"It's official" : MLK assassinated by US government

Oliver · 23rd January 2010, 10:39 AM

I don't know what to make out of this story. Supposedly MLK was killed by the US Government, according to a trial that took place in 1999:

Quote:

Martin Luther King’s family and his attorney, William F. Pepper, won a civil trial that found US government agencies guilty in the wrongful death of Martin Luther King. The 1999 trial, King Family versus Jowers and Other Unknown Co-Conspirators, is the only trial ever conducted on the assassination of Dr. King. The King family’s attempts for a criminal trial were denied, as suspect James Ray’s recant of what he claimed was a false confession was denied... [snip]

full source: http://www.examiner.com/x-18425-LA-C...-you-know-this

Another question the article raises is: Why didn't we hear about that trial in the media?

LightinDarkness · 23rd January 2010, 10:52 AM

Originally Posted by Oliver

I don't know what to make out of this story. Supposedly MLK was killed by the US Government, according to a trial that took place in 1999:

Another question the article raises is: Why didn't we hear about that trial in the media?

Not being a lawyer (Nor a Freeman-On-The-Land

) I'm not really sure, but I think all wrongful death means is that the government may have contributed to factors surrounding his death, and since its a civil claim (and not criminal) the standard of evidence is lower. Finding the government guilty of wrongful death is a far, far, cry from finding them guilty of assassinating someone.

It could be as small as some government official failing to act on information they had about the REAL assassination plot..or a wide variety of other things..which would not indicate the 'gubment' did it at all but would still make the liable for a civil claim...

The linked documents (conveniently) dont seem to provide full transcripts and from just skimming them its not clear to me what the trial was actually about (the depositions get into details of the crime scene, but nothing substantive about the defendants in the case)

LightinDarkness · 23rd January 2010, 11:03 AM

Although I think citing wikipedia is a bad idea, I think this might give an overview into how the "Examiner" spun this one into a non-existent conspiracy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loyd_Jowers

Even the DOJ Civil Rights Division thought it was nuts (ah, but They(TM) would, wouldn't they...).

Oliver · 23rd January 2010, 11:03 AM

Okay, I get your point - but even if the Government failed to act upon some information, they still would not be responsible for the assassination, no matter how low that standard for evidence was. At least not outside the US jurisdiction, me thinks.

Oliver · 23rd January 2010, 11:09 AM

Originally Posted by LightinDarkness

Although I think citing wikipedia is a bad idea, I think this might give an overview into how the "Examiner" spun this one into a non-existent conspiracy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loyd_Jowers

Even the DOJ Civil Rights Division thought it was nuts (ah, but They(TM) would, wouldn't they...).

This article explains a lot, even if I wonder how the Jury came to the conclusion that James Earl Ray wasn't the shooter in the first place.

LightinDarkness · 23rd January 2010, 11:12 AM

Originally Posted by Oliver

Okay, I get your point - but even if the Government failed to act upon some information, they still would not be responsible for the assassination, no matter how low that standard for evidence was. At least not outside the US jurisdiction, me thinks.

I'm not sure I understand what you mean. Finding the "government" guilty of wrongful death indicates that the court did NOT say the government killed MLK, just that they had some negligence involved in the act. You can not physically contribute to the murder of someone and still be liable in a variety of circumstances, depending on what you did or did not know about the events and how you acted upon the information.

Because the charge was wrongful death it shows there was no government conspiracy to assassinate MLK...just that jury has found, in accordance with the lower civil standard of proof, that the government was negligent...in something. For details he would need to link to the actual court case instead of a website that just lists the transcript volumes in a remote library.

For example, if someone else runs over you with a truck they would be charged with the murder. If I stood by and watched you cry out for help but did not contact 911 and the authorities found out, I would be negligent because my failure to act contributed to your ultimate untimely demise. Thus, I did not really kill you nor have anything to do with plotting your death, but could still be found liable for contributing to it. It would probably be extraordinarily easy to find such failure to act on the part of the government in the case of MLK - all you have to do is find one bigoted law enforcement member who failed to act on rumors of the assassination plot and you've won your civil case.

funk de fino · 23rd January 2010, 02:22 PM

This thread and OP deserves a facepalm.

MaGZ · 23rd January 2010, 03:14 PM

Originally Posted by Oliver

I don't know what to make out of this story. Supposedly MLK was killed by the US Government, according to a trial that took place in 1999:

Another question the article raises is: Why didn't we hear about that trial in the media?

I think the answer is there was an all-Black jury, so of course they would side with the King family.

Walter Ego · 23rd January 2010, 03:44 PM

"[In 1999] the King family, represented by Pepper, sued Loyd Jowers in a wrongful-death lawsuit. They believed Jowers's 1993 televised admission that he had participated in a "conspiracy" to kill King gave King's family sufficient grounds to initiate a private law suit. During the 1999 four-week civil trial, which was held in a Shelby County Court House in Memphis, Pepper repeated the claims he had made in his 1995 book, Orders To Kill. Pepper had no interest in seeing Loyd Jowers go to jail. The whole thrust of Pepper's efforts was in trying to prove that Jowers was merely a tool in a larger conspiracy involving the FBI, the Military, the CIA, and the Mafia. Pepper's thesis centered on the reasons why the government wanted to eliminate the civil rights leader.

"From the start, Pepper's courtroom allegations were viewed by many commentators as ludicrous, dependent as they were on the stories of many discredited witnesses who did not reveal their far-fetched tales until many years after the assassination. The jury, which consisted of six blacks and six whites, took three hours to reach its verdict of conspiracy involving Jowers. The King family received a token $100 award. The guilty verdict was hardly surprising, considering that Jowers's lawyer never disputed the contentions of the King lawyers. As the jury heard no evidence to rebut the conspiracy theory, it was inevitable it would return a verdict favorable to Pepper and the King family. The trial was, effectively, bogus. "

http://crimemagazine.com/05/martinlutherking,0612-5.htm

LashL · 23rd January 2010, 05:41 PM

Originally Posted by funk de fino

This thread and OP deserves a facepalm.

