918

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF SHELBY COUNTY,

TENNESSEE FOR THE THIRTIETH JUDICIAL

DISTRICT AT MEMPHIS

_______________________________________________

CORETTA SCOTT KING, MARTIN

LUTHER KING, III, BERNICE KING,

DEXTER SCOTT KING and YOLANDA KING,

Plaintiffs,

Vs. Case No. 97242-4 T.D

LOYD JOWERS, and OTHER UNKNOWN

CO-CONSPIRATORS,

Defendants.

_______________________________________________

BE IT REMEMBERED that the

above-captioned cause came on for Hearing on

this, the 24th day of November, 1999, in the

above Court, before the Honorable James E.

Swearengen, Judge presiding, when and where

the following excerpt of proceedings were

had, to wit:

Volume VII

DANIEL, DILLINGER, DOMINSKI,

RICHBERGER, WEATHERFORD

COURT REPORTERS

Suite 2200, One Commerce Square

Memphis, Tennessee 38103

(901) 529-1999

DANIEL, DILLINGER, DOMINSKI, RICHBERGER, WEATHERFORD

(901) 529-1999

919

- APPEARANCES -

For the Plaintiff:

DR. WILLIAM PEPPER

ATTORNEY AT LAW

575 MADISON AVENUE

NEW YORK, NY 10022

(212) 605-0515

For the Defendant:

MR. LEWIS GARRISON

ATTORNEY AT LAW

LAW OFFICES OF LEWIS K.

GARRISON, SR.

100 NORTH MAIN

SUITE 1025

MEMPHIS, TN 38103

(901) 527-6445

Reported by: MS. KRISTIN M. PETERSON

Court Reporter

Daniel, Dillinger,

Dominski, Richberger,

Weatherford

One Commerce Square

Suite 2200

Memphis, TN 38103

DANIEL, DILLINGER, DOMINSKI, RICHBERGER, WEATHERFORD

(901) 529-1999

920

- INDEX -

WITNESS: PAGE NUMBER

JACK SALTMAN

Direct Examination

By DR. PEPPER. . . . . . . . 921

CLAY CARSON

Direct Examination

By DR. PEPPER. . . . . . . . 969

EXHIBITS

Exhibit 14. . . . . . . . . . . . 941

Exhibit 15. . . . . . . . . . . . 943

Exhibit 16. . . . . . . . . . . . 964

Exhibit 17. . . . . . . . . . . . 966

Exhibit 18. . . . . . . . . . . . 969

DANIEL, DILLINGER, DOMINSKI, RICHBERGER, WEATHERFORD

(901) 529-1999

921

* PROCEEDINGS *

THE COURT: Bring the jury out.

(Whereupon, the jury enters the

courtroom.)

THE COURT: Good morning, ladies

and gentlemen.

Mr. Pepper, are you ready to go?

DR. PEPPER: Thank you, Your

Honor. Your Honor, the plaintiffs call

Mr. Jack Saltman.

JACK SALTMAN,

having been first duly sworn, was examined

and testified as follows:

DIRECT EXAMINATION

BY DR. PEPPER:

Q. Good morning, Mr. Saltman.

A. Morning.

Q. Thank you very much for coming here

this morning on this long flight from England

in light of your back surgery. We are very

grateful that you have made this trip.

Would you state for the record,

please, your full name and address.

A. My name is Jack Saltman,

DANIEL, DILLINGER, DOMINSKI, RICHBERGER, WEATHERFORD

(901) 529-1999

922

S-A-L-T-M-A-N, and my address is Morwenna.

That's M-O-R-W-E-N-N-A, the Causeway Claygate

in the county of Surrey in England.

Q. Mr. Saltman, can you tell us what has

been your -- your profession over the years?

A. I started off as a print journalist

in newspapers. I went into television in

1961 and became a television producer,

director, and, finally, editor of major

programs in Great Britain for thirty-five

years.

Q. And which television companies have

you worked with in that capacity?

A. My two main employers were the BBC I

worked for for sixteen years and a company

called Thames, that's T-H-A-M-E-S, as the

River Thames, for -- also for sixteen years,

but I also did coproductions with a number of

American companies like Home Box Office and

ABC television.

Q. In actual fact, when did you have the

first contact with the case of the

assassination of Martin Luther King?

A. 1978 to celebrate -- celebrate is the

DANIEL, DILLINGER, DOMINSKI, RICHBERGER, WEATHERFORD

(901) 529-1999

923

wrong word -- to note the tenth anniversary

of the assassination, I was asked to produce

and direct a one-hour documentary for BBC

television.

Q. And was that shown in England?

A. That was shown in Great Britain and

sold to a number of other countries.

Although, I'm not sure whether or not it

played in America.

Q. Right. And at that point in time,

did you come to Memphis to work on that

production?

A. Yes, I did. I spent four or five

days in Memphis. That's when James Earl Ray

was in the Brushy Mountain Penitentiary. We

saw him there, and I came to Memphis and then

various other places. We went to New York

and saw the former Attorney General and so

on.

Q. All right. So at that time now, many

years ago, over twenty years ago, you began

to familiarize yourself with this case and

the facts surrounding it?

A. Yes, as I do -- or as I did, I'm

DANIEL, DILLINGER, DOMINSKI, RICHBERGER, WEATHERFORD

(901) 529-1999

924

retired now -- as I did with all major

productions. I did a lot of reading so I

read all the literature that was then

available, and prior to doing mild research,

we had two researchers working on the ground,

and a lot of effort was put into the story to

try to get the facts as right as we possibly

could.

Q. Right. Was there a time then some

years later that you once again became

involved in this case?

A. Yes. In 1990, I think it was. An

idea had been put forward to my company,

Thames Television, that following a program I

produced -- coproduced for Home Box Office in

America and in Britain on the Trial of Kurt

Waldheim, the former secretary general of the

United Nations. We held a trial for our

trial on television, and following that, as a

sort of example of what we could do, and I

was approached with the view to making the

trial of James Earl Ray.

Q. And would you describe how that type

of trial -- documentary trial format works,

DANIEL, DILLINGER, DOMINSKI, RICHBERGER, WEATHERFORD

(901) 529-1999

925

both in the case of the Waldheim trial and

the case of the James Earl Ray trial.

A. With enormous difficulty and colossal

headaches, and as you well imagine, having to

work with an awful lot of lawyers who don't

necessarily agree. And the first problem,

obviously, is to try and get a format that is

legitimate because this is not what I regard

as cheap and nasty television.

The trial of James Earl Ray took a

year and a quarter in the making and cost

around about three million dollars. And we

went to endless trouble to try and get

everybody who was factually available,

retired FBI agents, witnesses.

This was not a television drama.

This was reality insofar as we recorded

everything over ten days, and we finished up

with eighty, ninety hours of material. It

was then with the agreement of both

attorneys, we then tried to balance as a fair

representation of all the evidence.

The judge was a real judge. He had

retired. He had been a federal judge in New

DANIEL, DILLINGER, DOMINSKI, RICHBERGER, WEATHERFORD

(901) 529-1999

926

York, and we had agreed that we would use

Tennessee law. The only concessions we made

to television as such was plainly in a

program that was scheduled to run for four

hours.

We couldn't have openings speeches,

for example, running two hours and forty

minutes each. So we had to have some rules

of engagement, as it were. For the rest, we

stuck religiously. In both cases, the

quality of the attorneys and the judges in

both programs, both Waldheim and James Earl

Ray, reflected the serious nature of what we

did.

In the Waldheim program, we had the

former British Attorney General, Lord

Ralenson(phonetic). We had Alan Ryan, who

was the chief prosecutor for the Office of

Special Investigation in Washington as a

prosecutor.

This was as serious as you could get

on television. It must be set at four

hours. It took a lot of effort on the part

of the audience to watch it and follow it

DANIEL, DILLINGER, DOMINSKI, RICHBERGER, WEATHERFORD

(901) 529-1999

927

because no concessions were made to

shortcuts.

Q. All right. And these trials and this

trial of James Earl Ray was tried over many

days; is that correct?

A. Yes. They were both recorded. My

principle was to let the judge run the day in

exactly the same way as His Honor will run

today. My idea was that the cameras would

always be on the outside looking in. We

would never stop and say "take two" or

anything silly like that.

