False Witness: The Real Story of Jim Garrison's Investigation and Oliver Stone's Film, JFK [Hardcover]

Patricia Lambert (Author)

Book Description

Publication Date: January 26, 1999

This absorbing book tells, for the first time in its entirety, the story of the arrest and trial of Clay Shaw, charged with conspiracy in the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. The trial and the events leading up to it were headline news internationally for almost three years in the late 1960s. Those who dismissed the Warren Report as government cover-up now saw the conspiracy that they had always suspected slowly being unraveled before their eyes.

Editorial Reviews

From Publishers Weekly

Lambert, a JFK conspiracy buff and writer, believes that the assassination has yet to be solved. In this engrossing report, she argues that New Orleans district attorney Jim Garrison's 1969 prosecution of local businessman Clay Shaw for conspiracy to murder KennedyAthe source for Oliver Stone's interpretation in his filmAwas reckless, fraudulent and nothing more than a red herring. A jury agreed, acquitting Shaw in 54 minutes. Lambert also makes a case that Stone used the trial to launch his attack on the Warren Report rather than to find the truth. Lambert contends that a key witness, Perry Russo, who was left out of the movie altogether, made his allegations under hypnosis and while drugged with a notoriously unreliable "truth serum," and that Garrison, through an assistant, tried to bribe at least one witness to supply false testimony. But the main points of divergence between Lambert and Stone come in their assessments of the characters: Stone portrays Garrison (who died in 1992) as a caring family man, a heroic truth-seeker battling sinister forces. Lambert, by contrast, presents the former DA as a mentally unhinged, fame-seeking demagogue who, she alleges, was also a wife-abuser and a pedophile. Stone's Shaw is, according to Lambert, "an arrogant, elitist sybarite, a butch homosexual with a taste for... conspiracy," while Lambert's Shaw is a restorer of French Quarter buildings, a lifelong registered Democrat and a civic leader. While emotions clearly play a role in which version (if any) readers will believe, Lambert must be commended for having done an impressive job of tracking evidence and putting together a compelling narrative of events. Photos.
Copyright 1999 Reed Business Information, Inc.

From Library Journal

The national trauma that was the Kennedy assassination spawned a continuing legacy of government mistrust. Lambert presents an exciting, well-documented account of an early example of this bleak inheritanceADistrict Attorney Jim Garrison's prosecution of Clay Shaw, a well-respected, secretly gay member of the New Orleans business community, for allegedly heading a CIA plot to murder the President. After four years of Garrison's legal machinations, Shaw was found innocent, and Garrison was condemned by the New York Times for perpetrating "one of the most disgraceful chapters...of American jurisprudence." Remarkably, the trial became the primary source of information for the 1979 House Committee on the Kennedy Assassination Report, and Garrison's self-promoting memoir inspired Oliver Stone's conspiracy-happy film JFK. Lambert does not attempt to discredit any assassination theory, but she succeeds admirably in her stated goal of chronicling Shaw's innocence. Recommended for all public libraries.AKarl Helicher, Upper Merion Twp. Lib., King of Prussia, PA
Copyright 1999 Reed Business Information, Inc.

See all Editorial Reviews

Product Details

• Hardcover: 400 pages
• Publisher: M.Evans & Company (January 26, 1999)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0871318792
• ISBN-13: 978-0871318794
• Product Dimensions: 9.4 x 6.4 x 1.5 inches
• Shipping Weight: 1.6 pounds
• Average Customer Review: 2.9 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (40 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #1,559,090 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

More About the Author

Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

12 of 13 people found the following review helpful:

2.0 out of 5 stars Weakly sourced and terribly biased view of Garrison investigation, May 11, 2009

By 

IBR "Iowa Book Reviewer" (Iowa) - See all my reviews

Amazon Verified Purchase

This review is from: False Witness: The Real Story of Jim Garrison's Investigation and Oliver Stone's Film JFK (Paperback)

When one attempts to unravel the truth of the Jim Garrison investigation through the written record, the first thing you notice is that there seems to be no middle ground surrounding it. Either Garrison walked on water or he was the devil himself. What would be wonderful is a truly independent biography that would use the work of Davy and DiEugenio and Mellan and also the work of Lambert and Kirkwood et al(and the FBI)and write an unbiased work that would chronicle the investigation both good and bad because while I think Garrison and his investigation did an immense amount of good his investigation was at times abusive and ridiculous(as evidenced by the participants in the investigations reluctance to refute abusive Big Jim stories that have been around for years, though they have had ample opportunitoes to do so and to cleanse themselves in the process).

Secondly, I have read Patricia Lambert's book and found it to be extremely one sided. Lambert's book rests on the shoulders of James Phelan, James Kirkwood, the FBI and unnamed sources. While she conducts some interviews she buries numerous instances in footnotes and elsewhere when the subject vehemently disagrees with the rumor the author puts forth, such as Garrison's lawyers putting a gun in the mouth a witness, Perry Russo's suicide attempt and rumors of very weird sexual practices etc. The basis for these salacious stories is usually Mr. "unnamed source" or high level Bureau (or CIA maybe) sources which permeate Lambert's footnotes and text like stinking dead fish. When you conclude a paragraph by stating that someone with knowledge told you there were "other" ominous reasons Garrison was let go from the FBI and you credit this statement and let the rumor hang out unsourced you devalue your entire project. Ms. Lambert does this throughout the book and it does not take long to know what you are reading is a one sided hatchet job.

I agree her book should be read to give a picture of the the worst that was accused of the Garrison investigation but this book doesn't lead anyone much closer to determining the truth.

