The Reporter Who Knew Too Much

Home > Other > The Reporter Who Knew Too Much > Page 18
The Reporter Who Knew Too Much Page 18

by Mark Shaw


  That Belli never disclosed much about Kilgallen was consistent with his behavior through the years about the Ruby trial. From the 1960s to 1995, when he died, he very much respected the Mob’s allegiance to the loyalty oath of Omertá, a code of silence.

  Despite requests to do so on many occasions by family, friends, legal colleagues and the media, Belli was suspiciously silent when the Ruby case became a topic of conversation. Known for his loquacious nature, Belli avoided talking about the Ruby case. Belli’s associate Kent Russell told this author, “I pumped him about it because I sensed something was wrong with his representation. But he wouldn’t give any thought or consideration to a conspiracy. He just kept saying how bad Dallas was.…He just totally shut the door about Ruby. He didn’t want to go there. I never quite understood that.”

  In the mid-1980s, this author briefly practiced law with Belli in San Francisco and became friends to the extent that the famous attorney invited him to the major league baseball All-Star game at Candlestick Park where Belli’s star power was witnessed firsthand. While writing Belli’s biography, Melvin Belli: King of the Courtroom, it was apparent to me the famous attorney was quite secretive about certain aspects of his legal career, especially the Jack Ruby case.

  Clues, never divulged, as to what Kilgallen learned from the Ruby interviews directly affecting his involvement in the assassinations, provided her impetus to continue digging into the twin assassinations. Kilgallen’s friend, CBS producer Marlon Swing, was certain that the Ruby interviews paid off for the famous journalist: “Dorothy would have gotten a lot out of the Jack Ruby interviews because she had that investigative technique. She had stumbled onto something.”

  Meanwhile, Kilgallen’s columns reflected a growing suspicion about what really happened in Dealey Plaza and the Dallas Police Department basement. This led to her early exposure of Jack Ruby’s statements to the Warren Commission. Despite grilling by government agents for hours on end, Kilgallen refused to disclose her source. Recall the FBI file memo that read, “She stated that she was the only person who knew the identity of the source and that she ‘would die’ rather than reveal his identity.”

  During her investigation, Kilgallen collected information from the Ruby interviews and inside facts from Belli and Tonahill. Recall that Kilgallen had assisted the defense with exposure of Joe Tonahill’s letter to the Warren Commission demanding more information about Oswald from the FBI and Justice Department. The commission and FBI refused to cooperate. The Justice Department only provided information about Oswald deemed “not relevant” to JFK’s assassination. This refusal, in addition to the swell of information she had gathered, enhanced Kilgallen’s curiosity.

  Without doubt, it was Ruby’s testimony at the Warren Commission perpetuating Kilgallen’s fervor to discover who killed JFK. The Journal-American published the secret testimony on August 19, 1964, five months after the Ruby trial. One may only imagine how shocked this crack investigative reporter turned detective was when she learned that Ruby had said, “I have been used for a purpose,” and “I won’t be around for you to come and question me again.”

  Later in his testimony, Ruby continued to request a lie detector test. Chief Justice Warren promised him one. Ruby said, “Gentlemen, my life was in danger here,” and then “I may not live tomorrow to give any further testimony.”

  To add to the intrigue, Ruby provided a statement outside his Warren Commission testimony that was most revealing. He spoke slowly and methodically as if scripted. Standing before what appeared to be a court railing, his arms gesturing as he spoke, Ruby said in an eerie tone:

  The world will never know the true facts of what occurred. My motives. I’m the only person in the background that knows the truth pertaining to everything relating to my circumstances. The people who have had so much to gain and have such an ulterior motive to put me in this position I’m in will never let the true facts come above board to the world.

  Armed with this information, Kilgallen continued to attack the Warren Commission Report (she listed some 100 discrepancies to consider) and the overall investigations by the FBI and Justice Department. To those who wanted the assassinations investigation terminated, they were on notice Kilgallen was still on the job. Government agencies may have closed the door but Kilgallen did not. This must have caused concern that she would get too close to the truth.

