The best evidence Ferrie and Clay Shaw were close acquaintences

[Lance Payette]

LP

Yes, but there is evidence Ferrie and Shaw knew each other, from the commentary of Orest Pena, a bar owner before the HSCA.

Perhaps Pena is mistaken, or maybe he is telling the truth. 

Pena says Shaw and Ferrie would visit the bar together.

There is no word if Pena's bar was a gay bar, or gay tolerant.

As for hook-ups always hewing to hoity-toity class lines...we all know sexual desire crosses class lines the way the wind blows through the bushes.

I must say, your pretty obvious desperation to cling to Pena is losing you a lot of points in my estimation of your reasoning abilities. Do you believe Pena was an FBI informant, even though the FBI said he wasn't and DeBrueys was adamant? That Oswald was an FBI informant? That he was consorting openly with DeBrueys, a Customs agent, and an INS agent, meeting them in restaurants.

It isn't a matter of "hook-ups." Shaw was a high-profile, highly respected public figure in New Orleans. If he were to stoop to "hooks ups" with a character like Ferrie, he sure as hell wouldn't be bar-hopping with him. Your egalitarianism is duly noted, but Shaw was not crazy.

There comes a time when rational people say "OK, let it go. I wish it were true to help my theory, but this goes nowhere."

Speaking of not letting it go, Richard Burnes not only brought in Josephine Hug's husband (a radio announcer) on August 3, 1967, he brought back HER for a second bite at the apple. It didn't go any better this time. One can only wonder what Burnes thought he was accomplishing. The killer, as it were, was that both spouses said they had recently seen the man she thought was Ferrie - long after Ferrie was dead. Oops.

https://aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/garr/grandjury/pdf/Hug2.pdf

[Gerry Down]

By way of example, Josephine Hug, who worked in the Trade Mart for several years, was one of the most concerning Ferrie-Shaw "witnesses." For much of the time, she occupied an office adjoining Shaw's. She saw, she told several people, Ferrie go into Shaw's office numerous times carrying an attache case, whereupon Shaw always closed the door. EEK!

If you want to read something humorous, read the transcript of Josephine Hug's appearance before Garrison's grand jury. After Richard Burnes of Garrison's office completely bungles the interrogation, the JURORS take over and do an absolutely superb job of nailing Josephine to the wall. She finally acknowledges that OK, it wasn't Ferrie at all.

https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/garr/grandjury/pdf/Hug.pdf

Several months later, Burnes took a stab at interrogating Hug's husband. That didn't go any better, to put it mildly:

https://www.jfk-online.com/hug3.html

Needless to say, Josephine Hug - once a star witness for connecting Shaw to Ferrie - was not called to testify at trial.

But not in conspiracy world, of course. Josephine actually saw a crew-cut David Ferrie go into Shaw's office 10-12 times with an attache case (WHAT WAS IN IT? MAYBE SEX TOYS!), whereupon Shaw mysteriously closed the door (SO THEY COULD HAVE SEX RIGHT THERE ON THE DESK!). Then "they" - whoever "they" are - got to her and TERRORIZED the poor woman into recanting The Truth.
 

You folks are nuts.

Ok, so this is a good example of the dismantling a witness such as Mrs Hug. But i have not seen any such dismantling like this on Pena. The objection to Pena seems to be "Well, i dont believe what he says so hes probably lying". To the best of my knowledge, Pena has not been caught out on any of his alleged lies. It seems to come down to a situation of whether one simply believes him or not, and i have not seen anything as of yet that would suggest i should not believe him.

[Gerry Down]

I must say, your pretty obvious desperation to cling to Pena is losing you a lot of points in my estimation of your reasoning abilities. Do you believe Pena was an FBI informant, even though the FBI said he wasn't and DeBrueys was adamant? That Oswald was an FBI informant? That he was consorting openly with DeBrueys, a Customs agent, and an INS agent, meeting them in restaurants.

It isn't a matter of "hook-ups." Shaw was a high-profile, highly respected public figure in New Orleans. If he were to stoop to "hooks ups" with a character like Ferrie, he sure as hell wouldn't be bar-hopping with him. Your egalitarianism is duly noted, but Shaw was not crazy.

There comes a time when rational people say "OK, let it go. I wish it were true to help my theory, but this goes nowhere."

Speaking of not letting it go, Richard Burnes not only brought in Josephine Hug's husband (a radio announcer) on August 3, 1967, he brought back HER for a second bite at the apple. It didn't go any better this time. One can only wonder what Burnes thought he was accomplishing. The killer, as it were, was that both spouses said they had recently seen the man she thought was Ferrie - long after Ferrie was dead. Oops.

https://aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/garr/grandjury/pdf/Hug2.pdf

I think DeBrueys admitted he called in to Pena a few times and Pena used give him information for free. Apparently it was an informal informant arrangment rather than Pena being a registered informant in the FBIs system. From Penas point of view he would view himself as an informant, but DeBrueys might not stricly view him as an informant as he would not have assigned Pena an informant number.

Apparently this informal informant arrangement is quiet common with the FBI.

[Tommy Shanks]

It seems to come down to a situation of whether one simply believes him or not, and i have not seen anything as of yet that would suggest i should not believe him.

Gerry, people don't believe him because there is no accompanying support for his statements, which do not jive with the overwhelming majority of the historical record about both Shaw and Ferrie. Couldn't Pena simply have been mistaken?

[Gerry Down]

Gerry, people don't believe him because there is no accompanying support for his statements, which do not jive with the overwhelming majority of the historical record about both Shaw and Ferrie. Couldn't Pena simply have been mistaken?

I dont think he could be mistaken. He was familar with Ferrie, he even spoke to Ferrie on the day before Ferrie died. And he would probably be familar with Shaw as Shaw was a well known person in New Orleans.

I guess one possibility is that it could be that the Ferrie Shaw acquaintence was a very short lived one, perhaps one that ended when Ferrie was fired from Eastern Airlines and Shaw wanted nothing more to do with him. Apparently its not stated what timeframe Ferrie and Shaw were coming in together into Penas bar.

[Fred Litwin]

James DiEugenio doesn't know the case.

He talks about Shaw's secretary saw Shaw and Ferrie together.

Here is a good case study in how he gets it completely wrong, and I mean completely wrong.

https://www.onthetrailofdelusion.com/post/did-clay-shaw-s-secretary-see-david-ferrie-in-shaw-s-office

[Tommy Shanks]

I dont think he could be mistaken. He was familar with Ferrie, he even spoke to Ferrie on the day before Ferrie died. And he would probably be familar with Shaw as Shaw was a well known person in New Orleans.

I guess one possibility is that it could be that the Ferrie Shaw acquaintence was a very short lived one, perhaps one that ended when Ferrie was fired from Eastern Airlines and Shaw wanted nothing more to do with him. Apparently its not stated what timeframe Ferrie and Shaw were coming in together into Penas bar.

I guess? But the notion of Shaw and Ferrie meeting at a bar flies in the face of every single thing we know about them. My guess is that Pena was wrong in his identification of Shaw. I'm also not sure why you're clinging to this one specific anecdote so heavily. Do you believe Shaw and Ferrie were up to anything untoward as it pertains to the JFK assassination?