Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members

Author Topic: Sylvia Meagher Writes Clay Shaw with an Idea  (Read 2037 times)

Online Fred Litwin

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 311
Sylvia Meagher Writes Clay Shaw with an Idea
« on: June 02, 2023, 04:55:27 PM »
Advertisement
One has to wonder why Jim Garrison never went for the phone records to see if a long distance call from San Franscisco
came into the hospital in New Orleans where Dean Andrews was a patient.

Perhaps he didn't want to know.

https://www.onthetrailofdelusion.com/post/sylvia-meagher-writes-clay-shaw-with-an-idea

JFK Assassination Forum

Sylvia Meagher Writes Clay Shaw with an Idea
« on: June 02, 2023, 04:55:27 PM »


Online Steve M. Galbraith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1434
Re: Sylvia Meagher Writes Clay Shaw with an Idea
« Reply #1 on: June 02, 2023, 05:43:37 PM »
One has to wonder why Jim Garrison never went for the phone records to see if a long distance call from San Franscisco
came into the hospital in New Orleans where Dean Andrews was a patient.

Perhaps he didn't want to know.

https://www.onthetrailofdelusion.com/post/sylvia-meagher-writes-clay-shaw-with-an-idea
I would guess that he did try to find it and hid the results. But wouldn't the FBI do a search as well?

As to Shaw: According to the Carpenter book Shaw left New Orleans a "few days" before the assassination. He had a room reserved for the 21st, the day before the shooting. So he left New Orleans on the 19th? 18th? I'll guess it was a two day trip by rail so he left the 19th.

How would Shaw - in San Francisco at the time and on a train before - know Andrews was hospitalized? And what hospital? There's no evidence that Andrews' secretary got a call from Shaw/Bertrand and told him about Andrews' hospitalization. Andrews said he later called his secretary about the call. Wouldn't she have told him, "Yes, a Mr. Shaw Bertrand called me earlier and I gave him your hospital room number"? In an FBI interview she said she never heard of a "Clay Bertrand." So again, how would Shaw get Andrews' number?

Garrison was deranged. Charming and smart but simply unstable. That people today follow him, repeat his nonsense is really shameful. We know who they are. Garrison was sick, he couldn't help himself for the most part. What is the excuse for these followers?
« Last Edit: June 02, 2023, 07:03:50 PM by Steve M. Galbraith »

Online Fred Litwin

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 311
Re: Sylvia Meagher Writes Clay Shaw with an Idea
« Reply #2 on: June 02, 2023, 06:15:57 PM »
The FBI would not have been looking for a SF long distance phone call in 1963 -1964.  Afterall, it was considered a local call.

fred

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Sylvia Meagher Writes Clay Shaw with an Idea
« Reply #2 on: June 02, 2023, 06:15:57 PM »


Online Steve M. Galbraith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1434
Re: Sylvia Meagher Writes Clay Shaw with an Idea
« Reply #3 on: June 02, 2023, 06:44:50 PM »
The FBI would not have been looking for a SF long distance phone call in 1963 -1964.  Afterall, it was considered a local call.

fred
Yes, but the FBI (obviously; this was the murder of the president) continued its investigation into Andrews' "Clay Bertrand" claims into 1967 and during Garrison's investigation. It didn't stop in 1963/64.

As in here where they tried to determine how Andrews could have come up with the name and/or whether a C. Bertrand did exist: https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=62428#relPageId=89&search=Dean_Andrews

Notice that they were informed of an unlisted phone number to a "C.A. Bertrand". They looked into it and discovered it was the number at one time for a "Carol Bertrand" who had worked at the hospital as an anesthesiologist at the hotel hospital where Andrews stayed. Shorter: they were still trying to track down this Bertrand person.

Shaw testified that he was in SF at the time of the assassination and thus any supposed phone call to New Orleans/Andrews. They could try to locate any long distance calls from SF to Andrews.
« Last Edit: June 02, 2023, 07:39:40 PM by Steve M. Galbraith »

Online Fred Litwin

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 311
Re: Sylvia Meagher Writes Clay Shaw with an Idea
« Reply #4 on: June 02, 2023, 07:20:52 PM »
Interesting document. They were just looking at a possibility for an explanation about the supposed phone call. But I don't think the FBI was interested in doing a serious investigation about the phone call. I think
they believed that it was all a figment of Andrews' imagination.

fred

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Sylvia Meagher Writes Clay Shaw with an Idea
« Reply #4 on: June 02, 2023, 07:20:52 PM »


Online Sean Kneringer

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 138
Re: Sylvia Meagher Writes Clay Shaw with an Idea
« Reply #5 on: June 02, 2023, 08:48:20 PM »
Just listened to a 1967 interview with Meagher that I found on YouTube. While more sane than the David Liftons of the world, she was a "patsy" advocate through and through. She doesn't think he ever fired a gun at Walker, Kennedy or Tippit. When asked if critics like her were obligated to explain what actually did go down on 11/22/63, she flatly said "no."