64 of 95 people found the following review helpful:

2.0 out of 5 stars INFLAMITORY AND SOMEWHAT MISGUIDED, May 27, 2000

By 

Reticuli (Las Vegas) - See all my reviews

This review is from: False Witness: The Real Story of Jim Garrison's Investigation and Oliver Stone's Film, JFK (Hardcover)

First: Oliver Stone's "JFK" was only partially inspired by Jim Garrison's memoirs. It was based mostly on the Jim Marrs book and often used the Clay Shaw trial only as backdrop for Marrs' and Stone's theories.

Second: Jim Garrison did not find evidence of direct assassination participation of current employees of the intelligence, military, law enforcement, and judicial community. Rather he found evidence that these groups seemed to have been mostly negligent and desirous of covering up their negligence. The main groups thought involved were Cuban-exiles, right-wing militia members, and agent level former intelligence recruitees (i.e. former non-operative level puppets). Mafia and wealthy bankers were thought to have possibly provided some support. The assassination was supposedly caused by blow-back as a result of the failed Bay of Pigs invasion JFK had publicly taken responsibility for. Modern records actually prove the CIA had disobeyed his orders in the planning of the operation to include air-support.

Third: As Garrison's case proceeded, the Clay Shaw ties became murky in light of the actual player's and event's increasingly apparent complexity. In the end, the prosecution seemed a little obsessed with Clay Shaw. Even Stone's flawed film alluded to this.

Fourth: If you want to talk about lawyer control of the police, let's discuss New Orleans District Attorney Harry Connick (father of Harry Connick Jr., musician), rival and successor of Jim Garrison. He ordered a police officer to destroy notes and papers from the Shaw trial. The officer disobeyed and stored these articles of historical importance in his attic. When the Assassination Records Review Board, started by Bush and funded by Clinton, made its way to New Orleans, the officer attempted to give them the notes and papers. Connick promptly threw the man in jail and attempted to do the same with the only reporter in New Orleans who'd listen to the story. The Board eventually received the historical documents and the wrongfully imprisoned were released. As far as I know, the only news station which aired this story was the reporter's own local one. I am not aware of any national coverage of this except in one piece of obscure journalists' rights literature. In reality, many of the accusers of Jim Garrison had ties with the same media companies which refused to stay objective on the trial and later apologized for their conduct; NBC and company come to mind.

Fifth: False Witness seems to polarize and filter information on the subject, choosing some questionable sources to quote. It also tends to rely more on inflamitory alleged accounts than actual physical evidence - worse than the somewhat deficient Shaw trial. There is also sparse discussion on the strange disappearance and destruction of evidence shortly after the assassination.

Final Words: I cannot wholly recommend this emotionally charged book. I have a difficult time coming to any final conclusion on the JFK assassination. It's important to keep gathering evidence and accounts, paying particular attention to views and theories held by past and present parties. We will be able to have a more complete dialog on the subject when pertinent material is released from the National Archives on the specified date. Even then, one need remember that the CIA admitted during the Congressional MK-Ultra hearings to having destroyed a very large portion of its most sensitive and classified documents. Yet, out of the small portion of relatively benign documentation which remained came evidence of serious ethical violations, and suggestions of illegal acts. It makes me wonder what information was contained in the documents they were actually compelled to destroy.

3 of 4 people found the following review helpful:

3.0 out of 5 stars A Very Biased View, October 29, 2010

By 

Miles (Richmond, Va, United States) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   

This review is from: False Witness: The Real Story of Jim Garrison's Investigation and Oliver Stone's Film JFK (Paperback)

Let me state that I've read a large amount of books on this subject. In part, I've read `On the Trail of the Assassins', `Crossfire', and this book. The problem with these types of books is that they are so biased toward their own point of view. As some reviewers pointed out already, Garrison is either portrayed as a superhero or a corrupt politician. This book takes the latter point of view.

I've read `On the Trail of the Assassins' several times and just couldn't believe how Garrison made himself out to be a crusading angel. Each time I read the book I felt more and more like I was only getting a very limited view. When I saw the movie `JFK', I immediately recognized Jim Marr's influence in the plot and watched it from the standpoint that it was fiction.

This book is very critical of the job that Garrison did, but I felt that it was closer to the truth than Garrison's account. Where most pro conspiracy books fall short is that they take simple human mistakes, poor decisions, and inept people and give it all a sinister spin. This book is like that only it directs all its focus on one person, Garrison.

This book talks a lot about how Garrison misused his official office, but it can't be as bad as this author suggests or Garrison couldn't have moved forward as he did. There is quite a bit of discussion about Garrison threatening people with jail time to keep them quiet, but almost no talk about the judges that must have been approving those warrants. Wouldn't those judges be misusing their offices just as bad as Garrison was?

The author suggests that Garrison misused his office by prosecuting Clay Shaw on the flimsiest of evidence. This makes me wonder if she's ever seen CourtTV or any of the hundreds of TV shows out there about innocent people convicted of crimes they didn't commit based on extremely flimsy evidence.

Where I think this book is strong is that it makes it clear how accidental misinformation, deliberate lies, and unchecked ambition, goes a long way to making a mountain out of a mole-hill. This happens every day and will probably continue to happen. Clay Shaw was found innocent of the charge, he was one of the lucky ones. Many people who are wrongly prosecuted ARE convicted and are sitting in prison right now.

I think this book is way too critical of the Garrison investigation. It borders on personal attacks of Garrison. I think the Garrison book is way to supportive of the investigation. Reality is probably somewhere in the middle.