compiling conflicting witness accounts and film footage.  
- **Dr. Robert Jollying**: Criticized findings of the ballistics panel and advocated for further research.  

Key Locations  
- **Ambassador Hotel (Los Angeles)**: Site of the assassination; ceiling panels and evidence were destroyed in 1969.  
- **Los Angeles County Courthouse**: Site of legal proceedings and court orders.  
- **LAPD Property Division**: Involved in handling firearms and ammunition.  
- **St. Louis Armory**: Mentioned as a location for clothing and bullet exhibits.  
- **Rampart Division (LAPD)**: Associated with the investigation into Thane Cesar’s weapon.  

Key Events  
- **1968 Assassination of Robert F. Kennedy**: Central event under investigation; occurred at the Ambassador Hotel.  
- **1971 Unauthorized Access to Exhibits**: Concerns about County Clerk’s management of evidence, including bullets and ballistic data.  
- **1975 Court Order by Judge Wenke**: Mandated retesting of Sirhan exhibits with independent experts.  
- **Trajectory Analysis Report (July 1968)**: Detailed account of eight shots fired during the assassination, later disputed in legal proceedings.  
- **Destruction of Evidence (1969)**: Ceiling panels and X-rays from the Ambassador Hotel were destroyed, affecting evidence integrity.  
- **Cross-Examinations**: Legal challenges to Wolfer’s testimony and ballistics evidence.  
- **Schrade’s Petition for Further Tests**: Denied by Judge Wenke, directing petitioner to pursue civil litigation.  
- **Schulman’s Conflicting Testimony**: Claims of a security guard firing at Kennedy were later contradicted by inconsistent accounts.  

Key Organizations  
- **Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office**: Led efforts to secure testing procedures for exhibits and oversaw the 1975 re-examination.  
- **Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)**: Involved in retesting processes and forensic analysis.  
- **Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD)**: Managed crime scene investigation, evidence handling, and Special Unit (S.U.S.).  
- **Grand Jury**: Conducted investigations into the assassination and related evidence handling.  
- **American Academy of Forensic Sciences**: Engaged in discussions about further research on rifle angles and ballistics evidence.  
- **Special Counsel’s Office**: Included Thomas Kranz and Allard Lowenstein, who debated forensic testing methodologies.  
- **Jim Garrison Organization**: Mentioned in relation to conspiracy theories and media coverage.

RFK Declassified Files

62-hq-587_ebf_1336_sec_001_ser_1336_only-part_2_of_6.pdf

Document Summary

Try AI Search