16-03-2012, 10:14 AM
THE COURT: Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, it's my understanding you've reached a unanimous verdict. I guess you're the foreperson, because you're carrying all the paperwork, right? Do you want to hand it to the marshal, please?
Do you want to do these, since they're all alike, the categories? We, the jury, unanimously find none of the plaintiffs proved defamation against Mr. Marvin, okay? Additionally, none of the plaintiffs proved defamation against Trine Day. Additionally, Mr. Marvin didn't prove defamation against any of the plaintiffs. Okay? Is that correct?
FOREPERSON: That's correct.
Court page 845. PDF page 54 of 56.
http://expendableelite.com/lawsuit2/1-30-06.pdf
The suit was brought by the plaintiffs alleging defamation which the jury found not proved.
The war the murdered president refused was fought over his dead body. And lost.
So much was lost.
Curiously the period when Marvin was in country was when the Chiefs went to the White House to ask Johnson's permission to mine Haiphong and bomb Hanoi.
His response was quick and left a lasting impression:
[URL="http://hnn.us/articles/34024.html"]http://hnn.us/articles/34024.html
[/URL]I found this story as a four-page article in Proceedings of the U.S. Naval Institute in the May 1996 edition.
And Col. Bui Tin explained the war Marvin had to fight in secret would've made the sacrifice worthwhile:
Q: How could the Americans have won the war?
A: Cut the Ho Chi Minh trail inside Laos. If Johnson had granted [Gen. William] Westmoreland's requests to enter Laos and block the Ho Chi Minh trail, Hanoi could not have won the war.
[URL="http://www.viet-myths.net/BuiTin.htm"]http://www.viet-myths.net/BuiTin.htm
[/URL]
The story of Dan Marvin touches upon the policy of assassination which the CIA sought to conceal, which was the source of perjured testimony to congress by no less than Richard Helms, a figure woven through the significant intrigues of deep political nature.
The suit failed to silence him. Though he has passed, his book remains.
[URL="http://expendableelite.com/lawsuit2/1-30-06.pdf"]
[/URL]
Do you want to do these, since they're all alike, the categories? We, the jury, unanimously find none of the plaintiffs proved defamation against Mr. Marvin, okay? Additionally, none of the plaintiffs proved defamation against Trine Day. Additionally, Mr. Marvin didn't prove defamation against any of the plaintiffs. Okay? Is that correct?
FOREPERSON: That's correct.
Court page 845. PDF page 54 of 56.
http://expendableelite.com/lawsuit2/1-30-06.pdf
The suit was brought by the plaintiffs alleging defamation which the jury found not proved.
The war the murdered president refused was fought over his dead body. And lost.
So much was lost.
Curiously the period when Marvin was in country was when the Chiefs went to the White House to ask Johnson's permission to mine Haiphong and bomb Hanoi.
His response was quick and left a lasting impression:
[URL="http://hnn.us/articles/34024.html"]http://hnn.us/articles/34024.html
[/URL]I found this story as a four-page article in Proceedings of the U.S. Naval Institute in the May 1996 edition.
And Col. Bui Tin explained the war Marvin had to fight in secret would've made the sacrifice worthwhile:
Q: How could the Americans have won the war?
A: Cut the Ho Chi Minh trail inside Laos. If Johnson had granted [Gen. William] Westmoreland's requests to enter Laos and block the Ho Chi Minh trail, Hanoi could not have won the war.
[URL="http://www.viet-myths.net/BuiTin.htm"]http://www.viet-myths.net/BuiTin.htm
[/URL]
The story of Dan Marvin touches upon the policy of assassination which the CIA sought to conceal, which was the source of perjured testimony to congress by no less than Richard Helms, a figure woven through the significant intrigues of deep political nature.
The suit failed to silence him. Though he has passed, his book remains.
[URL="http://expendableelite.com/lawsuit2/1-30-06.pdf"]
[/URL]