Indeed.

kookbreaker · 23rd January 2010, 08:25 PM

Originally Posted by Walter Ego

"[In 1999] the King family, represented by Pepper, sued Loyd Jowers in a wrongful-death lawsuit. They believed Jowers's 1993 televised admission that he had participated in a "conspiracy" to kill King gave King's family sufficient grounds to initiate a private law suit. During the 1999 four-week civil trial, which was held in a Shelby County Court House in Memphis, Pepper repeated the claims he had made in his 1995 book, Orders To Kill. Pepper had no interest in seeing Loyd Jowers go to jail. The whole thrust of Pepper's efforts was in trying to prove that Jowers was merely a tool in a larger conspiracy involving the FBI, the Military, the CIA, and the Mafia. Pepper's thesis centered on the reasons why the government wanted to eliminate the civil rights leader.

"From the start, Pepper's courtroom allegations were viewed by many commentators as ludicrous, dependent as they were on the stories of many discredited witnesses who did not reveal their far-fetched tales until many years after the assassination. The jury, which consisted of six blacks and six whites, took three hours to reach its verdict of conspiracy involving Jowers. The King family received a token $100 award. The guilty verdict was hardly surprising, considering that Jowers's lawyer never disputed the contentions of the King lawyers. As the jury heard no evidence to rebut the conspiracy theory, it was inevitable it would return a verdict favorable to Pepper and the King family. The trial was, effectively, bogus. "

http://crimemagazine.com/05/martinlutherking,0612-5.htm

It was stunts like this, along with Martin Luther King's son telling James Earl Ray that he believed that cocky-eyed story he told, that demonstrate the tragic exchanging the family's civil rights legacy for some cheap 'ghetto' paranoia.

Caustic Logic · 24th January 2010, 04:09 AM

Originally Posted by Walter Ego

"...The jury, which consisted of six blacks and six whites, took three hours to reach its verdict of conspiracy involving Jowers. The King family received a token $100 award. The guilty verdict was hardly surprising, considering that Jowers's lawyer never disputed the contentions of the King lawyers. As the jury heard no evidence to rebut the conspiracy theory, it was inevitable it would return a verdict favorable to Pepper and the King family. The trial was, effectively, bogus. "

http://crimemagazine.com/05/martinlutherking,0612-5.htm

This part is weird. So were both teams in on it? Sorry, but was this a play trial for an infomercial or what? Was the "jury" in on it? Was there a pretense of legal authority? I'm confused. Should have read the OP link but it's too late now.

Walter Ego · 24th January 2010, 06:49 AM

Originally Posted by Caustic Logic

This part is weird. So were both teams in on it? Sorry, but was this a play trial for an infomercial or what? Was the "jury" in on it? Was there a pretense of legal authority? I'm confused. Should have read the OP link but it's too late now.

Gerald Posner:

"First Pepper claimed he had located the mysterious Raoul, Ray's long-standing alibi. Second was Pepper's report that he had found witnesses who confirmed the 1993 TV "confession" by Loyd Jowers, a former Memphis restaurant owner who said he had been paid to kill King...

"What about restaurant-owner Loyd Jowers and his confession? Confidential files maintained by the Memphis prosecutor's office indicate that Jowers's likely motivation was to sell his story for $300,000. Memphis prosecutors interviewed the two sisters whom Pepper claimed had worked in Jowers's restaurant and had corroborated his story. Both recanted. Moreover, in a telephone conversation between the sisters, taped by authorities, the main witness for Jowers admitted that the entire story was false."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv...is/memphis.htm

---

This DOJ report pretty much explodes the Jower's "conspiracy."

United States Department of Justice
Investigation of Recent Allegations
Regarding the Assassination of
Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/crim/mlk/part1.htm#toc

Pardalis · 24th January 2010, 09:51 AM

Originally Posted by Oliver

I don't know what to make out of this story.

Just a regular day then?

Blender Head · 25th January 2010, 01:00 AM

Originally Posted by kookbreaker

some cheap 'ghetto' paranoia.

What, exactly, does this garbage mean?

dudalb · 25th January 2010, 11:03 AM

Originally Posted by Blender Head

What, exactly, does this garbage mean?

The Hurricane Katrina Conspiracy Theories are a prime example.

jmh423 · 25th January 2010, 02:03 PM

Originally Posted by dudalb

The Hurricane Katrina Conspiracy Theories are a prime example.

......Of "cheap ghetto paranoia"?....Boy, for someone who is so sensitive regarding "anti-semitism" you seem to disregard the feelings or concerns of those paranoid ignorant "ghetto" dwellers....Interesting...

defaultdotxbe · 25th January 2010, 02:13 PM

Originally Posted by jmh423

......Of "cheap ghetto paranoia"?....Boy, for someone who is so sensitive regarding "anti-semitism" you seem to disregard the feelings or concerns of those paranoid ignorant "ghetto" dwellers....Interesting...

its the same thing, just replace "jews/zionists" with "the man" and anti-semitism becomes ghetto paranoia

dudalb · 25th January 2010, 02:35 PM

Originally Posted by defaultdotxbe

its the same thing, just replace "jews/zionists" with "the man" and anti-semitism becomes ghetto paranoia

Paranoia happens regardless of race, color.or creed.

Walter Ego · 25th January 2010, 03:27 PM

Originally Posted by kookbreaker

It was stunts like this, along with Martin Luther King's son telling James Earl Ray that he believed that cocky-eyed story he told, that demonstrate the tragic exchanging the family's civil rights legacy for some cheap 'ghetto' paranoia.

From the Gerald Posner article linked above.

Quote:

What prompted the King family's decision to back the convicted assassin's bid for freedom? Ray's latest lawyer, William Pepper, had persuaded them that recent "breakthroughs" proved the assassination was part of a massive government-led conspiracy and that Ray--whose fingerprints were on the murder weapon--was a mere patsy.

