Dean Andrews' Perjury regarding Clay Shaw?

[Nick Rose]

I would first like to introduce myself to everyone here. I am thankful that such a forum exists and am excited to be joining it.

I picked this forum over several others since it seems most active, with the best balance between sanity and activity (meaning the discussions are broad, but moderated well).

I could not help but notice in the "index" to the Educational Forum (you know, that *other forum) that there is NO entry for Clay Shaw, and likewise, no entry for Dean Andrews Jr. This makes me sad, as there are entries for plenty of other two bit characters of questionable value in the index.

NOW ON TO MY VERY FIRST QUESTION...

Is the significance of the perjury in Dean Andrews' testimony,
( jfkassassination.net/Russ/testimony/Andrews.htm )
generally understood? To me, it seems to be either overlooked, or sort of nodded at and then everyone moves on.

This should be a big deal, and yet, not only does Shaw, in general, get little press on the forums, Andrews is usually a footnote in the rare Shaw thread, if mentioned at all.

Why?

Some items I consider bombshells in his testimony:

*He had seen Oswald in the presence of homosexual "Mexicanos" previously. Possible link to Shaw/Ferrie via the gay portion, and again with the "Mexicano", which could have been Cubans for all we know. although, I'm hard pressed to put cross-dressing Cuban kids in to the intelligence milleue.

*He admits a call from "Bertrand" to defend Oswald at trial.

*He admits to having seen Bertrand in person after the above exchange. Is irritated by the thought of him, calls him a rat, says he wants to beat him.

*Admits to having received several phone calls from Bertrand previously.

*Admits knowing Oswald was paid to hand out pro-Castro leaflets. Admits discussing this with Oswald.

*Admits having met Bertrand in person years prior as well. Makes assumption it was Bertrand who sent Oswald in with the gay Mexicanos.

*Positively identifies Bertrand as a "bisexual", "a swinging cat", whom he claims mostly sent him homosexual youth to defend on sex charges, etc.

*Makes a firm statement, based on his military experience, that he absolutely does not believe Oswald could have gotten off three shots, and killed the president by himself.

*Confirms in jive that he asked the FBI to perjure his prior statements regarding Bertrand, asking them to write that he was "crazy", so they would leave him alone.

There are probably some more items of great weight in Andrews' statements, but these are the ones I easily recalled while scanning over it.

It seems to me, this testimony should be leaned on more heavily.
Is it "ignored" simply because it has been beat to death before my time, because it is a dead end at this point, or is the importance of it simply not well understood.


??? Thank you, and I look forward to continued involvement here.

[Albert Doyle]

Any sending of Oswald in with gay Mexicans was probably a ruse to associate him as being just another one of Shaw's boys. Meanwhile the real reason was probably to get Dean Andrews used to him as a client just in case Oswald needed any legal protection for his political activities.


Read James DiEugenio's Destiny Betrayed to see this subject cracked wide open.

[Dawn Meredith]

Welcome to the forum. I agree that all of your points are important. However, that said we had a judge who was not going to allow certain things. Like the Bertrand alias. Given that it was fairly common knowledge that Saw used this alias, it is likely that the judge knew. Since that witness was excluded, I believe that the judge put little stock in what Dean Andrews had to say. This is just a guess. Jim DiEugenio is the Garrison expert here so I will expect he has a more complete answer.

Dawn

[Albert Doyle]

John Candy put it best. And to think deniers accuse Stone of practicing 'mythology':



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-PSXQJ9jujk

[Tracy Riddle]

Welcome to the forum, Nick. Personally, I think Shaw was either one of Oswald's handlers, or associated with his New Orleans handlers (Banister, Ferrie, etc). I don't think Shaw knew that LHO was going to be set up to be blamed as the President's assassin. In a compartmentalized intelligence operation, Shaw might have had little or no knowledge of the plot to kill JFK.

Oswald is just another "kid" running around doing COINTELPRO work, in this case against Castro and the FPCC. Shaw probably knew lots of kids like this, also involved in gun-running and drug smuggling and other rackets and black ops. I know Jim DiEugenio disagrees with me about the Clinton incident, but this is obviously another COINTELPRO operation to link the civil rights movement to the Commies.

covert operations under the official COINTELPRO label took place between 1956 and 1971.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cointelpro

So when LHO gets in trouble in Dallas, Shaw tries to get Andrews involved to help him out - not knowing the whole story, and just how much trouble this act would cause for Shaw later.

That's my theory anyway.

[Nick Rose]

That's my theory anyway.

tracy, dawn, and Albert.
thank you all for your replies. I was 12 when Stone's JFK came out, so obviously I am the younger of the younger generation and still trying to get my barings. I appreciate that compartmentalization within the intelligence structure makes it very hard to gauge motives of any individual or to gauge their real understanding of a situation.

Albert,
I like your idea that Shaw was attempting to "introduce" Oswald to Andrews. However, I have a hard time believing that someone on Shaw's level would even be aware of a conspiracy that far in advance (I believe Andrews states that one of the first time Oswald appears with the Mexicanos was over a year or more before the assassination) ... And further, to be perfectly frank, I have my doubts that the conspiracy had its formal origins much further back then NSAM 263 (which I assume was "the final straw").

