JFK Grand Jury

[Don Bailey]

Bill, you wrote in Post #21:

WHILE I DON'T THINK IT IS NECESSARY TO TARGET ANY SPECIFIC SUSPECTS, THE WITNESSES WHO TESTIFY WILL LEAD TO THE SUSPECTS - THOSE WHO ARE SUBJECTS THAT BECOME TARGETS MUST BE ADVISED THAT THEY ARE TARGETS.

This is where I think you are wrong.

I also think you need to show the crime was committed in the jurisdiction where the grand jury is to meet. Now I could be wrong about this but if for instance E. Howard Hunt (I'll take him since he is dead) sat down in his CIA office in Langley, Va with LHO (well, assume LHO did it just for the sake of argument) and conspired to kill JFK, arguably the conspiracy occured in VA even though the crime was committed in Texas.

So you are going to tell a US attorney, "I think there was a conspiracy to kill JFK but I do not know who the conspirators were but why don't you convene a grand jury to investigate the case, find out who the conspirators were and indict them?" Is that really what you are telling us?

Is there ANY evidence whatsoever to accuse any LIVING PERSON of conspiring to kill JFK?

How about a living person that was claimed as dead, can you convict them if evidence was provided??

[Tim Gratz]

Don, the law does not try dead people.

But of course I greatly sympathize with Bill's desire to solve the case.

An official investigation could make a finding that a dead person had probably participated in the plot. (Essentially, of course, the SC "convictrf" Oswald.) And if the investigation turns up evidence of the involvement of anyone who is stll alive, then THAT could be refered to a grand jury for indictment.

[Tim Gratz]

Don, perhaps I misunderstood you.

What do you mean by a "living person that was claimed as dead"? Do you mean a dead person, or a person alive who has convinced people that he is dead? Obviously the latter person can only be tried if he can be located and arrested.

Do you think there are any suspects believed to be dead who are still among us? If so, who?

[William Kelly]

But in order to have a crime of conspiracy to deprive someone of his civil rights I assume you must have evidence of a conspiracy, Bill.

Tim, I don't have evidence of anything. It's not up to me to present the evidence, it's up to the prosecutor, and he/she doesn't need evidence of a conspiracy to convene a grand jury, just a crime.

Grand juries also review evidence of other crimes, destruction of evidence, obstruction of justice, perjury, not just conspiracy.

I thought you went to law school.

BK

[William Kelly]

Don, the law does not try dead people.

UNLESS YOUR NAME IS LEE HARVEY OSWALD.

But of course I greatly sympathize with Bill's desire to solve the case.

THEN WHY, LIKE WITH THE CONGRESSIONAL OVERSIGHT HEARINGS THREAD, YOU BEAT IT TO DEATH SO NOBODY ELSE WILL READ IT?

An official investigation could make a finding that a dead person had probably participated in the plot. (Essentially, of course, the SC "convictrf" Oswald.) And if the investigation turns up evidence of the involvement of anyone who is stll alive, then THAT could be refered to a grand jury for indictment.

YES, IF THE PERSON KNOWN IN 1963 AT JM/WAVE AS "GORDON CAMPBELL," HEAD OF MARITIME OPERATIONS, AND A DEATH CERTIFICATE FOR HIM IS PRODUCED THAT SAYS HE DIED IN 1962, THEN SOMETHING FISHY IS GOING ON.

BK

[William Kelly]

From the

". . .[T]he federal grand jury's function is to determine whether a person shall be tried for a serious federal crime alleghed to have been committed in the district in which it sits."

. . .

"The major portion of the grand jury's work is concerned with evidence brought to its attention by an attorney for the government. . . This is necessary because the grand jury has no investigative staff, and legal assiatance will be necessary in the event an indictment is voted."

From:

Handbook For Federal Grand Jurors issued by the U.S. Judicial Conference.

Bill, you are evading my question.

A grand jury is NOT a body to investigate a crime. That is the function of a POLICE FORCE. A federal prosecutor will convene a grand jury if he or she believes there is sufficient evidence to try someone for a crime. Unless you have such evidence to show a federal prosecutor, you ain't goin' no place.

It seems you want a federal prosecutor to convene a grand jury simply to investigate the case. I could be wrong, but I don't think that is the way things work at all.

