Send Lawyers Guns & Money Pt2

First topic message reminder :

Professor Charles ("Chuck") Webster
Very little can be gleaned from the Warren Commission volumes about Charles Webster except that he had been at police head-quarters most of the day following the assassination; that he was a law professor at the Southern Methodist University (SMU); that he gave assurances to the DCLU delegation about Oswald's civil rights; that he had taken this delegation to Captain King for further assurances; that he may himself have been involved with the DCLU; and that he very likely attended a meeting with various officials regarding the upcoming arraignment. However, there is one document of no little interest in the HSCA subject files. It is a FBI memo regarding the American GI Forum and is dated June 20, 1960. This indicates that Bill Lowery had attended a meeting of a committee which had formed to support Webtser's run for Congress. The committee members were mainly CPUSA members or past members.[6] Lowery had been a founding member of the Dallas branch of the American GI Forum along with TSBD employee, Joe Molina. He had also been an FBI informant/infiltration agent since 1945. Another of those founding members was Felix Bartello (also an informant). Bartello was later to become a member of a Minutemen splinter group which had formed in support of Edwin Walker's efforts at Oxford. One of the other members, Ashland Burchwell, had been caught en-route to Mississippi with a car load of weapons.

In 1963, Lowery testified against a suspected communist named John Stafford before the Subversive Activities Control Board (SACB) in Washington. Stafford is also mentioned in the above document. The case drew headlines when RFK asked Texas state authorities to refrain from taking action on Stafford until the Feds were through with him. Further controversy arose when Lowery's status as informant was blown when, at the hearings, he admitted he had infiltrated the GI Forum and other reputable groups for the FBI. The FBI predictably denied he was acting for anyone other than the CPUSA - a lie exposed through the release of files.

As a sidebar, it may well be the Stafford case that gave Edwin Walker the idea to allege RFK had intervened in having Oswald released from police custody after being arrested for the Apr 10 so-called assassination attempt. Prof. Webster seems to have had a very cozy relationship with the Dallas DPD for someone of so pink a hue.

Grier & Louise Raggio timeline
1938: Louise Ballerstedt joins the American Friends Service Committee and spends that summer working in Galena, Illinois for the Society of Friends

1939: Louise graduates from the University of Texas and is awarded a Rockefeller Foundation grant for a one-year internship at the White House. Here, she meets the likes of Eleanor Roosevelt, befriends LBJ and dates John Connally. While in Washington, she also works for the National Youth Administration (NYA)

1940: Louise returns to Austin still with the NYA, working under Jake Pickle.[7] April 19, 1941: Grier Raggio and Louise Ballerstedt marry after a short courtship. Grier, a lawyer, is working for the Department of Agriculture investigating misuse of food stamps for purchase of alcohol and other illegal substances

December 7, 1941: Pearl Harbor is attacked by the Japanese resulting in the US entering WWII and Grier is drafted

March, 1942: Grier is sent to Pacific Theater after initially being sent to New Orleans to attend Officer's Training School for Intelligence where he is rejected on security grounds. He serves with the 386th Air Service Group. During the course of the war he would send letters home highly critical of the US army

August 6, 1942: First son Grier, Jr is born

September, 1945: Grier returns from the war and works for the Veteran's Administration Board

1946: Second son Tom is born

1947: At the insistence of Grier, Louise enrols in Southern Methodist University law School

1947: Third son Kenneth is born. Louise drops out of law school

1948: Grier is relieved of duties while answering 8 charges of "Un-American activities" including; being a member of the Communist Party; a member of the American Spanish Aid Committee; a member of the American Civil Rights Union; that he had advocated and praised the Russian system of government to co-workers and; that on another occasion had advocated the overthrow of the government by force. He and Louise travel to Washington where Grier appears before the Veterans Administrations Loyalty Board. He denies all charges except one - telling a fellow worker that “there is no difference between Stalin forcing Communism on the countries of Europe and the US forcing democracy on them”. This statement he asserts, had been taken out of context. He is cleared by the board and returns to work. Throughout this period and perhaps beyond, the Raggio's claim their phone is tapped and that they are under constant surveillance

1949: Louise and Grier join the Unitarian Church

1950: Louise returns to law school

1952: Louise graduates and does volunteer work for the League of Women Voters and the Women’s Alliance of the Unitarian Church while practicing law part-time from home. Meanwhile, Grier is again the focus of government interest in his activities

1953: Louise obtains a job as an assistant DA under Henry Wade through the help of friend and mentor, Judge Sarah T Hughes. Judge Hughes would, after the assassination of JFK, administer the oath of office to LBJ

March 1, 1954: Grier is guest speaker at a meeting of the Peace and World Relations Group of the Temple Emanu-El Sisterhood. His subject is, "Are We in Danger of Losing Our Civil Rights and Liberties?"

