JFK Assassination Forum
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion & Debate => JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate => Topic started by: Gerry Down on January 26, 2026, 04:46:11 PM
-
On a recent episode of The Lone Gunman podcast, Rob Clark reads out a Jan 1978 HSCA interview of Orest Pena. Its not his testimony, but an interview. Clark spends about 20 minutes reading the document here:
JFK INVESTIGATION - Ep. 373 - The Notorious F.B.I.
LINK (1 hour 22 mins to 1 hour 45 mins):
A particularly interesting part of the document, which Clark reads out at 1 hour 31 minutes, has Orest Pena stating:
“…Ferrie and Clay Shaw both came to my bar many times. They definitely knew each other because they came together a few times. Throughout the interview, Mr. Pena alluded to or inferred many pieces of information that he is in possession of. In effect he wanted some good faith on the part of the committee before he would talk about things. For instance, on the subject of Ferrie and Shaw he states that he knows the identity of a woman who came to the bar with Ferrie and she will be willing to talk to us. However he refused to identify her at this time.”
Orest Pena is generally viewed as a credible witness and so for Pena to say this would appear to be the best evidence that Ferrie and Shaw knew each other very well. Does anyone have a link to the Jan 1978 interview which Rob Clark reads out in the podcast and a link to the 90 page long testimony he references?
The only HSCA testimony of Pena I can find is his June 23rd 1978 testimony (RIF: 180-10075-10169) and that is only 36 pages long (not 90 pages) and can be viewed here:
https://www.archives.gov/files/research/jfk/releases/docid-32246611.pdf
There is also a July 31st 1978 summary of that June 23rd testimony (RIF: 180-10075-10166). The July 31st 1978 summary can be viewed here:
https://www.archives.gov/files/research/jfk/releases/docid-32246608.pdf
The only reference to Clay Saw in his June 23rd 1978 testimony is as follows and only mentions Clay Shaw at the bar but does not specifically mention Ferrie being in Shaws company:
(https://i.ibb.co/b5GW6zPK/Shaw.jpg)
-
[...]
Wowie zowie!
-
What's the evidence that Pena was "generally viewed as a credible witness"? Credible by who? On what basis?
Here is Pena's WC testimony. He says he saw Oswald once with a person who looked Cuban. Neither Shaw or Ferrie, to me, looked Cuban.
Mr. PENA - Well, they asked me in connection with the Mr. Kennedy, the late President Kennedy's assassination, and also if I know anything about it. I told them I didn't know anything about it. They asked me if I saw Oswald; so I said I saw him once. He went to my place of business with one or two friends. I don't know exactly. My bar is a very long bar, so to me it looked like he was with two friends. My bartender, Evaristo Rodriguez, said he was with only one man, so I don't know exactly. It was something that happened in my place of business; a customer asking for a lemonade; a man. They don't usually do that. That was the first time in 7 years I have been in business that a customer asked for a lemonade. So my bartender he learned to be a bartender at my place of business; he was a seaman before he came to me and said, "The customer wants a lemonade. Do we do that?" I said, "Sure." He didn't know how to make it, so I said, "Take a glass of water, couple of spoons of sugar, some lemon." He say, "How much should I charge ?" I said, "Twenty-five cents." He went .back and made a lemonade and put it to Oswald. Then Oswald got mad. Said 25 cents was too much for the lemonade, and then he asked for a tequila for his friend."
And:
Mr. LIEBELER - Now did you ever see Oswald at any other time?
Mr. PENA - No; I didn't.
Mr. LIEBELER - Did you ever see the man who was with him at any other time?
Mr. PENA - The man that was with him looked Spanish; more Cuban than anything else. You are American. You might know your people. I am Cuban. I can sight them. I don't think I am being mistaken about him, about Cuban people. I can spot them when I see them that they might be a Cuban.
Mr. LIEBELER - You thought this man might be a Cuban?
Mr. PENA - To me, I thought he was a Cuban. I can tell that is true. I wasn't even too close to him.
So which account should we believe?
https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/testimony/pena_o.htm
And here is Rodriguez's testimony. He mentions seeing Oswald once and that Oswald got drunk and sick and had to be helped out of the bar.
https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/testimony/rodrigue.htm
-
What's the evidence that Pena was "generally viewed as a credible witness"? Credible by who? On what basis?
