|
|
Post by Michael Capasse on Feb 9, 2021 19:08:46 GMT -5
CRIMINAL DISTRICT COURT
PARISH OF ORLEANS
STATE OF LOUISIANA
STATE OF LOUISIANA vs. CLAY L. SHAW
198-059
1426 (30)
SECTION "C"
EXCERPT FROM PROCEEDINGS IN OPEN COURT ON THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 1969,
B E F O R E: THE HONORABLE EDWARD A. HAGGERTY, JR., JUDGE, SECTION "C"
OPENING STATEMENT OF THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY MR. GARRISON:
*****
May it please the Court:
Gentlemen of the Jury, you have been imposed on, to some extent unavoidably, because you have to be sequestered,
and I am about to impose on you one more time, because I have to read to you a rather lengthy opening statement.
The reason I have to read it is because under our law we cannot introduce evidence which has not been described,
at least generally, in the opening statement, so as a result prosecuting attorneys in Louisiana have to read their opening statements
in order to make sure they have touched every point of evidence that they intend to introduce.
So I hope you will bear with me, and I will try and make it as painless as possible. I am going to read it verbatim,
because I intend to give a copy to the Defense for their convenience as soon as I finish, and I want the copy I give them
to be precisely the same as I have given you.
The State of Louisiana is required by law in all criminal trials to make an opening statement to the Jury.
This statement is merely a blueprint of what the State intends to prove.
It has no probative value and should not be considered as evidence in the case.
The defendant, CLAY L, SHAW, is charged in a bill of indictment with having willfully and unlawfully conspired with
DAVID W, FERRIE, LEE HARVEY OSWALD and others to murder JOHN F. KENNEDY. The crime of criminal conspiracy is to find in the
Criminal Code of Louisiana as follows:
CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY
"Criminal conspiracy is the agreement or combination of two or more persons for the specific purpose of committing any crime;
provided that an agreement or combination to commit a crime shall not amount to a criminal conspiracy unless,
in addition to such agreement or combination, one or more of such parties does an act in furtherance of the object
of the agreement or combination."
As required by the definition of criminal conspiracy, the State will prove the following overt acts:
1. A meeting of LEE HARVEY OSWALD, DAVID W. FERRIE and the defendant, CLAY L. SHAW, in the apartment of DAVID W. FERRIE
at 3330 Louisiana Avenue parkway in the City of New Orleans during the month of September, 1963.
2. Discussion by OSWALD, FERRIE and the defendant, SHAW of means and methods of execution of the conspiracy with regard
to assassination of JOHN F. KENNEDY -- particularly, the selection and use of rifles to be fired from multiple directions
simultaneously to produce a triangulation of crossfire, establishing and selecting the means and routes of escape from the
assassination scene, determination of procedures and the places to be used for some of the principals to the conspiracy so as
to establish alibis on the date of the assassination.
3. A "trip to the West Coast of the United States by CLAY L. SHAW during the month of November, 1963.
4. A trip by DAVID W. FERRIE from New Orleans, Louisiana to Houston, Texas on the day of November 22, 1963.
5. LEE HARVEY OSWALD taking a rifle to the Texas Book Depository in Dallas, Texas on or before November 22, 1963.
The Criminal Code defines murder in the following terms:
MURDER:
"Murder is the killing of a human being: (1)When the offender has a specific intent to kill or to inflict great bodily harm."
|
|
|
|
Post by Michael Capasse on Feb 9, 2021 22:01:14 GMT -5
Trial of Clay Shaw | Transcripts
Opening statement by Jim Garrison
The evidence will show that in New Orleans, in the Summer of 1963, LEE HARVEY OSWALD was engaged in bizarre activities
which made it appear ostensibly that he was connected with a Cuban organization, although in fact the evidence indicated
that there was no such organization in New Orleans. This curious activity began on June 16th, when he distributed
"Fair Play for Cuba Committee" leaflets on the Dumaine Street Wharf. This distribution took place at the docking site
of the United States Aircraft Carrier, the USS Wasp.