1955: Grier Raggio opens a law office in the Rio Grande Building in Dallas [8]

April, 1956: Louise quits DA's office to join her husband's law practice. Firm is now known as Raggio & Raggio and specializes in divorce cases

1957: Louise's former employer, Jake Pickle, becomes director of the Texas State Democratic Executive Committee. Holds that position until 1960

1960: Louise serves on the newly organized Family Law Section of the State Bar

1961: Jake Pickle becomes a member of the Texas Employment Commission

1961: Sarah Hughes becomes a Federal District Judge

January 27, 1963: Grier debates Wyatt W Lipscomb, city attorney in Garland for the Soroptimist Club of Dallas at the Baker Hotel. Subject of debate is "Does Membership in the United Nations Serve the Best interests of the United States?" Louise is a club member

November 13, 1963: Ruth Paine files a petition for divorce stating she separated from Michael on September 1, 1962, and that for 6 months prior to
separation, she had suffered a course of "unkind, cruel harsh and tyrannical treatment and conduct" at the hands of her husband. Ruth's attorney in this filing was Louise Raggio.[9] Recall that the Paine's and Raggio's attend the same church

November 22, 1963 Morning: Grier and Louise are at the Trade Mart for the luncheon [10]

November 22, 1963 Evening: Grier gets a call either from an ACLU member in Austin (according Greg Olds) or from Washington (according to Louise) concerning either finding out if Oswald was being denied counsel (according to Olds) or asking that he witness Oswald's arraignment (according to Louise). Grier phones Olds about this. In turn, Olds phones police, then calls Grier back. Grier suggests they go down and check out the situation

November 22, 1963, 11:15 PM: Olds, Raggio and 2 other DCLU members meet across from City Hall at Plaza Hotel, then try to talk to Earl Cabell without success before speaking with Prof. Charles Webster outside the office of Captain Fritz

November 22, 1963, 11:40 PM: Webster takes delegation to Captain King

November 22, 1963, 11:50 PM: According to Wade, Grier Raggio and Charles Webster are both at a meeting just prior to the midnight press conference regarding the arraignment in the JFK case. David Johnston however, only named himself, Curry, Fritz, Wade and 2 or 3 assistant DAs as being present

Midnight: According to Olds, the others in the delegation go home at the time he goes down to watch the press conference [11]

1970: Grier and Louise's eldest son, Grier, Jr starts up a journal called "The New Democrat" which he edits with Stephen Schlesinger, son of JFK aide and historian, Arthur

October 26, 1970: Conservative journalist, John Chamberlain writes widely published article, "Where else Can Democrats Go?" predicts that Raggio (whom Chamberlain describes as a Mayor John Lindsay functionary) and Schlesinger are "sewing the dragon's teeth" through their support of McGovern which he states will lead to problems at the '72 convention unless the Left gets its way

1972: Gary Allen, a John Birch Society propagandist and author of "None Dare Call it Conspiracy" publishes "Richard Nixon: The Man Behind the Mask" which quotes from the Chamberlain article, suggesting that Nixon and some of the Left in the Democratic Party are "part of the same conspiracy".

According to Allen, the Left, with Raggio and chlesinger playing prominent roles, will split the party, ensuring an easy win for Nixon

guns & money
There are two other people named Raggio who turn up in the records. Any connection to Grier Raggio is unknown, and they are mentioned here only for the benefit of anyone who might have an interest in genealogy. The first is David L Raggio originally of Natchitoches, Louisiana. He was a WWII veteran who served with the 879th Airborne Engineers.

