False Witness
Page 40
15. Robert A. Frazier, trial transcript, Feb. 21–22, 1969, pp. 49, 68–69.
16. Col. Pierre A. Finck, trial transcript, Feb. 24, 1969, pp. 11, 40.
17. Ibid., pp. 71 (“higher”), 48 (“in charge”), 117–120 (“not to,” “probe”) 17 (exited), 125 (“major bones”), 196–197, 207, (Feb. 25, 1969) 30–32 (rectangular structure), 137 (metallic fragments), 24–25, 192, (Feb. 25, 1969) 22, 28 (three inches too high). The New Orleans Times-Picayune (Feb. 25, 1969, p. 17, col. 3) reported Finck’s description of the throat wound’s exit point as “at the approximate level of the tie knot.” The trial transcript (p. 17) contains the word “know” instead of “knot.”
18. Following the trial, in a memorandum he submitted to Shaw’s attorneys, Dr. Finck addressed several of the issues that had given him difficulty on cross-examination. One was “why the neck wound was not dissected.” Finck wrote: “An attempt was made to probe this wound; however, the president had been transported from Dallas, Texas, to Washington, D.C., in a position other than that at the time he was shot and rigormortis had congealed the muscles in a manner different from the position at the time the bullet track or the missile track was made and this accounts for the inability to probe the wound.” A new item Finck mentioned was the backward movement of the president’s head at the time of the fatal shot. He wrote: “The Zapruder film shows the president extending back following the head wound. Some have used this as evidence that he was struck from the front. A better explanation is that (due to the severance of his brain from his spinal cord as described in the autopsy report) he experienced decerebrate rigidity due to loss of cerebral control” (six-page memorandum, undated and unsigned [from the files of William J. Wegmann]).
19. Dean Andrews, trial transcript, Feb. 25, 1969, pp. 3, 7, 11.
20. Ibid., pp. 8, 11, 13–16.
21. Ibid., pp. 17–34, 52, 55, 123, 126.
22. Ibid., pp. 127–128, 138, 130, 132, 131.
23. Ibid., pp. 132, 137.
24. Ibid., pp. 138, 147, 149, 157, 160, 148. During his direct examination by Dymond, Andrews said, “I believe my office investigator came to visit me and we talked about whether or not he remembered Lee Oswald,” and Andrews placed the investigator’s visit after the call to his secretary. But this conflicts with the earliest 1963 statements of Andrews and his investigator both as to the timing of the visit (it preceded the call to the secretary) and the content of their discussion (they talked about the upcoming election in which Andrews was running for a judgeship).
25. Kirkwood, American Grotesque, p. 395.
26. Charles A. Appel, Jr., trial transcript, Feb. 25, 1969, pp. 30–31.
27. Lt. Edward O’Donnell, trial transcript, Feb. 26, 1969, pp. 8, 7.
28. Clay L. Shaw, trial transcript, Feb. 27, 1969, pp. 5–6, 14–15, 7–8, 19–23; 15–17.
29. Ibid., pp. 11–12, 24–28.
30. Shaw referred to a letter dated Sept. 11, 1963, from the representative of the Columbia Basin World Development Conference in Portland, Oregon, confirming arrangements for him to speak there on Nov. 26. The Bermúdez letter soliciting the San Francisco speaking engagement was dated Nov. 11, prompting a telephone conversation between Shaw and Sullivan. Sullivan recalls that Shaw placed the call but Shaw’s recollection was that Sullivan initiated it. Shaw’s custom was to travel by train and he did so on this occasion. He stayed in Los Angeles from Nov. 18 to Nov. 20, 1963, and took the overnight Lark to San Francisco. He arrived there on the Nov. 21, left on Nov. 23, and traveled to Portland. The conference there was canceled but the sponsors arranged for him to address the Rotary Club (trial testimony, Feb. 27, 1969, pp. 24–25, 30–32; Monroe Sullivan, telephone conversation with author, June 21, 1995).