The idea was we would run

continuously as long as the judge wanted the

court to be in session. So we ran both cases

for something like ten or twelve days in the

Waldheim case; twelve -- seven, eight hours

days. We had fifty-odd witnesses two times.

Q. And in both cases, there was no

script at all, was there?

A. There was no script, only a running

order of the witnesses that their respective

attorneys chose to call that day. The entire

script for the day was about half a page of

DANIEL, DILLINGER, DOMINSKI, RICHBERGER, WEATHERFORD

(901) 529-1999

928

A-4, which really just said these are the

potential witnesses to be called. That's

all.

Q. And the juries were chosen according

to usual jury selection procedures?

A. To get a jury, I think my total bill

was sixty-four thousand dollars. That's a

good question. I had employed a company to

send them -- first of all, I got three cities

agreed between both attorneys that they

thought they were fair cities to attract

jurors from.

For example, New York was regarded

as too liberal a state so that was refused by

the prosecution, and we sent these private

detectives to select or to choose.

We finished up interviewing -- I

think there was twelve hundred and something

jurors. Out of which, we came down to a

hundred and something, which, together with

the two attorneys, we then played videotapes

of them answering the voir dire questions.

At the end of which, we tried to

then balance male, female and to get an

DANIEL, DILLINGER, DOMINSKI, RICHBERGER, WEATHERFORD

(901) 529-1999

929

ethnic mix as well so that it looked fair as

well as being fair, but insofar as we could,

that was as fair a jury as I think it was

possible to get.

Q. All right. And in the case of the

trial of James Earl Ray, that was aired both

in the United States and in United Kingdom?

A. Yes, it was. And in thirty-four

other countries as well, I think.

Q. And when was it shown?

A. It was shown on the anniversary of

the assassination, the twenty-fifth

anniversary, April the 4th, 1993.

Q. All right. And do you recall the

verdict of the jury in that case?

A. The jury were unanimous. The jury

sat for -- I think it was seventeen hours,

and we had two requests for further

information, which the judge and I saw

sitting outside the jury room, and in the

end, they unanimously found James Earl Ray

not guilty of the murder.

Q. Now, Mr. Saltman, moving on, as a

result of this experience and your previous

DANIEL, DILLINGER, DOMINSKI, RICHBERGER, WEATHERFORD

(901) 529-1999

930

work in the case, did you develop an ongoing

interest as to the facts and the details of

this assassination?

A. Yes, sir. As I said, the program

took fifteen months from the start, my first

trip over here to transmission, by which

time, I had got fairly deeply involved with a

number of the people peripheral to the case.

And, yes, I was on the point of

retirement anyway so I had some time on my

hands, and in a way, the story also chased me

because people knew that I produced this mega

program, and people then came to me with

different angles or new angles, and it

certainly -- the program itself, somebody

said it shook a few trees, and one or two

coconuts fell out.

Q. All right. So then did you --

because of all of this, did you begin your

own independent investigation of this case?

A. Together with an associate, who

without stating, lived over here in Memphis.

We did follow a number of leads, yes, and it

cost me quite a lot of money pursuing leads

DANIEL, DILLINGER, DOMINSKI, RICHBERGER, WEATHERFORD

(901) 529-1999

931

for no other reason than I was desperate to

get to what I believed was the truth.

Q. Right. This section of the

plaintiffs' case, Mr. Saltman, deals with the

issue of the existence of a person called

Raul. Did that individual become a focus of

some of your work?

A. That was the sort of second step,

second major step. We -- we -- Raul, of

course, was a name that had first been

broadcast, as it were, in the days when James

Earl Ray had been arrested in London, and the

name Raul has continued to be part of the --

of the dialogue of this case.

When, as a result of the program, I

was approached through an intermediary to

meet someone who claimed to have known "the"

Raul. I was very interested, and I flew over

to meet them.

Q. And did you have a -- a conversation

and a discussion with a source who claimed

acquaintanceship with Raul?

A. Yes. I had a number of conversations

with someone who claimed that she had known

DANIEL, DILLINGER, DOMINSKI, RICHBERGER, WEATHERFORD

(901) 529-1999

932

Raul in the 1960's, yes.

Q. All right. And where did that lead

you?

A. It led in various directions. It

lead, first of all, as a result of the work

of my associate, to getting a photograph of a

man, or at least a photocopy of a photograph,

of a man we believed was the said Raul, and

it also led me to New York state.

Q. Before you went on that path, was

this source of yours -- her name has come up

in Court -- Ms. Glenda Grabo. Was this

source of yours not steering you towards

Houston, Texas?

A. Yes. She claimed that her friendship

with Raul had all taken place in Houston, and

her story was so extraordinary that when I

first heard it, I'd have to say that I was

profoundly skeptical, but, yes, we did go to

Houston, and there was only parts of the

story that I could get corroboration on, but

what I found interesting were that the parts

of the story that I could corroborate were

all corroborated, and, plainly, if you find

DANIEL, DILLINGER, DOMINSKI, RICHBERGER, WEATHERFORD

(901) 529-1999

933

as any journalist that if someone -- the bits

of the story you can check turn out to be

accurate, it leads you to lend more

credibility to the rest of the story. So she

gained in credence.

Can I also just say one other

thing? This lady -- this lady is a very

uneducated lady. She left school when she

was very young. She had a horrendous life of

abuse when she was young by her father and

uncle. She would forget things. She's under

medication.

And I asked her if she would make

notes of things that struck her because I was

perhaps coming over every three or four

months. And I said if -- perhaps you'd be

kind enough to make notes of things that

strike you.

She took this to mean that I wanted

her to write her life story, and in what I

can only describe as a sort of literary

equivalent of Grandma Moses, she wrote her

life story, and this life story was quite

extraordinary because it is -- it's

DANIEL, DILLINGER, DOMINSKI, RICHBERGER, WEATHERFORD

(901) 529-1999

934

semi-literate. It's badly spelled, but it

tells of her life story.

The relevant bits are a tiny, tiny

part of this, and, again, for me, that led to

an enormous amount of credibility because

here's a woman who really was not used to

doing anything remotely like this who had

gone to this much trouble to tell her whole

story, for which these key bits were only a

tiny part.

Q. That's interesting. And she sent

this to you?

A. She sent me -- she gave me the --

yes. It was written in four thick exercise

books that were two sided. It was -- it was

some work just to read it.

Q. When you went to Houston, did you at

one point or another speak with a former

federal judge who had some knowledge of some

of the events in which this lady spoke?

A. I think he was a state judge rather

than a federal judge, but I stand to be

corrected on that.

I had been given his name through a

DANIEL, DILLINGER, DOMINSKI, RICHBERGER, WEATHERFORD

(901) 529-1999

935

contact of a contact and only managed to get

hold of him when we were at the airport

waiting to fly back to Little Rock, and then

drive to Memphis, and I rang him up on the

off chance and said -- asked him if he knew

anything about a man called Raul, and he came

back with a whole raft of material which

astounded me because I gave him no prompting

at all other than to ask him if he knew

anything about a man called Raul who had

been, as he were, moving around in Houston in

the 1960's.

He said that he, as a young

attorney, had defected a number of drug --

gun runners, I'm sorry, gun runners, and

that it was known -- the name Raul came up

quite frequently as the, quote, Mr. Big, of

the gun runners.

He said, I never met him, but he was

quite well known. It was also alleged, he

said, that he had been involved with a

federal agency in the illicit shipping of

arms to the Somoza Regime in Nicaragua.

Q. And did that tend to corroborate

DANIEL, DILLINGER, DOMINSKI, RICHBERGER, WEATHERFORD

(901) 529-1999

936

anything that the witness, Ms. Grabo, had

told you?

A. Well, Ms. Grabo had told me that she

had acted as a driver for Raul and for his

cousin or uncle, Amorro(phonetic), and that

he had -- she had driven down to the dock

side in Houston. She had been given

photographs of the guards on the gates, and

only if certain guards were on duty did she

then drive in.

And at the bottom of the gang plank

of a certain designated ship, there were

wooden boxes which she subsequently

discovered contained disassembled guns. Not

small guns like pistols, as she put it, but

larger caliber weaponry.

