Art Kevin on Dean Andrews' Testimony in the Clay Shaw Trial

[Fred Litwin]

https://www.onthetrailofdelusion.com/post/art-kevin-on-dean-andrews-testimony-in-the-clay-shaw-trial

Art Kevin on Dean Andrews' Testimony in the Clay Shaw Trial

Art Kevin was a reporter for the L.A. Free Press and he was in the courtroom for the trial.

Now, back to the courtroom, and Dean Andrews is on the witness stand, under oath and under cross-examination by Alcock. After telling the court that Shaw was not Bertrand, Andrews refused to answer most questions put to him by Alcock, claiming self-incrimination or lawyer-client privilege. Ultimately, Judge Haggerty had to decide that Andrews had to answer Alcock, that he could not show "only one side of the coin", as he put it. And then Dean Andrews cracked. This peculiar little man bared his soul to a hushed courtroom. Andrews testified that he'd lied to the Warren Commission about a man calling him up and wanting to defend Oswald. He said he'd plucked the name Clay Bertrand from a party joke. Andrews said he was just a little man who always wanted to be a big man and wanted to be remembered -- but not as a perjurer. On Dean Andrews testimony, the entire Garrison case fell apart. Garrison himself had often said that it was Andrews' testimony before the Warren Commission that first put him onto the mysterious Clay Bertrand, who he would eventually claim was Clay Shaw. If there was no Clay Bertrand, then how could there be a case? The jury answered that question when they declared Shaw innocent. And it should be noted here that Andrews even blew the case for Garrison's chief prosecutor, James Alcock. At day's end, Alcock sat down with me on a bench and asked me haltingly if I believed Andrews. His head hung low as we spoke. Eventually, he got up and walked away saying, "I wish to God that Garrison had never read the Andrews' testimony."

[Steve M. Galbraith]

Why would Shaw use the alias "Clay Bertrand" when he knew that Andrews was aware it was an alias he (Shaw) used? It's a worthless alias since Andrews knows it's really Clay Shaw not the pseudonym "Clay Bertrand".

Moreover, the Garrison/Garrisonites claim, one of the main ones, is that Shaw, Ferrie et al were framing Oswald for the assassination, he was their "patsy" after he initially assisted them with the planning for the assassination of JFK. Here Garrison et al. are claiming that Shaw is helping Oswald by trying to get him a lawyer. So which is it? Was he trying to frame Oswald, take a fall for the shooting? Or help him out? And, of course, calling someone to have them represent Oswald is connecting you to Oswald. Which is what happened. If he conspired with Oswald to kill JFK then why make this connection? With an alias that Andrews knew about? The entire story is illogical. And not supported by the evidence.

Here's the key testimony by Andrews in the Shaw trial where, as stated above, he admits that the Bertrand call never happened. This is something the Garrisonites don't want to talk about. As Art Kevin pointed out, Andrews acknowledges why he made the claim: for fame. The questioner below was James Alcock, Garrison's assistant DA. Garrison would claim ("Trail of Assassin") that Andrews withdrew the story due to fear of physical harm.

Q: Do you mean to tell me this time you are now telling this Court under oath that no one called you on behalf of the representation of Lee Harvey Oswald in Dallas?
Andrews: Per se my answer is yes, no one called me to say that. The phone call I received was a local call from Gene Davis involving two people who were going to sell an automobile and they wanted the title notarized and a bill of sale notarized.
Q: An automobile? I thought it was an act of sale you were talking about.
Andrews: That is an act of sale, a movable passing from one person to another.
Q: Why is it you called Monk Zelden on Sunday then and asked if he wanted to go to Dallas?
Andrews: No explanation. Don't forget I am in the hospital sick, I might have believed it my- self or thought after a while I was retained there, so I called Monk. I would like to be famous too, other than as a perjurer.

Later:
Q: Are you saying now that the call as far as it regards the representation of Lee Harvey Oswald is a figment of your imagination?
Andrews: I have tried to say that consistently, and nobody ever gave me a chance.

Link: https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=1302#relPageId=133&search=famous