Legacy of Secrecy (76 page)

Marcello or pointed suspicion even generally toward the Mafia, the
New

York Times
’s investigation showed that it was only a matter of time before

some journalist did so. From Marcello’s associates in Houston and New

Orleans, he was probably aware of the reporters’ digging, even before

it generated the November 21 letter about Ferrie and Marcello. Clearly,

the mob bosses had to take action, not to simply stay ahead of the story,

but to actually define the story.

First they concerned themselves with David Ferrie, since the
New York

Times
wouldn’t be alone in focusing on his arrest after JFK’s murder.

Instead of waiting until the press publicly linked Ferrie to Marcello,

they decided to define Ferrie in terms of his intelligence ties to Cuban

exiles. In today’s terminology, they essentially “rebranded” Ferrie as a

CIA anti-Castro operative, instead of as Marcello’s pilot. That percep-

tion would not only force the CIA to withhold information about Ferrie

and his associates, but would keep Bobby Kennedy silent as well. That’s

because Bobby had approved CIA funding for the New Orleans office

of Tony Varona’s Cuban Revolutionary Council (created by E. Howard

Hunt), which had involved Ferrie.

Almost everyone the Mafia chiefs used in the original JFK conspiracy

not only had ties to US intelligence, but also could have logically taken

the fall for the assassination, if necessary. That would come in handy

now, since Ferrie had been so publicly outspoken in his hatred of JFK

after the Bay of Pigs debacle. If evidence convinced the public that a

conspiracy must have happened, then the public and the press might

logically accept a small plot that was limited to Kennedy haters Ferrie

and Banister (now deceased), and to Ferrie’s associate Oswald.

Chapter Twenty-nine

The JFK investigation of New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison,

which began in late 1966, was controversial at the time and remains so

today, even after being chronicled in numerous books and Oliver Stone’s

film
JFK
. Our focus is on aspects of Garrison’s investigation that were

not covered in that film or in most books—on facts that cast the Gar-

rison affair in a new light. Having reviewed all of the relevant books,

articles, and documents, we can say that Garrison emerges as neither

devil nor saint. Though a larger-than-life character, Garrison was not

a mythic, all-knowing hero—but neither was he the complete tool of

Carlos Marcello.

Instances of Garrison’s cozy treatment of Marcello and his associ-

ates are often cited, but most—though not all—have been explained

by Garrison or his supporters. For each charge of complicity with the

Mafia, Garrison’s supporters can cite instances in which he acted against

Mafia associates or turned down bribes the Marcello organization

offered him, like a 1963 offer of $3,000 per week to allow slot machines

in New Orleans. While Garrison certainly didn’t wage a crusade against

Marcello, or even publicly acknowledge his crime-lord status, the same

would have been true of many big-city DAs in the 1960s, especially in

cities as corrupt as New Orleans. Garrison did what officials in various

cities did to survive politically: He essentially observed a truce with the

local godfather, who, in Garrison’s case, was one of the most powerful

mob bosses in the country. To do otherwise would have certainly cost

Garrison his position, if not more.

Jim Garrison had to begin his JFK investigation with David Ferrie

because of the
New York Times
’s inquiry, but Garrison could have cleared

and dropped Ferrie in a matter of days. Yet Garrison continued pressing

Ferrie for more than two months, and some would say that targeting the

man sitting with Marcello on the day of President Kennedy’s murder

was a courageous act, especially at that particular time and place. FBI

files we detail later show that Garrison briefly even considered indicting

Marcello for JFK’s murder. As with LBJ and Bobby, what Garrison said

in public could be quite different from what he actually believed or said

in private.1

Perhaps because Marcello wasn’t sure he could completely control

Garrison, associates of Trafficante and others tied to JFK’s assassina-

tion infiltrated and compromised Garrison’s investigation almost from

the start. These infiltrators hugely impacted the direction of Garrison’s

investigation. Garrison seems to have begun his investigation with good

intentions, apparently hoping that he could at least raise enough issues

to spur the federal government to begin a new, real investigation—but

he quickly became diverted and distracted.

Garrison also no doubt hoped the resulting publicity would boost his

political profile. This hunger for the spotlight would be his downfall.

Although Garrison initially tried to conduct his investigation in secret,

he cut a deal with
Life
magazine in late November 1966, giving the publi-

cation inside coverage of his investigation in return for its assistance.2

The first major step in Garrison’s investigation was having David

Ferrie brought in for questioning on December 15, 1966. Interrogating

Ferrie was John Volz, later the US attorney who would finally send

Carlos Marcello to prison for a lengthy sentence. The attention on Ferrie

no doubt worried Marcello, and within days, the first infiltrator volun-

teered to help Garrison. This was Cuban exile Alberto Fowler, who had

made a suspicious call to Harry Williams in the hours following JFK’s

death, after stalking JFK with violent exile Felipe Rivero just before the

attempt to kill JFK in Tampa.

The sophisticated and urbane Fowler was highly respected in New

Orleans as its Director of International Relations, based at the Trade

Mart. In that position, Fowler had worked with Clay Shaw, who had

retired the previous year to pursue his avocation of restoring homes in

the French Quarter. Fowler was still cordial with Shaw and had recently

rented a house from him. As for Garrison, he needed all the help he

could get, since he was still trying to conduct his investigation in rela-

tive secrecy and with limited resources. He especially needed someone

who could speak Spanish and deal with Cuban exiles, so when Fowler

volunteered his services, Garrison eagerly accepted.3

Fowler was only the first of several such volunteers who diverted

Garrison’s investigation away from Marcello, Trafficante, and their

associates. Soon, Fowler brought in someone to help with Garrison’s

investigation who was allegedly linked to drugs, Trafficante, and JFK’s

murder. Later, even Rolando Masferrer and another Trafficante associate

374

LEGACY OF SECRECY

would provide information to Garrison. These were all people who

should have been investigated themselves, but were instead influenc-

ing the course of Garrison’s investigation.