The King family and the execrable William Pepper were discussed two years ago in this thread and kookbreaker made a similar comment minus the "ghetto" adjective.

You could say the Kings were taken in by two con men... Ray and his mouthpiece Pepper (a long time conspiracy monger who was also Sirhan Sirhan's lawyer and is now... surprise, surprise... a 9/11 truther) but, more likely, the Kings don't want to believe that Dr. King was killed by a petty criminal (and pathological liar) like Ray for the same reason people don't want to believe JFK was killed by a loser and "lone nut" like Lee Harvey Oswald.

The scales don't seem to be balanced. Great men should not have their lives extinguished by "nobody" single assassins acting alone. There were plenty of people who did want King dead and Ray thought he could collect a $50k bounty by killing King.

And let's not forget that FBI director J. Edgar Hoover did have a vendetta against King even going so far as to have King's extra-marital sexual exploits recorded and sending a tape to King's wife. So the King family's willingness to believe in the government's animosity towards King is not totally unfounded.

dropzone · 25th January 2010, 07:28 PM

It might've been Pepper who claimed there were kill teams from the Army, Marines, and CIA hiding in the weedy undergrowth behind the Lorain Motel. I am forced to paraphrase John Dillinger in The Illuminatus Trillogy, "How the eff many people does it take to kill a civil rights leader?"

Oliver · 26th January 2010, 02:22 AM

Originally Posted by Pardalis

Just a regular day then?

Oliver · 26th January 2010, 03:57 AM

Originally Posted by LashL

Indeed.

Well, yes - indeed. I sensed all the hype about that story among Truthers and their 9/11 Blog without looking deeper into that issue. However, it is an interesting story that didn't get much attention as far I remember. :">

Blender Head · 26th January 2010, 07:42 AM

Originally Posted by dudalb

Paranoia happens regardless of race, color.or creed.

Boy, it's a good thing you put quotation marks around ghetto then, right?

Sort've reminds me of what GOP operative Lee Atwater said about using the phrase tax cuts and the 'N' word but that's a topic for another thread.

Now, some content: I do remember the History Channel talking about the civil trial, but that's as much "media" coverage of the case as far I know.

kookbreaker · 26th January 2010, 08:23 AM

Originally Posted by Blender Head

Boy, it's a good thing you put quotation marks around ghetto then, right?

Oh get your pants unwadded already, and it wasn't dubaln, it was me.

Like it or not, there are different brands of paranoia in this world, and I don't shy away from using the qualifiers to distinguish one brand from another. In other words, what the neo-Nazi comes up won't match what others come up with. I can give some lovely examples if you like.

'Ghetto' paranoia is a term oft used by black (and other minority) leadership. In their words GP is excuse-making or trying to blame shortcoming outside influences. The term 'ghetto' is used in a derogatory manner on purpose, as something to be overcome, avoided, discarded, or just left behind.

dudalb · 26th January 2010, 10:32 AM

Originally Posted by Blender Head

Boy, it's a good thing you put quotation marks around ghetto then, right?

Sort've reminds me of what GOP operative Lee Atwater said about using the phrase tax cuts and the 'N' word but that's a topic for another thread.

Now, some content: I do remember the History Channel talking about the civil trial, but that's as much "media" coverage of the case as far I know.

So you are denying there are crackpot conspiracy theorists who happen to be Afro American?
Or that to point this out and how silly the theories are is racist?
Thanks for displaying one of the less likable traits of the Ultra Libs: Accusing people of Racism at the drop of a hat.

KingMerv00 · 26th January 2010, 01:30 PM

Originally Posted by LightinDarkness

For example, if someone else runs over you with a truck they would be charged with the murder. If I stood by and watched you cry out for help but did not contact 911 and the authorities found out, I would be negligent because my failure to act contributed to your ultimate untimely demise. Thus, I did not really kill you nor have anything to do with plotting your death, but could still be found liable for contributing to it.

If I remember tort law correctly, I don't think your analogy works. Negligence only only applies if you have a legal duty to the injured party. In the example above, you have no legal duty to help the injured man. Some jurisdictions have required bystanders to call the police if it is safe to do so but that is not the same as a lawsuit.

Subliminal · 26th January 2010, 05:17 PM

It doesn't take the most intelligent person on the planet to realize MLK was assasinated by the CIA. He almost woke the world up from the dozey haze of ignorant denial most of you are still under.

KingMerv00 · 26th January 2010, 06:06 PM

Originally Posted by Subliminal

It doesn't take the most intelligent person on the planet to realize MLK was assasinated by the CIA. He almost woke the world up from the dozey haze of ignorant denial most of you are still under.

You know he pissed off a bunch of white supremacists too. Is it so unbelievable that one killed him? Why does it HAVE to be the CIA?

dudalb · 27th January 2010, 03:19 PM

Originally Posted by Subliminal

It doesn't take the most intelligent person on the planet to realize MLK was assasinated by the CIA. He almost woke the world up from the dozey haze of ignorant denial most of you are still under.

THis from the guy who thinks Swine Flu is a plot by the drug companies to sell vaccine.......

What's that about "dozy haze" again?

Walter Ego · 27th January 2010, 04:35 PM

Originally Posted by Subliminal

It doesn't take the most intelligent person on the planet to realize MLK was assasinated by the CIA. He almost woke the world up from the dozey haze of ignorant denial most of you are still under.

You of course read the Gerald Posner article I linked detailing the overwhelming evidence pointing to Ray as the assassin. Or do you believe Ray's imaginary friend "Raoul" was a real person?

Walter Ego · 27th January 2010, 04:36 PM

Originally Posted by KingMerv00

You know he pissed off a bunch of white supremacists too. Is it so unbelievable that one killed him? Why does it HAVE to be the CIA?