Online Steve M. Galbraith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1434
Re: Sylvia Meagher Writes Clay Shaw with an Idea
« Reply #6 on: June 02, 2023, 10:37:24 PM »
Just listened to a 1967 interview with Meagher that I found on YouTube. While more sane than the David Liftons of the world, she was a "patsy" advocate through and through. She doesn't think he ever fired a gun at Walker, Kennedy or Tippit. When asked if critics like her were obligated to explain what actually did go down on 11/22/63, she flatly said "no."
As I recall she said (at one time) that she believed that anti-Castro Cubans were behind the assassination - the Odio incident was the key to the crime since it showed to her that Oswald was really anti-Castro and not pro-Castro; but as to the "mechanics" or details of the actual shooting she was, as far as I can see, unable to give much of any. Why an anti-Castro Oswald wouldn't be involved - would be framed - is something I can't understand.

She also said that she knew - she was a committed leftist - when she heard about the assassination that "they" would blame a Communist. But "they" didn't blame a Communist; they blamed Oswald. They cleared Castro and the Soviets and didn't blame any domestic groups - communist or otherwise - as being involved. Oswald's motive was unclear; a mix of personal and political grievances perhaps. Supposedly these far right wingers wanted to get rid of Castro - Operation Northwoods and all - so why clear him? Use the assassination as a pretext for an invasion.

Political types - on the hard right or left - simply can't resist using the assassination to express their grievances with "the government" or some element of it. Even 60 years later they can't. RFK Jr. anyone?
« Last Edit: June 02, 2023, 10:58:23 PM by Steve M. Galbraith »

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Sylvia Meagher Writes Clay Shaw with an Idea
« Reply #6 on: June 02, 2023, 10:37:24 PM »


Offline Jon Banks

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1205
Re: Sylvia Meagher Writes Clay Shaw with an Idea
« Reply #7 on: June 03, 2023, 03:34:26 PM »
Just listened to a 1967 interview with Meagher that I found on YouTube. While more sane than the David Liftons of the world, she was a "patsy" advocate through and through. She doesn't think he ever fired a gun at Walker, Kennedy or Tippit. When asked if critics like her were obligated to explain what actually did go down on 11/22/63, she flatly said "no."

She was right though.

It's not the responsibility of JFK assassination researchers to solve the JFK assassination murder case. I would even go further and argue that researchers shouldn't speculate about "who" the real killers were (if not Oswald). The conspiracy speculation distracts from the fact that there are real holes, sometimes huge holes, in the Lone-nut narrative. It's easy to shoot down bad conspiracy theories but much more difficult to resolve the many problems with the evidence in the JFK assassination.

Objectively, the Warren report was full of holes. Meagher and other first generation Warren report critics did a public service by exposing the holes in what was pretty much a prosecutorial document with little to no exculpatory evidence included in the report. Oswald didn't live to stand trial so if not for the Warren report critics, there would've been no real effort to examine the evidence critically. The news media almost unanimously endorsed the report. It took independent investigators to bring to light all the problems with the evidence which led to other investigations being opened. 

As of today, I personally don't know if Oswald was a "patsy" or part of the conspiracy. But I'm about 60-70% convinced that there was a conspiracy based on all the evidence from the JFK assassination that I've observed in my lifetime. Yes, part of me, 30-40%, allows for the possibility that it was Oswald alone in spite of the problems with the evidence and investigations. It's possible even though I don't think it's the most likely truth.



Political types - on the hard right or left - simply can't resist using the assassination to express their grievances with "the government" or some element of it. Even 60 years later they can't. RFK Jr. anyone?


Strange lack of empathy from you given the facts of how his father and uncle were murdered.

It's likely (based on the autopsy and other evidence) that RFK's murder was a conspiracy and possible that JFK's murder was a conspiracy:


Noguchi's autopsy of Robert Kennedy concluded that the fatal shot was fired into the back of Kennedy's head, behind the right ear, from an upward angle, and from a distance of no more than 0.5 to 3 inches (15–75 mm) away. Such a finding has given rise to conspiracy theories regarding the assassination, as no witnesses reported seeing the convicted assassin, Sirhan Sirhan, any closer to Kennedy than 1 meter away and in a position to fire such a shot. Noguchi himself points out in his memoir Coroner that he has never officially ruled that Sirhan fired the fatal shot.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Noguchi


If you're convinced that your dad was murdered in a conspiracy that potentially involved the CIA, it wouldn't take a huge leap to conclude that your uncle was murdered in a similar manner.

Even if you disagree with RFK Jr, you should be able to express empathy towards him on this issue given the tragedies that he experienced.
« Last Edit: June 03, 2023, 03:46:26 PM by Jon Banks »