Bill Boxley aka William Wood
One of the most horrendous errors Garrison made was hiring a man named William Wood.98 Wood told Garrison he had previously worked for the CIA, then quit due to an alcohol problem. He had then gotten into the newspaper business, where he had been successful. When Garrison doubted he had actually worked for the Agency, Wood told Lou Ivon to call the infirmary at the Agency and the managing doctor there would vouch for him. When this happened, Garrison decided to hire him since he felt that Wood, who Garrison renamed Bill Boxley, could help him understand intelligence operations better. Garrison did this even though Boxley had failed two polygraph tests.99 Even though by the time he hired Boxley, in May of 1967, he had already experienced the likes of Gordon Novel, Bernardo De Torres, and Bill Gurvich. Something that Garrison did not know was that Boxley had tried to rejoin the Agency earlier in the year.100 If he had known that, hopefully, he likely would not have hired him.
Having read several of Boxley’s memoranda the author can vouch for what Vincent Salandria and Joan Mellen say about him. He specialized in writing long, detailed, complex memos that were really more like short essays. (The multi-paged one he wrote about Nina Sulzer, Ruth Paine, Ruth Kloepfer, and what he called the Quaker connection was a real doozy.) And since he was a good writer, these memos would generally be interesting. But in the end, all of his memos seemed to point to some kind of extraneous, isolated, sinister activity within say the Office of Naval Intelligence, the Quaker community, the FBI, etc. So when taken as a whole and read consecutively—then and only then—could one see what Mr. Wood was really doing. Which was leading Garrison to nowhere. As previously mentioned in Chapter 11, a complementary example of Boxley/Wood in the field would be when he tried to undermine Harold Weisberg at the Jones Printing Company by saying Weisberg really did not get identifications of Kerry Thornley as the man who actually picked up Oswald’s flyers. When in fact he did.
As Harold Weisberg has noted, another aspect of Boxley’s bizarre series of attempts to undermine Garrison from within was the Robert Perrin episode. Nancy Rich was one of the Commission’s most memorable witnesses. She described aspects of Jack Ruby’s association with the Dallas Police that showed just how enmeshed Ruby was with the force. She then described gunrunning activity in the Dallas-Fort Worth area that also featured Ruby and appeared to be sanctioned by the military. Nancy Rich also mentioned her husband in passing. Boxley tried to convince Garrison that somehow Nancy’s husband, Robert Perrin, was the assassin who had shot Kennedy from the front.101 Since some people in the office knew this was complete flim-flammery, they decided to set upon showing it as such. Boxley’s idea was to indict Perrin for the fifth anniversary of Kennedy’s murder. So Harold Weisberg set out to show this was completely misguided since Robert Perrin had died years earlier—in 1962 in New Orleans.102 Boxley next said that he had not actually died, the authorities got the wrong body and Perrin lived on. Harold Weisberg and Lou Ivon literally rebelled at this. And they kept Garrison away from the precipice.103
But Boxley had an alternative for Perrin. It was Edgar Eugene Bradley. Bradley was a forty-nine-year-old worker for fundamentalist evangelical Dr. Carl McIntire, the president of the American Council of Christian Churches. He was living in North Hollywood, California in 1967. Right before Christmas of that year Garrison filed an indictment against Bradley for conspiracy to assassinate John F. Kennedy.104 Bradley responded with disbelief. He said Garrison was being mislead; whatever information he was using in the indictment must have been planted.105 He then said that he was neither a rightwing nor leftwing extremist and he knew nothing about either Jim Garrison or the Kennedy assassination.106 Bradley said he was in El Paso on the day of the assassination, and had only been to New Orleans once in his life, and that was in 1967.107 Bradley was duly arrested on December 26, 1967. No bond was set, and the case was adjourned until the extradition papers arrived. This happened in March of 1968. Although Attorney General Edwin Meese recommended that Governor Ronald Reagan comply with the request, Reagan did not.108 It is not easy to comprehend how Bradley ever got injected into the information bank at Garrison’s office. The closest we can come to ascertaining this key point is from Tom Bethell’s diary entry of February 13, 1968.109
Since Bradley lived in California, William Turner—who lived in the San Francisco area—worked on this case. But strangely, so did Boxley. Boxley was supposed to be from Texas, but he was renting an apartment in New Orleans. But as Lou Ivon has said, one of the strangest things about Boxley is that he would just disappear for weeks at a time. What appears to have happened is that a man named Thomas Thornhill had written a letter to one Mike Karmazin in April of 1967. Thornhill wrote that Edgar Eugene Bradley had tried to hire a man he knew to murder John Kennedy. Apparently, Garrison did not think very much of this lead or the information in it. But one day in September, Turner had discovered it and decided to follow through.