And it's plainly fitted in with what

we had also discovered, that this same Raul

that we had met, having seen his

naturalization papers -- not his papers, but

his application -- we knew that he had been

working in an armor factory in Portugal -- in

Lisben, capital of Portugal -- prior to

seeking American naturalization, and I

DANIEL, DILLINGER, DOMINSKI, RICHBERGER, WEATHERFORD

(901) 529-1999

937

believe there was an FBI note on the papers

that suggested it was known that he had been

sending disassembled guns out of Portugal at

this time.

He was supposedly a mechanic, but I

think his papers said he was actually a clerk

in charge of the paperwork which enabled him

to do this.

Q. Did you eventually meet with this

judge in Houston?

A. Yes, I did.

Q. And did he face-to-face confirm to

you these details?

A. He confirmed the details to me. I'll

tell you the whole story. I was somewhat

disappointed because this is not a case that

you meet upper middle-class people all the

time.

Somebody once said to me in

litigation you tend not to meet too many

upper-class people. This is a case of an

awful lot of people whose words are extremely

dubious.

I thought with this judge we had got

DANIEL, DILLINGER, DOMINSKI, RICHBERGER, WEATHERFORD

(901) 529-1999

938

a wonderful, absolutely bona fide figure.

Now, undoubtedly, he wasn't happy. He was

very, very well respected. He was very well

educated, and I think for twelve or thirteen

years, he'd been a judge of considerable

repute.

I believe personal circumstances

have changed, and I think his career had

taken a very, very steep downward turn. He

was no longer judging. He was earning a

living as an attorney, and was -- he

corroborated everything he said to me on the

phone.

He was not able to give me any solid

leads that I could follow up. He gave me a

lot of names, but they were all people who

either moved off or gone away. Despite many,

many hours of trying to find people on the

phone, I never did.

I was never able to corroborate

anything that he said other than what he said

that corroborated what Glenda Grabo said.

Q. Did you then at some point meet with

a former associate of James Earl Ray's last

DANIEL, DILLINGER, DOMINSKI, RICHBERGER, WEATHERFORD

(901) 529-1999

939

attorney, Percy Foreman?

A. Yes, I did. I went to the company,

which is still called Foreman DeGarren. The

ghost of Percy Foreman hangs large over the

company, big portraits and photographs of him

all around the offices, and I met DeGarren

there, yes.

Q. And was a part of the information

that you had received earlier an indication

of a connection between Percy Foreman and

Ms. Grabo at some point in time?

A. Ms. Grabo had said -- she had told me

as part of her statement that her husband,

Roy, his brother was on a murder charge and

that she had been told that Percy Foreman was

the top man in the business and had gone

along to see him.

She said that he had said he would

charge her five thousand dollars, but that he

would give her three thousand dollars back if

she were to work for him. She said, I paint

houses; what is that going to be -- what use

is that going to be to an attorney. He said,

well, I want you to do some filing.

DANIEL, DILLINGER, DOMINSKI, RICHBERGER, WEATHERFORD

(901) 529-1999

940

I gathered the filing was of a more

sexual nature, and this was acknowledged by

Mr. DeGarren and that that's really what she

was asked to do. She never got the money.

However, when she told Raul --

according to her story, when she told Raul

that she was working for Percy Foreman, he

apparently lost his temper, and there were

furious words between him and Percy Foreman.

Foreman then allegedly rang up

Glenda Grabo and said, your life is in

danger. Now, she claimed by that

statement -- she was driving her car on one

occasion, and her brakes had total failure,

and she was very lucky to escape with her

life, and when she got this warning that her

life was in danger, she sold up her house in

Houston and moved to where she lives now.

Q. Did you at one point obtain a drawing

of Percy Foreman that he had autographed for

Ms. Grabo?

A. Yes. Ms. Grabo gave me -- it was a

cartoon of Percy Foreman, and he had

inscribed it to her in his own handwriting,

DANIEL, DILLINGER, DOMINSKI, RICHBERGER, WEATHERFORD

(901) 529-1999

941

and Michael DeGarren, now the senior partner

at the company, confirmed that that was Percy

Foreman's handwriting, and that it was

exactly the sort of thing that he did with

these little bimbos. I don't know what you

call them. That is the -- that is the

drawing.

Q. That is the -- that is a copy of the

drawing?

A. Yeah.

Q. And is that the signature that was

confirmed by Attorney DeGarren?

A. Yes, it is.

DR. PEPPER: Okay. Plaintiffs

move admission of this drawing.

(Whereupon, a document was marked as

Exhibit 14.)

Q. Did you undertake any other

investigative acts in Houston that made you

more -- more comfortable with Ms. Grabo's

story?

A. We found where the alleged -- the

guns were brought to a house on the dock side

there, and we had it pointed out to us where

DANIEL, DILLINGER, DOMINSKI, RICHBERGER, WEATHERFORD

(901) 529-1999

942

these guns were allegedly assembled.

I also went -- I tried to find out

about his -- his cousin, Amorro, and I went

to the Seamen's Union and discovered that --

that he was a retired seaman and that he had

about three years pension that had

accumulated because it hadn't been claimed,

and they had no forwarding address.

I found a man -- his cousin or

uncle, I'm not sure which, had been in a

hospital, and I found him and collected him

from the hospital, and he had lived with this

man for a few weeks and then had gone to his

sister or niece in Brazil, and I got the

address in Brazil from him.

I wrote and phoned the lady in

Brazil and was told that Amorro had died, so

I was then able to let the Seamen's Union

know that the pension that had accumulated

should go to his estate, or there was no

point in paying it anymore.

But I did discover to my

satisfaction there was an Amorro who did

exist, again, consistent with everything

DANIEL, DILLINGER, DOMINSKI, RICHBERGER, WEATHERFORD

(901) 529-1999

943

Glenda Grabo had said. So this together with

the elements and various little pieces began

to build in my mind a conviction that a lot

of what Glenda Grabo said was true, even

though she is a most unlikely source, it must

be said.

Q. Though we're not using the last name

of the family involved here, let me show

you -- it is true, is it, that this Amorro

had the same last name as Raul?

A. Yes, he did.

Q. Let me show you a photograph and ask

if you obtained -- at some point if you

obtained this photograph of the relative of

Raul?

A. I obtained four or five photographs,

and I think that was one of them. I have to

say it's so long since I looked at them, but

I -- but that certainly is him.

DR. PEPPER: That's fine.

Plaintiffs move admission of this

photograph.

THE COURT: All right, sir.

(Whereupon, a document was marked as

DANIEL, DILLINGER, DOMINSKI, RICHBERGER, WEATHERFORD

(901) 529-1999

944

Exhibit 15.)

Q. Now, in the continuation of your

work, did you at some time, from a source,

obtain a photograph of Raul himself?

A. Yes, we did. A contemporaneous

photograph or an old photograph?

Q. A photograph of any nature or any

type.

A. Well, we obtained a photograph that I

believe was the one on his naturalization

papers, so that would have been sixty --

sixty-four was it?

Q. Sixty-seven, I think.

A. Sixty-seven is what it was. I'm

sorry. With age, my memory is beginning --

we got that, and then we -- having got his

address, we then got some contemporaneous

photographs of him.

Q. Right. And when you obtained this

photograph, this naturalization photograph,

immigration naturalization photograph, did

you also obtain information about him? A

kind of report about who he is and where he

came from and that --

DANIEL, DILLINGER, DOMINSKI, RICHBERGER, WEATHERFORD

(901) 529-1999

945

A. Yes. It had on his original home in

Lisbon. It had on the date of his passport,

the number of his passport. It had on his

new social security number and the date he

was naturalized, his then address, and then

it had -- attached to it also was this FBI

comment that it was known that he was

shipping arms out of Portugal when he was

there.

Q. All right. Did you subsequently

learn of a place of employment that was

attributed to him?

A. Yes. I was subsequently told where

he was alleged to have worked, yes.

Q. Do you recall where that was?

A. It was a motor company, but I have to

say I cannot remember.

Q. I'm going to show you -- at what

point did you and or your associates put

together this immigration naturalization

photograph into a spread of photographs that

would be available to show to various

witnesses?

