The more I think about this Don Morgan business, the more it gnaws at me. What are the odds that two guys unknown to each other are both at the same time, the same month, "selling" Richard Nagell to Garrison's people, while coincidentally using the same invented alias? I don't buy it. That's just too goddamn unlikely. In March of 1967 there were probably only fifty people in America who knew Richard Nagell's name in association with the JFK murder. Consider your agitation over the "Morgan/Gordon" business in Dick Russell's book. What was simply an editing favor done for a silly mistake I made twenty-five years earlier, when I hastily wrote a letter to Jim Garrison and mistakenly signed a boyhood friend's somewhat similar name to one I used on occasion, becomes something darker, almost sinister. You are not to be blamed for raising an eyebrow at that astounding coincidence.
So I've got to conclude that Kroman somehow got the name by way of or from Garrison's people. Richard Popkin told me that when my letter came in to the New Orleans office in 1967 nobody knew what to do with it. So it went unanswered for months, and by the time they attempted to contact me I had moved on and closed out my drop. The ONLY people who could have known I used that mistaken alias were people from Garrison's investigation, because — I repeat — I had NEVER used it before. I suspect that omebody's timeline is wrong. If Kroman cannot be shown using the Don Morgan alias before March 1967, then we definitely know where he got it.
Unless the world needs another outrageous coincidence.
Dick Russell was fair and accurate in his pages that dealt with me. Even then it caused some concern among my friends and family, who feared that there were those who would misinterpret my peripheral role as somehow connecting me to the assassination. But my decision to cooperate with Dick Russell's effort to unravel the mystery of Nagell's role and knowledge was based solely on my desire to see the assassination issue resolved and the crime of the century solved. I wrote the 1967 letter to Garrison in the same spirit. I have never lied about what little I know, if for no other reason than I know so little. And I am not lying about the "Don Morgan" mistake I foolishly made on that day.
Since the Morgan/Gordon incident is solely of my making, I suppose I better try to get what information I can on Kroman's pre-Springfield assassination investigation history. What I'll be looking for, of course, is PROOF that Kroman was "Don Morgan" before I was.