Here is Pena's WC testimony. He says he saw Oswald once with a person who looked Cuban. Neither Shaw or Ferrie, to me, looked Cuban.
Mr. PENA - Well, they asked me in connection with the Mr. Kennedy, the late President Kennedy's assassination, and also if I know anything about it. I told them I didn't know anything about it. They asked me if I saw Oswald; so I said I saw him once. He went to my place of business with one or two friends. I don't know exactly. My bar is a very long bar, so to me it looked like he was with two friends. My bartender, Evaristo Rodriguez, said he was with only one man, so I don't know exactly. It was something that happened in my place of business; a customer asking for a lemonade; a man. They don't usually do that. That was the first time in 7 years I have been in business that a customer asked for a lemonade. So my bartender he learned to be a bartender at my place of business; he was a seaman before he came to me and said, "The customer wants a lemonade. Do we do that?" I said, "Sure." He didn't know how to make it, so I said, "Take a glass of water, couple of spoons of sugar, some lemon." He say, "How much should I charge ?" I said, "Twenty-five cents." He went .back and made a lemonade and put it to Oswald. Then Oswald got mad. Said 25 cents was too much for the lemonade, and then he asked for a tequila for his friend."
And:
Mr. LIEBELER - Now did you ever see Oswald at any other time?
Mr. PENA - No; I didn't.
Mr. LIEBELER - Did you ever see the man who was with him at any other time?
Mr. PENA - The man that was with him looked Spanish; more Cuban than anything else. You are American. You might know your people. I am Cuban. I can sight them. I don't think I am being mistaken about him, about Cuban people. I can spot them when I see them that they might be a Cuban.
Mr. LIEBELER - You thought this man might be a Cuban?
Mr. PENA - To me, I thought he was a Cuban. I can tell that is true. I wasn't even too close to him.
So which account should we believe?
https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/testimony/pena_o.htm
Clay Shaw was 6' 4". If Pena had seen him, I think he would have mentioned that fact.
-
What's the evidence that Pena was "generally viewed as a credible witness"? Credible by who? On what basis?
Here is Pena's WC testimony. He says he saw Oswald once with a person who looked Cuban. Neither Shaw or Ferrie, to me, looked Cuban.
Mr. PENA - Well, they asked me in connection with the Mr. Kennedy, the late President Kennedy's assassination, and also if I know anything about it. I told them I didn't know anything about it. They asked me if I saw Oswald; so I said I saw him once. He went to my place of business with one or two friends. I don't know exactly. My bar is a very long bar, so to me it looked like he was with two friends. My bartender, Evaristo Rodriguez, said he was with only one man, so I don't know exactly. It was something that happened in my place of business; a customer asking for a lemonade; a man. They don't usually do that. That was the first time in 7 years I have been in business that a customer asked for a lemonade. So my bartender he learned to be a bartender at my place of business; he was a seaman before he came to me and said, "The customer wants a lemonade. Do we do that?" I said, "Sure." He didn't know how to make it, so I said, "Take a glass of water, couple of spoons of sugar, some lemon." He say, "How much should I charge ?" I said, "Twenty-five cents." He went .back and made a lemonade and put it to Oswald. Then Oswald got mad. Said 25 cents was too much for the lemonade, and then he asked for a tequila for his friend."
And:
Mr. LIEBELER - Now did you ever see Oswald at any other time?
Mr. PENA - No; I didn't.
Mr. LIEBELER - Did you ever see the man who was with him at any other time?
Mr. PENA - The man that was with him looked Spanish; more Cuban than anything else. You are American. You might know your people. I am Cuban. I can sight them. I don't think I am being mistaken about him, about Cuban people. I can spot them when I see them that they might be a Cuban.
Mr. LIEBELER - You thought this man might be a Cuban?
Mr. PENA - To me, I thought he was a Cuban. I can tell that is true. I wasn't even too close to him.
So which account should we believe?
https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/testimony/pena_o.htm
And here is Rodriguez's testimony. He mentions seeing Oswald once and that Oswald got drunk and sick and had to be helped out of the bar.
https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/testimony/rodrigue.htm
In the 1978 interview cited in the OP, Pena does not say he saw Oswald with Ferrie or Shaw. There is nothing about Oswald. Pena says he saw Shaw and Ferrie together.