In December of 1967, Turner and Boxley went to a house on Fulton Street in Van Nuys, California. This was the home of one Carol Aydelotte. She lived there with her husband and Thornhill. Turner then wrote a memorandum saying that the woman knew Bradley, and that Bradley had said continually that someone should kill Kennedy. There had been a civil suit filed between the two over her accusations. Aydelotte then gave the investigators two names of persons who would back up what she said, Dennis Mower and Wesley Brice. When Mower was interviewed he said that Bradley had indeed solicited him to kill Kennedy when he was running for president in 1960. But he had reported the solicitation to the FBI. The eventual Brice information said nothing about New Orleans in connection with Bradley. There were supposed to be photos of Bradley in Dealey Plaza, but this was never actually confirmed. There was supposed to be some kind of connection between Loran Hall and Bradley. But this turned out to be quite tenuous also. Almost all of the Aydelotte and Thornhill information came through Boxley, and to a lesser extent Turner. What appears to have happened is that, on one of his California trips, Boxley and Turner presented Garrison with their work on Bradley. Garrison did not cross check it or bring it to one or more of his lawyers for a written critical analysis of its legal implications. For when the legal staff did finally get a hold of the Boxley/Turner evidence they realized that they actually had no case against Bradley, because 1.) There was no credible evidence Bradley was in New Orleans prior to the assassination. Therefore their office had no jurisdiction over any criminal acts as a result of his possible part in a conspiracy. 2.) Even if Bradley had solicited Mower, that solicitation was for an attempt in California before Kennedy became president, and Mower had turned it down. 3.) There was no credible evidence then linking Bradley to what happened in Dealey Plaza. After this was all out in the open, the criminal lawyers on Garrison’s staff—Andrew Sciambra, Richard Burnes, Charles Ward, and Jim Alcock—made short work of it. They considered it lucky that Reagan had not signed and returned the extradition papers.
Then there was Boxley and the Farewell America hoax. This was a book published in Europe that ended up in Garrison’s office. The publishing house was something called Frontiers Publishing in Geneva, Switzerland. One day, Garrison got a call from an alleged representative of Frontiers. He asked Garrison if he was interested in seeing the manuscript of a new book they were publishing on the Kennedy assassination. The DA said fine. In short order, the manuscript appeared and then a copy of the bound book followed.110 Garrison then sent a copy of the typewritten manuscript to the editor of Ramparts, Warren Hinckle. Hinckle was astonished at how beautifully typed the manuscript was: not a word was spelled wrong, not one comma was out of place. This is what began his doubts about the efficacy of the book.111
There then were two overseas inquiries about the actual origins of the book. One was by Steve Jaffe, a young student who had volunteered for Garrison’s staff. The other was by Ramparts’ Larry Bensky who was sent to Europe by Hinckle. Both men were given the runaround by mysterious Kafkaesque characters. Jaffe was given a card by
a French intelligence operative with Charles de Gaulle’s name on it. This was supposed to certify that the book had the French premier’s approval. In other words, the ostensible story was that de Gaulle had doubted the Warren Commission. He commissioned French intelligence, the SDECE, to investigate the case. Farewell America was the product. Benksy met a mysterious man named Michael. Michael promised a closing chapter to the book which would reveal the true names of the killers. When that “final chapter” came, it was nothing but a half page long. And it named no one.112 It turned out that there really was no Frontiers Publishing company. It was created as a front.113 But a front for what? Neither Bensky nor Jaffe could actually find out. Then the book’s alleged author arrived in New Orleans.
The book had been serialized in Germany and published in book form in France.114 The supposed author was James Hepburn. This was a pseudonym for one Herve Lamarr. On his European tour, Jaffe had been introduced to Lamarr in one of the law offices which the young investigator had traced Frontiers to. In 1968, Lamarr turned up in New Orleans. He said he was the writer of the book. Garrison and Ivon wanted to know why they should believe that was the case. Lamarr only replied in generalities. Harold Weisberg was in the office at this time. He looked at the irregular legal pads which contained the manuscript. He was completely puzzled. Weisberg had been a government investigator as far back as World War II. The only place he had ever seen those irregular shaped legal pads was in the Pentagon. This made him quite suspicious about both the book and Lamarr.115 So he began to tail Lamarr in order to find out who his associates were. And also who his sources were. He also began to ask some of his field contacts who he had developed while working for Garrison if they had encountered Lamarr. Some of them had. Many of these were in the oil business in Texas. But there was one other person who Harold discovered had been assisting Lamarr: Bill Boxley.116 In fact, Boxley had actually penned a drawing of what the book was supposedly saying. It was written in typical Boxleyian language: All kinds of name dropping, putting together every possible association—Ruby, Shaw, Lee Odom, H. L. Hunt, the FBI, Earle Cabell, etc.—into a Rube Goldberg contraption that no one could believe. Or explain.117 Even after Garrison fired Boxley, Boxley said that Garrision swore by the book. Which simply was not true at that time.118
After putting together an investigative dossier of what he had uncovered, Weisberg showed it to Lou Ivon. He explained that what Lamarr was presenting as a top secret French intelligence investigation of the JFK murder, done with the hidden approval of de Gaulle, was looking more and more like a homegrown American product. If this was so, then why was Lamarr not arrested for failure to register as a foreign agent operating in America? Would Hoover really be willing to have a foreign intelligence agency uncover the truth about the JFK case? The fact he was not arrested implied that either 1.) He was not really working for the SDECE, and/or 2.) His mission was being sanctioned by American intelligence. This, plus Boxley’s role in the affiar, led Harold to believe that the clandestine sponsor of the book was the CIA.119 Or as he put it, “I think the probability they are in accord with the purpose of this is high, as is their involvement.” One of the most remarkable things about Weisberg’s memo is that he actually found out who the secret sponsor of the project was. He referred to him as “Philippe.” He also suspected he was a double agent, that is, he was ostensibly with the SDECE, but really working for the CIA. He had also found out that he had once been stationed in Washington under diplomatic cover. Harold felt this was probably when Philippe was turned. Harold turned over his investigative file to Garrison. It is truly one of the most remarkable pieces of sleuthing this author has ever seen one man do in this case. Garrison’s handwritten notes on this file, based on Weisberg’s work, map out every contributor to the book in each subject area. But at the top of the annotated chart is this name: Philippe de Vosjoli. When the author first discovered this graph, that name was foreign to him. But it was part of Tom Mangold’s biography of James Angleton. It turned out that Weisberg was correct. De Vosjoli was a double agent who had worked for Angleton. From what is contained in this file, Weisberg was not aware of that precise connection. He suspected that “Phillipe” had been turned by the “liberal” side of the Agency. Which Angleton certainly did not represent. But that appears to be the only thing that the indefatigable investigator got wrong. Farewell America offers up the mysterious Committee of Texas oil barons who put in the money to finance the murder of JFK. That scenario would be the kind of diversion that Angelton— and Boxley—would find useful. If it fooled the DA, perfect. If he spent valuable time and energy trying to figure it out, almost as good.