31. Clay L. Shaw, trial transcript, Feb. 27, 1969, pp. 55–56, 59, 42–43.
32. New Orleans Times-Picayune, Feb. 28, 1969; Kirkwood, American Grotesque, pp. 413–414.
33. Mr. and Mrs. Nicholas M.Tadin, trial transcript, Feb. 27, 1969, pp. 12–13, 10, 18–19, 29–31; Kirkwood, American Grotesque, p. 417.
34. Dr. John Marshall Nichols, trial transcript, Feb. 28, 1969, pp. 4–8, 35–41.
35. Kirkwood, American Grotesque, p. 423; Elizabeth McCarthy, trial transcript, Feb. 28, 1969, pp. 86, 92.
36. Jim Garrison, closing statement, trial transcript, Feb. 28, 1969, pp. 138–141; 146; 157. (Page 150 is missing in the available transcript but the text of it may be found in Kirkwood’s American Grotesque at p. 458.)
37. Kirkwood, American Grotesque, p. 301.
38. Ibid., pp. 550, 557; New Orleans Times-Picayune, March 2, 1969; “Press Interviews of the Jury Immediately Following the Acquittal of Clay A. Shaw on March 1, 1969,” eight-page memorandum (from the files of Edward F. Wegmann).
39. New Orleans Times-Picayune, March 2, 1969.
40. Kirkwood, American Grotesque, pp. 492–493.
CHAPTER TWELVE
1. Perry Russo’s statement to this writer that he may have been hypnotized as many as five times is supported by the charges Dr. Fatter billed to Garrison’s office for his services. (See Daniel J. Jones, Christenberry transcript, p. 411.)
2. Jim Garrison, Christenberry transcript, p. 235.
3. Ibid., p. 226.
4. Ibid., pp. 246–247.
5. Ibid., pp. 269–270.
6. Ibid., pp. 275–276 (“a warm feeling”); p. 272 (“I cannot”).
7. F. Irvin Dymond, interview with author, Nov. 2, 1995.
8. Christenberry transcript, p. 23.
9. Willard E. Robertson, Christenberry transcript, pp. 50, 51.
10. Nor did the founders of T & C have any information about Governor McKeithen’s two 5,000 contributions. But when the news reached the governor that his generosity had been revealed in Christenberry’s courtroom, McKeithen admitted to inquiring reporters that his donation had come from public funds; and that information was presented to the citizens of New Orleans in a banner headline.
11. William Gurvich, Christenberry transcript, pp. 337–346, 354.
12. Clay Shaw, Christenberry transcript, p. 465.
13. Perry Russo, interview with author, Dec. 4, 1993.
14. F. Irvin Dymond, interview with author, Nov. 2, 1995; Wegmann Memorandum; Russo–Defense Team Interview; Russo–Gurvich Interview; Russo–Wegmann et al. Interview.
15. Perry Russo, interviews with author, Dec. 4, 1993, Feb. 7, 1994.
16. Judge Christenberry’s opinion, May 27, 1971, Clay L. Shaw v. Jim Garrison, Civil Action No. 71–135, 328 F.Supp. 390–404. Louis Ivon had confirmed that a Life magazine photographer took Shaw’s picture unbeknownst to him through a two-way mirror (Christenberry transcript, pp. 443–444).
17. New Orleans States-Item, Aug. 15, 1974.
18. Edward O’Donnell, Confidential Report, to Joseph I. Giarrusso, Superintendent of Police, Aug. 10, 1970.
19. Conversation with David Snyder, Aug. 15, 1995.
20. Shaw Journal, pp. 37, 1; David Snyder, “The Ordeal of Clay Shaw: Character Assassination,” New Orleans Times-Picayune, July 28, 1996.
21. Shaw Journal, pp. 106, 71; David Snyder, “The Ordeal of Clay Shaw: Character Assassination,” New Orleans Times-Picayune, July 28, 1996.
