Report On President’s Guards Has Shocked

Press, Volume CIII, Issue 30560, 1 October 1964, Page 17

Report On President’s Guards Has Shocked

[From FRANK OLIVER, N.Z.P.A. Special Correspondent) NEW YORK, Sept. 29. No doubt had been left in anyone’s mind that the Warren report would find Oswald guilty of Mr Kennedy’s assassination and that he had functioned as a lone wolf. But no-one seems to have been prepared for the damning criticism of the F. 8.1. and the Secret Service, This came as a shock to everyone I know and apparently also to the nation at large. Both services have long been regarded as completely

above reproach and also as practically infallible. When the F. 8.1. is called in, the public believed, the most difficult case is resolved and the guilty caught and brought to justice. As for the Secret Service, its ’•eputation could scarcely be higher and everyone has believed for a long time that it was superbly efficient, and unmatched in the world. These beliefs are the measure of the shock the Warren commission criticism caused from coast to coast. The public found it hard to believe that the nine men who guarded the life of President Kennedy drank intoxicating beverages and got little sleep before they reported for duty. The report says had they not done these things they might have been more alert in the Dallas motorcade but “there is no evidence these men failed to take any action . . . within their power that would have averted the tragedy.” Strict Rules It also pays tribute to their “instantaneous and heroic response” when the tragedy occurred. But the point which bothers some people is that , these men were disobeying the regulations of their important service. The Secret Service has strict rules about drinking and men on travel status are barred from the “use of intoxicating liquor of any kind, including beer and wine.” The regulations state that violation or even slight disregard of these provisions “will be cause for removal from the service.”

Ironically the nine appear to have been saved’by the

seriousness of the crime in Dallas. Although their behaviour was ground for dismissal none was punished because, it. is indicated, disciplinary action would have implied a Cause-and-effect relationship between the flouting of the drinking rule and the assassination. This, plus the fact that the report says the security steps taken by the Secret Service were inadequate, is what has shocked and startled the general public. The general reaction is that no wonder the commission recommends sweeping changes and a revision of the Secret Service organisation and basic operating practices. As far as the assassination itself is concerned the detailed and documented report has failed to dispel the belief of many that such a . successful affair could have been accomplished by one not terribly bright man.