A. You're asking me for a date?

DANIEL, DILLINGER, DOMINSKI, RICHBERGER, WEATHERFORD

(901) 529-1999

946

Q. Not asking for dates. I'm saying did

you --

A. Oh, yes. Sorry. At that state, yes,

we did. What -- with having obtained the

immigration photograph, what we then did was

we got five other similar type photographs,

and we made a spread of six photographs which

I'm told was the sort of thing the police

would do in this sort of a situation, and

then we used that spread to offer it to

witnesses to get them to identify the one

they thought was the said Raul.

Q. Right. Would you take a look at this

spread and tell us if this is the spread that

you put together.

A. Yes.

Q. And, secondly, would you identify the

immigration naturalization photograph that

you received, do you recall?

A. Yes. It's the -- I identify the

spread as being the one I showed. Featured

there is Carlos Marcello and a lawyer who

went to jail for a couple years for helping

Mr. Hoffa, but the actual photograph of Raul

DANIEL, DILLINGER, DOMINSKI, RICHBERGER, WEATHERFORD

(901) 529-1999

947

is the middle one on the right-hand side.

That one there, yes.

Q. You're indicating it's this

photograph?

A. That's right.

Q. All right. And did you show that

spread to various people who had information

about this case?

A. Yes. I think I showed it to four or

five people who were relevant.

Q. At one point did a former lawyer

of -- attorney representing James Earl Ray,

representing him around the time of the

select committee hearings -- did this

attorney happen to see the photograph you've

identified?

A. It was complete happen chance. I had

been to the prison in Nashville to get James

Earl Ray to pick out -- to pick out the face

he said was Raul, and I come back to my

associate's house, and there were a number of

photographs on the table. Not just that

photograph, but a number of different

photographs, some were the contemporaneous

DANIEL, DILLINGER, DOMINSKI, RICHBERGER, WEATHERFORD

(901) 529-1999

948

ones, various odd photographs we had. I had

taken a lot of photographs where the

gentleman lived.

And this attorney picked that

particular photograph up, totally

unsolicited, and we were actually going out

with her partner for a social evening, and

she picked the photograph up and said, I saw

this photograph in 1978.

And it was particularly resonate

because she didn't say, I saw that person;

she said, I saw that photograph in 1978, and

I was absolutely astonished because here was

a direct link of that particular photograph

and that person, so it wasn't just any Raul.

This was very specifically "the" Raul.

And I said, what happened, and she

said, well, there was a name written on the

back of it, and they checked that out, and it

turned out to be policeman and had no

relevance to the photograph. And I said,

well, did you pursue who the photograph was

of.

She had been shown the photograph

DANIEL, DILLINGER, DOMINSKI, RICHBERGER, WEATHERFORD

(901) 529-1999

949

by, I think, house investigators who were

looking into the house assassination's

committee investigation that was going on at

that time, and she said she was shown the

photograph by one of the investigators, and

they had a copy of it in the office.

And I said, did you pursue it, and

she said, at that time we had no money

backing us at all. James Earl Ray obviously

was in no position to pay, and we just did

not have the money to hire private

investigators to go checking so, no.

Why it particularly resonated with

me was because when I went into the prison

with a -- what you call it -- a notary to try

and get James to make a statement about, you

know, who he thought was Raul. As well as

picking that person up, he said that

photograph was around in 1978. I was shown

it then by the house investigators.

Now, these are two people completely

disparate, completely separate, no possible

contact at all, one in Memphis, one in a

prison in Nashville who both identified not

DANIEL, DILLINGER, DOMINSKI, RICHBERGER, WEATHERFORD

(901) 529-1999

950

just the person, but the specific photograph,

mug shot, and I have to say that I found that

very convincing.

Q. Yes, indeed. You showed this

photograph to James Earl Ray in a prison

cell. Did you show him the individual

photograph, or did you show it to him in the

form of a spread?

A. No. Very specifically, I showed it

to him as a spread with the notary as a

witness. James Earl Ray had been under

instructions from his attorney not to sign

anything, which made my life a little bit

difficult. But what I did, I -- the prison

authorities allowed me to take a tape

recorder in with me, and I got James -- and I

still have that tape -- to identify clearly

on tape that that photograph, the one I

identified, was the Raul that he met in the

Neptune Bar in Canada and subsequently drove

a car for and gave the rifle, the .30-06

rifle, to in Birmingham, Alabama.

And I have that tape recording

still, but I also then got the notary who

DANIEL, DILLINGER, DOMINSKI, RICHBERGER, WEATHERFORD

(901) 529-1999

951

witnessed this to go to another public notary

and swear an affidavit to the effect of what

he had seen and heard -- that James Earl Ray,

in his presence, had identified that

particular photograph.

Q. I see. Moving on then, did you at

some point having accumulated this

information, endeavor to contact Raul?

A. Yes, I did.

Q. And did you speak with him on the

telephone?

A. Initially, I did. I rang him from my

home in England, and as luck would have it, I

picked a bad day. It was his daughter's

wedding day. And I said that I had met his

cousin in England because his cousin was a

merchant seaman and obviously traveled the

world as a merchant seaman, and I said that I

met his cousin, which was not totally true,

I'm afraid.

But I said that I had met his cousin

and I was trying to contact Amorro, and he

said, yeah -- well, I can't remember the

words, and I wouldn't want to mislead

DANIEL, DILLINGER, DOMINSKI, RICHBERGER, WEATHERFORD

(901) 529-1999

952

anybody. I can't remember the words. This

was a long time ago.

And he -- but he left me no doubt at

all that what he was acknowledging -- that he

had a relation with Amorro, who was in

Houston, and he further acknowledged that he

had been in Houston himself.

He then said, I'm sorry, I can't --

there was pandemonium in the background.

There was an awful lot of very excited

voices, which is not surprising being the

bride's house just before the wedding, and he

said, you know, can you possibly contact me

again, and I rang off.

Q. Right. Did you attempt to contact

him again?

A. Some months later. I can't remember

how long. Some months later, I went around

to his house in New York state and knocked on

the door, and the door -- if I can explain --

was -- there was a wrought iron grille type

door, and then there was a sort of mesh glass

door, a glass door with a mesh on it. They

could obviously see out, but all I could see

DANIEL, DILLINGER, DOMINSKI, RICHBERGER, WEATHERFORD

(901) 529-1999

953

was a sort of dark interior of the house with

shapes. That's all I could see.

First of all, a lady came to behind

the door and started hailing what I can only

imagine was abuse. It was in Portuguese. It

sounded like abuse. It was in Portuguese,

and my Portuguese is nil.

Then she was sort of pushed aside by

someone I assume to be the daughter who got

married. She was dressed in white, and I

could see her white outline, and she spoke

perfect English, and she told me to go away,

what did I want, and I was being a nuisance.

I explained that I was an English

journalist, that I had had various

allegations made to me about her father, and

all I wanted to do was to sit down with her

father. If he wanted, by all means, to bring

an attorney along and sit down with him and

his attorney so I could put the points to him

that I had had made to me and get his

answers.

And I said that if I was convinced

at the end of that conversation that it was

DANIEL, DILLINGER, DOMINSKI, RICHBERGER, WEATHERFORD

(901) 529-1999

954

the wrong Raul and he had nothing at all to

do with this that I would leave them alone

and never get anywhere near them again.

She told me that her father was

indisposed. Now, I knew that was untrue

because I could see vaguely a figure of a

male, and I could hear loud state whispers,

and I was fairly sure that was Raul.

In the meantime, the mother had come

around to a side window and was taking

photographs of me through the side window.

For what reason, I have no idea. And the

daughter kept saying that I wasn't doing my

job properly, and I said, well, I'm trying to

do my job properly by checking the facts

because that's what I do.

I don't go dashing in, you know. We

don't sort of get a story today and print it

tomorrow. My protos take a year in

gestation. So about the same time, it's not

anything really.

And then, you know, I said I was

trying to check my facts, and all I wanted to

do was to speak to her father. She didn't

DANIEL, DILLINGER, DOMINSKI, RICHBERGER, WEATHERFORD

(901) 529-1999

955

want to know about this, said her father was

indisposed.