Raggio, in 1963 and by now a geologist, entered into a partnership with Richard Davis and Gus de la Barre. The business which resulted was known as the Guatemalan Lumber & Mineral Corp. In actuality however, it was a front for training Cuban exiles at camps in the area around Lake Pontchartrain.

The second is William Raggio. As Washoe County District Attorney and friend of Frank Sinatra, he was heavily involved in the investigation into the December 8, 1963 kidnapping of Sinatra's son, Frank Jr. In March, 1968, New Orleans played host to the National Convention of District Attorneys. An awards banquet was planned as part of the convention with Hubert Humphrey originally slated as guest speaker. When Humphrey withdrew after hearing how Garrison was criticizing LBJ over various aspects of the Shaw case, as well as the original investigation of the assassination, Garrison placed himself into the guest speaker role.

The organizing committee, fretting over what Garrison might say, requested a meeting with him. The meeting culminated in barbed exchanges between Garrison and Raggio - who had attempted to warn Garrison to leave out any mention of the assassination in his speech. Garrison reacted by cancelling the banquet and shipping all the catered food to an orphanage.

In 1970, Richard Nixon hatched plans to recapture a hostile senate for the Republicans at the Nov 3rd elections. To this end, he hand-picked 9 candidates. Among them was William Raggio. Raggio failed in his bid.

In 1972, he did win a seat in the Nevada state senate, and has held it ever since.


ENDNOTES
[1] Commission Exhibit 987 is a letter from Greg Olds to J Lee Rankin. It is on DCLU letterhead which lists all board members and other office holders within the organization.

[2] Also according to Louise Raggio, her husband had called Olds at the insistence of someone from the Washington Office - not Austin.

[3] Commission Document 87, p 549

[4] Treasure-Hunting in the National Archives, The Third Decade, vol 2, # 2 by Sylvia Meagher, January 1986. The document cited by Meagher in the article is found in Commission Document 5, p 400

[5] The 1:35 Arraignment and the Rewriting of History, The Third Decade, vol 3, # 4 by Timothy Cwiek, May, 1987

[6] NARA Record Number: 124-90010-10040

[7] Pickle bio: 1938; United States Navy, served three and a half years; area director, National Youth Administration, 1938-1941; radio business; public relations executive; director of Texas state Democratic Executive Committee, 1957-1960; member of Texas Employment Commission, 1961-1963). He had also been a political aide to LBJ and in Nov 1963 was the Democratic Nominee in the 10th District run-off with Republican Jim Dobbs. He was hated by the liberal faction of his own party who had got Kennedy over the line in Texas in 1960. In fact, one of those Kennedy supporters, Jack Ritter appeared on TV, Nov 21 urging those who had previously supported him to now support Dobbs, indicating that Pickle was not an acceptable candidate for the Democrats, and had been "less than forthright" during debates. Kennedy was due in Austin after the Dallas visit.

[8] The 112th MIG also had an office in the Rio Grande Building, as did the Immigration & Naturalization Service. The latter was listed in Oswald's address book

[9] Warren Commission Document 849, p33. As no further action was taken within 6 months of filing, the case was automatically dismissed

[10] November 22 - The Day Remembered by Morning News Staff, Dallas, p136

[11] Unless otherwise stated, background information on Louise and Grier Raggio has been sourced from the roster of the 386th Air Service Group; Louise Raggio's autobiography, Texas Tornado; Louise Raggio profile from the Texas State Bar; article published by the Texas Women Lawyers Association, "Louise B Raggio: Handing the Torch to Today's Generation" and; The Dallas Morning News archives

Just to clear something up that I started in an early post to this thread.

The Nichols who worked on Operation Integrity was not Dallas lawyer H Louis Nichols. It was ex FBI asst dir. Louis Nichols. Somewhere along the line, someone writing about the Nixon operation got the two Nichols mixed up and named him as H. Louis Nichols and I took that at face vale as being the Dallas lawyer. 

Ed, good pick up on who Nichols worked for.

