Listen to the oral arguments in Morley v. CIA

Click for the audio recording of what was said in the Courtroom 31 yesterday. This gets very technical very fast, so lawyers will enjoy it most.

The first speaker is Judge Brett Kavanaugh. The next speaker is my attorney Jim Lesar.

Listen for Judge Kavanaugh to dismantle the CIA’s claim that I launched this litigation “for commercial purposes.”

And Judge Henderson’s timely factual correction, via telephone, when the government misstated the facts about what was released.

 

——-

CIA & JFKFrom a 5-Star Amazon review of Jefferson Morley’s new ebook, CIA and JFK: The Secret Assassination Files.

The crown jewel of Mr. Morley’s work details his discovery that a retired CIA officer named George Joannides was called back to Washington to stall a re-investigation of the assassination by the House of Representatives in the late 1970s.

 

 

5 comments

  1. Bogman says:

    When the judges ask what connection Joannides has to the JFK assassination, the paraphrase of this quote came to mind:

    “Of all the gin joints in all the towns in all the world, the alleged future assassin walks into the CIA’s.”

    Amazing that. And that the CIA’s manager of those ‘gin joints’ has a residence in this town. And he and his boss – top agency official Richard Helms – purposefully, deliberately and illegally withheld personal knowledge of that relationship from successive federal investigations over several decades with the apparent continuing support by the CIA.

    Yeah nothing to see here.

  2. Bogman says:

    What could we learn from the full disclosure of the Joannides files?

    1) if the case officer for the DRE ever heard of LHO’s antics in NO and what his reaction might have been

    2) if the case officer was using LHO for an intelligence purpose such as embarrassing the FPPC

    3) whether the case officer reported either of the above to his direct report for the DRE in the agency, second-in-commands Richard Helms. In fact, Helms had fold the DRE to notify him of any further TV coverage of the group. Both Oswald and the DRE were in NO TV – and that footage was used the night of the assassination to paint Oswald as pro-Castro.

  3. Yoss says:

    Interesting to listen to the court case unfolding. I’m no attorney so please take my question accordingly, but isn’t the reason you have a right to this file is due to the idea that release of the file would either implicate the CIA in covering up the fact that Oswald worked with them in an anti Castro group, which would shift the underlying pro Castro narrative in such a way as to provide evidence of a cover up?

    I hope that makes sense.

    What are the next steps?

    Good luck~ !

  4. Steven P Schwendeman says:

    Dear Mr. Morly,

    I think you might consider sharing with the judges of the case (if possible) the following from Jacob G. Hornberger, who quotes a number of reputable sources such as judge John Tunheim and G. Robert Blakey:

    https://www.fff.org/2018/03/22/april-26-cias-jfk-cover-will-continue/

    This blog provides a compelling story about the pattern of CIA coverup that includes the dishonesty of Mr. Joannides. Of course your efforts and case is quoted.

    Best wishes,

  5. Kennedy63 says:

    I noticed that, overall, of the 4 arguments, 3 favored Morley; and, the fourth appears to favor the government (CIA). Yet, the outcome isn’t a cumulative total of arguments, but the lower court’s determination of public value – that it is small. I don’t understand how a court can make this determination. Such decisions are akin to determining the value, to humanity, of establishing a colony on Mars. Short-sightedness precludes visionary expansion or inuring benefits, while conservative construction sees benefits, but favors the status quo of life on earth. Morley v CIA, the court must answer whether the FOIA applies to the Johaniedes File (JF). My understanding is that CIA pigeon-holes the “public benefit” to commercial enumeration for Morley, while conceding this factor as small. The court views the JF as operational, not JFK related; thus, JF falls under the exemption clause of the JFK Act. Getting the JF will be like winning Powerball. The odds are stacked against us, but one favorable decision can change everything.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

In seeking to expand the range of informed debate about the events of 1963 and its aftermath, JFKFacts.org welcomes comments that are factual, engaging, and civil. more