Comment on this article
Apaches
sue to recover Geronimo's skull
May/June 2009
by
Carole Bass '83, '97MSL
Three
years after the Yale Alumni Magazine revealed new evidence that Skull and Bones may have robbed
Geronimo's grave, his great-grandson is suing for return of the relics. But
Skull and Bones is only one of the defendants. A lawyer for Harlyn Geronimo
says that Yale and its most notorious secret society are not the main focus of
the suit: the first-named defendants are President Barack Obama and the
secretaries of defense and the army.
| |
Harlyn Geronimo wants to move all of his great-grandfather's remains to New Mexico.
|
In the
32-page complaint, Skull and Bones receives only one paragraph, points out the
lawyer, Ramsey Clark. "The main entity is the U.S. Army," owner of Fort Sill,
the Oklahoma army base where Geronimo was held as a prisoner of war and buried
after his death in 1909.
The
rumor that Skull and Bones had remains of Geronimo first came to public
attention in the 1980s. In 2006, the Yale Alumni Magazine printed a newly unearthed 1918
letter from one Skull and Bones member to another that reported on the "skull
of the worthy Geronimo the Terrible, exhumed from its tomb at Fort Sill." But
some experts believe that even if Skull and Bones desecrated a grave, it could
not have been Geronimo's.
The
aim of Harlyn Geronimo's suit -- filed in federal court in Washington, DC, on
February 17, the 100th anniversary of Geronimo's death -- is not to return any
missing relics to Oklahoma, but rather to move all of his great-grandfather's remains
to his New Mexico homeland.
Skull
and Bones has not commented on the matter. A university spokeswoman points out
that Skull and Bones is not part of the university and is legally independent
of it. Neither Yale nor the secret society had filed a response, or even
entered a court appearance, by press time.
Asked
how confident he is that Skull and Bones actually has Geronimo's skull, Clark -- a
former U.S. attorney general who has represented accused Serbian war criminals
and Saddam Hussein, among others -- replies simply: "We don't know. There's been
enough commentary about it over enough time that you can't ignore it." 
|