Here is a Dallas Bar oral history int. with him

https://vimeo.com/87873075

Nichols is an "City" attorney in 1959

 January, 1959 TKt Municipal League Asks Gas Price Hike Request Denied with Dallas iml Fort Worth offering legal ind city public utility! office help without diirge. 3. A letter advising the effect of the rate Increase on local rate itractures should be sent to all cities. The committee said fcat Lone Star's request for tn escalator clause would allow the company to raise gate rates automatically without going to the commission when field prices go up. ·You are reminded that last summer beginning in July most of the cities were asked and granted a three-cent Increase across the aoird on domestic and commercial users, nnrl likewise, we are Informed the company raised the Industrial rate two cents across the board," the com' mittee said. The committee's report was signed by J. W. Monk, Dallas public utilities supervisor, as chairman; Gordon W h i t m a n , Fort Worth assistant city attorney; J P. Cox Jr., Sherman city attor ney; Charles R. Griggs, Swoet water city attorney; Allen Harp Childress city attorney; and ' H Louis Nichols as attorney for five Dallas county towns.

https://www.newspapers.com/newspage/30122248/

In Texas, tradition still has meaning. The tradition of excellence represented by Nichols, Jackson, Dillard, Hager & Smith, LLP dates back to 1895, making it one of the oldest law firms in Texas.
“Since 1951 the firm has been dedicated to public sector clients,” explains Peter Smith, the firm’s managing partner.

Dallas Bar Association 1961-1970
http://www.tklaw.com/files/News/fb0de8c2-303a-4529-9b96-97fef3ca25b0/Presentation/NewsAttachment/d3390830-10e0-4367-b353-9bde1f3eff9f/HN_08-2009.pdf

Nichols helped cover for Curry.
He was President of the DBA and it fell upon him to ask if Lee had been told he could get a lawyer once indicted.
Nichols could not be Lee's lawyer but was allowed to see him. Hmm
The two ACLU lawyers could have represented him for his arrest, bail, arraignment, lineups, perhaps interrogations, transfer, charges, and anything else a lawyer whom represents his or her client would do.
Yet they were dissuaded from such a face to face like Nichols received, even though Nichols said Lee asked for ACLU!!!!
Lee needed a lawyer as soon as he was charged. If not sooner.
Getting in front of those cameras and stating their client is innocent of all charges and this will be proven beyond a shadow of a doubt in a court of law was of huge importance in a Media trial. Lee had enough cash to retain such a mouthpiece for a short period, then he would be broke, and at indictment Lee could claim destitution and ask for legal aid. (having had to fire his attorney)

But this would have put pressure on the DPD,
so Nichols tries to quiet Lee, I can hear it now, 'shut up boy you can't get a lawyer till trial.'

Wisely Lee did use his time on camera at midnight press conference to again say no one has come forward to represent him.
Nichols is not a criminal attorney and was not there to try and represent him, he may of asked if he wanted the DBA to secure a lawyer for him but is that a trial lawyer after he is indicted and once again of no use
to Lee at that moment, and possibly detrimental to his defense.

The context of Nichols question to a criminal lawyer was so blatantly unorthodox given the complaints Lee was making about his treatment, hygiene, use of phone, lack of representation, false arrest, short and sweet hearings, nebulous arraignments, and evidence he said was fake.

A lawyer is need NOW to secure his rights, gather evidence of his innocence, and secure witnesses whom may try to leave the state!!!
Not weeks or months later... by then you may have no rebuttal, and any criminal lawyer knows better.
Mr. Nichols was a civil lawyer unfamiliar with criminal law. Hence the need to call a criminal lawyer for an opinion.... Finally he gets a call from a lawyer whom is a professor at SMU... 
Yeah Chuck Webster! Whom is hanging about looking out for Curry's rights also.

Nichols kept this "criminal" lawyers name secret for very good reason.

Cheers, Ed

Ed. Ledoux wrote:Nichols helped cover for Curry.
He was President of the DBA and it fell upon him to ask if Lee had been told he could get a lawyer once indicted.
Nichols could not be Lee's lawyer but was allowed to see him. Hmm
The two ACLU lawyers could have represented him for his arrest, bail, arraignment, lineups, perhaps interrogations, transfer, charges, and anything else a lawyer whom represents his or her client would do.
Yet they were dissuaded from such a face to face like Nichols received, even though Nichols said Lee asked for ACLU!!!!
Lee needed a lawyer as soon as he was charged. If not sooner.
Getting in front of those cameras and stating their client is innocent of all charges and this will be proven beyond a shadow of a doubt in a court of law was of huge importance in a Media trial. Lee had enough cash to retain such a mouthpiece for a short period, then he would be broke, and at indictment Lee could claim destitution and ask for legal aid. (having had to fire his attorney)

But this would have put pressure on the DPD,
so Nichols tries to quiet Lee, I can hear it now, 'shut up boy you can't get a lawyer till trial.'