Then I said, would you have a look

at this photograph and confirm -- or with

words to this effect -- that this photograph

is your father, and she said something to the

effect that -- that anybody could get

naturalization photographs, and if I could

get that, then I could get all the other

answers to what I was chasing anyway and not

to bother them, something to that effect.

She left me no doubt at all that she

had positively identified -- I didn't show

her the spread. I showed her an enlargement

of that photograph.

Q. You just showed her a single

photograph?

A. Yes. Yes. There was no point in

asking her to pick out father because I now

believe that was her father. That seemed to

be an academic exercise, so I showed her a

blow up of that -- well, in fact, the

original size we got it, and I was convinced,

as a result of this conversation -- I felt a

DANIEL, DILLINGER, DOMINSKI, RICHBERGER, WEATHERFORD

(901) 529-1999

956

bit silly talking through this door. It was

like talking to a wooden door.

And I did -- I had taken a

precaution, journalist precaution, because I

did want to get more photographs of Raul to

try and get people to ID him, and I had hired

a photographer with a long telephoto lens,

and in the end I said, look, I will give you

a mobile telephone number; please, ask your

father.

I'd thrown in various names of

people that I had associated with Raul in the

hope that I would stimulate sufficient

interest or concern that he would at least

want to talk to me, and I gave them the

mobile telephone number. I have to say I did

not give him the hotel we were staying at

because I think I was a little bit scared

really.

Q. Okay.

A. And then -- and then I left my

visiting card in the post box outside, and

after we had driven away, we got photographs

of the daughter in white getting the card out

DANIEL, DILLINGER, DOMINSKI, RICHBERGER, WEATHERFORD

(901) 529-1999

957

of the post box and going in the house.

The following day, I rang Raul from

the mobile, and I spoke to him for about ten

seconds, and, basically, he just hailed abuse

at me and slammed the phone down.

I rang back about ten minutes later

hoping he'd cool down and said, look, all I

really want to do is just have a

conversation, a sensible conversation.

If you're totally innocent, what

have you got to fear? If you're not involved

in any of this, the sensible thing -- now,

I've had forty years in journalism, and I

have spoken to an awful lot of people, many

of whom were villains, but many of whom were

innocently involved and caught up in

something, and the people generally are more

than happy to sit down and tell you their

side of the story.

And quite often, you say, well, I'm

sorry I troubled you, I really am, you know.

The last thing I want to do -- the reason we

never went public with the name, nor ever

have done, was because I never felt I got the

DANIEL, DILLINGER, DOMINSKI, RICHBERGER, WEATHERFORD

(901) 529-1999

958

final piece of the jigsaw, and because I

hadn't got that, I thought it would be

wickedly irresponsible to go public with this

person and possibly give them a lot of

grief. That's the job of the law, not of a

journalist like myself.

Q. Could you just --

A. Sorry.

Q. Could you just -- that's all right.

Could you just describe -- it's very

helpful. Could you just describe again for

the jury, so it will help them with the

visualization, of the door and where the

daughter was standing and what was between

you and her, and the second part of the

question is, are you convinced that she could

clearly see the photograph that you showed

her?

A. Yes. The -- it was a modern house in

a row, quite expenses houses. Although, this

was one of the more modest houses in the

row. It was by itself. There was quite a

gap on both sides. There was, I think, three

or four steps up to the front door. The

DANIEL, DILLINGER, DOMINSKI, RICHBERGER, WEATHERFORD

(901) 529-1999

959

front door had an iron grille, an ornate

grille, not a sort of embellished grille,

just a real sort of ornate thing you see in

Spain quite a lot, decorative grilles, and

then there was a sort of a glass door with a

sort of mesh substance.

Now, I could see the shape quite

clearly inside, but it was dark inside.

Outside -- of course, I was in daylight, and

there was no doubt at all that she could see

whatever I was showing her outside. She

didn't say, I can't see the photograph or

anything like that. She acknowledged seeing

the photograph by her answers.

Q. And you are convinced that when she

saw that photograph, she acknowledged that

that was a photograph of her father?

A. I came away absolutely convinced that

she had acknowledge that. Yes, sir, I did.

Q. Mr. Saltman, did you memorialize that

conversation at the front door with her?

A. By memorialize, you mean did I write

it down?

Q. Did you record it?

DANIEL, DILLINGER, DOMINSKI, RICHBERGER, WEATHERFORD

(901) 529-1999

960

A. Record it, sorry. Yes, we did. Yes,

I'm sorry. Yes, sorry. It wasn't really

high-tech I'm afraid. It was just a little

old tape recorder that I had with me which I

had in my pocket.

Yes, I did record it. This is my

own safety because, you know, people

sometimes say I was harassing them or

whatever, and I just wanted to make sure that

there was no -- on tape -- anything remotely

like that.

Q. This is routine practice for you in

pursuing your profession?

A. Well, I should think most

journalists, radio, television and print

these days, carry tape recorders. One, to

get an accurate version of what people say.

The days when journalists like me had to

learn shorthand are long since gone. Yes, in

the modern technology, it is standard.

Q. Mr. Saltman, I'd like you to listen

to a tape recording which you have provided

to us and see if you can authenticate it for

the Court and the jury.

DANIEL, DILLINGER, DOMINSKI, RICHBERGER, WEATHERFORD

(901) 529-1999

961

(Whereupon, a portion of an

audiotape recording was played.)

Q. Would you identify the other voice on

the tape, please.

A. That's the voice of my associate,

Kenneth Herman, who -- with whom I've been

working on this story for an awful long

time. He was a private detective. He's now

retired to Florida, and that's his voice. He

came with me to the door.

Q. Was anyone else with you at the door?

A. No, no one at the door. Just Kevin

and myself.

DR. PEPPER: Okay.

(Whereupon, a portion of an

audiotape recording was played.)

DR. PEPPER: Your Honor?

THE COURT: Yes.

DR. PEPPER: While the

technician sorts out some of the -- of the

interference here, could we take a brief

recess?

THE COURT: Yes, sir.

(Whereupon, a recess was taken.)

DANIEL, DILLINGER, DOMINSKI, RICHBERGER, WEATHERFORD

(901) 529-1999

962

THE COURT: Bring in the jury.

(Whereupon, the jury returns to the

courtroom.)

DR. PEPPER: Thank you, Your

Honor. In order to save the Court's time on

this last day before the holiday, what we've

done is to move this tape, authenticated by

the witness, up to a very critical point

where he shows the photographs and asks the

daughter to look at it.

We will leave -- enter the tape into

evidence, Your Honor, and move to have it

entered into evidence afterward and leave it

available to the Court and the jury to listen

to through headphones at any time if they

want to, but, for now, let us just move us up

to that point in time.

(Whereupon, a portion of an

audiotape recording was played.)

DR. PEPPER: Will you repeat

that?

(Whereupon, a portion of an

audiotape recording was played.)

DR. PEPPER: Once more.

DANIEL, DILLINGER, DOMINSKI, RICHBERGER, WEATHERFORD

(901) 529-1999

963

THE COURT: Just a moment.

Before you play it again, can you all agree

on what she's saying?

DR. PEPPER: Counsel, do you

want to --

MR. GARRISON: Your Honor, I

understand what she said.

DR. PEPPER: We believe she's

saying: You got a photograph from a

naturalization file or thing, and anybody

could get that photograph. Then she goes on

to say: If you got that photograph, you can

get other information that you want.

THE COURT: I can't understand a

word she's saying.

DR. PEPPER: Let's try --

(Whereupon, a portion of an

audiotape recording was played.)

DR. PEPPER: Okay.

THE COURT: All right.

Q. Okay. Mr. Saltman, this is the

conversation that you recall?

A. Yes, it is. Yes, sir.

Q. And you recall this response from

DANIEL, DILLINGER, DOMINSKI, RICHBERGER, WEATHERFORD

(901) 529-1999

964

her: You got this photograph from a

naturalization -- sounded like -- thing?

A. That's right. It's a photocopy of

the photo that was used for his

naturalization papers.

DR. PEPPER: All right. Okay.

Nothing further. Nothing further, Your

Honor.

THE COURT: All right.

Mr. Garrison?

MR. GARRISON: Your Honor, I

have no questions. Thank you.

THE COURT: All right. Thank

you very much. You can stand down now, and

you are free to leave if you'd like, or you

can remain in the courtroom.