-
Clay Shaw was 6' 4". If Pena had seen him, I think he would have mentioned that fact.
Pena says he saw Shaw and Ferrie together. Not that he saw either one with Oswald.
-
Well, let's see, Oswald, Ferrie and Shaw all frequented Pena's bar. Pena also saw Oswald at "Pedro's Restaurant" 10-12 times. Ferrie knew Shaw very well, he knew Bringuier very well, and he knew Sergio Arcacha Smith very well. Pena knew Oswald was an FBI informant because they both reported to Warren DeBrueys. He saw Oswald in the company of DeBrueys as well as in the company of Customs and INS officials in his bar. And that's just for starters.
John Armstrong's file on Pena, from which I borrowed some of the above: https://digitalcollections-baylor.quartexcollections.com/Documents/Detail/new-orleans-witnesses/705794.
If you occupy the Garrison Wing of Conspiracy World, I suppose this seems credible. To me, not so much. Or rather, not at all.
I said on another thread that the "CT Oswald" apparently had 72 hours a day to in order to do his CT stuff that those closest to him knew nothing about, because we have a pretty idea of what he was doing in the 24 hours available to rest of us. Ditto with Clay Shaw. Having now digested Carpenter's almost absurdly detailed biography of Shaw, I find the notion of him and Ferrie entering the Habana Bar together completely comical. Due to their gay proclivities, Ferrie may have occasionally been in unknowing proximity to Shaw, but there is no way Shaw was bar-hopping with him.
God knows what Pena's game was, but he's one of those familiar (to me, anyway) characters who is just "too good to be true." They pop up like moles (see what I did there? :D) in all area of weirdness, from Roswell to the JFKA. They never have the sense to tone down their bombshells to a level of plausibility.
Anyway, read Carpenter's book and you will both (1) know more about Shaw than you probably want to know, and (2) be pretty damn certain he had no time or inclination for "JFKA stuff." He's right up there with Ruth Paine on the Mount Rushmore of CT-maligned decent folks.
(https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/71z8JDinojL._SL1024_.jpg)
-
Well, let's see, Oswald, Ferrie and Shaw all frequented Pena's bar. Pena also saw Oswald at "Pedro's Restaurant" 10-12 times. Ferrie knew Shaw very well, he knew Bringuier very well, and he knew Sergio Arcacha Smith very well. Pena knew Oswald was an FBI informant because they both reported to Warren DeBrueys. He saw Oswald in the company of DeBrueys as well as in the company of Customs and INS officials in his bar. And that's just for starters.
John Armstrong's file on Pena, from which I borrowed some of the above: https://digitalcollections-baylor.quartexcollections.com/Documents/Detail/new-orleans-witnesses/705794.
If you occupy the Garrison Wing of Conspiracy World, I suppose this seems credible. To me, not so much. Or rather, not at all.
I said on another thread that the "CT Oswald" apparently had 72 hours a day to in order to do his CT stuff that those closest to him knew nothing about, because we have a pretty idea of what he was doing in the 24 hours available to rest of us. Ditto with Clay Shaw. Having now digested Carpenter's almost absurdly detailed biography of Shaw, I find the notion of him and Ferrie entering the Habana Bar together completely comical. Due to their gay proclivities, Ferrie may have occasionally been in unknowing proximity to Shaw, but there is no way Shaw was bar-hopping with him.
God knows what Pena's game was, but he's one of those familiar (to me, anyway) characters who is just "too good to be true." They pop up like moles (see what I did there? :D) in all area of weirdness, from Roswell to the JFKA. They never have the sense to tone down their bombshells to a level of plausibility.
Anyway, read Carpenter's book and you will both (1) know more about Shaw than you probably want to know, and (2) be pretty damn certain he had no time or inclination for "JFKA stuff." He's right up there with Ruth Paine on the Mount Rushmore of CT-maligned decent folks.
(https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/71z8JDinojL._SL1024_.jpg)
Pena never suggests Shaw had anything to do with the JFK assassination. He simply states Shaw and Ferrie used come into his bar together.