Wisely Lee did use his time on camera at midnight press conference to again say no one has come forward to represent him.
Nichols is not a criminal attorney and was not there to try and represent him, he may of asked if he wanted the DBA to secure a lawyer for him but is that a trial lawyer after he is indicted and once again of no use
to Lee at that moment, and possibly detrimental to his defense.

The context of Nichols question to a criminal lawyer was so blatantly unorthodox given the complaints Lee was making about his treatment, hygiene, use of phone, lack of representation, false arrest, short and sweet hearings, nebulous arraignments, and evidence he said was fake.

A lawyer is need NOW to secure his rights, gather evidence of his innocence, and secure witnesses whom may try to leave the state!!!
Not weeks or months later... by then you may have no rebuttal, and any criminal lawyer knows better.
Mr. Nichols was a civil lawyer unfamiliar with criminal law. Hence the need to call a criminal lawyer for an opinion.... Finally he gets a call from a lawyer whom is a professor at SMU... 
Yeah Chuck Webster! Whom is hanging about looking out for Curry's rights also.

Nichols kept this "criminal" lawyers name secret for very good reason.

Cheers, Ed

Couldn't have put it better. Everything done and said in regard to a lawyer by anyone but Oswald was done and said in the cause of denying and delaying.

I go back to the documentary, Murder on a Sunday Morning where the defense nails one of the detectives on just this issue. The detective told the 15 year old kid he would organize a lawyer for him, but had to admit under oath he did nothing about it with the lame excuse that he never promised he would do it. In other words, the he did not include the "p" word in what he told the kid so he was under no obligation to do it.

greg parker wrote:

Ed. Ledoux wrote:Nichols helped cover for Curry.
He was President of the DBA and it fell upon him to ask if Lee had been told he could get a lawyer once indicted.
Nichols could not be Lee's lawyer but was allowed to see him. Hmm
The two ACLU lawyers could have represented him for his arrest, bail, arraignment, lineups, perhaps interrogations, transfer, charges, and anything else a lawyer whom represents his or her client would do.
Yet they were dissuaded from such a face to face like Nichols received, even though Nichols said Lee asked for ACLU!!!!
Lee needed a lawyer as soon as he was charged. If not sooner.
Getting in front of those cameras and stating their client is innocent of all charges and this will be proven beyond a shadow of a doubt in a court of law was of huge importance in a Media trial. Lee had enough cash to retain such a mouthpiece for a short period, then he would be broke, and at indictment Lee could claim destitution and ask for legal aid. (having had to fire his attorney)

But this would have put pressure on the DPD,
so Nichols tries to quiet Lee, I can hear it now, 'shut up boy you can't get a lawyer till trial.'

Wisely Lee did use his time on camera at midnight press conference to again say no one has come forward to represent him.
Nichols is not a criminal attorney and was not there to try and represent him, he may of asked if he wanted the DBA to secure a lawyer for him but is that a trial lawyer after he is indicted and once again of no use
to Lee at that moment, and possibly detrimental to his defense.

The context of Nichols question to a criminal lawyer was so blatantly unorthodox given the complaints Lee was making about his treatment, hygiene, use of phone, lack of representation, false arrest, short and sweet hearings, nebulous arraignments, and evidence he said was fake.

A lawyer is need NOW to secure his rights, gather evidence of his innocence, and secure witnesses whom may try to leave the state!!!
Not weeks or months later... by then you may have no rebuttal, and any criminal lawyer knows better.
Mr. Nichols was a civil lawyer unfamiliar with criminal law. Hence the need to call a criminal lawyer for an opinion.... Finally he gets a call from a lawyer whom is a professor at SMU... 
Yeah Chuck Webster! Whom is hanging about looking out for Curry's rights also.