Trafficante, Marcello, and Rosselli must have worried when the press

announced on December 7, 1966, that a new trial had been ordered for

Jack Ruby. Even worse for the Mafia bosses, the trial of their mutual

associate Ruby would be held in Wichita Falls, Texas, away from Dallas

and its mob-affiliated sheriff. Ruby had largely maintained his silence

so far, just as he had done since 1939 about other mob hits and Mafia

matters. However, due to Ruby’s relative isolation while facing the death

penalty, his mental state had declined and there was no way to know if

Ruby might crack at some point, despite the apparent Mafia threats to

harm his family.

On December 10, 1966, three days after the new trial was ordered, Jack

Ruby was reported to be ill from lung cancer. The distraught Ruby, who

had recently passed a physical exam with a clean bill of health, claimed

that he had been injected with cancer cells.4

On December 10, 1966, Bobby Kennedy was distracted from any con-

cerns about Ruby’s upcoming trial—and what it might reveal—by two

other matters. That day, J. Edgar Hoover leaked a report blaming Bobby

for some of the FBI’s electronic surveillance. Hoover’s report was in

response to Senator Edward Long’s surveillance hearings that had

been designed to “get Bobby” and aid Hoffa. One of the pretexts for

Long’s hearings had been lawsuits about an FBI surveillance effort in

Las Vegas that had been leaked to the Mafia. (The source of the leak was

never determined, but some authors think it might have been Hoover

himself.)5

Bobby scrambled to respond to Hoover’s disclosures, with only lim-

ited success. The general public and most journalists didn’t distinguish

between phone taps (which Bobby had sometimes authorized) and ille-

gal break-ins to plant bugs (which Bobby apparently had not explicitly

authorized). However, Bobby had listened to some tapes from bugging

operations, though he claimed to aides that he thought they had been

recorded by local law enforcement beyond his control. At that time, the

press wasn’t aware of Hoover’s now well-documented practice of taking

an Attorney General’s authorization for limited phone taps and using

that as carte blanche for break-ins and bugging, as Hoover had done

with Dr. Martin Luther King. Bobby barely managed to cover himself

in the press, but claims of his complicity in the surveillance damaged

his reputation, especially with liberals. LBJ saw pushing the allegations

against Bobby as one more way to constrain his rival’s possible presi-

dential aspirations.

In December 1966, Bobby’s popularity also took a hit from another

dispute being played out in the press: the impending publication of Wil-

liam Manchester’s
Death of a President
, which Bobby and the President’s

widow, Jackie, had authorized. Months earlier, Bobby had been suc-

cessful in having Manchester tone down some passages that depicted

LBJ in an unflattering light, knowing they would only exacerbate the

already bad situation between them. However, Jackie wanted additional

changes about other matters, and in December 1966 she filed suit to stop

publication of the book and upcoming excerpts in
Look
magazine. Bobby

supported Jackie in his statements to the press and public, despite his

own reservations about many of her concerns. In hindsight, it’s inter-

esting that Bobby tried to interfere only with the publication of a book

that firmly endorsed the Warren Commission’s lone-nut conclusion,

and he didn’t interfere with books that pointed to a conspiracy in JFK’s

murder.

Evan Thomas writes that “the only good news about the Manchester

controversy [for Bobby] was that it pushed the bugging controversy off

the front pages. The suit was settled . . . but the damage to” Bobby had

been done, since it looked like he had tried to interfere with the press,

and he “began to sink in the polls.” Thomas points out that while Bobby

had been leading LBJ by five points in presidential preference polls in

the fall of 1966, by March 1967 the negative publicity had reversed the

situation, and Bobby trailed LBJ by twenty-two points.6 That would put

Bobby in a very weak position when publicity about JFK’s assassination

became front-page news in late February and March 1967.

Ruby’s impending move and trial, coupled with rising interest in JFK’s

murder due to the proliferation of conspiracy books and articles, may

have contributed to Johnny Rosselli’s patron moving even farther away

from the US. In December 1966, former Chicago mob boss Sam Giancana

left Mexico for Argentina, putting him well out of reach if the press or the

trial uncovered Ruby’s Chicago payoff. Giancana’s move put Rosselli in

an even weaker position, which would result in a humiliation that never

would have happened just a few years earlier, when Giancana was at

the height of his power.7

Johnny Rosselli’s satisfaction over his impending casino deal with

376

LEGACY OF SECRECY

Howard Hughes was dampened by his unexpected, but brief, arrest

in Las Vegas on December 29, 1966. The charge was minor—a misde-

meanor for not registering as a convicted felon—and Rosselli was bailed

out almost immediately by his friend Hank Greenspun. However, the

arrest reminded Rosselli of his precarious position as an illegal alien. The

earlier leak to Greenspun about the Castro plots hadn’t helped Rosselli,

so the Mafia don made plans to ramp up the pressure considerably, with

the help of Ed Morgan and Jack Anderson.8

Though Rosselli hadn’t seen any positive results from his leak to

Greenspun, the resulting article and his talks with his former CIA con-

tacts Sheffield Edwards and William Harvey were affecting Richard

Helms. They were also complicating the already difficult relationship

between Helms’s CIA and Hoover’s FBI. A declassified memo from

December 21, 1966, to Helms from the CIA’s Director of Security (How-

ard Osborne, who had replaced Edwards) summarized the problem,