Upon request of the commanding officer of the Wasp, Officer GIROD RAY of the Harbor Police approached Oswald and informed him
that he would have to stop passing out the leaflets and leave the wharf area. At this time, Officer RAY confiscated two pieces
of the literature being handed out by LEE HARVEY OSWALD. One of these was a leaflet, yellow in color with black print,
entitled "Hands Off Cuba!" The body of the leaflet contained an invitation to join the Fair Play for Cuba Committee in New Orleans.
The other item taken by Officer RAY was a pamphlet entitled "The Truth About Cuba" published by the Fair Play for Cuba Committee,
799 Broadway, New York 3, New York. In conjunction with Officer RAY's testimony, the State will offer into evidence
copies of these two pieces of literature.
The evidence will further show that in June, 1963, the defendant, CLAY SHAW, was present at a party given in an apartment
in the French Quarter of this City. Among the guests at the party was DAVID FERRIE, a man known as an accomplished airplane pilot.
During the course of the party, the conversation among a small group of those present turned to President JOHN F. KENNEDY.
In this group were DAVID FERRIE and the defendant, CLAY SHAW. The comment was made that PRESIDENT KENNEDY should be killed and
that the job could best be done by a rifle. At this point, the defendant, CLAY SHAW, suggested that the man doing the shooting would
probably be killed before he could make his escape. The defendant, after making this observation, turned to FERRIE and asked if it
might not be possible to fly the gunman from the scene of the shooting to safety. DAVID FERRIE replied that this would be possible.
At this point, the conversation was turned to other subjects.
Later in June of 1963, the defendant, CLAY SHAW, was observed speaking to LEE HARVEY OSWALD on the lakefront in the City of New Orleans.
The defendant arrived at the lakefront in a large, black 4-door sedan, and was there met by LEE HARVEY OSWALD, who had walked to the
meeting point along the lakefront from a westerly direction. The defendant and OSWALD had a conversation which lasted approximately fifteen minutes.
At the conclusion of this conversation, the defendant gave OSWALD what appeared to be a roll of money which he immediately placed in his pocket.
In shoving the money into his pocket, OSWALD dropped several leaflets to the ground. These leaflets were yellow in color with black
printing and dealt with Cuba. The color, contents and size of these leaflets were identical with the "Fair Play for Cuba Committee"
leaflet taken from OSWALD earlier that month on the Dumaine Street Wharf by Harbor police Patrolman GIROD RAY.
The evidence will show that on August 9, 1963, LEE HARVEY OSWALD was arrested by members of the New Orleans Police Department as a
result of his becoming involved in a fight with several Cubans who were protesting his passing out "Fair play for Cuba Committee" literature.
This literature was confiscated by the New Orleans police Department. The State will offer into evidence three of the seized items,
one of which is a yellow leaflet with black print entitled "Hands off Cuba!" This is the same type of leaflet taken from OSWALD at the
Dumaine Street Wharf on June 16, 1963, and also the same as the leaflet dropped by OSWALD at the lakefront in the latter part of June, 1963.
The State will also introduce the Bureau of Identification photograph taken of LEE HARVEY OSWALD at the time of his booking. A week later,
on August 16, 1963, LEE HARVEY OSWALD was again distributing "Fair Play for Cuba" leaflets. Once again the distribution was done more as if
to attract attention than to actually accomplish distribution. The actual distribution lasted only a few minutes, ending shortly after
the news media departed. The State will introduce pictures and a television tape of this distribution, which took place in front of the
International Trade Mart whose Managing Director at the time was the defendant, CLAY SHAW.
|
|
|
|
Post by Michael Capasse on Feb 9, 2021 22:01:25 GMT -5
Trial of Clay Shaw | Transcripts
Opening statement by Jim Garrison
The State will show further, that in the latter part of August or the early part of September, 1963,
LEE HARVEY OSWALD went to Jackson, Louisiana, a small town located not far from Baton Rouge, Louisiana.
While in Jackson, he talked to witnesses in reference to his getting a job at the East Louisiana State Hospital in Jackson,
Louisiana and registering to vote in that parish, so as to be able to get the job.
The State will introduce the witnesses who talked to LEE HARVEY OSWALD on this occasion.
