Documents / FOIA release

Newspaper Article: a Reporter at Large

Central Intelligence Agency · 1968-07-13 · 19 pages · text from the file's own layer

This CIA-held copy of a 13 July 1968 magazine article, "A Reporter at Large," was written by the author of the book "Inquest." It examines New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison's investigation into the Kennedy assassination and his arrest of Clay Shaw. The author concludes that Garrison mishandled evidence and decoded address book numbers without sound basis. It also says the only evidence the author saw connecting Shaw to the assassination was fraudulent. Flying saucers come up only in passing.

~
a -
, 0
the right judges, but the conviction was
reversed by the U.$. Supreme Court,
in a decision that held that individualt
have the right to criticire public oili-
. rials even tlioogh the charges may turn
mtt to be unfounded. (iarrison is popu-
larly referred to in New ()__rh-ans as
the jolly Green Giant--an image eon-
_jured up by his imposing physical
stature (sir: feet six inches) and his
.political glad hand. \\'ht-n l met him,
in__r_1t_iyl1\p_r_il_, his welcorne Was gra-
Citrus, if ‘slightly fulsomc; he told
me, almost solemnly, that it was his
reading Jmy book that first set him
thinlting about launching anrinvestigr
_
tioit of-his own. (Later. l learned
that this was a standard greeting, ex-
_
tended to almost all critics or the
1 ll/arrcn Comniixsioo.) Over a leisure-
‘
ly dinner at llmussar_d's, Garrison be-
,
gan to tcll me about the conspiracy hei
had uncovered. lt was .1 diffuse nar-
rative, in which it appeared that Os-
waldbad only beeitifeig-ning the role
lie went tn considerable lengths to es-
'
tablish for himself as a pro-Castroitc
antl had in fact been part of an anti‘-
Castro assassination tearn trained by
David Ferric. Ferrie, in turn, was in
some important way-——Ga'rrison never
explained exactly how_-personally in-
volved with Clay Shaw. \Vhen a plan
shoot Castro was aborted becauseI
to
E i Oswald could not obtain it visa to Cuba,
the asmssinatitin team turned its atten-
mission. .
~
'
conspimcy? “It's exactly like a chess
problem," he explaincd."'The \Var-
ten Commission moved the same pieces
back and forth and got nowhere. l
made a new move and solvtid the
iprohlcm." The movehe meant was the
iarrest of Clay Shaw. He pointed out
that after Shaw wasarresterl men from
the District Attorney's otlice searched
Shaw’: home, in-the French Quarter,
_and found in it zt cache of new evi-
E
dencc, which he suggested that l should
see, becattsc it would give me "it new
perspective on the case." _
Early the‘ next morning, l_ wettt to
the District /\ttorney's oflice, which is
housed, next to the Parish Prison, in
‘
‘
the Criminal District Court Building,
"
a massive structure at Tulane Avenue
5
and South Broad. Garrison had not yet
arrived, but one of his assistants, James
C. Aleock, told me that- Garrison had
; left word that l should “start going
1 through the evidence." I did so with
-
joncs Harris, .1 'Nc.w Yorker of inde-
pendent means whohas devoted the
better part of the last three years to a
private investigation of the assa_sina-
tiorl.
-t
t
.3-
SK cardboard c.tt"tou.x were
‘brought out containing t\etsti|\;tl be-
‘I
fl
mgitigs of Clay Shaw: letters, photo-
raplu, financial rccordt, hlucprittt.\ for
renovating houses in the French
Quarter, the tn.1rtttscript_e of pl:t_\'_s he
h ad written years ago, calemlars,
_checltbooltn, atldrt-as boolts. ln one box
were a hlaclt cmtume, a ttct mask, and
MIIIIQ
S
l
sud
had
plastic .\lippers—all of which
had claimed were part of his
hlardi Gran costume. Alcoclt
that the District -'\ttor'nc_v's statt
yet to examine all this material,
haw!
96$
and he soggestetl that llarris and l
look through Shaw's addres boolts and
V financial records in hopes of discover-
_- ing some information that might inter-
est Garrison. \Ve were lcit alone with
y
t
l
4
hatl
I SI
he evidence.