  Kilgallen’s determination to expose the truth was dangerous. She was truly a huge threat as the months passed into late 1965. Kilgallen was not like other reporters. She had the bully pulpit, the national forum, the proven credentials. Her Journal-American column and investigative stories appeared in hundreds of newspapers across the country. The powerful Hearst media syndicate backed her. She had a solid reputation as a credible journalist. She was also a television star seen each week by millions of viewers.

  At the lavish parties she and Richard hosted, attended by anyone and everyone who was important in the world, Kilgallen was the main attraction. When she spoke or wrote, people listened and read with interest because of her credibility. If Kilgallen would not quit, if she exposed damning evidence continuing to call into question the “Oswald Alone” proclamation, the chance of further investigation became a reality. This caused problems, big problems, for anyone with something to hide.

  53 As reported by the New York Times, during an American Bar Association convention, while conducting his “Belli Seminar,” Belli introduced a “tax expert” as Professor Julian O’Brien of Harvard University. The professor proceeded to lecture the attendees with what Belli described as “an amusing pastiche” which ended with altogether fitting proportion, “My advice to you guys is, Pay your taxes.” Duly impressed, the delegates to the convention began to discuss Professor O’Brien’s speech that evening. They were shocked when they discovered that it was not a Harvard professor who had spoken to them but Meyer Harris “Mickey” Cohen, Belli’s buddy and a Los Angeles mobster who had been charged with tax evasion.

  CHAPTER 25

  For those fearing any follow-up investigations on the assassinations, the worst possible scenario would have been the convening of a grand jury.

  None happened in 1963/64. The explanation provided at the time was a simple one: J. Edgar Hoover proclaimed that unless evidence of a conspiracy was uncovered, no convening of a grand jury could happen.

  The House Select Committee on Assassinations report54 released in the late 1970s provides a new perspective. From the information gathered, it is clear that if Kilgallen exposed even the whisper of a conspiracy in November 1965 or thereafter, the course of history could have been significantly altered.

  As the Committee began its investigation, noted syndicated columnist Liz Smith, one of Kilgallen’s rivals in the 1960s, wrote a column entitled, “The Kilgallen Mystery.” Released nationally on December 15, 1976, and featuring a large photo of Kilgallen, Smith’s column revealed that both author Lee Israel, and Kilgallen’s son, Kerry, had been attempting to “wrest from the FBI and CIA the pertinent papers concerning Kilgallen’s involvement with the assassination of JFK.”

  Calling it the “Strange Case of Dorothy Kilgallen,” Smith said that while Israel sought the papers for a book she was writing, Kerry wanted them because “he is mad, frustrated, and wants to find out what his mother knew and how she really died.” Smith added that Kerry, who must have suspected the official cause of death was suspect, was “proud of what he has learned of his mother, and wants the story of her prescience and courage in the matter of JFK’s death made public.”

  Without providing a source, Smith swore, “The FBI has voluminous material” about Kilgallen. Regarding the CIA, Smith added, “What was this international agency doing investigating a gossip columnist? The CIA had 20 odd pages on Dorothy Kilgallen in its files. It contacted 51 CIA offices in her ‘case!!!’” In closing, Smith stated, “With both the FBI and CIA in the shadows of suspicion and clouds of disgrace, on
e would think it would behoove them to act quickly and openly and make the Kilgallen dossiers available to her outraged son. But the cover-up continues.” No evidence has revealed that either Lee Israel or Kerry Kollmar was successful in the attempts to retrieve government files about Kilgallen.