The State will show that shortly thereafter still in late August or early September, 1963, the defendant,
CLAY L. SHAW, LEE HARVEY OSWALD and DAVID W. FERRIE drove into Clinton, Louisiana -- which is very close to Jackson --
in a black Cadillac, parking the Cadillac near-the Voter Registrar's Office on St. Helena Street. While the defendant,
CLAY L. SHAW and DAVID W. FERRIE remained in the car, LEE HARVEY OSWALD got out of the car and got in line with a group
of people who were waiting to register.
The State will introduce witnesses who will testify that they saw the black Cadillac parked in front of the Registrar's
Office and who will identify the defendant, CLAY L. SHAW, LEE HARVEY OSWALD and DAVID W. FERRIE as the individuals in that car.
The State will introduce a witness who talked to the defendant, CLAY L. SHAW, on this occasion. In asking Mr. SHAW for his identification,
he was told by the defendant, that he (SHAW) was from the International Trade Mart in New Orleans, Louisiana.
The State will introduce a witness who will identify LEE HARVEY OSWALD as the person he talked to in the Registrar'S
Office and who will also identify the defendant, CLAY L. SHAW, and DAVID W. FERRIE as the two men seated in the black Cadillac
that brought LEE HARVEY OSWALD to Clinton, Louisiana. The State will also introduce into evidence a photograph of a black Cadillac
car that the witnesses will identify as either the same car or one identical to the one that they saw in Clinton that day.
The evidence will show that in the month of September, 1963, the defendant, CLAY SHAW, DAVID FERRIE and LEE HARVEY OSWALD
participated in a meeting in which plans for the murder of President JOHN F. KENNEDY were discussed and refined.
This meeting took place in DAVID FERRIE's apartment at 3330 Louisiana Avenue parkway in the City of New Orleans. SHAW
(using the name of CLEM BERTRAND) FERRIE and OSWALD (using the first name of LEON), discussed details of the conspiracy
in the presence of PERRY RAYMOND RUSSO, after FERRIE gave assurance that RUSSO was all right.
The plan brought forth was that the President would be killed with a triangulation of cross fire with at least two gunmen,
but preferably three, shooting at the same time. One of the gunmen, it was indicated, might have to be sacrificed as a
scapegoat or patsy to allow the other participants time to make, their escape. No one indicated to OSWALD at the meeting
that he was going to be the scapegoat and there was no indication of any awareness on his part of such an eventuality.
They also discussed alternate routes of escape, including the possibility of flying to other countries.
The defendant and DAVID FERRIE agreed that as part of the plan they would make sure they were not at the scene of the assassination.
Their plan for the day of the shooting was to be engaged in a conspicuous activity in the presence of as many people as possible.
The defendant, SHAW, stated he would go to the West Coast of the United States. FERRIE, not as positive about his alibi,
said he thought he might make a speech at a college in Hammond, Louisiana.
As the State will show, SHAW made his way to the West Coast and FERRIE, after his long drive back from Texas,
made his way to Hammond, Louisiana, where he slept, not in a hotel room, but on a bed in a college dormitory.
By a month after the meeting, LEE OSWALD had moved into a rooming house in Dallas, under an assumed name.
By the following month when the time for the president's parade arrived, OSWALD was on the parade route
at the Texas School Book Depository, where a job had been found for him. By the night of Friday, November 22nd the president was dead,
FERRIE was driving through a thunderstorm to Houston, Texas and the defendant, SHAW, was out on the West Coast.
LEE OSWALD, however, was in a Dallas jail ending up as the scapegoat. As to the planning -- the conspiracy --
our jurisdiction is limited to New Orleans, although we will later offer evidence concerning the assassination in Dealey Plaza in Dallas --
|
|
|
|
Post by Michael Capasse on Feb 9, 2021 22:01:38 GMT -5
Trial of Clay Shaw | Transcripts
Opening statement by Jim Garrison
MR. DYMOND: Excuse me. If the Court please, we object to this.
THE COURT: On what ground?
MR. DYMOND: The Court has repeatedly ruled that the actual assassination in Dallas has no place in this case,
that there may have been 50 conspiracies, as Your Honor put it, to assassinate President Kennedy.
A conspiracy within this jurisdiction is alleged the overt acts have been alleged. The State is certainly bound by the answer
to the application for a bill of particulars as to overt acts. Consequently, any other allegations or any other proof as
to additional acts by anyone would be outside the scope of these pleadings.