Tracy,
i think you are probably close to the truth there with Shaw being clueless of the big picture, and thinking he was helping out his low level operative who got in the wrong place. Though, perhaps this is allowing that Shaw is too clueless? Surely he couldn't think that someone even at Oswalds low level could be on TV accused of presidential assassination without their being something much larger going on. Why did he not just stay away? His heart was big and kind??? Perhaps, maybe, Shaw, if not fully knowledgeable, knew (suspected) enough to know that they would need a *dirty lawyer to keep things hushed that needed hushed and give the *illusion of defending Oswald, while secretly serving more sinister ulterior interests (ie. not letting the cat out of the bag at trial). Obviously, Andrews' connection with Carlos Marcello makes this notion at least somewhat plausible. ???

Thanks again for making me feel welcome here. I will try to keep my thoughts concise, keep threads on track, and keep from asking the *really stupid questions if and when at all possible.

[Albert Doyle]

Albert,
I like your idea that Shaw was attempting to "introduce" Oswald to Andrews. However, I have a hard time believing that someone on Shaw's level would even be aware of a conspiracy that far in advance (I believe Andrews states that one of the first time Oswald appears with the Mexicanos was over a year or more before the assassination) ... And further, to be perfectly frank, I have my doubts that the conspiracy had its formal origins much further back then NSAM 263 (which I assume was "the final straw").

Shaw could be handling Oswald for the simple reason of clearing his Marines record so he could continue his Agent Provocateur work. Just smoothing out a pet gripe Oswald had after serving in Russia.

[Jim DiEugenio]

I disagree that the conspiracy could not have been spun that far in advance.

I mean, how else does one explain the Clinton/Jackson incident?

I agree that Shaw and Ferrie might not have known the ultimate aim of that exercise.

But they sure as heck did know after.

Or else why was Ferrie frantic to find if Oswald had used his library card, and to eliminate any photo of him and he together in the CAP?

And why did Ferrie risk multiple counts of perjury and obstruction of justice by lying his head off in his FBI interview?

My feeling is that the N. Orleans stuff was compartmentalized. But once the news hit, these guys knew what had happened and they were a part of it. ANd they did typical CYA stuff. Unawares that the upper level plotters were going to have Oswald killed on short notice anyway.

[Tracy Riddle]

But Jim, why do you think Shaw put himself out there trying to get Oswald a lawyer, rather than cutting him loose? If he had kept quiet, he might never have been put on trial.

And I think a better explanation for the Clinton incident is COINTELPRO (probably for Banister's organization). CORE (Congress of Racial Equality) was attracting national press attention at the time with voter registration of blacks in the South. Clinton, Louisiana was one of those hotspots.

I have an old copy of Collier's Encyclopedia Yearbook 1964 that has a photo from 1963 of blacks lined up inside the Registrar office with the caption "Future voters wait to register in Clinton, La."

If Oswald was involved in agent provocateur assignments (like trying to discredit the FPCC), this may have been part of that effort. They may have wanted to link CORE with "Castro supporters" like Oswald to "prove" that the civil rights movement was communist-directed. For whatever reason, it didn't go very far before Oswald was sent back to Dallas. I don't know why Clay Shaw would be there.

If they only wanted to get him a job at the state hospital, a) I don't know how being a registered voter would help him get a job (have you ever heard of such a thing?) and b) Oswald could have registered to vote in New Orleans where he lived. Why drive to a civil rights hotspot like Clinton?

The three civil rights workers murdered in Mississippi in 1964 belonged to CORE. When they disappeared, the local authorities said, "This is all a hoax. Those boys are probably hiding out in Cuba."

http://www.crmvet.org/docs/63-64_core_violence.pdf

[Jim DiEugenio]

But Jim, why do you think Shaw put himself out there trying to get Oswald a lawyer, rather than cutting him loose? If he had kept quiet, he might never have been put on trial.

And I think a better explanation for the Clinton incident is COINTELPRO (probably for Banister's organization). CORE (Congress of Racial Equality) was attracting national press attention at the time with voter registration of blacks in the South. Clinton, Louisiana was one of those hotspots.

I have an old copy of Collier's Encyclopedia Yearbook 1964 that has a photo from 1963 of blacks lined up inside the Registrar office with the caption "Future voters wait to register in Clinton, La."

If Oswald was involved in agent provocateur assignments (like trying to discredit the FPCC), this may have been part of that effort. They may have wanted to link CORE with "Castro supporters" like Oswald to "prove" that the civil rights movement was communist-directed. For whatever reason, it didn't go very far before Oswald was sent back to Dallas. I don't know why Clay Shaw would be there.

If they only wanted to get him a job at the state hospital, a) I don't know how being a registered voter would help him get a job (have you ever heard of such a thing?) and b) Oswald could have registered to vote in New Orleans where he lived. Why drive to a civil rights hotspot like Clinton?

The three civil rights workers murdered in Mississippi in 1964 belonged to CORE. When they disappeared, the local authorities said, "This is all a hoax. Those boys are probably hiding out in Cuba."

http://www.crmvet.org/docs/63-64_core_violence.pdf

I don't think that is the way to look at the evidence today.

For the simple reasons that, today 1.) We know Shaw was Bertrand, and 2.) We know that he called Andrews.

In my view, these are certainties today.

As per why he made the call, I have always felt that he knew he had deniability because he made it as Bertrand, and secondly because he also knew Andrews would be tractable.