But we can all agree you’re discounting the testimony of one of the MAIN people involved – Jowers himself. And he was quite old at the time of this trial – the idea that he would accuse himself of the murder of an icon in order to make some money at a ripe old age, after keeping quiet for a generation, seems kind of far fetched to me. So there WAS a KEY witness to the assassination and co-conspirator at this trial, and you’ve chosen to believe he made it all up. You are entitled to believe that, but let’s just call a spade a spade.
I just tried to comment and was told I’m probably a hacker but if I’m not they say they won’t hold it against me.lol. idk hardly how to use cpmputers
Thanks for the reply, Lee. I re-watched your presentation on the King v. Jowers trial. I doubt I’m the only one who was given the impression, that in an adversarial proceeding, a jury found the U.S. Government liable for MLK’s death. In fact, there was no adversarial proceeding because the plaintiffs (the King family) and defendant (Jowers) were on the same side. They both alleged a government conspiracy to assassinate MLK. It’s not surprising that a jury found their allegations to be more likely true than not, given that there was no evidence presented to refute their allegations. My quick Google search led me to the Justice Department’s recounting of the evidence presented at the trial, which is available here: http://www.justice.gov/crt/about/crm/mlk/part6.php. If the U.S. Government had been named as a defendant in the lawsuit, it’s possible that some of this information, which was fairly compelling, may have led the jury to a different verdict. Or maybe not. Either way, I think it’s important when covering the King v. Jowers trial to note that it was not an adversarial proceeding, the government was not a party, and therefore, there were no government lawyers present to raise hearsay objections, cross-examine witnesses, or introduce evidence to refute the plaintiff’s and defendant’s joint allegations.
This is just a test to see if I can avoid being blocked by the WP Sentinel.
Thanks! You’re incorrect about the MLK trial and a quick google search could help you realize that. Various gov’t agencies and their actions were a big part of the trial. Here are some quick quotes from the first article I found on the trial – “Much of the testimony focused on the extent of operations carried out by the FBI against King” and “Dozens of internal FBI memoranda document the surveillance and harassment of King. In one incident King’s alleged “sexual escapades” were used in an attempt to blackmail him. Shortly before the assassination Hoover distributed an internal memo to the FBI calling for King’s “removal from the national scene.” AND “Jurors saw the videotaped deposition of Jack Terrel, formerly of the US military, who testified that he had a conversation with a military operations specialist who told him that he was assigned to a triangular shoot team that had a special mission in Memphis around the time of King’s death. Terrel stated that the specialist was never told about the specifics of the mission, and that the team was pulled out of Memphis at the last minute.” And although Terrel claims they were pulled out, this still speaks to large role the government and related agencies played in the information at the civil trial. So the trial was very much about that.
Finally – someone has covered the MLK ruling!!! Lee thank you so much for getting that detail out to your audience. It’s a travesty among a giant pile of travesties, but still…You covered it. People should know and people should want to know if they really think about it. It’s important.
As always, you’re brilliant, and I think you have achieved the perfect balance of comedy and hard hitting informative and sobering discourse.
I’ll keep my eyes open for Mr. Snuggles.
aww! That little critter impersonating Mitch is *so* kawai! Why can’t he/she/it be senator?
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *
Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.