Armed with this new information about the book, Ivon and Garrison summoned Lamarr back for questioning. They demanded to know who his sources were for the tome. Predictably, Lamar was not forthcoming. Lucky for him, as he would have been challenged by Weisberg’s work. They insisted again that he reveal his sources. Again, Lamarr would not cooperate. There are two versions of what happened next: Ivon’s and Weisberg’s. Ivon said that he told Lamarr he had no credibility and asked him to leave. When the author told Weisberg this, Harold replied, “Oh no Jim. That is not what Lou did. He grabbed Lamarr by the back of the neck, lifted him off his chair, and threw him out of the office. He then yelled at him something like, “Go out and mislead someone else!”120
The triple disasters of Perrin-Bradley-Lamarr made 1968 a bad year for Garrison. Toward the end of it, after the Perrin-Bradley false accusations, Garrison had confided in fellow Warren Commission critic Vince Salandria. He told him that he felt like his office was the object of some intricately designed counterintelligence operation.121 On one of his visits to New Orleans, Salandria had listened to Boxley speak to the staff about one of his journeys to Dallas. Afterwards, Salandria asked to see some of Boxley’s work product. The Philadelphia lawyer spent some time going through his memos. He had brought down a book that he wanted Garrison to read a chapter from. It was a chapter about how counterspies were used in the Russian Civil War against Lenin and Trotsky. Garrison read it. Salandria then handed him a small stack of Boxley’s memos. Garrison had the same experience described above: an elegant and deliberate voyage to nowhere, coolly planned in advance. When Garrison was done reading he understood he had been taken. The pair then called up Lou Ivon and he drove over. They then phoned Boxley and asked him to come over to Garrison’s home. Boxley said he would. They all waited. But he did not show. They called again. He said he would come over. They waited. He did not show. Ivon called a third time. Boxley now cackled into the phone: “Lou, tell Big Jim, we’re coming after him—with it all!” He then laughed loudly and hung up.122 All three men then drove over to Boxley’s rented room. He was not there. They knocked on the landlady’s door. The woman said she had not seen him since he first took a lease. Boxley just sent her a check each month. When she showed them Boxley’s room, there was one folded shirt on the bed. That was it. When Garrison showed her the number he had given him, she said, “There’s no phone with that number here.” Garrison now realized why Boxley always brought a bigger and bigger briefcase to work. He was absconding with his investigative files.123
The aftermath of all this was that Garrison finally understood that he had made a huge error in accepting volunteers to work in his office. His excuse was that there were too many leads to follow and he could not pursue them all with the small staff he had. There was some truth to this of course. But the problem was that the Kennedy case was so politically charged that there was bound to be attempts at infiltration. Or as Ray Marcus once said to the author, “If the infiltration did not happen, then the critics were wrong.”124 Well, the critics were right. Except Garrison had handled it poorly. Once he realized what had happened he now asked every volunteer to turn in his deputy’s badge.125 From here on in, with few exceptions, Garrison stuck almost exclusively with his professional staff in the office.
There now began to be deep-rooted and bitter recriminations—which exist to this very
day—about who had worked with Boxley and what they were up to. Because of the Bradley fiasco, the entire California contingent was now suspect by those from back East—that is, people like Weisberg and Salandria and Gary Schoener now had deep suspicions about Bill Turner and former CIA pilot Jim Rose, another volunteer who had worked with Turner.126 At one point Jaffe was literally cross examined by Ray Marcus and Marjorie Field.127 Steve Burton mailed back his credentials stating that certain actions of his cohorts had shown what inexperience can do to damage an investigation.128
Destiny Betrayed: JFK, Cuba, & the Garrison Case Page 42