THE COURT: I need not hear further.
MR. DYMOND: -- irrelevant to the issues.
THE COURT: Objection overruled. I cannot tell the State how to run its case.
If they wish to over prove their case, they may do so.
MR. DYMOND: If the Court please, I wish to call the Court's attention to the case of State vs. (Peterson) --
THE COURT: What is the name of it?
MR. DYMOND: -- cited at 95 So. 2d 608; State vs. White, cited in 153 So. 2d 401, and State vs.Mann,
cited in 202 So. 2d. 259, all three of which cases are to the effect that when the State answers an application for a bill
of particulars setting forth certain particulars in connection with an alleged crime, that the State is bound by this answer
for an application, cannot go outside the scope --
THE COURT: I will be glad to hear from you, Mr. Alcock.
Mr. ALCOCK: The State is bound, and the State -- and Mr. Dymond knows that, we have argued this point many times in
the picking of this Jury -- the State is as a matter of fact bound by its answers to the bill of particulars.
The State must prove one or more of those overt acts, but, as this Court rightly points out, the State may over prove its case all it wants to.
If it under proves its case it is out of court, but if it over proves it, that is its own wishes and its own will.
Additionally, these facts are certainly corroborative of a conspiracy which talked of triangulation of cross fire,
or a scapegoat and of a patsy. These facts are purely corroborative, and I would cite to the Court State vs. Kelly,
a Louisiana case which may be found at 112 So. 2d 694. There is no dispute between myself and Mr. Dymond as to the State being
bound on the answers to the bill of particulars. This Court has no dispute with that, as I appreciate its comments during the picking of the Jury.
The sole issue is are we going to be circumscribed by Mr. Dymond's wishes or are we going to be allowed to prove our case, and,
if we want to over prove it, to over prove it, and I think the Court has properly ruled that this area may be gone into as
one to be corroborative, and, No. 2 if the State wishes to over prove its case, it may.
Mr. DYMOND: If the Court please, I am not asking that the State be circumscribed by my wishes, I am asking that they be circumscribed by the law.
Your Honor stated from this bench during the voir dire that the state is definitely bound and restricted by the answer to the
application for particulars. Your Honor would have to make a 180-degree turn on your rulings on the voir dire to the effect that
we could not even go into the question of what prospective jurors felt about what happened in Dallas,
whether President Kennedy was killed as a result of a conspiracy.
MR. ALCOCK: Your Honor, I can remember vividly Mr. Dymond on at least two occasions, perhaps more, asking this Court point blank and directly,
are you going to deny the State the right to go into Dallas? And this Court repeatedly said, "I cannot do such a thing.
We will cross that bridge when we come to it. If the State wants to over prove its case, the State may over prove its case."
The Court has consistently held that, contrary to what Mr. Dymond is now saying.
MR. DYMOND: Your Honor, unfortunately, there was one bridge we had to cross before we came to it, and that was the selection of a jury,
and your Honor would not permit us to go into Dallas at all on the voir dire, and I submit that that ruling is absolutely contrary
to any contention at this time that the State has a right in their evidence to go into this question.
THE COURT: I don't know if you cited the d'Ingianni Case, but I tried the d'Ingianni Case and I remember specifically the
Supreme Court stating although the State is limited in its proof, if the State were to prove, say, nine other overt acts but
did not prove one of the six, I would have to grant you a directed verdict, but I will agree with the State's position that
they can corroborate their evidence, and I therefore overrule your objections.
MR. DYMOND: To which ruling Counsel reserves a bill of Exception, making the opening statement being made by Mr. Garrison,
Counsel's objections to the content of the opening statement, together with the reasons therefor and the ruling part of the bill.
THE COURT: Your point is, "As to the planning -- "
|
|
|
|
Post by Michael Capasse on Feb 9, 2021 22:01:48 GMT -5
Trial of Clay Shaw | Transcripts
Opening statement by Jim Garrison
MR. GARRISON: As to the planning -- the conspiracy -- our jurisdiction is limited to New Orleans,
although we will later offer evidence concerning the assassination in Dealey Plaza in Dallas because it confirms the existence
of a conspiracy and because it confirms the significance and relevance of the planning which occurred in New Orleans.
