On the Trail of the Assassins: My Investigation and Prosecution of the Murder of President Kennedy (Hardcover)

On 11/22/1963 Guy Banister pistol whipped his associate Jack Martin, who then told Assistant DA Herman Kohlman that David Ferrie had made a quick trip to Texas that Friday (p.7). DA Jim Garrison ordered Ferrie jailed for questioning by the FBI. His doubts about the case began after a talk with Senator Russell Long in 1966 (p.13). JG found the Warren Report to be "disorganized and confused" (p.15). Page 25 tells how Lee H Oswald acted as an agent provocateur in New Orleans for Guy Banister.

In 1966 JG started to re-investigate the case (Chapter 3). In Chapter 4, JG compares the real Oswald to the Warren Commission caricature. Oswald had the character for an intelligence recruit: a military family, close-mouthed by nature, above average in intelligence (p.47). All the facts of his life say Oswald worked for a government agency (p.55). Pages 101-3 tell of the original route for the Presidential motorcade, but not who had it changed. Pages 110-2 shows their detective work on a telephone call. Page 115 shows use of the "red book" (lists individuals by addresses). JG tells what he accomplished as DA of New Orleans (p.128).

Chapter 13 tells of "The Assault" on his investigation by the corporate media (p.161). Page 167 tells of the witness tampering by NBC. The criminals who testified for NBC later took the Fifth, and a contempt conviction, rather than repeat their stories under oath (p.170). JG's staff was infiltrated by the CIA (p.179). Extraditions and subpoenas were returned without action. Chapter 15 explains why Oswald did not kill Officer Tippit: he didn't match the description, there was a problem with the shells (pp.198-202). In telling about his appearance on the Johnny Carson show, JG wonders why the NY media industry was "so allergic to the very concept of conspiracy" (p.214).

Chapter 18 has his history of the trial of Clay Shaw. The autopsy testimony is on pages 246-249; were these errors deliberate, or due to incompetence? The jurors agreed that JFK was killed as the result of a conspiracy (p.251). The prosecution of Clay Shaw for perjury was stopped, in violation of Federal law (p.253). Then Jim Garrison won re-election as district attorney. Two years later the IRS arrested him on allegations of gambling pay-offs. One example of the desperate tricks used is on pages 259-260. Pages 265-270 tell how the case against JG was forged. But the trial derailed his re-election campaign, and he lost. Chapter 20 has a retrospection on the history of those times. JG believes the JFK assassination was to continue the Cold War and spending by the military-industrial complex (p.277). He discusses the various theories of who was behind the conspiracy. JG believes it came from within the CIA, with civilian help; just like Contragate (p.290). Page 293 suggests to me that Richard Condon's "Winter Kills" is a symbolic solution to why JFK was killed.

After reading On the Trail of the Assassins--and, at about the same time, the excellent, perhaps even more depressing Secrets: A Memoir of Vietnam and the Pentagon Papers by Daniel Ellsberg--I decided I had to read the other side's story about JFK's assassination. The best choice seemed to be Case Closed by Gerald Posner.

Three important issue rose out of the muddy waters of these readings.

1) I came away very confused about the assassination of JFK: the physical evidence in this monumental turning point in American politics was so poorly documented and so grossly mismanaged that we may never really find out what happened.

2) Worries about our government were revived, specifically our ability to control our federal agencies like the CIA and FBI. Memories of Watergate and the Nixon presidency came back, and all the revelations that arose from that debacle in our not-too-distant past.

3) A realization crystallized, especially from reading Garrison's and Posner's books, that it may have become impossible for the average person (one not willing to spent a fraction of one's lifetime looking in detail into this issue) to judge whom to believe, and what is credible. Posner's book, in particular, appears to be very well documented, but has significant omissions in a number of areas that one presumes must not have supported Posner's thesis.

The truth about JFK's assassination, forty years after the fact, seems to becoming a historical essay in confusion: either serious blundering by a large number of people occurred, or a conspiracy killed the president and worked to cover-up the truth. The truth here is important. But is it attainable?

The apparent inability for average people to determine the truth and relevance of major book, media and internet offerings is very significant in today's society. Garrison's and Posner's books only clarify how big the problem is, but do not offer assistance otherwise in resolving this new, 21st century problem.

The most relevant issue that we can do something about, with the understanding that comes from JFK's assassination, is the concern about our government and proper oversight and control of it's agencies. This concern is ever so important right now, with the current degradation of our personal freedoms, and the great strengthening of the agencies that were (hopefully) better controlled following Watergate.

Garrison presents a very readable and compelling story. No doubt, it is one that is hard to accept from many points of view. The conspiracy he suggests would have had to be quite large. Are the public and media at the mercy of their inner desires to just not believe it to be possible? Could local police agencies and the FBI get caught up in a cover-up for reasons other than the murder of a popular, bright, revolutionary, and, in important circles, hated president? Perhaps.

The truth of JFK's assassination seems secondary at this time. The possibilities Garrison and other conspiracy "buffs" (as Posner coins them) suggest, and that Ellsberg and the Pentagon Papers clearly show, are the true story worth reading. The public's desire for the good ending, the honorable society, and the hindrance of dissenting opinions requires balance: Garrison provides some here.