Tim Gratz Posted April 18, 2005 Share Posted April 18, 2005 (edited) Is anyone aware of witnesses who refused to testify before the House Select Committee on Assassinations, citing his or her constitutional right not to incriminate himself or herself? I know of one witness who did take the fifth: Loran Hall. What inferences if any should we draw from Hall's refusal to testify? But as noted above I am also interested to find out if any one else refused to testify about the Kennedy assassination. Next question: why was Hall not granted immunity, thereby forcing his testimony? Clearly, he was not the "big fish" and his testimony, if indeed he was a conspirator, could have led to others. Edited April 18, 2005 by Tim Gratz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Gratz Posted April 18, 2005 Author Share Posted April 18, 2005 (edited) Is replying to your own post as bad as talking to oneself? In any event, I think it may be possible to draw inferences from Hall's refusal to testify and I note his association with Santo Trafficante, Jr. (my candidate for the second most likely conspirator (behind the obvious Jack Ruby, of course). Edited April 18, 2005 by Tim Gratz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan Crowe Posted April 18, 2005 Share Posted April 18, 2005 Tim, I dont think Hall's testimony is as important as Seymours since it has never been made public. Think of everyone whose testimony was made public but not Seymours Hmmm...I wonder what he said And yes, answering your own post can qualify you for the padded room Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Gratz Posted April 19, 2005 Author Share Posted April 19, 2005 (edited) Ryan has an interesting point (not the padded room comment but his first re people whose testimony is still classified). Does anyone have a list of testimony before either the Church Committee or the HSCA which remains classified? This would make an interesting list. Plus the possibility of re-requesting the documents after a suitable passage of time. Edited April 19, 2005 by Tim Gratz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pat Speer Posted April 19, 2005 Share Posted April 19, 2005 Trafficante testified early on in the HSCA in closed session and took the fifth something like 30 times. I believe Sprague was out as chief cousel within a week. (Not that there's any known connection.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Gratz Posted April 19, 2005 Author Share Posted April 19, 2005 Trafficante's testimony had confused me because I read he had taken the fifth and then later encountered a transcript of his HSCA testimony in which he soes not take the fifth. And interestingly Trafficante denied any knowledge of the CIA-Mafia plots to kill Castro, clearly perjorious testimony. Is anyone aware of any other witnesses who refused to testify before either Church Committee or HSCA? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pat Speer Posted April 19, 2005 Share Posted April 19, 2005 Trafficante's testimony had confused me because I read he had taken the fifth and then later encountered a transcript of his HSCA testimony in which he soes not take the fifth.And interestingly Trafficante denied any knowledge of the CIA-Mafia plots to kill Castro, clearly perjorious testimony. Is anyone aware of any other witnesses who refused to testify before either Church Committee or HSCA? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I believe Trafficante was called by Sprague very early in the investigation, took the fifth, then came back under Blakey a year or more later, and lied his ass off. Marcello did pretty much the same...the whole tomato salesman routine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Gratz Posted April 19, 2005 Author Share Posted April 19, 2005 Pat, thank you for the clarification. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now