22. HSCA Report, pp. 142; G. Robert Blakey and Richard N. Billings, The Plot to Kill the President (New York: Times Books, 1981), p. 46.
GARRISON EXPOUNDS ON THE ASSASSINATION
1. New Orleans Times-Picayune, Feb. 25, 1967; Nicholas C. Chriss, “Melodrama, but the Plot is Obscure,” Los Angeles Times, March 26, 1967; Paris Flammonde, “Why President Kennedy Was Killed,” Evergreen, Jan. 1969, p. 73 (citing the Associated Press and the Washington Post of Feb. 25, 1967, and the Washington Sunday Star of Feb. 26, 1967).
2. Newsweek, March 20, 1967, citing Paris-Match quoting Garrison.
3. Nicholas C. Chriss, “Melodrama, but the Plot is Obscure,” Los Angeles Times, March 26, 1967.
4. Baton Rouge Morning Advocate, May 22, 1967, citing Garrison interview with Bob Jones on WWL-TV
.
5. Baton Rouge Morning Advocate, May 24, 1967, and New Orleans States-Item, May 23, 1967, both citing Associated Press interview with Garrison.
6. New York Times, July 17, 1967, describing Garrison’s July 15, 1967, speech on NBC television.
7. Garrison, letter to Bertrand Russell, Aug. 27, 1967 (included in transcript of Assassination Records Review Board hearing in New Orleans on June 28, 1995, pp. 78–79).
8. Garrison, interview, “Mike Wallace at Large,” NBC, Sept. 26, 1967.
9. Paris Flammonde, “Why President Kennedy Was Killed,” Evergreen, Jan. 1969 (quoting Garrison interview on WFAA-TV in Dallas, Dec. 9, 1967), p. 76; Brener, The Garrison Case, p. 223 (citing the New Orleans Times-Picayune, Dec. 19, 1967).
10. New Orleans Times-Picayune, Dec. 27, 1967.
CHAPTER THIRTEEN
1. Dymond et al. Interview.
2. Ibid.
3. Salvatore Panzeca, interview with author, Nov. 30, 1993.
4. Jim Garrison, filmed interview, 1989, in Richard Cohen and Carol Kachmer’s Rough Side of the Mountain, a documentary work-in-progress begun in 1971 about the Clinton witnesses.
5. Edwin Lea McGehee later (after Marina Oswald testified that Oswald could not drive, owned no car and that she had never been to the Clinton area) tried to disassociate his “Oswald” from the old car and its female passenger. He speculated to this writer that the “black car” with those other men inside could have been parked around the corner from his barber shop, out of sight. Yet, although McGehee never said he saw “Oswald” exit the car, in his earliest statement to the D.A.’s office and in his trial testimony McGehee clearly indicated that he believed Oswald arrived in it. Also, the car and the woman passenger were reportedly seen at the home of Reeves Morgan as well. Both were an integral part of the Oswald-in-Clinton story, at least in the beginning.
6. Kirkwood, American Grotesque, p. 612–613.
7. Director of the FBI, letter to the Attorney General, Feb. 10, 1969.
8. Richard H. Kilbourne, Sr., interview with author, Dec. 6, 1993.
9. John Manchester, trial transcript, Feb. 6, 1969, p. 69; William Dunn, trial transcript, Feb. 7, 1969, pp. 19–20.
10. Manchester, trial transcript, Feb. 6, 1969, p. 59; Palmer, trial transcript, p. 85.
11. Manchester, trial transcript, Feb. 6, 1969, p. 72; Corrie Collins, trial transcript, Feb. 6, 1969, p. 118.
12. Garrison, On the Trail of the Assassins, pp. 108–109; Garrison also recited the Oswald-record-switching explanation in the documentary film, Rough Side of the Mountain (see note 4).
