The Doctor Who Saw Everything

Why Dr. Burkley's Papers Remain Sealed—and Why It Matters

On November 22, 1963, Rear Admiral George G. Burkley—President Kennedy's personal physician—witnessed something no other doctor did: he saw JFK's wounds at both Parkland Hospital in Dallas and the Bethesda Naval Hospital autopsy that night. He rode in the motorcade, watched the Parkland trauma team work, accompanied the body on Air Force One, and stood in the autopsy room as military pathologists examined the President's body.

The next morning, November 23, Burkley signed the White House death certificate. He also wrote "Verified" on the autopsy face sheet (Commission Exhibit 387), placing his signature on documents that would become central to one of history's most contentious debates.

Yet the Warren Commission never called him to testify. And papers that may explain what he really saw remain locked away to this day.

What the Documents Actually Say

The death certificate Burkley signed described Kennedy's wounds as follows: the fatal head wound was "shattering in type causing a fragmentation of the skull," and he noted "a second wound occurred in the posterior back at about the level of the third thoracic vertebra."

This back wound location—at T3, roughly five inches below the collar—presents a significant problem for the Single Bullet Theory. The Warren Commission concluded that a bullet entered Kennedy's upper back and exited his throat before striking Governor Connally. But if the entry wound was as low as Burkley documented, the bullet would have had to travel upward to exit the throat—an impossibility given that the supposed shooter was six floors above.

The autopsy face sheet that Burkley verified shows the same T3 location. This diagram, with Burkley's signature, was later published as CE 397—but notably, the version in the Warren Commission volumes does not show his signature.

Meanwhile, the Parkland doctors who first treated Kennedy described what they saw: Dr. Malcolm Perry identified a small wound in the anterior throat that he interpreted as an entrance wound, and Dr. Kemp Clark described a large wound in the right rear of the head. These descriptions suggest shots from the front—the opposite of the official conclusion.

The Doctor Who Was Never Asked

Despite being the only physician present at both locations, Burkley was never called before the Warren Commission. As the Mary Ferrell Foundation notes: "The Warren Commission never interviewed him. Though Burkley was continually mentioned by other Commission witnesses, the only statements from the doctor himself to appear in the Warren Commission's 26 volumes is CE 1126, a report Burkley wrote 2 days before the Commission was announced."

In a 1967 oral history interview with the Kennedy Library, Burkley was asked whether he agreed with the Warren Report's conclusions about the number of bullets that entered the President's body. His response: "I would not care to be quoted on that."

The Hints He Dropped

1977: Burkley's attorney, William Illig, contacted Richard Sprague, then Chief Counsel of the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA). According to the committee's records, Illig conveyed that his client had information indicating "others besides Oswald must have participated" in the assassination. Sprague was forced out of his position shortly afterward. The HSCA never took Burkley's testimony; instead, months later, he signed an affidavit but was never deposed as a witness.

1982: Researcher Henry Hurt spoke with Burkley by telephone. In his book Reasonable Doubt, Hurt wrote that Burkley "told the author in a telephone conversation that he believed that President Kennedy's assassination was the result of a conspiracy." When Hurt attempted to follow up, Burkley declined further contact.

1983: Historian Michael Kurtz interviewed Burkley. According to Douglas Horne, who later served as Chief Analyst for Military Records on the Assassination Records Review Board, Burkley told Kurtz "that he knew there was a conspiracy to kill the President and that he recalled an exit wound in the back of President Kennedy's head"—a description matching what the Parkland doctors saw, but contradicting the official autopsy findings. When Kurtz tried to continue the conversation, Burkley cut off contact.

A pattern emerges: Burkley repeatedly hinted at knowledge that contradicted the official story, then retreated into silence.

The Folder That Remains Sealed

Dr. Burkley died in 1991. In 1996-97, the Assassination Records Review Board (ARRB) attempted to obtain any papers he might have left behind.

According to Douglas Horne, ARRB General Counsel Jeremy Gunn contacted Burkley's daughter, Nancy Denlea, the executor of his estate. They asked her to sign a waiver that would allow the ARRB to examine files that Burkley's attorney (Illig) might have retained. She initially agreed.

Then she changed her mind. Horne recounted: "Jeremy called her on the phone, she had completely changed her mind and adamantly refused to sign it and terminated the phone call."

The ARRB's mandate expired in 1998. No one has ever obtained access to whatever documents may exist in the files of Burkley's legal representatives.

Where We Stand in 2025

In January 2025, President Trump signed an executive order directing the release of remaining classified records related to the Kennedy assassination. Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-FL) chairs the House Task Force on the Declassification of Federal Secrets, which has held hearings featuring researchers Jefferson Morley, Oliver Stone, and James DiEugenio.

Thousands of pages have been released. Yet the task force has focused primarily on CIA files, Oswald's movements, and intelligence operations. To date, there has been no public effort to obtain the Burkley papers through legal channels.

These papers are not held by any government agency. They are likely in private hands—the files of a deceased attorney or his successors. Attorney-client privilege can be pierced under certain circumstances, particularly when the client expressed intent to disclose (which Burkley did, repeatedly) or when overwhelming public interest exists.

No lawsuit has been filed. No subpoena has been issued.

Why This Matters

Six million pages of JFK assassination records are now public. Russian archives have been consulted. Researchers have spent decades analyzing ballistics, trajectories, and witness testimony.

But the contemporaneous observations of the one physician who saw everything—who signed documents placing wounds in locations incompatible with the official theory, who verified autopsy paperwork, who hinted at conspiracy knowledge to multiple researchers over two decades—remain unexplored.

Dr. George Burkley may have left behind nothing of significance. Or he may have documented exactly what he saw that day in Dallas and that night in Bethesda—observations that could either confirm the official account or demolish it.

We don't know, because no one has ever forced the question.

The Question That Needs Asking

What is in the Burkley papers, and why hasn't anyone pursued them?

Primary Sources & References

1.       White House Death Certificate (Burkley, 11/23/63) — ARRB Medical Document #6

2.      Autopsy Descriptive Sheet — Warren Commission Exhibit 387

3.      Burkley Oral History Interview, Kennedy Library, October 17, 1967

4.      HSCA correspondence regarding Burkley/Illig contact — National Archives RIF 180-10093-10407

5.      Henry Hurt, Reasonable Doubt: An Investigation into the Assassination of John F. Kennedy (1985), p. 49

6.      Douglas P. Horne, Inside the Assassination Records Review Board (2009), Volume IV

7.      ARRB correspondence with Burkley family members, 1996-97 — ARRB Medical Document #189

8.     Mary Ferrell Foundation, "The Missing Physician" — maryferrell.org

9.      Parkland physician testimony — Warren Commission Volumes II, III, VI

—

@coacha04 • November 2025

This document presents documented facts and asks a straightforward question: Why has no one pursued the Burkley papers? If you believe this question deserves an answer, share it with those who might be able to help—researchers, journalists, and the members of the House Task Force on Declassification.