-
Well, let's see, Oswald, Ferrie and Shaw all frequented Pena's bar. Pena also saw Oswald at "Pedro's Restaurant" 10-12 times. Ferrie knew Shaw very well, he knew Bringuier very well, and he knew Sergio Arcacha Smith very well. Pena knew Oswald was an FBI informant because they both reported to Warren DeBrueys. He saw Oswald in the company of DeBrueys as well as in the company of Customs and INS officials in his bar. And that's just for starters.
John Armstrong's file on Pena, from which I borrowed some of the above: https://digitalcollections-baylor.quartexcollections.com/Documents/Detail/new-orleans-witnesses/705794.
If you occupy the Garrison Wing of Conspiracy World, I suppose this seems credible. To me, not so much. Or rather, not at all.
I said on another thread that the "CT Oswald" apparently had 72 hours a day to in order to do his CT stuff that those closest to him knew nothing about, because we have a pretty idea of what he was doing in the 24 hours available to rest of us. Ditto with Clay Shaw. Having now digested Carpenter's almost absurdly detailed biography of Shaw, I find the notion of him and Ferrie entering the Habana Bar together completely comical. Due to their gay proclivities, Ferrie may have occasionally been in unknowing proximity to Shaw, but there is no way Shaw was bar-hopping with him.
God knows what Pena's game was, but he's one of those familiar (to me, anyway) characters who is just "too good to be true." They pop up like moles (see what I did there? :D) in all area of weirdness, from Roswell to the JFKA. They never have the sense to tone down their bombshells to a level of plausibility.
Anyway, read Carpenter's book and you will both (1) know more about Shaw than you probably want to know, and (2) be pretty damn certain he had no time or inclination for "JFKA stuff." He's right up there with Ruth Paine on the Mount Rushmore of CT-maligned decent folks.
(https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/71z8JDinojL._SL1024_.jpg)
I think it's quiet plausible the two could have known each other. They were both well known individuals. Shaw being the director of the trade mart and Ferrie being an airline pilot, head of a cadet group and was generally viewed as a well read interesting guy who had parties at his house. Shaw and Ferrie were two well known individuals in the city, and both members of the gay community. Shaw would probably find that Ferrie was one of the few people who could relate to him on an intellectual level.
-
I think it's quiet plausible the two could have known each other. They were both well known individuals. Shaw being the director of the trade mart and Ferrie being an airline pilot, head of a cadet group and was generally viewed as a well read interesting guy who had parties at his house. Shaw and Ferrie were two well known individuals in the city, and both members of the gay community. Shaw would probably find that Ferrie was one of the few people who could relate to him on an intellectual level.
Every teller of tall tales has to have some degree of superficial plausibility to his tale or it goes nowhere. I won't bore you with the litany of really plausible-sounding Roswll witnesses whose lies and exagerrations (together, usually, with some kernel of truth) were finally exposed after extensive research, sometimes spanning many years, by diligent investigators like Kevin Randle (who, somewhat like the interpid Factoid Buster here, describes himself as "chaser of footnotes" because that's often how you finally expose the lies). After they are exposed, the True Believers whose theories hinge on their tales still insist, "No, he was the real deal!"
Ferrie was an interesting and bizarre character. He and Shaw shared gay proclivities. They were both in New Orleans at the same time. Voila, superficial plausibility, and off we go.
Shaw was not starved for sexual or intellectual companionship. He had REALLY significant friends and contacts - including famed playwright Tennessee Williams and some very significant New Yorkers. In its heyday, the Trade Mart was a BIG deal. Simply because the gay district of New Orleans is not all that physically large, I think it's certainly possible that Ferrie and Shaw were in proximity to one another at one time or another, but all attempts to connect them came to nothing. I filter Pena's Ferrie-Shaw revelations through the lens of his other crap and come up with "teller of tall tales."
With almost all the characters in the JFKA saga, the downfall of CT theorizing is learning all you can about the real people. The CT version typically proves to be completely at odds with their real lives. For that matter, if Ferrie and Shaw did have some sexual/social connection that had nothing to with the JFKA, then who cares? Surely, in every instance the purpose is to connect Shaw to some Garrison-type JFKA plot through innuendo.
Reading everything Pena said, I see him as a classic teller of tall tales. The HSCA interview notes refer to him as "dangling bits of information," and that seems to be all he did. He places himself just about everywhere in the New Orleans wing of JFKA speculation, but he never really says anything apart from his obvious effort to implicate DeBrueys and transform Oswald into some sort of FBI/Customs/INS operative (WHAT?). Yes, he doesn't specifically connect Shaw to the JFKA, but like many tellers of tall tales, he does so through innuendo. When asked by the HSCA about a connection between Oswald and Shaw, he just declines to comment on that (wink wink).