fhough none of these materials, as .
far as l could sec after e.\att\ining them,G
aiiything directly to do with the
sxtssination, the odd way in which
Garrison treated them did give tne,
when l thought about it later, “.1 new
perspective on the case.” l recallctl that
a judge's order had forbidden discus-
sion or disclosure of any evidence in
the case. The very fact that llarris and
I were allowed to examine objct't.\
seized from Shaw's home and desig-
nated "evidence" scctnetl to be a direct
.
violation of that order. \\'hy, l wort-
dererl, should the District Attorney
risk having his case thrown out of
ill
~ llowi had Garrison discovered this th
;
I
tion to President Kennedy, and, on} court on a technicality by letting
November Z2, I963, carried out its outsidi.-rs go freely" through the evi-
<-nce? Moreover, it scented curious
:tt Clay Shaw's papers had not al-
t-ady beenirigorously set-utini/.etl by
Garrison or his .stafl', especially .~utce
=_Garrison had told several people, in-
‘
c hiding rue, that one of the main rt'a-
sons for arresting Clay Shaw on i\l;o'ch
lst was to prevent hint frotn tlc_\lttl_\‘-
.ing his personal papers. Six weclts had
P
:1
assed», and yet from what l ,sa\v tt
ppeared that no real investigation of
,Clay Shaw was going on at :tll but
C
I
[only a search for peripheral cl|:tr:tctt'rs
onnected with David l*err"e. lf Gar-
‘
rison believed that $ha\v
had-openly conspired to kill
the President, why was the
inquiry- into his activities
beittgtreated with such ap-
parent nonchalance?
A discovery thatijoncs
Harris made while we were
going through the papers
provided considerable in-
sight into the nature of
Garrison‘: investigation.
\Vhat_ Harrb found was a
five-digit number that was
common to both Shaw's
: and Oswald's ‘address
booltsi The entry in $lt.-t\v's
M ‘lmolt was "Lee ()tluttt, l'()
llox l9l(l(r, l);tll.n, 'l.e.\."
ln ().\walrl'_\ book, the
number l9lfI6 was pre-
ceded by tltc Cyrillic
l-rim‘ ll ;t (which, mt-
other Rttssinn letters on
the page, the \\'arrcn Com-
mistion had zmunted were
made during ()swa'|d's two-
and~a-half-year stay
in the soviet Union),
Tlimiglt the coinci-
dence of numbers
proved nothing in it-
self. it was striking, and
(.i.trriso|t decided that
further investigatiott
was merited. Shortly
thereafter, Garrison
announced to the press
that he had found the
cntrr "l'() l9lll6" in
both ()swalrl's and
Slt.t\v's .'ttltlt't‘:~$ books,
and that the num-
her was a “tttittt'.\i$tt‘tlt
or fictional mnnht-r,"
which removed “the
possibility of coinci-
dence." Moreover,
Garrison mid that
“l'() l9lfl6" was a
code that, when deci-
phert-tl, produced jack
R|th_i,"s unlisted tele-
phone number, \\"ll
l-$60!, ano “no oth-
-
er tuiniher on earth."
The method by which Garrison “deci-
phered" the.eodc is worth following.
Starting with the "scrambled" number
l9lfl6, Garrison “unscr.-tmliled" it (by
choosing the nearest digit, then the
farthest, thed tltenext nearest, etc.)
to produce the number l6')Ol. Ruby's
number was l560l, so by unscram-
bling thedigits Garrison managed to
match the last two digits in the two
numbers. The next step was to subtract
Llllll from l69(l-l, and—prestr+-—
l56(ll. Finally, Garrison (onvcrtctl rli¢
Pl’K‘fi-Y .“l'0" to “\\'ll" by .1 systetu
that, according to the proniinent cryp-
tographer lrwin Mann, yieltlsat lmst
six different prefixes; Garrison cltosc
Ruby's. _
'
A few days after Carrison_,1n-
nnunced that he had deciphcred the
code, it became known that the num-
ber l9lO6 in S_h:iw’s address book was
by no means “nonexistent or fiction-Tl."
PO Box l9lO6 had been, as Shaw's
addres book indicated, the address in
Dallas of a man named Lee Odom,
Qdom stated that he had been intro-
duced to Shaw in_ I966 by the nttnagrer

Not linked to a story yet.

About this file

FOIA release, from the cia-readingroom collection. The PDF is mirrored here; the original link is above. 19 pages are in the text index: search them above, or from the library's search.