13. Anne Hundley Dischler, field notes (hereinafter Dischler Notes), entry dated May 18, 1967.
14. The message in the Dischler Notes reads: “People in St. Francisville few months [ago?]—Oswald—tried reg. to vote—tried to work at hosp.—in company of Shaw and Ferrie—Cadillac Henry Earl Palmer—Registrar of Voters 504-683-5171—Clinton, LA.” The word “Jackson” appears after Palmer’s name, but a line has been drawn though it (Dischler Notes, entry dated May 18, 1967). The meaning of the reference to St. Francisville, which is about twenty-five miles from Clinton, is unclear. But it is the home of Judge John Rarick (see note 28).
15. Jack Rogers had his own relationship with Jim Garrison, as seen in this Dischler notation dated Aug. 29, 1967: “Spoke to Jack Rogers by phone—said he is going to [New Orleans] this P.M.—needs to see Garrison. . . .”
16. The following entry in the Dischler Notes suggests that susceptibility to Garrison’s rhetoric among Clinton’s black community may have been a factor in their cooperation with him: “CORE people decided this year not to vote for [Clinton] Alderman [Willie Joe] Yarbrough because of his connection with Shaw (relative) who was mixed up with Oswald, so they may be of more help.” (Dischler Notes, entry dated Aug. 15, 1967). Yarbrough was married to Doris Shaw, Clay Shaw’s first cousin.
17. Anne Dischler, interview with author, Feb. 2–3, 1994 (hereinafter Dischler Interview); Billings Personal Notes, entry dated May 23, 1967, p. 81.
18. Dischler Interview. Dischler, who had earlier explained that many of Garrison’s files had been stolen, said if I didn’t find this picture that it might have been among those that “came up missing.”
19. Dischler Interview; Dischler telephone conversation, Feb. 4, 1994.
20. Ibid.
21. Corrie Collins said the car stayed there “10 or 15 minutes” (Dischler Notes, Oct. 3, 1967). But the other testimony placed it in that spot for five hours; at the trial Collins retreated, saying he could not recall how long it was parked there.
22. In the Dischler Notes the name “Morgan” is accompanied by a question mark and then in parentheses: “(Is Zip Morgan related to Estus?).” That is followed by: “Note: This man may not be a Morgan—refer to Henry Earl [Palmer]” (Dischler Notes, Oct. 3, 1967).
23. The identification of the man “in white” as Winslow Foster was provided to Dischler by Henry Earl Palmer (Dischler Notes, entry dated Oct. 3, 1967; Dischler Interview).
24. Richard Stevens, telephone interview, April 8, 1995; Barney Lea, telephone interview, April 7, 1995.
25. Nellie Louise Morgan, telephone interview, March 31, 1996. (She and Estus Morgan were married three years and had two sons.) Morgan’s birth and military information are found in his hospital employment records.
26. Andrew Sciambra, Memorandum to Garrison, June 1, 1967, re interview with Henry Earl Palmer on May 29, 1967.
27. Bethell Diary, Oct. 2, 1967, p. 10.
28. In Henry Earl Palmer’s May 29, 1967, interview he stated that Judge John Rarick “may have been with him” when he saw the black car and that it “could have been” Judge Rarick who ran the license check on it. Notably, at that time John Manchester, who later provided the definitive identification of the car and its driver, was not yet a firm witness. This reference to Rarick suggests the role he might have played if Manchester had not firmed up. An ardent segregationist later elected to the U.S. House of Representatives, John Rarick’s support of Jim Garrison is not widely known. But in 1971, when Garrison was under indictment on bribery charges, Rarick reportedly entered remarks into the Congressional Record supporting him. Described recently by a lifelong Clinton resident as “the spiritual leader” of the Ku Klux Klan, Rarick’s 1963 rulings from the bench exacerbated the local strife. Then and later (while he was in Congress), Rarick reportedly maintained an extremely active interest and influence over all aspects of the Clinton community, especially East Louisiana State Hospital, and at least two of the Clinton witnesses had close ties to him: Palmer was regarded as Rarick’s protègé, and barber McGehee in 1993 was still cutting Rarick’s hair. It may be relevant that Rarick resides in St. Francisville, the first location mentioned in the initial tip about the black Cadillac (see note 14).