Excuse me Tim, I refer you to SB:

http://campus.udayton.edu/~grandjur/fedj/f...ury%20functions

There are two kinds of federal grand juries: Regular federal grand juries and special federal grand juries. Regular federal grand juries tend to spend their time hearing evidence and considering indictments submitted to them by a prosecutor. They spend the bulk of their time deciding, therefore, whether probable cause exists to return a set of proposed charges against the defendants names therein. Special federal grand juries were created in 1970 specifically to investigate organized crime. They, too, consider whether indictments should be returned against certain persons, but special grand juries also devote a great deal of their time to investigating possible criminal activity.

For case studies I suggest you check out the Rocky Flats Colorado runaway grand jury, (the best of all possible worlds) and the DC assassination of ex-Chile ambassador, which give good insight into how a good prosecutor works a grand jury to get records, testimony, etc., but in the Rocky Flats case, how a grand jury can get away from the prosecutor. This can occur when the grand jurors realize they too can ask witnesses questions, and request testimony and records, and even though the proceedings are secret, issue a report even if the prosecutor refuses to indict even though the jury brought down indictments. And the case involves Rockwell Int./Collins Radio, the same defense contractors we run into in Dallas.

So now, you know - grand juries CAN investigate crimes after all.

And I refer you to Susan's web site for backround information on grand juries, and how they've been applied to 9/11, etc.

http://campus.udayton.edu/~grandjur/feedback/feedba74.htm

BK

Edited September 23, 2007 by William Kelly

[Tim Gratz]

Bill wrote:

Tim, I don't have evidence of anything. It's not up to me to present the evidence, it's up to the prosecutor, and he/she doesn't need evidence of a conspiracy to convene a grand jury, just a crime.

Grand juries also review evidence of other crimes, destruction of evidence, obstruction of justice, perjury, not just conspiracy.

I thought you went to law school.

Bill, in almost every case a prosecutor will have evidence of a crime BEFORE a grand jury is convened. And the crime must occur within the prosecutor's jurisdiction.

You intend to ask a prosecutor to convence a grand jury when you admit you "don't have evidence of anything"? How silly is that!

[William Kelly]

Bill wrote:

Tim, I don't have evidence of anything. It's not up to me to present the evidence, it's up to the prosecutor, and he/she doesn't need evidence of a conspiracy to convene a grand jury, just a crime.

Grand juries also review evidence of other crimes, destruction of evidence, obstruction of justice, perjury, not just conspiracy.

I thought you went to law school.

Bill, in almost every case a prosecutor will have evidence of a crime BEFORE a grand jury is convened. And the crime must occur within the prosecutor's jurisdiction.

You intend to ask a prosecutor to convence a grand jury when you admit you "don't have evidence of anything"? How silly is that!

Tim,

I don't have to convince you, just a District Attorney, in whose jurisdiction a crime has been committed, and there's certainly plenty of evidence out there, most of it being at the NARA, which is one reason why a Special Federal Grand Jury should be convened in DC rather than Dallas, New Orleans or Miami.

It would be prudent for you and anyone else interested in the JFK Grand Jury Project to review some of the material I posted in the seminar section of the Education Forum.

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...mp;#entry119292

Those who are really interested in this approach may want to become part of the JFK Virtual Mock Grand Jury, in which we will run though what a real grand jury would do if they reviewed the evidence in the JFK assassination, except it will be done on line.

BK

[Tim Gratz]

Bill wrote in a post above:

Tim, I don't have evidence of anything. It's not up to me to present the evidence, it's up to the prosecutor, and he/she doesn't need evidence of a conspiracy to convene a grand jury, just a crime.

Grand juries also review evidence of other crimes, destruction of evidence, obstruction of justice, perjury, not just conspiracy.

I thought you went to law school

Note, of course, his sarcasm. Did I ever state a grand jury could only hear evidence of conspiracy?

Of course not. But with respect to Bill's proposed "JFK Grand Jury" all I was doing was following what Bill himself said. Here is what he wrote about his petition for the formation of a grand jury re the Kennedy case:

[Note: Although the assassination of the President was not a federal crime in 1963, it was a federal crime to conspire to kill a federal official in the line of duty. Therefore we are submitting this petition, with evidentiary exhibits of conspiracy to Special Federal Grand Juries in the Northern District of the State of Texas, in New Orleans Parish in Louisiana and Washington D.C. requesting that a Special Federal Grand Jury be convened especially for these particular cases, guided by a Assistant U.S. Attorney and assisted by a Task Force of independent researchers, professionals, investigators, law enforcement officers and judicial officials.] [Emphasis supplied.]

It was BILL you see who predicated his petition for a grand jury on the theory that there had been a conspiracy to kill JFK.