James Earl Ray thought he might collect a $50K bounty offered by some of those white supremacists. That was his motive, simple greed not racism.

KingMerv00 · 28th January 2010, 10:35 AM

Originally Posted by Walter Ego

James Earl Ray thought he might collect a $50K bounty offered by some of those white supremacists. That was his motive, simple greed not racism.

Fair enough. But it was still racists that killed him. Hiring a thug to kill someone for you isn't really different than doing it yourself.

Walter Ego · 28th January 2010, 11:26 AM

Originally Posted by KingMerv00

Fair enough. But it was still racists that killed him. Hiring a thug to kill someone for you isn't really different than doing it yourself.

I was wrong about racism not being a probable motive for Ray's murder of King.

From the Posner article.

Quote:

When he was 17, Ray joined the Army. He became infatuated with Adolf Hitler through the influence of a close German friend, and asked to be stationed in Germany. He got kicked out of the Army, and in the following years was convicted of increasingly serious crimes. Early in his prison career, he refused to accept a transfer to the prison's integrated honor farm--Ray, who had never lived or worked with blacks, was not about to start. In 1960, Ray, who was then in the Missouri State Penitentiary after a 23-month sojourn in the outside world, began boasting that there was money to be made in killing black leaders like H. Rap Brown, Stokely Carmichael, and King. This talk could easily have brought Ray to the attention of those in the prison who wanted King dead...

What motivated Ray? A lust for quick cash (the $50,000) and his dismissive view of blacks... are most likely.

There is no evidence, however, that Ray was actually hired to kill Dr. King or was directly in contact with those offering the bounty on King. Most likely, he hoped to collect the money by claiming to be the man who killed King.

In other words, no conspiracy.

PhantomWolf · 28th January 2010, 11:56 AM

Originally Posted by Walter Ego

"[In 1999] the King family, represented by Pepper, sued Loyd Jowers in a wrongful-death lawsuit. They believed Jowers's 1993 televised admission that he had participated in a "conspiracy" to kill King gave King's family sufficient grounds to initiate a private law suit. During the 1999 four-week civil trial, which was held in a Shelby County Court House in Memphis, Pepper repeated the claims he had made in his 1995 book, Orders To Kill. Pepper had no interest in seeing Loyd Jowers go to jail. The whole thrust of Pepper's efforts was in trying to prove that Jowers was merely a tool in a larger conspiracy involving the FBI, the Military, the CIA, and the Mafia. Pepper's thesis centered on the reasons why the government wanted to eliminate the civil rights leader.

"From the start, Pepper's courtroom allegations were viewed by many commentators as ludicrous, dependent as they were on the stories of many discredited witnesses who did not reveal their far-fetched tales until many years after the assassination. The jury, which consisted of six blacks and six whites, took three hours to reach its verdict of conspiracy involving Jowers. The King family received a token $100 award. The guilty verdict was hardly surprising, considering that Jowers's lawyer never disputed the contentions of the King lawyers. As the jury heard no evidence to rebut the conspiracy theory, it was inevitable it would return a verdict favorable to Pepper and the King family. The trial was, effectively, bogus. "

http://crimemagazine.com/05/martinlutherking,0612-5.htm

The King Family site has the first part of the transcript on it, from the opening addresses it is obvious what the conclusion will be.

Plantiff - It was a government conspriacy and the defendant was involved.
Defendant - It was a government conspriacy but the defendant wasn't involved that much.

okay......

KingMerv00 · 28th January 2010, 12:30 PM

Originally Posted by Walter Ego

There is no evidence, however, that Ray was actually hired to kill Dr. King or was directly in contact with those offering the bounty on King. Most likely, he hoped to collect the money by claiming to be the man who killed King.

In other words, no conspiracy.

That's splitting hairs don't you think? A bounty isn't much different than a murder contract.

Walter Ego · 28th January 2010, 01:41 PM

Originally Posted by KingMerv00

That's splitting hairs don't you think? A bounty isn't much different than a murder contract.

There is no evidence Ray was "contracted" to kill Dr. King. He did hope to collect money for the killing. White supremacists were offering $50k for anyone who would kill King. There is no indication Ray was in contact with them, however.

Gerald Posner on Charlie Rose show (starting at about the 5:50 mark).

Posner: "He did it for the money." (7:16 mark)

Google Video This video is not hosted by the JREF, the JREF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

KingMerv00 · 28th January 2010, 04:23 PM

Originally Posted by Walter Ego

There is no evidence Ray was "contracted" to kill Dr. King. He did hope to collect money for the killing. White supremacists were offering $50k for anyone who would kill King. There is no indication Ray was in contact with them, however.

I know. That's why I said, "A bounty isn't much different than a murder contract."

23rd January 2010, 10:39 AM	#1
Oliver ~The Rascal~ Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Cologne Posts: 17,369	"It's official" : MLK assassinated by US government I don't know what to make out of this story. Supposedly MLK was killed by the US Government, according to a trial that took place in 1999: Quote: Martin Luther King’s family and his attorney, William F. Pepper, won a civil trial that found US government agencies guilty in the wrongful death of Martin Luther King. The 1999 trial, King Family versus Jowers and Other Unknown Co-Conspirators, is the only trial ever conducted on the assassination of Dr. King. The King family’s attempts for a criminal trial were denied, as suspect James Ray’s recant of what he claimed was a false confession was denied... [snip] full source: http://www.examiner.com/x-18425-LA-C...-you-know-this Another question the article raises is: Why didn't we hear about that trial in the media?
	__________________

23rd January 2010, 10:52 AM	#2
LightinDarkness Master Poster Join Date: Jun 2008 Posts: 2,551	Originally Posted by Oliver I don't know what to make out of this story. Supposedly MLK was killed by the US Government, according to a trial that took place in 1999: Another question the article raises is: Why didn't we hear about that trial in the media? Not being a lawyer (Nor a Freeman-On-The-Land ) I'm not really sure, but I think all wrongful death means is that the government may have contributed to factors surrounding his death, and since its a civil claim (and not criminal) the standard of evidence is lower. Finding the government guilty of wrongful death is a far, far, cry from finding them guilty of assassinating someone. It could be as small as some government official failing to act on information they had about the REAL assassination plot..or a wide variety of other things..which would not indicate the 'gubment' did it at all but would still make the liable for a civil claim... The linked documents (conveniently) dont seem to provide full transcripts and from just skimming them its not clear to me what the trial was actually about (the depositions get into details of the crime scene, but nothing substantive about the defendants in the case)
	Last edited by LightinDarkness; 23rd January 2010 at 10:58 AM.