I don't know what Pena's game was - but that's what I end up saying, again and again, about the inexplicable tellers of tall tales across the entire spectrum of weirdness. The fact that they often have no obvious motive or agenda is what makes them doubly tough to expose. Pena certainly comes across in the HSCA testimony as having a major vendetta against DeBrueys for some reason.
-
Ferrie was an interesting and bizarre character. He and Shaw shared gay proclivities.
What are the proclivities you are referring to here? Does the Carpenter book go into Shaws sex life?
-
Pena certainly comes across in the HSCA testimony as having a major vendetta against DeBrueys for some reason.
Thats straightforward. Pena was passing info to DeBrueys about possible cuban exile communists in the New Orleans area and next thing Pena sees DeBrueys working with the communist LHO. Pena probably thought he and DeBrueys were on the same side until he saw DeBrueys and LHO together. Then he may have thought DeBrueys had communist sympathies. This would mean Pena had been passing all his tips on unearthing communists to the communist DeBrueys. I think thats what the beef is about.
-
For that matter, if Ferrie and Shaw did have some sexual/social connection that had nothing to with the JFKA, then who cares? Surely, in every instance the purpose is to connect Shaw to some Garrison-type JFKA plot through innuendo.
If Garrison was right about Ferrie and Shaw knowing each other, and then he sees Shaw denying this, you can see how Garrison may have come to become obsessed with Shaw. Even if it has nothing to do with the JFKA, it may help clarify what was going on with Garrison and his investigation.
-
What are the proclivities you are referring to here? Does the Carpenter book go into Shaws sex life?
Very much so. Possibly more than you want to know. But not with Ferrie.
-
My Amazon review of Carpenter's book, FWIW:
Customer Review
3.0 out of 5 stars Worthwhile but overwhelming with extraneous and unnecessary detail
Reviewed in the United States on October 16, 2025
Format: Kindle Verified Purchase
This is an exhaustive and exhausting effort. It reads as though compiled from Shaw's calendar and correspondence. The level of extraneous and unnecessary detail is like no book I've ever read. Seemingly every meeting Shaw ever attended, every speech he ever gave, every letter he ever wrote. "And then he did this ... and then he did this ... and then he did that," but with little insight or context. When you're done, there are perhaps 200 pages comprising a good, solid, well-researched biography of Shaw, with plenty of details that I as a longtime JFK assassination buff didn't know and found very interesting. It's just that it's all buried beneath so much extraneous and unnecessary detail that I finally found myself skipping through large portions on my Kindle and then pausing when there was finally something more substantive than "And then he did this ... and then he did this ... and then he did this." It is definitely a worthwhile book but desperately in need of an editor or publisher with the sense to say "250 pages and not one page more."
I see you started the same thread at the Ed Forum. I'm guessing you'll have a much more receptive audience since there is a 2022 Pena thread in which DiEugenio, Simpich and Boylan were practically orgasmic. I have a hard time believing DeBrueys was central to the JFKA and completely lying about his non-relationship with Pena, or that Oswald was openly consorting with DeBrueys, Customs agents and INS agents. All of which leads me to think the Ferrie-Shaw stuff is likewise nonsense.
-
Very much so. Possibly more than you want to know. But not with Ferrie.
Do you think Ferrie could have been supplying young men from the parties at his house to Shaw? Would that be the kind of thing Shaw would have been known to be into?
-
I think this is all very silly. Both Shaw and Ferrie denied knowing each other. None of their friends said they knew each other.
They were in very different social circles.
The only person to say they knew each other was Perry Russo, and, as we know, he has zero credibility.
fred
-
Being a Serious JFKA Researcher, I went back through my Kindle edition of Carpenter's book. He does not mention the Habana Bar or Pena, presumably because the book was published in 2014 and Pena's HSCA testimony did not become public until the 2017 document release.
