Here is a very good case study in the duplicity of Jim Garrison's investigation. Somehow, a witness statement from 1967 is turned on its head in 1971.
In 1971, Jim Garrison filed papers to dismiss Clay Shaw's attempt to stop his prosecution for perjury. His filing listed his prospective witnesses, and one witness was James Louviere, who worked for David Ferrie and Al Beauboeuf (they had gone into business together with a service station that was open for about ten months in 1964).
Here is the paragraph from the court filing:
Excerpt from Garrison's motion to dismiss Clay Shaw's complaint (court case 71-135) regarding perjury charges.
The above document was filed sometime in 1971. Here is a Garrison document from March 1967 about an interview with James Louviere:
Note that Louviere even gets the date of his employment with Ferrie wrong.
When shown a picture of Clay Shaw, "Louviere said he didn't recall of seeing this man in the service station." They then note that the picture they had shown Louviere was three years old, and they show hm a new photograph of Shaw. He still demurs: "Louviere said that he wouldn't want to say that this was the man."
The discussion then turned to a white T-Bird which used to come into the station. Clay Shaw used to own a T-Bird. But Louviere "said that this is not the man from this picture that was driving the car."
The court filing claims that Louviere saw Shaw in a big black car at the station and at David Ferrie's house. The car was similar to the one used in Clinton. But Louviere never identified Clay Shaw, never said anything about a black car, and never said anything about meeting Shaw at Ferrie's house.
So, did Garrison convince Louviere to change his testimony? If the court filing accurately represents Louviere's thinking in 1971, then something happened. Of course, had Clay Shaw gone to trial he would not have access to the 1967 interview because there was no discovery in Louisiana Courts. Louviere's testimony could have been damaging.
There is no credible evidence that Clay Shaw knew David Ferrie.
Did Clay Shaw Know David Ferrie?
James DiEugenio claims that David Logan was introduced to Clay Shaw by David Ferrie. This is totally untrue. After the party, someone pointed out to Logan that Ferrie was at the party.
A look at Nicholas and Mathilda Tadin's claim that they saw David Ferrie with Clay Shaw.
When Kimble first talked to Garrison's investigators, he said nothing about Clay Shaw.
Raymond Broshears was a fabulist, and DiEugenio falls for his nonsense.
James DiEugenio claims that Clay Shaw's former secretary, Aura Lee, saw Ferrie in Shaw's office. Only problem - her name was not Aura Lee; and she was not Shaw's former secretary; and there are no direct statements from Aurelie Alost.
James DiEugenio claims that Herbert Wagner saw Shaw and Ferrie together, and that Ferrie admitted to Wagner that he was part of Operation Mongoose. This is totally untrue.
This is James DiEugenio's favorite type of evidence -- non-existent.
DiEugenio's allegations about Freeport Sulphur only suffer from lack of evidence.
Joseph Newbrough never said a word about this allegation until he spoke to a conspiracy theorist. Was he weaving a story?
A ridiculous anonymous letter is good enough for James DiEugenio.
The witness did not get a good view of either man he took fishing.
More evidence that never turned up.
James DiEugenio claims that Lefty Peterson remembered a "Leon Oswald" at David Ferrie's house. This is totally not true.