It is the position of the State of Louisiana that, regardless of the power which might bring about the execution of a
President of United States, whether it be initiated by a small group or the highest possible force, neither the planning of
his murder nor any part of it, will be regarded in Louisiana as being above the law.
And so, with DAVID FERRIE now dead and LEE OSWALD now dead, the State is bringing to trial CLAY SHAW for his role --
as revealed by evidence -- in participating in the conspiracy to murder JOHN F. KENNEDY.
Returning our attention to the cluttered apartment Of DAVID FERRIE:
The evidence will show that PERRY RUSSO had been a fairly close friend of DAVID FERRIE for some time prior to the meeting
between the defendant, FERRIE and LEE HARVEY OSWALD The evidence further will show that PERRY RUSSO first met
LEE HARVEY OSWALD at DAVID FERRIE's apartment shortly before the principal meeting between the named conspirators took place.
At this meeting OSWALD, who was cleaning a bolt-action rifle with a telescopic sight, was introduced to RUSSO by FERRIE as LEON.
PERRY RUSSO saw LEE HARVEY OSWALD at FERRIE's apartment at least once after the meeting of the conspirators.
On this occasion OSWALD appeared to be having some difficulty with his wife and he gave RUSSO the impression he was leaving town.
RUSSO also had seen the defendant, SHAW, once before the meeting. This was at the Nashville Street Wharf at the time
PRESIDENT KENNEDY was speaking there in the Spring of 1962. The defendant, SHAW, also was seen by RUSSO with DAVID FERRIE
subsequent to the assassination at FERRIE's service station in Jefferson Parish. The State will also introduce other evidence
to show that CLAY SHAW, LEE HARVEY OSWALD and DAVID FERRIE knew each other.
In connection with the testimony of PERRY RUSSO, the State will introduce into evidence pictures of the defendant,
DAVID FERRIE and LEE HARVEY OSWALD, as well as pictures of the exterior and interior of DAVID FERRIE's apartment at
3330 Louisiana Avenue Parkway, and other corroborating evidence.
In connection with photographic evidence the State will qualify PETER SCHUSTER of the Orleans Parish Coroner's Office
as an expert in the field of photography.
The evidence will further show that the defendant in accordance with the plan and in furtherance of it,
did in fact head for the West Coast of the United States -- ostensibly to make a speech -- on November 15, 1963.
He remained there until after PRESIDENT KENNEDY's assassination on November 22, 1963, thereby establishing an alibi
for himself for the day of the shooting.
The State will offer into evidence a ledger sheet of travel consultants and testimony which reflects the arrangements made by the defendant,
SHAW, to go to the West Coast. This travel consultant firm -- which in 1963 was located in the International Trade Mart --
was the same firm which arranged for LEE OSWALD to go to Europe, from which he went to Russia, several years earlier.
The State will show that FERRIE drove to Houston on the day of the assassination, departing from New Orleans on the evening of November 22nd --
some hours after the President was killed and two days before LEE OSWALD was killed. FERRIE drove, with two young companions,
through a severe storm for the ostensible purpose of going ice skating in Houston.
Upon arriving in Houston, FERRIE and his companions went to the Winterland Skating Rink where FERRIE loudly and repeatedly
introduced himself to the manager of the rink. Despite the fact that he had driven all the way from New Orleans to Houston
for the purpose of ice skating, DAVID FERRIE never put on any ice skates at all. While his young friends skated, FERRIE stood by
the public pay phone as if waiting for a call.
The evidence will further show that earlier, after LEE OSWALD's departure from New Orleans, he took a short trip to Mexico and
then made his way to Dallas. On October 14, 1963, he rented a room at 1026 N. Beckley Street under the fictitious name of O. H. Lee.
Two days later he went to work at the Texas School Book Depository, which was located at the intersection of Houston and Elm Streets
in Dallas, Texas.