He does mention Ferrie 523 times and I, as a Serious JFKA Researcher, scrolled through all 523 references. Carpenter does not shy away from the various folks who said they had seen Ferrie and Shaw together, or from the several who knew one or both of them very well and said they had never heard one mention the other. Carpenter doesn't state a firm conclusion, but there just doesn't seem to be any solid evidence. Many people apparently believe the confusion is that Ferrie was seen in the company of Bannister - who, like Shaw, was tall and gray-haired.
The book gives you a sense of how very important, respected and even beloved Shaw was. Yes, he was heavily into the gay scene and the book recounts one of his kind-of-clumsy efforts to pick up a young guy, but he certainly didn't "need" Ferrie and would have descended far below his social, economic and intellectual class to have openly associated with him. The Shaw who emerges from the book simply would not have descended to the level of frequenting the Habana Bar with Ferrie.
FWIW, when Ferrie was first asked about Clay Shaw, his response was "Who's Clay Shaw?"
I think I'm going to bump my Amazon review to 4 stars. Carpenter worked 18 years on this book, and it is really quite astonishing.
-
I debunk a lot of the Ferrie knew Shaw nonsense in this blog post.
https://www.onthetrailofdelusion.com/post/the-scholarship-of-james-dieugenio (https://www.onthetrailofdelusion.com/post/the-scholarship-of-james-dieugenio)
-
Excellent work, Fred. Not sure why Gerry is suddenly clinging to Orest Pena's tall tales.
-
Excellent work, Fred. Not sure why Gerry is suddenly clinging to Orest Pena's tall tales.
How do you know they're tall tales?
I don't see anything tall about these tales. Pena is just saying he saw two people coming in to a bar together. Seems kinda mundane to me.
-
They're tall tales because they're not supported by any other evidence, as Fred points out in his own blog posting.
-
How do you know they're tall tales?
I don't see anything tall about these tales. Pena is just saying he saw two people coming in to a bar together. Seems kinda mundane to me.
You are conveniently ignoring that he also said he was an FBI informant, knew Oswald was an FBI informant, saw Oswald with Warren DeBrueys, and saw Oswald 10-12 times in Pedro's restaurant, often in the company of Customs and INS agents. His claims about seeing Ferrie and Shaw are not, on their face, outlandish, although they are at odds with pretty much all the evidence and difficult to believe in the context of Shaw's life. It's Pena's other stuff that would make me put his Ferrie-Shaw stuff in the category of a tall tale. If the same thing had been said by some banker who had no connection of any sort with any JFKA stuff, that would be one thing - but Pena was knee-deep in JFKA stuff and clearly trying to implicate Shaw via innuendo for some purpose known only to him.
-
You are conveniently ignoring that he also said he was an FBI informant, knew Oswald was an FBI informant, saw Oswald with Warren DeBrueys, and saw Oswald 10-12 times in Pedro's restaurant, often in the company of Customs and INS agents. His claims about seeing Ferrie and Shaw are not, on their face, outlandish, although they are at odds with pretty much all the evidence and difficult to believe in the context of Shaw's life. It's Pena's other stuff that would make me put his Ferrie-Shaw stuff in the category of a tall tale. If the same thing had been said by some banker who had no connection of any sort with any JFKA stuff, that would be one thing - but Pena was knee-deep in JFKA stuff and clearly trying to implicate Shaw via innuendo for some purpose known only to him.
I don't see anything unusual with LHO being in the company of FBI and customs. Oswald was ingratiating himself with lots of people in that timeframe that he would be ideologically opposed to such as Bringuier and the Walker rally in October.
And it just happens that if LHO was in the company of the FBI that summer, it would explain why he called them when he was in jail.
It should be remembered that the customs building was directly opposite Penas bar so if one was to see LHO with customs, it would most likely have been in the vicinity of Penas bar.
-
GD-
Thanks for your post.
I am a little taken aback by people who (never having met Shaw) say that, "Well, you know Shaw was an elite high-class guy, who would have never been seen in the company of Ferrie, or consorted with him."
Some forget that Shaw and Ferrie shared a strong ideological bond, an opposition to communism (then a big issue). They were both CIA assets. It assumed that Shaw must be a snob, with no evidence for that. And yes, Shaw and Ferrie shared a secret sex lifestyle (at that time and place). They had a lot in common.
The US is not really a class-conscious society; I am sure there are exceptions. But Shaw in the company of Ferrie? Why not?
-
Neither were CIA assets.
There is not one piece of evidence that they knew each other.