Nichols kept this "criminal" lawyers name secret for very good reason.

Cheers, Ed

Couldn't have put it better. Everything done and said in regard to a lawyer by anyone but Oswald was done and said in the cause of denying and delaying.

Olds was given the runaround by Webster, Fritz and King on the 22nd.
Nichols walks in late afternoon on the 23rd at which time Lee had apparently conversed with Ruth Paine and Marina, about getting Abt.
I do not find that part not to be very truthful,  Ruthy throws him under a bus with her answer during the wc (she did not bother).
I have not found anything showing Webster was around on the 23rd.

greg parker wrote:Just to clear something up that I started in an early post to this thread.

The Nichols who worked on Operation Integrity was not Dallas lawyer H Louis Nichols. It was ex FBI asst dir. Louis Nichols. Somewhere along the line, someone writing about the Nixon operation got the two Nichols mixed up and named him as H. Louis Nichols and I took that at face vale as being the Dallas lawyer. 

Ed, good pick up on who Nichols worked for.

Here is a Dallas Bar oral history int. with him

https://vimeo.com/87873075

I took the film at that link and re-cut it to the segment of Nov 22-23

Why is every one ringing the president of the CIVIL lawyers association?

Lawyer friends who he can't remember the names of?

greg parker wrote:Why is every one ringing the president of the CIVIL lawyers association?

Lawyer friends who he can't remember the names of?

Regarding part 2. Olds had the same issue......

New York Times had the name wrong, but finally corrected itself:


John de J. Pemberton Jr.,
who as executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union during the turbulent 1960s helped double its size and shift its focus to the criminal courts as an arena for issues like civil rights and Vietnam, died Oct. 21 in Monte Rio, Calif. He was 90.The cause was congestive heart failure, said his daughter Nancy Pemberton. Mr. Pemberton, who said he considered himself a militant on civil liberties issues, sometimes had to balance the views of other militants with those of A.C.L.U. members who favored a more moderate approach. A contentious issue early in the Vietnam War was whether the civil rights group should help draft resisters. It eventually did, in 1968. “The in-fighting gives us our strength,” Mr. Pemberton said in an interview with The New York Times in 1970.The A.C.L.U. certainly grew stronger under Mr. Pemberton’s leadership. When he became executive director in 1962, there were 28 A.C.L.U. affiliates with a membership of 61,000 people and a total income of $535,000. When he stepped down in 1970, there were 47 affiliates with a membership of 144,000 and a total income of $2 million. Mr. Pemberton helped orchestrate a major shift in the A.C.L.U.’s legal strategy. The group had historically chosen to pursue appeals of important test cases in higher courts in order to establish a constitutional principle, often as a friend of the court.
But, under Mr. Pemberton and his board, the A.C.L.U. came to serve as criminal counsel for an individual defendant in 95 percent of the cases. He said in an interview with The New York Times Magazine in 1966 that this change was necessary to make the lower courts work.

ACLU held Dallas police responsible,... how?

I would claim they were prevented from seeing their client.
I would sue them for civil rights violations.
But hey I'm no 95 percenter like Pemberton. 
I'd say Oswald case checked every box.
Right up until Oswald filled one.

Cheers, Ed

Pemberton jumps ship in Jan 6 1964 for Otto Otepka
https://www.marxists.org/history/etol/newspape/themilitant/1964/v28n01-jan-06-1964-mil.pdf

Otto was being bugged and Mr. P said State Dept. was breaking laws.

https://kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-articles/what-did-otto-otepka-know-about-oswald-and-the-cia



Hon. J. Edgar Hoover

Federal Bureau of Investigation w ,

Walton, B.C. Q^ fj^J^

My dear Edgar:



For your eyes alone I am sending a copy

of letter addressed by Mr. Pemberton, of the ACLU
to Osmond K. Fraenkel. I am also sending a copy
to Irv Ferman, who put me to work on this little
chore .

Yours
Ernst


CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION AMERICA
156 FIFTH AVENUE
NEW YORK 10, N. Y,
October 7 9 1964

Osmond K Fraenkel Esq*
120 Broadway
New York.