THE WITNESS: Thank you, Judge.

(Witness excused.)

DR. PEPPER: Your Honor,

plaintiffs move admission of this tape into

evidence.

THE COURT: All right.

(Whereupon, an audiotape was marked

as Exhibit 16.)

DANIEL, DILLINGER, DOMINSKI, RICHBERGER, WEATHERFORD

(901) 529-1999

965

THE COURT: Call your next

witness.

DR. PEPPER: Yes, Your Honor.

This section of plaintiffs' case deals with

the broader conspiracy in the development of

the case of unknown co-conspirator

defendants.

Plaintiff would like to move into

evidence an article that was published by the

Commercial Appeal on Sunday morning,

March 21, 1993. I'd like to read into the

record just one short portion of that

article, and then turn the entire article

over to the pile of evidence.

That is this section: On March 31,

the president of the United States became a

casualty of Vietnam. Johnson announced he

would not seek reelection. On April 3rd,

King returned to Memphis, Army agents from

the 111th military intelligence group

shadowed his movements and monitored radio

traffic from a sedan crammed with electronic

equipment. Eight -- eight Green Beret

soldiers from an operation detachment Alpha

DANIEL, DILLINGER, DOMINSKI, RICHBERGER, WEATHERFORD

(901) 529-1999

966

180-14 were also in Memphis carrying out an

unknown mission. Such A-teams usually

contained twelve members.

Plaintiff moves this entire article

into admission.

(Whereupon, a document was marked as

Exhibit 17.)

DR. PEPPER: As a result of this

publication, which itself followed an

eighteen-month investigation of the reporter,

Your Honor, plaintiffs' counsel became

involved in this aspect of the case and

settled a procedure whereby evidence could be

developed, and I would like to just move the

admission of an affidavit into evidence with

respect to the procedures that were followed

by counsel in obtaining this evidence. I

will only read a portion of the affidavit

that deals with those procedures.

THE COURT: Affidavit by whom?

DR. PEPPER: Excuse me?

THE COURT: Whose affidavit is

it?

DR. PEPPER: May we approach?

DANIEL, DILLINGER, DOMINSKI, RICHBERGER, WEATHERFORD

(901) 529-1999

967

(Whereupon, a conference at the

bench was held outside the hearing of the

jury.)

DR. PEPPER: With the Court's

permission, I'll continue.

THE COURT: All right, sir.

DR. PEPPER: Paragraph 10:

Initially, in response to precise question --

well, let me start with nine.

From late summer of 1993 through

August of this year, 1995, the time this

affidavit was developed, I have helped Doctor

Pepper in his work.

Initially, in response to precise

questions, I've provided him with detailed

background information. Also at his request,

I carried specific questions to a number of

the covert Army team, which was in Memphis on

that day of the assassination.

This soldier, who now lives outside

of the United States, knew of Doctor Pepper

and agreed to -- he agreed to answer his

questions. Because Doctor Pepper is a lawyer

and, in particular, James Earl Ray's lawyer,

DANIEL, DILLINGER, DOMINSKI, RICHBERGER, WEATHERFORD

(901) 529-1999

968

he would not agree to meet face-to-face with

him. I have known this former Green Beret

now for a number of years and have always

found him to be truthful and reliable.

On behalf of Doctor Pepper, I

traveled to see him on several occasions,

taking with me detailed questions about the

mission in Memphis and other assignments of

his during 1967 to '68. After each trip, I

was debriefed by Doctor Pepper, usually

face-to-face, and subsequently in numerous

telephone conversations.

Both the questions and the

debriefings were detailed and comprehensive.

The soldier would never volunteer

information, neither would he speculate. If

he didn't know the answer, he would say so,

and, occasionally, he refused to comment. I

believe that he was true to form, truthful

and candid in the responses he gave.

Since I was unfamiliar with much of

the subject matter, I was not in a position

to lead the soldier or influence his

answers. That was the procedure that was

DANIEL, DILLINGER, DOMINSKI, RICHBERGER, WEATHERFORD

(901) 529-1999

969

followed over quite a period of time, and

this affidavit was executed on 11 September,

1995.

With the Court's permission, I'd

move its admission into evidence as well as

other documents that we will cover in the

course of this examination. We will,

however, also with the Court's permission and

agreement with counsel be redacting names of

individuals in these documents for their own

safety and security, but to enable the Court

and the jury to have access to the documents.

THE COURT: Okay. You have the

Court's permission.

(Whereupon, a document was marked as

Exhibit 18.)

DR. PEPPER: Plaintiffs call

their next witness, Professor Clay Carson.

CLAY CARSON,

having been first duly sworn, was examined

and testified as follows:

DIRECT EXAMINATION

BY DR. PEPPER:

Q. Dr. Carson, good afternoon -- barely

DANIEL, DILLINGER, DOMINSKI, RICHBERGER, WEATHERFORD

(901) 529-1999

970

afternoon. Thank you for joining us here.

You've come some three thousand miles, and I

know that time is precious in terms of your

schedule, so I'd like to just move ahead.

Would you please state your full

name and address for the record.

A. Clayborne Carson, Palo Alto,

California.

Q. And what is your profession?

A. I'm a professor of history at

Stanford.

Q. And what do you -- what is your

relationship to the works and life of Martin

Luther King, Junior?

A. I'm the editor of Martin Luther

King's papers, and I'm director of the Martin

Luther King papers project at Stanford.

Q. And how long have you been in that

position?

A. Fifteen years.

Q. And have you published various works

on Doctor King's work and life?

A. Yes, I have. I've published, I

think, edited or authored five -- I think

DANIEL, DILLINGER, DOMINSKI, RICHBERGER, WEATHERFORD

(901) 529-1999

971

five books on Martin Luther King.

Q. All right. And is the King papers

project at Stanford University an ongoing

project?

A. Yes, it is. It's a long-term project

to publish all of the historically

significant papers of Martin Luther King.

It's been going on for fifteen years. It

will probably go on as long as I go on.

Q. And in your capacity and as part of

that project at Stanford, do you have the

process of collecting documents and materials

of all sorts of natures related to Doctor

King's life, work and death even?

A. Yes, sir. The purpose of the paper

is -- papers project is to assemble all of

the historically significant papers from

archives around the world. We've contacted

probably some two hundred or more archives to

make sure that we have all of the

historically significant papers. Obviously,

the largest collections are those at the King

Center in Atlanta and at Boston University.

Q. Right. And as a part of that

DANIEL, DILLINGER, DOMINSKI, RICHBERGER, WEATHERFORD

(901) 529-1999

972

responsibility, did you receive from me

certain documents, certain reports, with

respect to the assassination of Martin Luther

King?

A. Yes, I did.

Q. And it should be clear to the Court

and Jury that you are not in any way involved

in attesting to the accuracy or the validity

of this information, but you are simply

reporting on what it is that you have

received; is that correct?

A. That's right.

Q. So we're asking you to do that in a

professional capacity and in line with your

role as editor and director of the King

papers project.

With that background, Professor

Carson, I'd like you to move, please, to the

first set of responses in the documentation

that I've provided to you and of the project

that I addressed to a resource who was

traveling and providing me with information.

The Court and Jury have become aware

with how that process worked so we just need

DANIEL, DILLINGER, DOMINSKI, RICHBERGER, WEATHERFORD

(901) 529-1999

973

to go into a question and answer mode here.

On Page 2 of -- well, on Page 2 of

the questions and whatever page of the

response, I'd ask you to turn to Paragraph

2.1.4, and the question that was asked to be

answered was: Was the operation, in re, our

target, a one op, or were there other similar

operations? If others, any details

possible. Please, at least learn if they

were domestic, foreign or both.

What is the answer that you have?

A. Answer: Lots of other ops

nationwide. These are the ones I was at,

summer of 1967 -- parentheses, June 12th

through 15th, 1967 -- Tampa, Florida. Two

Alpha teams deployed during riots. Detroit,

summer, July 23rd, riot. Washington,

October 1967, riot. Chicago, just before

Christmas, 1967, recon. February 1968, Los

Angeles.

