Did Clay Shaw Get the Help He Deserved?, Part Seven

Fred Litwin
12 minutes ago
4 min read

Wegmann files a forty-five-page complaint in the U.S. District Court in New Orleans.

*Photo from Rosemary James' article, "The Dark Side of Not Guilty," in New Orleans Magazine.*

In May of 1968, Wegmann filed a forty-five-page complaint in the U.S. District Court in New Orleans.

What does he have to lose? The DOJ won't help him so perhaps the courts will help.

Wegmann asks for "a 'sanctuary' in this Court to grant him relief from the irreparable harm, clear and imminent, which he [Shaw] has suffered at the hands" of Garrison and his associates.

Garrison's real interest in the court case is discrediting the Warren Report:

Because of the lack of discovery in Louisiana Criminal courts, Wegmann asks that various documents be made available to the defense:

Wegmann took note of Garrison's publicity campaign:

The real reason that Garrison chose to have a preliminary hearing was so that he could choose the presiding judges.

And Garrison has now put Clay Shaw in the unenviable position of defending the Warren Report -- which should never have been his responsibility:

And Garrison has created an atmosphere of fear:

Even Marina Oswald was fearful of Garrison's grand jury.

Wegmann noted the various statements of Garrison attacking the Warren Report:

Wegmann mentioned that the Warren Report was not allowed to be admitted into evidence during the preliminary hearing:

Thus, Wegmann asks the Court to allow that the findings of facts and conclusions of the Warren Report be allowed into evidence.

Wegmann wants to protect the "integrity" of the President, the members of the Warren Commission and the Attorney General:

And here is what Wegmann wanted the Court to order:

Patricia Lambert writes:

Wegmann firmly believes what he writes, that Shaw's case is of "tremendous public importance" and that Garrison, by his conduct already may have "imperiled the security of the country." Who better to defend the national interest than the nation's number one attorney? This quixotic. almost desperate tactic reflects more than Wegmann's concern for his client. It shows his understanding of the potentially disastrous long-term consequences of what Garrison is doing, the bottomless black hole of doubt and suspicion directed toward the government that he is birthing. That insight seems prescient.

Wegmann also sent his complaint to Louis Lacour:

And Wegmann sent the complaint directly to Ramsey Clark:

In the meantime, Judge Heebe had issued a temporary restraining order, and Wegmann sent a note to Ramsey Clark:

The complaint caught the attention of the DOJ:

Vinson notes Judge Heebe's restraining order, and asks for some thought about whether the DOJ should intervene or not.

Here is an article about Judge Heebe's restraining order:

*New Orleans Times-Picayune, Mary 29 1968*

A three-judge panel was now going to hear this case.

Garrison was furious and issued this press release:

As you can see, Garrison instructed his staff not to cooperate with any subpoena and to not answer any questions in court.

Louis Lacour wrote an note about what happened when Shaw's attorneys tried to take the depositions of three members of Garrison's staff:

"They refused to give anything other than their names, positions and social security numbers using a written order by Garrison for them not to give any information at the deposition."

Lacour believes that Garrison might proceed with prosecution in contempt of the restraining order. He believes that Judge Haggerty will consult with him and asks his colleagues for help with the situation.

Edwin Weisl, an assistant attorney general in the civil division wrote that "the prosecution of Shaw by Louisiana would seem to be a bizarre state of affairs."

However, Weisl also wrote that "there does not appear to be any basis or justification to intervene in the federal suit for any purpose." He believes that Shaw can "vindicate himself if he is not guilty." And so the decision is to not intervene.

Two weeks later, Wegmann filed an amended petition and asked that the Attorney General be joined to the suit as a "defendant or involuntary plaintiff."

Lacour's plea for help was unnecessary. On June 23, 1968, the court dismissed Wegmann's complaint.

Money Quote:

Our adverse ruling to plaintiff should not be construed as an intimation of any view whatsoever on the merits of the pending criminal charge against him. As a matter of law, plaintiff Shaw's request for relief in the federal court is premature, for under our system of federalism in the circumstances presented here, he must first seek vindication of his rights in the state courts as to this pending prosecution.

Wegmann appealed this decision to the U.S. Supreme Court and on December 9, 1968, it upheld the lower court's decision.