23rd January 2010, 11:03 AM	#4
Oliver ~The Rascal~ Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Cologne Posts: 17,369	Okay, I get your point - but even if the Government failed to act upon some information, they still would not be responsible for the assassination, no matter how low that standard for evidence was. At least not outside the US jurisdiction, me thinks.
	__________________

23rd January 2010, 11:09 AM	#5
Oliver ~The Rascal~ Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Cologne Posts: 17,369	Originally Posted by LightinDarkness Although I think citing wikipedia is a bad idea, I think this might give an overview into how the "Examiner" spun this one into a non-existent conspiracy. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loyd_Jowers Even the DOJ Civil Rights Division thought it was nuts (ah, but They(TM) would, wouldn't they...). This article explains a lot, even if I wonder how the Jury came to the conclusion that James Earl Ray wasn't the shooter in the first place.
	__________________

23rd January 2010, 11:12 AM	#6
LightinDarkness Master Poster Join Date: Jun 2008 Posts: 2,551	Originally Posted by Oliver Okay, I get your point - but even if the Government failed to act upon some information, they still would not be responsible for the assassination, no matter how low that standard for evidence was. At least not outside the US jurisdiction, me thinks. I'm not sure I understand what you mean. Finding the "government" guilty of wrongful death indicates that the court did NOT say the government killed MLK, just that they had some negligence involved in the act. You can not physically contribute to the murder of someone and still be liable in a variety of circumstances, depending on what you did or did not know about the events and how you acted upon the information. Because the charge was wrongful death it shows there was no government conspiracy to assassinate MLK...just that jury has found, in accordance with the lower civil standard of proof, that the government was negligent...in something. For details he would need to link to the actual court case instead of a website that just lists the transcript volumes in a remote library. For example, if someone else runs over you with a truck they would be charged with the murder. If I stood by and watched you cry out for help but did not contact 911 and the authorities found out, I would be negligent because my failure to act contributed to your ultimate untimely demise. Thus, I did not really kill you nor have anything to do with plotting your death, but could still be found liable for contributing to it. It would probably be extraordinarily easy to find such failure to act on the part of the government in the case of MLK - all you have to do is find one bigoted law enforcement member who failed to act on rumors of the assassination plot and you've won your civil case.
	Last edited by LightinDarkness; 23rd January 2010 at 11:17 AM.

23rd January 2010, 02:22 PM	#7
funk de fino Dreaming of unicorns Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Alba Posts: 10,786	This thread and OP deserves a facepalm.
	__________________ Stundie - Avoided like the plaque, its a scottish turn of phrase. Christopher 7 - There is no need to contact them for conformation. That is just a denial tactic

23rd January 2010, 03:14 PM	#8
MaGZ Suspended Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 6,319	Originally Posted by Oliver I don't know what to make out of this story. Supposedly MLK was killed by the US Government, according to a trial that took place in 1999: Another question the article raises is: Why didn't we hear about that trial in the media? I think the answer is there was an all-Black jury, so of course they would side with the King family.
MaGZ Suspended Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 6,319

23rd January 2010, 03:44 PM	#9
Walter Ego Master Poster Join Date: Jan 2008 Posts: 2,557	"[In 1999] the King family, represented by Pepper, sued Loyd Jowers in a wrongful-death lawsuit. They believed Jowers's 1993 televised admission that he had participated in a "conspiracy" to kill King gave King's family sufficient grounds to initiate a private law suit. During the 1999 four-week civil trial, which was held in a Shelby County Court House in Memphis, Pepper repeated the claims he had made in his 1995 book, Orders To Kill. Pepper had no interest in seeing Loyd Jowers go to jail. The whole thrust of Pepper's efforts was in trying to prove that Jowers was merely a tool in a larger conspiracy involving the FBI, the Military, the CIA, and the Mafia. Pepper's thesis centered on the reasons why the government wanted to eliminate the civil rights leader. "From the start, Pepper's courtroom allegations were viewed by many commentators as ludicrous, dependent as they were on the stories of many discredited witnesses who did not reveal their far-fetched tales until many years after the assassination. The jury, which consisted of six blacks and six whites, took three hours to reach its verdict of conspiracy involving Jowers. The King family received a token $100 award. The guilty verdict was hardly surprising, considering that Jowers's lawyer never disputed the contentions of the King lawyers. As the jury heard no evidence to rebut the conspiracy theory, it was inevitable it would return a verdict favorable to Pepper and the King family. The trial was, effectively, bogus. " http://crimemagazine.com/05/martinlutherking,0612-5.htm
	Last edited by Walter Ego; 23rd January 2010 at 03:45 PM.

23rd January 2010, 05:41 PM	#10
LashL Goddess of Legaltainment™ Administrator Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 26,174	Originally Posted by funk de fino This thread and OP deserves a facepalm. Indeed.