Q. Thank you. Question 2.1.5: When was

the instant operation? The instant operation

is the Memphis operation against Martin

Luther King. When was the instant operation

DANIEL, DILLINGER, DOMINSKI, RICHBERGER, WEATHERFORD

(901) 529-1999

974

first raised with him, that is, the source.

A, where and by whom? Answer.

A. Answer: Date unknown. Place, Camp

Shelby, Mississippi. Briefed by Captain

Name. First, a recon-op -- not sure when

killing King first mentioned.

Q. What -- 2.1.6: What were the first

details of the operation scenario put to

him? A: Was target named?

A. Yes, King. Another answer.

Q. Yes. Please continue.

A. Young added later.

Q. First answer, King. Young added

later.

B: What was site?

A. Site not set. Depended on our intel

and recon. We positioned at rooftop ascent

across Lorraine motel about 1300 hours, 4

April. Don't know why or how intel came in.

At brief, 0430, reminded Doctor King

was the leader of a movement to destroy

American government and stop the war. We

were shown CR, close range photos, of King

and Young. Don't know -- don't remember

DANIEL, DILLINGER, DOMINSKI, RICHBERGER, WEATHERFORD

(901) 529-1999

975

anyone worrying about killing those sacks of

shit.

One bud -- buddy on Team 1, remember

bragged about him, had him in center mass,

parentheses, this is a sniper term meaning

cross hairs and center of chest. During that

big March in Alabama, should have done it

then.

Parentheses, Bill, I did some

checking from my files. There is a John Hill

listed among the 20th special forces teams

that was deployed in Selma, Alabama in 1965

for the beginning of the march to

Montgomery.

I interviewed two of the team

members who were there, and they said a

sniper team had King in their scope until he

turned left and crossed the bridge. This may

be the same Hill on main team. None of the

other names match.

Another Name -- parentheses, that's

me -- asked about clothes. We were dressed

as working stiffs working on the docks.

Parentheses, I believe this means their cover

DANIEL, DILLINGER, DOMINSKI, RICHBERGER, WEATHERFORD

(901) 529-1999

976

was day laborers on President's Island where

the riverboat barge and the warehouses are

located, end parentheses.

Equipment was stored in suitcases,

moved along, came up in cars from Camp

Shelby. Only place I remember eating in

Memphis was a Howard Johnson's.

My spotter and I were met by a Name

down near the train tracks where we were let

out. I remembered this guy because he looked

a lot like a buddy -- parentheses, buddy of

mine. This guy got us to the building where

we set up. I always figured he was a spook.

From him, we got a detailed AO --

parentheses, area of operations map -- not

the kind you'd buy in a gas station, pictures

of cars the King group were driving, and the

guy got us to the building where we set up.

I always figured he was a spook.

From him, we got a detailed AO --

parentheses, area of operations map -- not

the kind you'd buy in a gas station, pictures

of the cars the King group was driving and

the Memphis police tact -- parentheses,

DANIEL, DILLINGER, DOMINSKI, RICHBERGER, WEATHERFORD

(901) 529-1999

977

tactical radio frequencies. Maybe some other

stuff, I just don't remember.

Q. C: Any explanation of reason?

A. Name gave none.

Q. D: Any indication of sanction by or

involvement of others, one at federal, state

or local levels?

A. Everybody but my brother was there.

Spooks, the company -- parentheses, CIA --

Feebs -- parentheses, FBI -- police, you name

it.

The only person I remember talking

to besides CO, Name, was some guy who was the

head of the city -- parentheses, Memphis tact

parentheses -- tactical squad. I think his

first name was Sam.

Name put him on radio to describe to

us what was in that hotel -- parentheses,

Lorraine. I do remember he saying friendlies

would not be wearing ties. Took that to mean

that somebody inside the King group as

informant.

Did meet in person one other guy.

Met him on sidewalk down couple blocks from

DANIEL, DILLINGER, DOMINSKI, RICHBERGER, WEATHERFORD

(901) 529-1999

978

our perch. Directed by Name. This guy

identified himself with the police

intelligence. Said city was about to

explode, and blacks would be murdering whites

in the streets.

After a few minutes, I figured was

asking me to sit tight and kill any rioters

if things went to hell. He seemed to know

something about us and said had met with Name

before this day.

Q. E: Was operation pure military, any

involvement of FBI, state police, local

sheriff's, poster police, civilians, anyone

in targets organization?

A. Our part military. Far as I know, we

were coordinating with units at NAS. This

would be Millington Naval Air Station.

Q. Okay. Move over to the response to

Question 3, please. Was he aware of any

support from inside Doctor King's

organization, SCLC, or inside the local

Memphis groups working with Doctor King?

Details and names if possible.

A. Scuttlebutt was 111th -- parentheses,

DANIEL, DILLINGER, DOMINSKI, RICHBERGER, WEATHERFORD

(901) 529-1999

979

military intelligence group out of Fort

McPherson -- had guy inside King's group.

Q. Moving to Number 7. Did he actually

see anything at the time of the shooting?

Where was he precisely?

A. I thought Team 1 had fired early. I

guess I still think they may have. After

that day, I only saw Captain Name twice more,

and both times, he refused to talk to me

about what happened.

After the shot, I keyed --

parentheses, radioed -- CO to ask for

instructions, and after a wait --

parentheses, I think this means Name told him

to wait -- was told to exit building and make

our way to pick-up point.

If this helps, I heard a lot of

gunfire, and I think remembering -- I

remember thinking it was an Army sniper

shot. It surprised me later when I heard

some wacko civilian had done it.

Name described the shooting to me,

and let me tell you this. Whoever fired that

shot was a professional. Even from three

DANIEL, DILLINGER, DOMINSKI, RICHBERGER, WEATHERFORD

(901) 529-1999

980

hundred meters, there's no way just anyone

could make that shot.

Q. Eight: If the military unit did it,

how does he explain the head shot, and their

not waiting for the coordinated hits from the

second target, A-Y, after Young?

A. When you have everybody's hands in

someone's pants, it's a cluster fuck. That's

what happened in Nam -- what happened here.

Q. What kind of weapons were they

carrying?

A. Standard forty-five caliber sidearms,

M-16 sniper rifles and some K-bars --

parentheses, this is a military knife. We

also had some frags -- parentheses,

fragmentation grenades -- and two or three

laws, light anti-air -- anti tank weapon

rockets.

Q. Ten: How did the two teams

communicate with each other? When was the

last contact prior to the killing?

A. By radio. The shot was fired just

after the TTR -- parentheses, top of the hour

I guess this means, 1800, end parentheses --

DANIEL, DILLINGER, DOMINSKI, RICHBERGER, WEATHERFORD

(901) 529-1999

981

sit rep -- parentheses, situation report.

Q. Eleven: Set out details of their

exiting Memphis, how -- where they went.

A. Exit by foot to waiting boat.

Q. Finishes the first section. Now the

second -- second series of questions and

answers. We'll just move through these.

Number 1: Where was Young?

A. Best I remember, a bunch of them had

been upstairs. My spotter got Young when

they all left. He went downstairs. He had

come out of his room below and looked like to

me was heading for the -- a car when the shot

was fired. We were just getting ready to do

the sit rep. He was definitely out of his

room.

Q. Second page, 2.15 and 2.16: What was

the nature of the training -- real purpose

training?

A. This was a recon, slash, surveillance

mission to support major Army element at

Millington and possible deployment of other

heavy units, dash, one of the dozens in

cities with large black populations.

DANIEL, DILLINGER, DOMINSKI, RICHBERGER, WEATHERFORD

(901) 529-1999

982

We were walking the ground

literally. We would walk city streets to

identify possible sniper and ambush sites,

anything that would help the guys coming into

a riot to survive.

Target reduction -- parentheses,

Bill, he means killing Young and King, end

parentheses -- was discussed as an option

should the situation go in the toilet, and we

had a riot on our hands in the AO --

parentheses, area of operations. Then and

only then was that option briefed.

You need to talk to him --

parentheses, he's referring here to you, end

parentheses -- about how a military mission

is done. Logistics, intelligence,

communications which make up seven-eighths of

a mission. What I'm saying is that target

reduction was brief, but we had to get to a

riot before it was authorized on the net.

Do you want me to go on?