At the Book Depository, BUELL WESLEY FRAZIER was employed in the order filling department. FRAZIER lived in Irving, Texas,
a suburb of Dallas, and was a co-worker of OSWALD's. OSWALD's wife and baby daughter also lived in Irving with MRS. RUTH PAINE,
a friend of the OSWALDS. FRAZIER's sister, LINNIE MAY RANDLE, was a neighbor of MRS. PAINE's in Irving. Since OSWALD had an apartment in Dallas,
he made arrangements with FRAZIER to ride to Irving with him only on weekends. OSWALD thereafter rode to Irving with BUELL FRAZIER
every Friday except the one immediately preceding the assasination. OSWALD did not go to see his wife and daughter on that weekend
because he said, he was working on getting his driver's license. However, that next week OSWALD once more broke his ritual with FRAZIER.
On Thursday, November 21, 1963, LEE HARVEY OSWALD asked FRAZIER if he could ride to Irving that night for the purpose of picking up
some curtain rods for his apartment. On Friday morning, November 22, 1963, BUELL WESLEY FRAZIER drove OSWALD from Irving to the
Texas School Depository. OSWALD had with him a package wrapped in brown wrapping paper. When he inquired as to its contents,
FRAZIER will testify, OSWALD replied that the package contained the curtain rods he had returned home to pick up the night before.
FRAZIER will further testify that OSWALD told him that he would not be returning to Irving that night, Friday, November 22, 1963.
BUELL FRAZIER will testify that he entered the Texas School Book Depository building that morning about 50 feet behind LEE OSWALD.
OSWALD was still carrying the package. FRAZIER will testify that he saw OSWALD a couple of times that morning, but never saw the package again.
Around noon of that day, FRAZIER went to the front steps of the Texas School Book Depository to watch the presidential motorcade
which was due to pass directly in front of the Book Depository as it made its turn off Houston Street onto Elm Street.
While the motorcade was passing, FRAZIER heard three shots which sounded like they came from the area of the underpass --
near the grassy knoll -- in front of the President. At the conclusion of FRAZIER's testimony, the State will introduce into evidence
pictures of a paper sack found in the Texas School Book Depository, as well as pictures of Dealey Plaza as it appeared on the day
of the assassination. With regard to the assassination itself, the State will establish that on November 22, 1963,
President JOHN F. KENNEDY and Governor JOHN CONNALLY, who was riding in the same limousine were wounded as a result of gunshot fired
by different guns at different locations.
|
|
|
|
Post by Michael Capasse on Feb 9, 2021 22:02:03 GMT -5
Trial of Clay Shaw | Transcripts
Opening statement by Jim Garrison
Furthermore, the State will show that PRESIDENT KENNEDY himself was struck by a number of bullets coming from different guns
at different locations -- thus showing that more than one person was shooting at the President. The evidence will show that
he was struck in the front as well as the back -- and that the final shot which struck him came from in front of him, knocking him
backwards in his car. Once again, since LEE OSWALD was in the Book Depository behind the President this will show that a number of
men were shooting and that he was, therefore, killed as the result of conspiracy.
The State, in showing that a number of guns were fired during the assassination of President JOHN F. KENNEDY, will offer,
in addition to eyewitnesses, various photographs and motion pictures of what transpired in Dealey Plaza on November 22, 1963.
First, the State will offer an 8mm color motion picture film taken by Abraham Zapruder, commonly known as the Zapruder film.
This film which has not been shown to the public, will clearly show you the effect of the shots striking the President.
In this connection we will also offer slides and photographs of various individual frames of this film.
The State will request permission from the Court to allow you, the jury, to view this material. Thus, you will be able to see --
in color motion picture -- the President as he is being struck by the various bullets and you will be able to see him fall backwards
as the fatal shot strikes him from the front -- not the back but the front.
Also, the State will introduce as evidence certain other photographs and motion picture films, taken during the assassination,
as listed below:
1. The "Moorman picture" which is a polaroid photograph taken by Mary Moorman in Dealey Plaza on November 22, 1963.
In addition to this picture, but in connection with it, the State will offer various blow-up prints of this photograph.
2. Various photographs taken by Mr. Philip Willis in Dealey Plaza on November 22, 1963.
3. Various photographs taken by Miss Wilma Bond in Dealey Plaza on November 22, 1963.
4. A motion picture film with slides and photographs taken by Mr. John Martin on November 22, 1963.
The State will qualify ROBERT H. WEST, the County Land Surveyor for Dallas County, Texas, as a licensed registered public surveyor
and thus competent to testify as an expert as to the topographical aspects of Dealey Plaza, Dallas, Texas.