23rd January 2010, 08:25 PM	#11
kookbreaker Evil Fokker Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 9,159	Originally Posted by Walter Ego "[In 1999] the King family, represented by Pepper, sued Loyd Jowers in a wrongful-death lawsuit. They believed Jowers's 1993 televised admission that he had participated in a "conspiracy" to kill King gave King's family sufficient grounds to initiate a private law suit. During the 1999 four-week civil trial, which was held in a Shelby County Court House in Memphis, Pepper repeated the claims he had made in his 1995 book, Orders To Kill. Pepper had no interest in seeing Loyd Jowers go to jail. The whole thrust of Pepper's efforts was in trying to prove that Jowers was merely a tool in a larger conspiracy involving the FBI, the Military, the CIA, and the Mafia. Pepper's thesis centered on the reasons why the government wanted to eliminate the civil rights leader. "From the start, Pepper's courtroom allegations were viewed by many commentators as ludicrous, dependent as they were on the stories of many discredited witnesses who did not reveal their far-fetched tales until many years after the assassination. The jury, which consisted of six blacks and six whites, took three hours to reach its verdict of conspiracy involving Jowers. The King family received a token $100 award. The guilty verdict was hardly surprising, considering that Jowers's lawyer never disputed the contentions of the King lawyers. As the jury heard no evidence to rebut the conspiracy theory, it was inevitable it would return a verdict favorable to Pepper and the King family. The trial was, effectively, bogus. " http://crimemagazine.com/05/martinlutherking,0612-5.htm It was stunts like this, along with Martin Luther King's son telling James Earl Ray that he believed that cocky-eyed story he told, that demonstrate the tragic exchanging the family's civil rights legacy for some cheap 'ghetto' paranoia.
kookbreaker Evil Fokker Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 9,159	__________________ Thanks for helping me win Best Children's Gifts and Best Toys in Philly Voter in 2011 & 2012! Spectrum Scientifics - My store - Google it people!

24th January 2010, 04:09 AM	#12
Caustic Logic Illuminator Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 3,979	Originally Posted by Walter Ego "...The jury, which consisted of six blacks and six whites, took three hours to reach its verdict of conspiracy involving Jowers. The King family received a token $100 award. The guilty verdict was hardly surprising, considering that Jowers's lawyer never disputed the contentions of the King lawyers. As the jury heard no evidence to rebut the conspiracy theory, it was inevitable it would return a verdict favorable to Pepper and the King family. The trial was, effectively, bogus. " http://crimemagazine.com/05/martinlutherking,0612-5.htm This part is weird. So were both teams in on it? Sorry, but was this a play trial for an infomercial or what? Was the "jury" in on it? Was there a pretense of legal authority? I'm confused. Should have read the OP link but it's too late now.

24th January 2010, 06:49 AM	#13
Walter Ego Master Poster Join Date: Jan 2008 Posts: 2,557	Originally Posted by Caustic Logic This part is weird. So were both teams in on it? Sorry, but was this a play trial for an infomercial or what? Was the "jury" in on it? Was there a pretense of legal authority? I'm confused. Should have read the OP link but it's too late now. Gerald Posner: "First Pepper claimed he had located the mysterious Raoul, Ray's long-standing alibi. Second was Pepper's report that he had found witnesses who confirmed the 1993 TV "confession" by Loyd Jowers, a former Memphis restaurant owner who said he had been paid to kill King... "What about restaurant-owner Loyd Jowers and his confession? Confidential files maintained by the Memphis prosecutor's office indicate that Jowers's likely motivation was to sell his story for $300,000. Memphis prosecutors interviewed the two sisters whom Pepper claimed had worked in Jowers's restaurant and had corroborated his story. Both recanted. Moreover, in a telephone conversation between the sisters, taped by authorities, the main witness for Jowers admitted that the entire story was false." http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv...is/memphis.htm --- This DOJ report pretty much explodes the Jower's "conspiracy." United States Department of Justice Investigation of Recent Allegations Regarding the Assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/crim/mlk/part1.htm#toc
	Last edited by Walter Ego; 24th January 2010 at 06:51 AM.

24th January 2010, 09:51 AM	#14
Pardalis Banned Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Montréal Posts: 25,831	Originally Posted by Oliver I don't know what to make out of this story. Just a regular day then?

25th January 2010, 01:00 AM	#15
Blender Head Muse Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 682	Originally Posted by kookbreaker some cheap 'ghetto' paranoia. What, exactly, does this garbage mean?
Blender Head Muse Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 682	__________________ "As you know, Bush never attempted to link Saddam to the 9/11 attacks." -Ron Wieck "The only way for there to be no conspiracy is for nothing to exist." -Travis [DRG] is a follower of Jesus Christ and the Truth, so I will follow St. Griffin as well in this regard. -Galileo

25th January 2010, 11:03 AM	#16
dudalb Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 22,782	Originally Posted by Blender Head What, exactly, does this garbage mean? The Hurricane Katrina Conspiracy Theories are a prime example.

25th January 2010, 02:03 PM	#17
jmh423 Banned Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 731	Originally Posted by dudalb The Hurricane Katrina Conspiracy Theories are a prime example. ......Of "cheap ghetto paranoia"?....Boy, for someone who is so sensitive regarding "anti-semitism" you seem to disregard the feelings or concerns of those paranoid ignorant "ghetto" dwellers....Interesting...
jmh423 Banned Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 731

25th January 2010, 02:13 PM	#18
defaultdotxbe Drunken Shikigami Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: The Dark Side of the Sun Posts: 7,482	Originally Posted by jmh423 ......Of "cheap ghetto paranoia"?....Boy, for someone who is so sensitive regarding "anti-semitism" you seem to disregard the feelings or concerns of those paranoid ignorant "ghetto" dwellers....Interesting... its the same thing, just replace "jews/zionists" with "the man" and anti-semitism becomes ghetto paranoia
	__________________ I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones. -Albert Einstein

25th January 2010, 02:35 PM	#19
dudalb Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 22,782	Originally Posted by defaultdotxbe its the same thing, just replace "jews/zionists" with "the man" and anti-semitism becomes ghetto paranoia Paranoia happens regardless of race, color.or creed.