[Tim Gratz]

Bill wrote:

Tim, I don't have evidence of anything. [His Post #67]

But then just a few posts later he wrotes:

and there's certainly plenty of evidence out there, [His Post #71]

But I have searched his posts in vain for any EVIDENCE he would present to a prosecutor to persuade a prosecutor to convene a grand jury. Bill, care to share any of that evidence?

Edited September 24, 2007 by Tim Gratz

[William Kelly]

Bill wrote:

Tim, I don't have evidence of anything. [His Post #67]

But then just a few posts later he wrotes:

and there's certainly plenty of evidence out there, [His Post #71]

But I have searched his posts in vain for any EVIDENCE he would present to a prosecutor to persuade a prosecutor to convene a grand jury. Bill, care to share any of that evidence?

Tim, Why give it to you or announce it on the internet, so the Dealey Plaza Cleanup Crew can go to work?

BK

[Tim Gratz]

Bill, that is a good point. I will take you at your word that you indeed have evidence that ought to remain confidential (despite what you said in your Post #67).

But aren't the "Dallas Clean Up Crew" getting a bit old by now? Why, at a minimum I bet they qualify for the senior citizen discounts.

[William Kelly]

I am getting ready to begin a JFK Mock/Virtual Grand Jury - which will be a dry run of what a real grand jury would do except on line.

Those interested in participating should review some of the articles and items in the JFK Grand Jury section of the Seminars.

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=8326&pid=120820&start=0entry120820

://http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/i...;#entry120820

://http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/i...;#entry120820

I hope others are interested in this.

BK

[William Kelly]

I am getting ready to begin a JFK Mock/Virtual Grand Jury - which will be a dry run of what a real grand jury would do except on line.

Those interested in participating should review some of the articles and items in the JFK Grand Jury section of the Seminars.

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=8326&pid=120820&start=0entry120820

://http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/i...;#entry120820

://http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/i...;#entry120820

://http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/i...;#entry120820

://http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/i...;#entry120820

://http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/i...;#entry120820

://http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/i...;#entry120820

I hope others are interested in this.

BK

Bill, Just read the other thread and it all looks good and interesting. Glad to see Sheehan and Davis there, as well as the others. You can be sure the big boys will be watching this one closely with that all-star cast....not to mention the subject matter. The only thing I don't yet get is how you intend to do a mock mock trial on the internet.....can you explain. I can imagine, but I can imagine several scenarios. Who is going to select the grand jury and who is going to 'represent' or play the part of those witnesses who don't really want to participate until you [in a real GJ] subpeona them? Are some of the real friendly witnesses going to participate? Do those not a part of the GJ just watch or can they comment? Not the least of all...when and where!? And as the danger that many of the witnesses could die before you get to a real GJ, is there anyway they can at the same time have notarized signed sworn affidavits done, if that hasn't been done already. Etc.

Hi Peter,

Glad you are interested.

While the real JFK Mock Grand Jury will be produced in a real federal grand jury room when not in use, and will have real prosecutors, jury and witnesses who will testify under oath, and will be secret - until its over - all filmed for educational purposes - the Virtual internet Mock Grand Jury will not be done in secret, and anybody can be a juror.

The witnesses will be real however, and will be emailed a list of questions that would normally be asked before the grand jury.

A real grand jury sits for 18 months, so the virtual MGJ will be a quick step run though - and the Mock Grand Jury will be cut back to a few weeks, though will be done as real as possible.

We already have a number of witnesses (James Tague, Harry Dean, et al) who will be questoned during the Virtual Mock Grand Jury - while most of the new witnesses we've developed will be kept out of the picture and hopefully brought before the real deal.

If enough people are really interested and have the time to devote to the project, we can have a number of juries - Texas jury/American jury/Internatonal Jury and see if they differ.

More info will be posed on the JFK Assassination Seminar section.

While Bill Davis and Dan Sheehan have talked on the phone and have been sent a package of info on the JFK Grand Jury Project, and have voiced approval, they have not committed themselves yet. Others have however, including one active assistant federal prosecutor.

BK

[Tim Gratz]

Bill wrote:

While the real JFK Mock Grand Jury will be produced in a real federal grand jury room when not in use, and will have real prosecutors, jury and witnesses who will testify under oath, and will be secret - until its over - all filmed for educational purposes - the Virtual internet Mock Grand Jury will not be done in secret, and anybody can be a juror.

I think I can assure you no grand jury proceeding will be filmed! Holy cow!