Q. Yes.

A. Here Name digressed into an argument

over radios. Said team had PRC 77's,

DANIEL, DILLINGER, DOMINSKI, RICHBERGER, WEATHERFORD

(901) 529-1999

983

although wanted more sophisticated AN, slash,

PRC 117. Caused big argument because they

couldn't get them. Said PRC 77's

unreliable. Out of -- on that roof that

evening, we were watching. I had Young

targeted, but only to watch.

Q. Then moving down -- Bill, I asked

here about the psychological warfare photo

recon stuff at this point. Continue.

A. Big psy-ops (phonetic) plan to

discredit King and his party using any means

at hand. We weren't told much about this,

but, again, SOP with fifth special forces was

psy-ops included and everything.

M-A-C-V-S-O-G had long time begged into

this.

We call this, quote, gray operations

and spreading propaganda to newspapers and

radio stations. This was done a lot against

black pot-heads. I wasn't involved in this,

but I kept my ears open, and this was a big

push.

Any intel we picked up to help this

effort out was passed back up the chain. Not

DANIEL, DILLINGER, DOMINSKI, RICHBERGER, WEATHERFORD

(901) 529-1999

984

sure about reserved element of psy-ops. Most

guys in Nam I knew worked for the fourth

psy-ops group at Teng Sau Nu. I know there

they ran their own newspaper, radio and TV

operations.

Q. Yes. 2.1.7: When was Memphis first

mentioned?

A. Not sure. Original brief of

twentieth recon operations including --

included Memphis among cities where possible

rioting was possible at Camp -- Camp

Landing. Parentheses, Bill, this is in

Florida, end parentheses.

Memphis was scouted 22 February by

Alpha team for sniper communications and

supply sites. We had a lot of stuff going

in, but previous recon produced a lot more.

What we were doing is similar to

Nam. Maps, terrain studies, readouts of

infrared imagery from aerial recon

blackbirds -- parentheses, Bill, he's

referring to SR 71 blackbird over flights of

Memphis and other potential riot cities, this

mentioned in my series, end parentheses --

DANIEL, DILLINGER, DOMINSKI, RICHBERGER, WEATHERFORD

(901) 529-1999

985

and anything else we could find, which we

shipped to S2 and Nam Trang.

Here we shipped to Camp Shelby S2.

Where intel went from there, I'm not sure.

Q. 2.1.8: Who was in charge of

training?

A. Name Captain.

Q. How long was the training period?

A. Can't remember. Too long ago. Too

many missions before and after.

Q. During training -- 2.1.13: During

training, who were you told were targets?

A. We were told these were recon

missions whose purpose was to reverse the

cluster fuck in Detroit where our guys didn't

even have maps of city streets. Our mission

was to walk the ground before the heavies --

parentheses, Bill, means tanks and APCs

here -- got there.

Training was entirely based on

identifying communications links, supply

sites, places where troops could be quickly

and safely inserted where the black community

was, where black churches were, where black

DANIEL, DILLINGER, DOMINSKI, RICHBERGER, WEATHERFORD

(901) 529-1999

986

leaders congregated -- parentheses,

restaurants, churches.

Q. 2.1.14: Other members of team

involved other sites.

A. Worked with Captain Name in Tampa.

Q. 2.1.15. Were all those 9-0 second

operations?

A. Don't know and don't care. What I

know is this. You start asking a lot of

questions about the 9-0 second -- he

pronounced ninety-deuce -- you'd better be

digging a deep hole.

Parentheses, Bill, he was very

reluctant to discuss 9-0 second. I tried

several times in this interview to broach

subject. He refused to.

Q. 2.1.16: Who controlled training and

actual operations?

A. Team leader and his exact control.

Q. 3.2: Who was on the February 22nd

Memphis recon mission?

A. I was on it. Will give other names

if agreed they not be made public.

Q. 3.3: Did entire unit go together to

DANIEL, DILLINGER, DOMINSKI, RICHBERGER, WEATHERFORD

(901) 529-1999

987

Memphis on 4 April or separate? Explain.

A. No. We went in separate cars in

two's.

Q. 3.4: What time leave Camp Shelby

from Memphis?

A. Don't remember.

Q. 3.8: You're referring to this Name

fellow -- I'm sorry. 3.8: Who did spook on

ground work for?

A. You're referring to this Name fellow

who met us down by railroad yards. Guy

smelled like a company guy. We had maps, but

this guy gave us a detailed map of the AO --

parentheses, area of operations -- not a

regular service station map. This was like a

grid map you got in the field with street and

building names.

Anyway, this Name, I think it was

James reminded me of a friend. I got no

proof though, but he was definitely a spook.

Q. 3.9: Details of conversation.

A. You got to be kidding. We just

talked about the current situation, our

location and radio net.

DANIEL, DILLINGER, DOMINSKI, RICHBERGER, WEATHERFORD

(901) 529-1999

988

Q. And then questions 3.9 to 3.14.1: No

answers?

A. Parentheses, Bill, these questions,

he simply could not remember.

Q. That finishes the second section.

Lastly, Professor Carson, you have a

one-page report of a meeting that took place

in Chicago, also at plaintiffs' counsel's

request, having to do with the location of

some photographers on the roof of the fire

station in Memphis.

Would you read that report, please.

A. Trip to meet Name, 1 December, 1994,

Chicago. Location, Hyatt Regency, downtown

off Michigan Avenue. Breakfast, slash,

lunchroom off of lobby.

Description, about five-feet-ten

inches, one-sixty to one-seventy pounds.

Gray, short chopped hair, nice suit --

parentheses, Brook Brothers style -- wing

tipped shoes, erect, obviously ex military.

Said in Vietnam assigned first

SOG -- parentheses, special operation

group -- base, Kan Tu, worked 525th

DANIEL, DILLINGER, DOMINSKI, RICHBERGER, WEATHERFORD

(901) 529-1999

989

psychological operations battalion.

Refused to discuss place of birth,

date of birth or other personal info.

April 3, 4 weekend, 9-0 second operation.

New Colonel Name, worked with him number of

assignments. Two agents in Memphis day of

killing. Therefore, routine photos and

surveillance copied to Name and Name --

Q. Yes.

A. -- believed distributed to other

agencies. Idea to pick up anyone in photos,

might be identified as communist or national

security threat -- such H-U-M-I-N-T-S-O-P in

King's surveillance.

When King came out on balcony,

camera was filming. No photo moment King

shot, but several of him falling.

Second guy with Name watched

approaching cars, heard shot and saw white

man with rifle. Quickly snapped his picture

several times as this guy left scene.

Shooter was on the ground clearly visible.

Name witnessed only his back as left scene.

Said never got a visual face ID.

DANIEL, DILLINGER, DOMINSKI, RICHBERGER, WEATHERFORD

(901) 529-1999

990

Name and second guy rooftop of fire

station, both armed with forty-five caliber

automatics. Second guy carried small

revolver in holster, small of back.

Pictures hand delivered to Colonel

Name, but second guy with Name kept

negatives. Name has no copies. Said will

approach second guy for two thousand dollars,

give us name and address.

DR. PEPPER: Thank you very

much, Professor Carson.

There is a final document, which is

a chronology of important dates, that has

been provided to us from January 17, 1967 to

the 4th of April listing dates, times and

places and subjects of meetings that took

place in government agencies throughout that

entire year.

We're not going to go through that

here, but I am going to close that and move

that that be admitted as a part of the total

package of evidence.

Thank you for coming, and no further

questions.

DANIEL, DILLINGER, DOMINSKI, RICHBERGER, WEATHERFORD

(901) 529-1999

991

MR. GARRISON: I have no

questions, Your Honor.

THE COURT: All right. You may

stand down.

(Witness excused.)

THE COURT: Let me ask you, have

you got anything really short?

DR. PEPPER: I'm afraid not,

Your Honor. I'm sorry.

THE COURT: I know how sorry the

jurors are to hear that.

Okay. Ladies and gentlemen, we're

going to stop here today. I know there are

several of you who want to get started for

the holiday. I hope that you all survive it

and that we'll see you early Monday morning.

(Whereupon, court was adjourned,

and proceedings were to be resumed Monday,

November 29, 1999.)

DANIEL, DILLINGER, DOMINSKI, RICHBERGER, WEATHERFORD

(901) 529-1999