Remarks by, and about the important contributions of, Anna Marie Kuhns-Walko, Carol Hewett, Milicent Cranor and Cindy McNeill.
In the New York Times Magazine of August 6, 1995, author Gerald Posner was allowed to do what no other American can do at this moment: pass judgment on a 5 drawer file cabinet of materials from the late Jim Garrison's JFK assassination probe. DA Harry Connick has given Posner sole access to materials about which he said on local television last month: "Everything connected with that case [Shaw trial] should have been retained and preserved in some way." Later before the Assassination Record and Review Board hearing he stated that the files contained, ". . .things that would be of great interest to the American public and the world, as a matter of fact." In praise of the mission of the ARRB, namely to obtain and open up all records on the JFK murder, he said: "I compliment you for attempting to do what I think is a necessary undertaking"; and still later in his testimony, ". . .we think that what you are doing is important and we think that what we can hopefully add to what you're doing will clarify some of the clouded areas of the past and make sense out of what happened." At the time of his testimony-June 28th-Connick was arranging to ship these records to the National Archives so the American public could begin the "clarification of clouded areas" for itself.
Nearly a month and a half later, the public has yet to see the files. Yet Connick has allowed one select person privileged access. He is Gerald Posner, author of the 1993 book "Case Closed" which argued that the Warren Commission was correct in its 1964 finding that Lee Harvey Oswald was the lone, deranged assassin of President Kennedy. In a 1994 interview with researcher James DiEugenio, Connick said that no one could have these files except an "official body". The article does not explain Connick's apparent reversal on this point. Posner also never explains why Connick is delaying the National Archives receipt of these materials.
Mr. Posner's article is relatively brief: 11/2 pages, or 3 magazine columns. In this short piece, Posner spends 7 paragraphs dealing with the contents of these new files. Of these, 3 deal with information not already published in books. Yet, the last people able to peruse these files, the House Select Committee on Assassinations (a true official body) made a recently declassified index to these records. The index itself is 16 pages long! From this skeleton guide much of the material ignored by Posner is new and seems to support some of Garrison's charges, specifically about the association of Shaw with Oswald and the attempts some people made to intimidate and bribe his witnesses, which is why he wished them surveilled. This is left out by Mr. Posner.
Finally, Posner leaves out the most important story of all. The ARRB is about to request the release of CIA HQ files on Oswald to the Archives. The CIA is resisting. If, as Posner states, the case is closed and Oswald was the sole, deranged assassin, why would the CIA a.) have voluminous files on him, and b.) not want the public to see them fully disclosed 32 years later. Posner and the Times should save their space for an article on this issue and its outcome done by an unbiased writer whose interpretations can be checked against the record. Openness, not elitist bias, is what the JFK Act was all about.
In response to a slur concerning his professional reputation in a memorandum from 1969.
Jim DiEugenio comments on a press release concerning Connick's testimony that he ordered the Garrison files destroyed (and some misleading statements that conclude it).