25th January 2010, 03:27 PM	#20
Walter Ego Master Poster Join Date: Jan 2008 Posts: 2,557	Originally Posted by kookbreaker It was stunts like this, along with Martin Luther King's son telling James Earl Ray that he believed that cocky-eyed story he told, that demonstrate the tragic exchanging the family's civil rights legacy for some cheap 'ghetto' paranoia. From the Gerald Posner article linked above. Quote: What prompted the King family's decision to back the convicted assassin's bid for freedom? Ray's latest lawyer, William Pepper, had persuaded them that recent "breakthroughs" proved the assassination was part of a massive government-led conspiracy and that Ray--whose fingerprints were on the murder weapon--was a mere patsy. The King family and the execrable William Pepper were discussed two years ago in this thread and kookbreaker made a similar comment minus the "ghetto" adjective. You could say the Kings were taken in by two con men... Ray and his mouthpiece Pepper (a long time conspiracy monger who was also Sirhan Sirhan's lawyer and is now... surprise, surprise... a 9/11 truther) but, more likely, the Kings don't want to believe that Dr. King was killed by a petty criminal (and pathological liar) like Ray for the same reason people don't want to believe JFK was killed by a loser and "lone nut" like Lee Harvey Oswald. The scales don't seem to be balanced. Great men should not have their lives extinguished by "nobody" single assassins acting alone. There were plenty of people who did want King dead and Ray thought he could collect a $50k bounty by killing King. And let's not forget that FBI director J. Edgar Hoover did have a vendetta against King even going so far as to have King's extra-marital sexual exploits recorded and sending a tape to King's wife. So the King family's willingness to believe in the government's animosity towards King is not totally unfounded.
	Last edited by Walter Ego; 25th January 2010 at 03:28 PM.

25th January 2010, 07:28 PM	#21
dropzone Graduate Poster Join Date: May 2009 Posts: 1,666	It might've been Pepper who claimed there were kill teams from the Army, Marines, and CIA hiding in the weedy undergrowth behind the Lorain Motel. I am forced to paraphrase John Dillinger in The Illuminatus Trillogy, "How the eff many people does it take to kill a civil rights leader?"

26th January 2010, 02:22 AM	#22
Oliver ~The Rascal~ Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Cologne Posts: 17,369	Originally Posted by Pardalis Just a regular day then?
	__________________

26th January 2010, 03:57 AM	#23
Oliver ~The Rascal~ Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Cologne Posts: 17,369	Originally Posted by LashL Indeed. Well, yes - indeed. I sensed all the hype about that story among Truthers and their 9/11 Blog without looking deeper into that issue. However, it is an interesting story that didn't get much attention as far I remember. :">
	__________________

26th January 2010, 07:42 AM	#24
Blender Head Muse Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 682	Originally Posted by dudalb Paranoia happens regardless of race, color.or creed. Boy, it's a good thing you put quotation marks around ghetto then, right? Sort've reminds me of what GOP operative Lee Atwater said about using the phrase tax cuts and the 'N' word but that's a topic for another thread. Now, some content: I do remember the History Channel talking about the civil trial, but that's as much "media" coverage of the case as far I know.
Blender Head Muse Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 682	__________________ "As you know, Bush never attempted to link Saddam to the 9/11 attacks." -Ron Wieck "The only way for there to be no conspiracy is for nothing to exist." -Travis [DRG] is a follower of Jesus Christ and the Truth, so I will follow St. Griffin as well in this regard. -Galileo

26th January 2010, 08:23 AM	#25
kookbreaker Evil Fokker Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 9,159	Originally Posted by Blender Head Boy, it's a good thing you put quotation marks around ghetto then, right? Oh get your pants unwadded already, and it wasn't dubaln, it was me. Like it or not, there are different brands of paranoia in this world, and I don't shy away from using the qualifiers to distinguish one brand from another. In other words, what the neo-Nazi comes up won't match what others come up with. I can give some lovely examples if you like. 'Ghetto' paranoia is a term oft used by black (and other minority) leadership. In their words GP is excuse-making or trying to blame shortcoming outside influences. The term 'ghetto' is used in a derogatory manner on purpose, as something to be overcome, avoided, discarded, or just left behind.
kookbreaker Evil Fokker Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 9,159	__________________ Thanks for helping me win Best Children's Gifts and Best Toys in Philly Voter in 2011 & 2012! Spectrum Scientifics - My store - Google it people!

26th January 2010, 10:32 AM	#26
dudalb Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 22,782	Originally Posted by Blender Head Boy, it's a good thing you put quotation marks around ghetto then, right? Sort've reminds me of what GOP operative Lee Atwater said about using the phrase tax cuts and the 'N' word but that's a topic for another thread. Now, some content: I do remember the History Channel talking about the civil trial, but that's as much "media" coverage of the case as far I know. So you are denying there are crackpot conspiracy theorists who happen to be Afro American? Or that to point this out and how silly the theories are is racist? Thanks for displaying one of the less likable traits of the Ultra Libs: Accusing people of Racism at the drop of a hat.

26th January 2010, 01:30 PM	#27
KingMerv00 Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Philadelphia, PA...USA Posts: 14,482	Originally Posted by LightinDarkness For example, if someone else runs over you with a truck they would be charged with the murder. If I stood by and watched you cry out for help but did not contact 911 and the authorities found out, I would be negligent because my failure to act contributed to your ultimate untimely demise. Thus, I did not really kill you nor have anything to do with plotting your death, but could still be found liable for contributing to it. If I remember tort law correctly, I don't think your analogy works. Negligence only only applies if you have a legal duty to the injured party. In the example above, you have no legal duty to help the injured man. Some jurisdictions have required bystanders to call the police if it is safe to do so but that is not the same as a lawsuit.
	__________________ If man came from dust, why is there still dust?