  The CIA focus on Kilgallen causes suspicion it may have had something to do with her death. Recall that she had crossed paths with the agency as early as 1951 when she alleged Radio Free Europe was not “free.” Kilgallen suspected subversive groups influenced it and the column triggered the agency’s interest in her. A subsequent dossier documented Kilgallen’s less than cooperative attitude when agents in search of a source for her column entry contacted the protective journalist. Criticisms of Kilgallen prevail throughout the report including, “[She] procrastinated until we lost all patience with her.” Regarding the agent who hounded her for information, the report stated, “He [did] everything in his power to get Miss Kilgallen to change her mind [about revealing her source] [but] he despaired of any interest.”

  Despite the CIA’s harsh words, Kilgallen’s confrontation with it happened 14 years before her death. Connecting the agency as a strong suspect if in fact she was murdered, is less than viable unless new evidence surfaces.55

  Regardless, when the HSCA report was finally released, it severely criticized the Justice Department having “largely abdicated what should have been important responsibilities in the continuing investigation.” It then added, “Officials at Justice did not exercise any significant role in shaping, monitoring, or evaluating the FBI’s investigation, despite the Bureau’s organization status with the Department.”

  The report also said there was “little indication Justice Department officials moved to mount a sophisticated criminal investigation of the assassination, including its conspiracy [Emphasis added] implications.” It added that the department failed to use its “power and capabilities of a federal grand jury, and the granting of immunity.”

  The Committee concluded federal jurisdiction did exist over the assassination because there was evidence of a conspiracy in 1963. In addition, the report stated Robert Kennedy’s mental state “significantly affected the Government’s handling of the investigation” while chastising him with failure to advance “a strong position” with FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover “on the course of the investigation.”

  While this conclusion appeared in the late 1970s, it blankets what would have occurred in 1963, 1964, or later if Kilgallen had rustled up enough evidence to suggest that a conspiracy existed. This, in turn, could have triggered the call for convening a grand jury investigation. It would have possessed “evidence-gathering tools as a grand jury” and “grants of immunity,” as noted by the Committee.

  To those negatively impacted by a grand jury probe, Dorothy Kilgallen was indeed a strong threat. By November 8, 1965, the day she died, Kilgallen had been pursuing new evidence for 18-plus months.

  While considering Kilgallen’s determination to push forward, a decision guaranteed to embroil her in controversy, it was apparent hairdresser Charles Simpson had a special affection for the gifted journalist. Marc Sinclaire had introduced them. Over time, Simpson became Kilgallen’s trusted friend. He was most impressed with her humble manner. During the recorded interview in the late-1990s, Simpson said Kilgallen was “even gracious to the girls at the desk, all the small people,” a reference to the popular Lily Daché’s Midtown Manhattan Salon for Ladies. He added, “I’ve never known this woman [Dorothy] to be mean in any way.” He also said “[Dorothy] had a rosary, a pearl rosary and she would take it out on the second floor of her townhouse, a five-story Georgian mansion and what she did was go out and there was a little hedge on there and she would lay the rosary out there when Marc or I flew anywhere and leave it there until we returned. And she told us she did this.”

  Charles Simpson was Kilgallen’s hairdresser and make-up artist along with Marc Sinclaire.

  The recorded comments by Simpson are quite impressive. Wearing a bright golf shirt while chain-smoking, the balding and mustachioed Simpson spoke deliberately. He paused and reflected before answering questions about Kilgallen. When the interviewer attempted to get him to agree with a statement, and he did not, Simpson held his ground.

  Specifically, the hairdresser, who also handled Kilgallen’s make-up chores, recalled she was smart enough to “only go so far,” and not “cross the line” when dishing criticism of celebrities and public figures. Simpson also said that “when it came to really big stuff,” Kilgallen did “not pull any punches when necessary when there was someone who really needed to be exposed for something they were doing, government people, things like that she pulled no punches.” He added, “It wasn’t like today when if [celebrities] have fungus under [their] fingernails, [the media] exposes it. There was an unwritten law then and Dorothy knew the limitations.”