Except for the testimony of Perry Russo.
Just because they were both gay doesn't mean they knew each other.
Layton Martens, who knew both of them, said they didn't know each other.
fred
-
Why not?
Because there is no evidence - would that be a reason?
Based on your goofy analysis, there are probably 2,000 people in my little town to whom I could be "plausibly connected" via innuendo but in fact have never met.
I forgot to mention that Shaw's housekeeper of 18 years said she had never seen Ferrie.
-
The US is not really a class-conscious society; I am sure there are exceptions. But Shaw in the company of Ferrie? Why not?
Benjamin, because, as Fred Litwin has shown here, there is literally no evidence to support such a claim.. and, people who knew both of them and have no reason to distort the truth insist they never knew each other.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
Do you want to believe Pena?
-
TG--
What has "want" got to do with it?
Pena was a witness, who evidently did in fact own a bar in New Orleans. He is not some off-the-wall crackpot.
A bar owner would be a great resource as to who knows who in New Orleans, in that time and place. Bar owners tend to keep tabs on customers---it is their business and trade, after all.
Why is Pena's word dismissed, but the word of others accepted?
Do you have reasons to regard Pena as an unreliable witness?
-
Pena just said that in an outside contact report but would not repeat it under oath.
He provides no evidence....
Why on earth would we believe this.
He said lots of other stuff too that I don't believe.
fred
-
FL--
That is a valid point, that Pena would not repeat his understanding of the Shaw-Ferrie relationship under oath.
Do you have any clue why Pena would not repeat, under oath, the rather specific statements he made regarding Shaw and Ferrie?
What did Pena have to gain by fabricating the Ferrie-Shaw friendship?
-
FL--
That is a valid point, that Pena would not repeat his understanding of the Shaw-Ferrie relationship under oath.
Do you have any clue why Pena would not repeat, under oath, the rather specific statements he made regarding Shaw and Ferrie?
What did Pena have to gain by fabricating the Ferrie-Shaw friendship?
From what I can see, Pena wasn't asked about the Ferrie Shaw relationship in his testimony. It looks like the interviewer quickly moved on to asking about Banister after asking about Shaw. Pena could have interpreted this as meaning to keep your mouth shut about it. Of course the interviewer might not have meant it that way. The interviewer at that stage might genuinely be frustrated with Penas lack of candor in his answers and just be looking to bring the testimony to a close. Though it does seem a bit odd that the interviewer did not explore the issue of the Ferrie Shaw relationship, as that would have been central to the Garrison case 10 years previously.
-
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
-
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.
-
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.
-
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, 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.
-
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 (https://www.onthetrailofdelusion.com/post/did-clay-shaw-s-secretary-see-david-ferrie-in-shaw-s-office)
-
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?
-
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?
I don't believe they were involved in the JFKA.
But if they did know each other, it would vindicate Garrison on at least that point. And also mean Shaw lied in court.
-
I don't believe they were involved in the JFKA.
But if they did know each other, it would vindicate Garrison on at least that point. And also mean Shaw lied in court.
I mean, I guess so? What value does "vindicating" Garrison on "that point" have in the grand scheme of things, especially in light of the lives he destroyed and the nonsense he disseminated about the "real" assassins and plotters?
-
But if they didn't know each other, Shaw didn't like.
Why should we believe Pena in the absence of any corroborating evidence? Why was he reluctant to make
such a statement under oath?
fred
-
GD--
Even Max Holland admitted that Shaw lied in court, regarding his role as a CIA asset.
I doubt Shaw was knowingly involved in the JFKA.
Was Shaw monitoring LHO in 1963, on behalf of Solie or someone else in the CIA? That seems like a legit question.
-
Shaw didn't like, and he wasn't a CIA asset. He was only a domestic contact, nothing more.
-
Shaw didn't like, and he wasn't a CIA asset. He was only a domestic contact, nothing more.
Shaw didn't like what?
Chocolate ice cream?
-
Oops, Shaw didn't lie.
fred
-
The HSCA found that Pena was not a reliable witness. See page 193 of the HSCA final report.
-
The HSCA found that Pena was not a reliable witness. See page 193 of the HSCA final report.
The HSCA also found that Yuri "The KGB Had Absolutely Nothing to Do with Oswald in the USSR" Nosenko was not a credible witness.