26th January 2010, 05:17 PM	#28
Subliminal Student Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 35	It doesn't take the most intelligent person on the planet to realize MLK was assasinated by the CIA. He almost woke the world up from the dozey haze of ignorant denial most of you are still under.
Subliminal Student Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 35

26th January 2010, 06:06 PM	#29
KingMerv00 Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Philadelphia, PA...USA Posts: 14,482	Originally Posted by Subliminal It doesn't take the most intelligent person on the planet to realize MLK was assasinated by the CIA. He almost woke the world up from the dozey haze of ignorant denial most of you are still under. You know he pissed off a bunch of white supremacists too. Is it so unbelievable that one killed him? Why does it HAVE to be the CIA?
	__________________ If man came from dust, why is there still dust?

27th January 2010, 03:19 PM	#30
dudalb Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 22,782	Originally Posted by Subliminal It doesn't take the most intelligent person on the planet to realize MLK was assasinated by the CIA. He almost woke the world up from the dozey haze of ignorant denial most of you are still under. THis from the guy who thinks Swine Flu is a plot by the drug companies to sell vaccine....... What's that about "dozy haze" again?

27th January 2010, 04:35 PM	#31
Walter Ego Master Poster Join Date: Jan 2008 Posts: 2,557	Originally Posted by Subliminal It doesn't take the most intelligent person on the planet to realize MLK was assasinated by the CIA. He almost woke the world up from the dozey haze of ignorant denial most of you are still under. You of course read the Gerald Posner article I linked detailing the overwhelming evidence pointing to Ray as the assassin. Or do you believe Ray's imaginary friend "Raoul" was a real person?

27th January 2010, 04:36 PM	#32
Walter Ego Master Poster Join Date: Jan 2008 Posts: 2,557	Originally Posted by KingMerv00 You know he pissed off a bunch of white supremacists too. Is it so unbelievable that one killed him? Why does it HAVE to be the CIA? James Earl Ray thought he might collect a $50K bounty offered by some of those white supremacists. That was his motive, simple greed not racism.

28th January 2010, 10:35 AM	#33
KingMerv00 Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Philadelphia, PA...USA Posts: 14,482	Originally Posted by Walter Ego James Earl Ray thought he might collect a $50K bounty offered by some of those white supremacists. That was his motive, simple greed not racism. Fair enough. But it was still racists that killed him. Hiring a thug to kill someone for you isn't really different than doing it yourself.
	__________________ If man came from dust, why is there still dust?

28th January 2010, 11:26 AM	#34
Walter Ego Master Poster Join Date: Jan 2008 Posts: 2,557	Originally Posted by KingMerv00 Fair enough. But it was still racists that killed him. Hiring a thug to kill someone for you isn't really different than doing it yourself. I was wrong about racism not being a probable motive for Ray's murder of King. From the Posner article. Quote: When he was 17, Ray joined the Army. He became infatuated with Adolf Hitler through the influence of a close German friend, and asked to be stationed in Germany. He got kicked out of the Army, and in the following years was convicted of increasingly serious crimes. Early in his prison career, he refused to accept a transfer to the prison's integrated honor farm--Ray, who had never lived or worked with blacks, was not about to start. In 1960, Ray, who was then in the Missouri State Penitentiary after a 23-month sojourn in the outside world, began boasting that there was money to be made in killing black leaders like H. Rap Brown, Stokely Carmichael, and King. This talk could easily have brought Ray to the attention of those in the prison who wanted King dead... What motivated Ray? A lust for quick cash (the $50,000) and his dismissive view of blacks... are most likely. There is no evidence, however, that Ray was actually hired to kill Dr. King or was directly in contact with those offering the bounty on King. Most likely, he hoped to collect the money by claiming to be the man who killed King. In other words, no conspiracy.

28th January 2010, 11:56 AM	#35
PhantomWolf Philosopher Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Lost Deimos Moon Base Posts: 9,891	Originally Posted by Walter Ego "[In 1999] the King family, represented by Pepper, sued Loyd Jowers in a wrongful-death lawsuit. They believed Jowers's 1993 televised admission that he had participated in a "conspiracy" to kill King gave King's family sufficient grounds to initiate a private law suit. During the 1999 four-week civil trial, which was held in a Shelby County Court House in Memphis, Pepper repeated the claims he had made in his 1995 book, Orders To Kill. Pepper had no interest in seeing Loyd Jowers go to jail. The whole thrust of Pepper's efforts was in trying to prove that Jowers was merely a tool in a larger conspiracy involving the FBI, the Military, the CIA, and the Mafia. Pepper's thesis centered on the reasons why the government wanted to eliminate the civil rights leader. "From the start, Pepper's courtroom allegations were viewed by many commentators as ludicrous, dependent as they were on the stories of many discredited witnesses who did not reveal their far-fetched tales until many years after the assassination. The jury, which consisted of six blacks and six whites, took three hours to reach its verdict of conspiracy involving Jowers. The King family received a token $100 award. The guilty verdict was hardly surprising, considering that Jowers's lawyer never disputed the contentions of the King lawyers. As the jury heard no evidence to rebut the conspiracy theory, it was inevitable it would return a verdict favorable to Pepper and the King family. The trial was, effectively, bogus. " http://crimemagazine.com/05/martinlutherking,0612-5.htm The King Family site has the first part of the transcript on it, from the opening addresses it is obvious what the conclusion will be. Plantiff - It was a government conspriacy and the defendant was involved. Defendant - It was a government conspriacy but the defendant wasn't involved that much. okay......
	__________________ It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. -- JayUtah I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. -- Charles Babbage (1791-1871) My Apollo Page. 1 on 1 Debating Forum for Skeptics and sceptics. Last edited by PhantomWolf; 28th January 2010 at 11:57 AM.

28th January 2010, 12:30 PM	#36
KingMerv00 Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Philadelphia, PA...USA Posts: 14,482	Originally Posted by Walter Ego There is no evidence, however, that Ray was actually hired to kill Dr. King or was directly in contact with those offering the bounty on King. Most likely, he hoped to collect the money by claiming to be the man who killed King. In other words, no conspiracy. That's splitting hairs don't you think? A bounty isn't much different than a murder contract.
	__________________ If man came from dust, why is there still dust?