Final Reflections on King's Assassination

I hope what you saw yesterday was not too confusing. The interview with Dr. Wrone was entertaining, but unfortunately not as enlightening as it could have been. Let me make a few final observations about each video presentation.

"Who Killed MLK?"

I am sorry that I cannot answer some of your questions about some specific points in that video. There were statements made by both government officials and critics that I believe are suspect, but I can't prove it. The commentary I handed out on the CNN special, however, is based in documented evidence, much of it produced at Ray's hearing in 1974 in sworn testimony. I am absolutely convinced based on what I know about this case that if Ray had had a fair trial with competent legal representation, that he would have been acquitted based on the evidence. And there is strong evidence that Ray was being manipulated and set up to take the wrap, which means there undoubtedly was a conspiracy to kill King. Who those conspirators are, however, is anyone's guess, and we don't know that principally because of the failure of the Memphis authorities, not to mention the FBI, to adequately investigate this case. A similar point can be made regarding President Kennedy's assassination. And the facts in this case have been muddled over the years by both critics and defenders (especially one Gerald Posner who Dr. Wrone mentioned in his interview).

More specifically, I would certainly vouch for what Harold Weisberg said in the documentary. I knew him well and visited his basement archive on numerous occasions over a roughly 15 year period. He was Ray's investigator for that evidentiary hearing. Unfortunately, I did not pick his brain as much as I could have on that case in comparison to JFK.

Walter Fauntroy, a former SCLC member and the Congressman who headed the House Select Committee on Assassinations, did NOTHING during his "leadership" to expose any of this. In my book, he is a FRAUD with a capital F. And him saying that he has been considering working to release some of those files is disingenious -- to my knowledge he never lifted a finger in that regard. And the committee he headed was really only interested in dispelling various conspiracy theories, not getting justice for James Earl Ray.

Former Attorney General Ramsey Clark made a comment about Hoover and the FBI that I thought was incredible -- that he believed the FBI was under pressure to do a thorough investigation because of what was known about Hoover's animosity toward King. BUT THAT WAS HARDLY KNOWN AT THE TIME, AND CERTAINLY NOT BY THE GENERAL PUBLIC. This was not first exposed until the mid-70s and Hoover was dead by then. And his comment about all the so-called evidence they had against Ray is likewise incredible, especially coming from the once chief lawyer in the U.S. The record of the FBI in both this case and JFK's is disreputable.


Cheryl Harleston's interview with David Wrone:

Dr. Wrone did bring up some things that I have not seen but I have no reason to doubt do exist -- such as a photograph at the time of the assassination showing that bathroom window closed. Mrs. Harleston was pressing him at the end based on her perception that a conspiracy necessarily means some grand plot involving many players. But conspiracy essentially only means two or more people combining to commit a crime. And we tend to think that conspiracies are usually too big to hide -- that someone is bound to talk or be caught. But not necessarily, especially when someone like Ray had been framed and the government did not plan to look any farther than that.

I know this is not the final word, but for the sake of this course, it will have to be.

Remember, Writing Assignment #2 is due tomorrow (3/19) and Jeremy, Tomas, and Jessica H. will be presenting what they wrote. I will make some final comments about Sitkoff. Then next week we'll be getting into a Testament of Hope. Check the previous blog post for the reading assignment.