29. In a memorandum dated Oct. 26, 1967 (thirteen days after Frugé and Dischler were removed from the case), Andrew Sciambra advised Jim Garrison that he had a tape recording of an interview with Collins and that Collins remembered seeing the black Cadillac. Conspicuously missing from this October memorandum by Sciambra is any reference to the occupants of the car. The two men—one in white, the other (possibly) in blue jeans—that Collins told Frugé and Dischler he saw exiting the car, had vanished permanently from Collins’s testimony. Sciambra wrote that a transcript of the Collins tape recording would be done “later”; it has never surfaced. The story that Collins would tell at Shaw’s trial began to emerge in a memorandum Sciambra wrote to Garrison on January 31, 1968, describing an interview with Collins conducted by Sciambra and James Alcock. At this point, the two men exiting the car had become one man, and Collins positively identified a picture of him. In this January memorandum, Sciambra also specifically disassociated Estus Morgan from the car and from Oswald, stating that Collins said he knew Morgan and saw him in the registration line, but was uncertain whether or not it was the same day.
30. The trial testimony concerning Oswald’s visit to East Louisiana State Hospit
al also materialized on Andrew Sciambra’s watch. Maxine Kemp’s claim that she saw Oswald’s job application first appeared in a memorandum Sciambra wrote to Garrison two months after Frugé and Dischler were dismissed. Bobbie Dedon’s claim that Oswald asked her for directions to the personnel office first appeared in another Sciambra memorandum written six days later, supposedly recapping an interview conducted on Aug. 4, 1967. But the Aug. 4, 1967, entry in the Dischler Notes describing that interview said only that Dedon found Oswald’s picture “very familiar” (she said the same about Shaw’s), and made no mention of Dedon having seen or spoken to Oswald. (Andrew Sciambra, Memorandum to Garrison, regarding Guy Broyles, Personnel Manager, ELSH, Jan. 23, 1968; Sciambra, Memorandum to Garrison, regarding interview with Bobbie Dedon on Aug. 4, 1967, dated Jan. 29, 1968; Dischler Notes, Aug. 4, 1967.)
31. The Committee members apparently accepted without question the statements made by Francis Frugé. But Frugé misled the Committee in several particulars: (1) Frugé said he was “detailed to work on the Garrison investigation in 1968.” In fact, he was assigned to the case in February 1967, when he and Dischler looked into the Rose Cheramie matter. The Dischler Notes on the Cheramie investigation, which are quite extensive, start on February 25, 1967, and begin “Garrison—New Orleans—called Frugé in connection with one Rose Cheramie . . .” (2) When asked “what trail” led to the Clinton witnesses, Frugé said that Andrew Sciambra “would know best,” that Sciambra had provided the list of “forty-five-plus potential witnesses.” In fact, the “tip,” as outlined in this chapter, went to Frugé and Dischler from the Sovereignty Commission. As for the names of potential witnesses, they were obtained by Frugé and Dischler in the course of their investigation. Many, perhaps most, appear to have come from Palmer’s list of registrants. (3) Frugé told the Committee “one of the most believable” Clinton witnesses was Andrew Dunn, who died “in a jail cell before he could testify.” Dunn, an alcoholic, who was found hanged in his cell in the Clinton jail and ruled a suicide, was regarded by Anne Dischler as quite credible. But Dischler told me Frugé disagreed, claiming that Dunn’s alcoholism hurt his reliability, and Dunn was never slated to testify. Frugé touting Dunn to the HSC was odd since Dunn’s story was quite different from the official one told in court. He claimed, for example, that there were four men in the Cadillac, one of them Banister, and they “got out of the car and stretched their legs” (Frugé, HSCA Outside Contact Report, Dec. 19, 1978; Dischler Interview; Sciambra, memorandum to Jim Garrison, July 18, 1967, re July 17, 1967, interview with Andrew H. Dunn; Andrew H. Dunn Affidavit, July 13, 1967).