DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Attempting to resurrect that fraud of a New Orleans prosecutor named Earling C. (Jim) Garrison (with respect to the JFK assassination case and Garrison's bogus prosecution of Clay Shaw) is enough to make anybody laugh so hard, they are likely to bust wide open.
But Jim DiEugenio seems to enjoy endorsing an obvious fraud (Garrison) who decided to prosecute his own "patsy" named Clay Shaw on a charge of conspiracy to murder the President of the United States, despite the fact that the fraud named Garrison had zero pieces of evidence to prove Shaw's complicity in the crime he was being charged with.
To show just how much of a fraud Garrison was, when Garrison boldly announced to the world on February 24, 1967, that he and his staff had "solved" the JFK case, Garrison's "star" witness, Perry Russo, had not even come forward to tell his tale of lies to Garrison and his prosecution team.
Quoting from "Reclaiming History":
"On February 24 [1967]...Garrison...announced that "my staff and I solved the case weeks ago. I wouldn't say this if I didn't have evidence beyond a shadow of a doubt. We know the key individuals, the cities involved, and how it was done . . . There were several plots . . . The only way they are going to get away from us is to kill themselves . . . It's a case we will not lose, and anybody that wants to bet against us is invited to, but they will be disappointed." Garrison said, "There is no doubt that the entire thing [alleged plot to kill Kennedy] was planned in New Orleans."
For good measure, Garrison told the press, "I have no reason to believe that Lee Harvey Oswald killed anybody in Dallas on November 22, 1963." Garrison said that "the key to the whole case is through the looking glass. Black is white. White is black. I don't want to be cryptic, but that's the way it is."
Of course, Garrison was just bluffing. In fact, Perry Russo, Garrison's star witness and the one around whom he virtually built his entire case, hadn't even been interviewed by Garrison's staff yet. That took place the following day, February 25, when they spoke to him for the very first time.
Not one scrap of evidence has ever emerged that on February 24, the day Garrison announced that he and his staff had "solved the case," he had any evidence connecting anyone, in any way, with the assassination. If there were nothing else at all, this alone, by definition, would be enough to prove beyond all doubt that Garrison had no personal credibility with respect to this case.
No assassination theory, many originating with the Dealey Plaza Irregulars and bought by Garrison, was too wild or far-out for Garrison's taste. .... It is said that no other people love fantasy more than the people of New Orleans, and their elected DA intended to give them as much as their girths could hold.
Before he finally settled in on elements of the CIA and anti-Castro Cubans working for "war-oriented elements of the American power structure" as being behind the plot to kill Kennedy, the fertile-minded Orleans Parish DA saw many other different villains behind the plot and had screwy visions of how it was pulled off.
In her book about Garrison and the Shaw trial, 'False Witness', the best book on the case, Patricia Lambert chronicles, with citations, Garrison's progression of fantastic and bizarre theories, all of which he shared with the media." -- Vincent Bugliosi; Pages 1365-1366 of "Reclaiming History"
-------------------
To hear a quick overview of the kind of "fantastic and bizarre theories" that Vince Bugliosi was referring to in the above book quote, check out Jim Garrison's January 31, 1968, interview with Johnny Carson on "The Tonight Show".
At the link provided below, Carson provides the audience with a rundown of some of the various theories that the Jolly Green Crackpot named Garrison had placed on the table within just the previous eleven months prior to his 1/31/68 appearance on Carson's late-night NBC-TV program.
David Von Pein
September 6, 2010
