When Shaw was Arrested, What Serious Evidence did Garrison have that he Conspired to Kill JFK?
The $64 challenge still stands: When Clay Shaw was arrested, what serious evidence did Jim Garrison have that he conspired to kill JFK?
A few days I ago I posted an excerpt from Clay Shaw's journal. Before Shaw was arrested, Jim Garrison demanded that Shaw take either a lie detector test or truth serum. Shaw accepted but only if he was given one day to rest and provided his lawyers could "edit the questions to be sure that they were relevant to the inquiry." Garrison turned down his offer and immediately arrested Shaw.
Of course to Jim Garrison, "certain areas" of Shaw's "private life" were entirely relevant to the inquiry. After all, he was quickly coming to the conclusion that homosexuality was the key to the conspiracy. You can read more about this here, and in my series on an article in the German magazine Quick.
"His lawyers refused the requests Garrison made about a polygraph and other tests. Which in light of what we now know about Shaw, he surely would have flunked: his Bertrand alias, his friendship with Ferrie, his employment by the CIA. The stuff about his private life is more of Shaw's bunk since JG never went there. Its only there to cover up his real reasons."
So here is my question to Mr. DiEugenio. At the moment that Garrison demanded a lie detector test of Clay Shaw, what serious evidence did he have that Shaw had conspired to kill JFK?
At the time Shaw was arrested, Garrison had little evidence that he was Clay Bertrand, little evidence that he was friends with David Ferrie, and no evidence that Shaw was employed by the CIA.
The only 'evidence' pointing to Clay Shaw came from Perry Russo, and the claim that he witnessed a discussion with Shaw at Ferrie's house about the assassination.
However, Perry Russo was hardly a reliable witness. Remember that when first interviewed in Baton Rouge, Russo said nothing about Clay Shaw, Clay Bertrand, Lee Harvey Oswald, or a party where the assassination was discussed.
The $64 challenge is open to anybody.