Dear Osmond

Further to our correspondence and discussion concerning the
Warren Commission Report I am writing to ask if you would take
on the drafting of a proposed statement of ACLU's comments on
the civil liberties issues raised by the report*

It occurs to me that these issues are three

(1) The prejudicial publicity*

Here the report seems to endorse all of the criticise)
wc issued in our December 6th statement* Since we
have not since then beer, able to resolve our views as
to what remedial measures should be adopted (whether
limited to measures imposing restraint on the law
enforcement agencies and prosecutors or whether re-
straints on the representatives of the media them-
selves should be added) p ^there may be little else we
can say*

<2) The interrogation of Oswald and the protection of right to counsel*
I have the impression that the report here offers little
but conclusions that Oswald's rights were recognized*
It would seem to me that would have doubts as to,
factually^ whether prolonged or oppressive .interroga-
tion occurred and in principle, whether mere mention
of a right to counsel during the course of an arraignment
that was not public and the interview with Louis Nichols
of the Dallas Bar Association,, the opportunities afforded
him to make a telephone call to John Abt and to request
his relatives to do so afforded sufficient recognition
of his right to counsel* Here again is an issue which wc
raised in our December 6th statement; I am not sure
whether the report answers the questions we asked*


Osmond K. Fraenkel, Esq. Page 2 October 7 P 1964

(3) Impairment of individual liberty in efforts to protect the security of the Presidents *
From what I have seen (eog d(> recommendations 1 9 4(a) 9 7» and
11 of chapter one ft on page 3 of the newspaper copy; and the
discussion of "preventive intelligence" in- chapter VIII ^ pages
35 and 36 of the newspaper copy) I agree that the Commission
does not recommend preventive detention of defectors 9 sub-
versives atxd other- suspicious characters* However j> I haven 7 1
seen the report explicitly negative such preventive detention 9
And what is more serious 9 I think excessively security minded
individuals (especially among law enforcement agencies) may
well read into the recommendations a -justification for taking
risks with police practices that 'may well result in (1) haras-
sment of such suspicious characters 9 and (2) leaks of infor-
mation that they are on security lists by reason of their
associations „ political beliefs 9 or even presumed psychiatric

quirks* The risk;, as I see it, nay arise out of the insistance
upon a much larger screening d£ potential undesirables 9 requiring
the participation of additions to the SEcret Service force who
may be less well trained and cooperation of local law enforce-
ment officers who may be relatively untrained and insensitive to
principles of individual liberty* The report^ of course^ calls
for such substantial increase in the numbers of names to be
submitted to and screened by the Secret Service and explicitly
calls for use of local law enforcement agencies in evaluating
these names and taking preventive measures a

I dont think we need to criticize the report or charge its authors with
civil liberties insensitivity, in order to make the point that national
preoccupation with security of the President may well endanger other im-
portant national values I think Mr hoover in his testimony released
last Friday makes our point for us quite well*

Very sincerely,,
John de J Pemberton Jr
Executive Director

Gold

Would it be worthwhile revisiting the idea of contacting the ACLU, reminding them of this early work and showing how much we have expanded upon it with a view to taking whatever further steps in the legal system that can be taken?

That's not a bad idea, would be worth a try.

Just an add on. I have managed to get scans of a lot of DCLU material which I have all included in my Anatomy Of Lee Harvey Oswald's Interrogations paper. All on pages 243-262.

Not sure whether this has been posted before.
Here is the ACLU's reaction from Dec 63

http://jfk.hood.edu/Collection/White%20Materials/White%20Assassination%20Clippings%20Folders/Security%20Folders/Security-Police/Item%2006.pdf

Greg Olds, Grier Raggio Otto Mulinax and L.N.D. Wells were the four men who went to the D.P.D. Friday night.

Outstanding Bart,

The Usual Suspects


L to R: Otto Mullinax, L.N.D. Wells, Jr., Oscar Mauzy

Cheers,Ed

Grier H. Raggio Jr. 

But not Lee's family...

Thanks Bart. Wells was the one I didn't know about. Good job!

Both Mullinex and Raggio took credit for being the catalyst for going.  I remain deeply suspicious of the Raggios.

They were prodded into 'action' by Rev. Brandon Lovely, the chairman from the ACLU in Austin.
He had heard Oswald say on TV that he had no representation

G. Raggio