  Simpson, who stated, “I’ve never seen her in a Sunday night show when she wasn’t alert and with it,” remembered the days when “I fixed her hair every Sunday before What’s My Line” He said he and Marc Sinclaire both had keys to Kilgallen’s townhouse so they could wake her without “waking up the servants.” Simpson said the “night she died, Marc had done her hair for the show and she was taking a plane to London the next day. This is why I find it very hard to believe that she committed suicide for the simple fact that she was looking forward to this trip to London the next morning. And Marc went over very, very early in order to get her ready for the plane trip to London and that’s when he found her.”

  Regarding the JFK assassination, Simpson recalled that Kilgallen “never quit investigating, never quit.” He said she, “dug up something about the assassination of President Kennedy that somebody didn’t want her to know because she even told us of her own volition, ‘I used to share things with you guys,’ she said, as noted, ‘but after I have found out NOW what I know, if the wrong people knew what I know, it would cost me my life’ and she was dead about nine months later.”

  Regarding the Jack Ruby Warren Commission testimony, Simpson said, “She printed it on the front page of the Journal-American BEFORE the president received it and therein lies the tale. From then on we were stalked. Marc and me, our phones were tapped [since] they were trying to figure out where she got her information, that she could get this information before the president got it.” This was because, Simpson said, “Actually, even though I didn’t know anything about the assassination, these people, whoever they were, didn’t know that, they didn’t know what Dorothy may have told us. And, yes, I kept it to myself and denied everything until recent years.” Asked if it was safe to talk about it at the time of the interview, Simpson paused and then replied, “No, uh, no.”56

  On one specific occasion, Simpson declared that someone followed Sinclaire and him. He said “four men in expensive suits” tried to force him into a room but “I refused.” He added, “When I got back to my room [at the Pickwick Arms], someone “had gone through all my things” and that he and Sinclaire “joked that it was either the Mafia or CIA.”

  Marc Sinclaire, speaking carefully about Kilgallen and her intention to gather enough evidence exposing those involved in JFK’s assassination, corroborated Simpson’s account of Kilgallen’s steadfast pursuit of the truth, a path fraught with danger since it was counter to the “Oswald Alone” theory perpetuated by the powerful J. Edgar Hoover and the Warren Commission. During his videotaped interview, Sinclaire was asked why he finally spoke about Kilgallen after several decades. He answered, “I was terrified to talk about this. When Lee Israel called and told me about her book, I wouldn’t talk to her at all ten years after. I was still having problems.” Asked why he decided to finally talk about his friend, Sinclaire, pausing to think before answering, stated, “Now everyone is dead or older than I am so I don’t think it makes much difference.” Commenting on why others had refused to question how and why Kilgallen died, he stated, “They wouldn’t have becaus
e you could wind up dead.”

  At the outset of the interview, Sinclaire examined a newspaper front page featuring a headline touting Kilgallen’s exposure of Jack Ruby’s Warren Commission testimony and then commented, “That’s when the heat really started. That’s when my phones were bugged…people started following us [he and Simpson]…it wasn’t very good after that.” He also said, “Everything was done to discredit [Dorothy] after she wrote about the assassinations. To degrade her.”

  Sinclaire recalled, “Dorothy wouldn’t stop [with the JFK assassination investigation]. She had it all. She told me about this. And Donnell [Simpson] was there too and he knew. We knew what she was doing.” He added, “She said this was the case of a lifetime, a story of a lifetime. That she would prove…who assassinated the president.” Regarding the Ruby Warren Commission testimony, Sinclaire said, “[What Dorothy did] was like slapping them [the government] in the face.”

  Citing the rumors swirling about JFK’s assassination, Sinclaire stated, “People were saying there was more to this than meets the eye. Maybe the government did it [killed JFK]. Maybe [President] Johnson’s people did it. People would ask me questions because I knew Dorothy and they would want to know. Charlotte Ford [Henry Ford’s daughter] wanted to know. Mr. Levitt [A famous developer, William Levitt was called “the father of modern American suburbia”] wanted to know. He would ask me questions when I went to do his wife’s hair.”

 

‹ Prev