In conjunction with the testimony of Mr. WEST, the State will offer into evidence a certified survey, an aerial photograph and a
mock-up of Dealey Plaza. The State will also qualify Dr. ROBERT SHAW as an expert in the field of medicine, and in connection
with this tesimony we will offer x-rays and medical records concerning GOVERNOR CONNALLY's wounds and treatment at Parkland
Memorial Hospital in Dallas, Texas.
The State will qualify and offer the testimony of DR. JOHN NICHOLS, a medical expert in the field of forensic medicine and pathology.
In connection with his testimony the State will offer certain exhibits, x-rays and photographs into evidence. Furthermore,
during the presentation of this case, the State will qualify and offer the testimony of Special Agent ROBERT A. FRAZIER of the
Federal Bureau of Investigation as an expert in the field of ballistics. Special Agent LYNDAL SHANEYFELT as a photographic expert
with the Federal Bureau of Investigation, be qualified and will testify.
The State also will present eyewitness testimony, corroborating what is shown in the Zapruder film: that the President's fatal
shot was received from the front and that he was thrown backward -- not forward -- from the force of this fatal shot.
The eyewitness testimony will also show that the shooting came from a number of directions and that, therefore,
the President was murdered, not by a lone individual behind him but as the result of conspiracy to kill him.
We will then show that a few minutes after the shooting LEE OSWALD came running down the grass in front of the Book Depository,
that he climbed into a station wagon with another man at the wheel and that this station wagon pulled away and disappeared into
the traffic on Elm Street.
The evidence will further show that shortly after the assassination of PRESIDENT KENNEDY, on November 25, 1963,
agents of the Federal Bureau of Investigation interviewed DEAN A. ANDREWS, JR. in his room at Hotel Dieu Hospital in New Orleans.
As a result of this interview with DEAN ANDREWS, a local attorney, the Bureau began a systematic and thorough search for a "CLAY BERTRAND."
A man who identified himself as "CLAY BERTRAND" called ANDREWS the day after the President's assassination requesting him to defend
LEE HARVEY OSWALD, who by then had been formally charged with the murder of JOHN F. KENNEDY. The State will introduce evidence
in the course of this case showing that the defendant, CLAY SHAW, and the "CLAY BERTRAND" who called DEAN ANDREWS on behalf of
LEE HARVEY OSWALD, are one and the same person.
The evidence will further show that sometime during the year 1966 the defendant CLAY SHAW, requested the U.S. Post Office to
deliver mail addressed to him at his residence at 1313 Dauphine Street to 1414 Chartres Street, the residence of a long-time friend,
JEFF BIDDISON. This change of address order was terminated on September 21, 1966. During the period that the change of address
remained in effect, the U.S. Post Office letter carrier for that route delivered at least five letters to 1414 Chartres Street addressed
to "CLEM BERTRAND," the name used by the defendant at the meeting between himself, DAVID FERRIE and LEE HARVEY OSWALD in FERRIE's
apartment in mid-September, 1963. None of the letters addressed to "CLEM BERTRAND" were ever returned to the postal authorities for any reason.
The period during which these letters addressed to "CLEM BERTRAND" were delivered to 1414 Chartres Street
preceded by at least six months the publication of the fact that the Orleans Parish District Attorney's Office was investigating
the assassination of President JOHN F. KENNEDY. In fact, it preceded the start of the investigation by the District Attorney's office.
In connection with this evidence, the state will offer into evidence the US Post Office forms reflecting the change of address initiated
by the defendant and testimony showing the delivery to that address of mail delivered to "CLEM BERTRAND."
It will be shown that in December 1966 the defendant, CLAY SHAW, visited the VIP room of one of the airlines at Moisant Airport and that,
while there, he signed the guest register in the name of "Clay Bertrand." Eyewitness testimony will be presented and the guest book
which he signed will be introduced into evidence.
The State of Louisiana will ask you to return a verdict of guilty as charged against the defendant, Clay Shaw.
|
|
