Dr. King family’s civil trial verdict: US government assassinated Martin

“What then is, generally speaking, the truth of history? A fable agreed upon.”  - Napoleon Bonaparte [69]

The following is from : Occupy This: US History exposes the 1%’s crimes then and now (6-part series)

Dr. Martin Luther King’s family and his personal friend and 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, [70] 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. Mr. Ray said that his government-appointed attorney told him to sign a confession in order to receive a trial. When Mr. Ray discovered that his signature meant no trial, his and the King family’s subsequent requests were denied.

The US government also denied the King family’s requests for independent investigation of the assassination.

Therefore, and importantly, the US government has never presented any evidence subject to challenge that substantiates their claim that Mr. Ray assassinated Dr. King.

US corporate media did not cover the trial, interview the King family, and textbooks omit this information. Journalist and author, James Douglass: [71]

“I can hardly believe the fact that, apart from the courtroom participants, only Memphis TV reporter Wendell Stacy and I attended from beginning to end this historic three-and-one-half week trial. Because of journalistic neglect scarcely anyone else in this land of ours even knows what went on in it. After critical testimony was given in the trial’s second week before an almost empty gallery, Barbara Reis, U.S. correspondent for the Lisbon daily Publico who was there several days, turned to me and said, “Everything in the U.S. is the trial of the century. O.J. Simpson’s trial was the trial of the century. Clinton’s trial was the trial of the century. But this is the trial of the century, and who’s here?” ”

For comparison, please consider the media coverage of O.J. Simpson’s trials: [72]

“Media coverage of the Simpson trial, which began in January 1995, was unlike any other. Over two thousand reporters covered the trial, and 80 miles of cable was required to allow nineteen television stations to cover the trial live to 91 percent of the American viewing audience. When the verdict was finally read on October 3, 1995, some 142 million people listened or watched. It seemed the nation stood still, divided along racial lines as to the defendant’s guilt or innocence. During and after the trial, over eighty books were published about the event by most everyone involved in the Simpson case.”

The overwhelming evidence of government complicity introduced and agreed as comprehensively valid by the jury includes the 111th Military Intelligence Group were sent to Dr. King’s location, and that the usual police protection was pulled away just before the assassination. Military Intelligence set-up photographers on a roof of a fire station with a clear view to Dr. King’s balcony. 20th Special Forces Group had an 8-man sniper team at the assassination location on that day. Memphis police ordered the scene where multiple witnesses reported as the source of shooting cut down of their bushes that would have hid a sniper team. Along with sanitizing a crime scene, police abandoned investigative procedure to interview witnesses who lived by the scene of the shooting.

The King family believes the government’s motivation to murder Dr. King was to prevent his imminent camp-in at Washington, D.C. until the Vietnam War was ended and those resources directed to end poverty and invest in US hard and soft infrastructure.

Please watch this six-minute video of the evidence from the trial, [73] and this eight-minute video [74] on the FBI’s disclosures of covert operations against Dr. King, including confirmation from his closest friends and advisors.

Coretta Scott King, Dr. King’s wife, is certain of the evidence after 30 years of consideration from the 1968 assassination to the 1999 trial:

“For a quarter of a century, Bill Pepper conducted an independent investigation of the assassination of Martin Luther King, Jr. He opened his files to our family, encouraged us to speak with the witnesses, and represented our family in the civil trial against the conspirators. The jury affirmed his findings, providing our family with a long-sought sense of closure and peace, which had been denied by official disinformation and cover- ups. Now the findings of his exhaustive investigation and additional revelations from the trial are presented in the pages of this important book. We recommend it highly to everyone who seeks the truth about Dr. King’s assassination.” — Coretta Scott King, Dr. King’s wife.

The US Department of Justice issued a report in 2000 that explains their investigation into their own possible guilt in the assassination found no evidence to warrant further investigation. Dr. King’s son issued the following statement [75] rebuking a “self-study” rather than the independent investigation the King family assert the evidence demands:

“We learned only hours before the Justice Department press conference that they were releasing the report of their results of their “limited investigation,” which covered only two areas of new evidence concerning the assassination of Dr. King. We had requested that we be given a copy of the report a few days in advance so that we might have had the opportunity to review it in detail. Since that courtesy was not extended to us, we are only able at this time to state the following:

1. We initially requested that a comprehensive investigation be conducted by a Truth and Reconciliation Commission, independent of the government, because we do not believe that, in such a politically-sensitive matter, the government is capable of investigating itself.

2. The type of independent investigation we sought was denied by the federal government. But in our view, it was carried out, in a Memphis courtroom, during a month-long trial by a jury of 12 American citizens who had no interest other than ascertaining the truth. (Kings v. Jowers)

3. After hearing and reviewing the extensive testimony and evidence, which had never before been tested under oath in a court of law, it took the Memphis jury only one (1) hour to find that a conspiracy to kill Dr. King did exist. Most significantly, this conspiracy involved agents of the governments of the City of Memphis, the state of Tennessee and the United States of America. The overwhelming weight of the evidence also indicated that James Earl Ray was not the triggerman and, in fact, was an unknowing patsy.

4. We stand by that verdict and have no doubt that the truth about this terrible event has finally been revealed.

5. We urge all interested Americans to read the transcript of the trial on the King Center website and consider the evidence, so they can form their own unbiased conclusions.

Although we cooperated fully with this limited investigation, we never really expected that the government report would be any more objective than that which has resulted from any previous official investigation.”

Let’s summarize: Under US Civil Law, covert US government agencies were found guilty of the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Dr. King was the leading figure of the Civil Rights Movement, a Nobel Peace Prize winner, and widely recognized as one of the world’s greatest speakers for what it means to be human. The family’s conclusion as to motive was to prevent Dr. King from ending the Vietnam War because the government wanted to continue its ongoing covert and overt military operations to control foreign governments and their resources.

It is therefore a factual statement that under US Civil Law, the US government assassinated Dr. King.

This is similar that under Criminal Law, both O.J. Simpson and the US government are not legally guilty for murder, but both parties are guilty for killing innocent victims under Civil Law.

People of sufficient intellectual integrity and moral courage will embrace the trial evidence and testimony, jury conclusion, and King family analysis as appropriate and helpful information in seeking the facts.

People who at least temporarily reject challenging information out of fear might say something like, “The government killed Dr. King? That’s a crazy conspiracy theory!”

Let’s consider that statement.

When someone says that a body of evidence is “crazy,” or a “conspiracy theory” (meaning an irrational claim easily refuted by the evidence) that’s a claim. With a claim comes a burden of proof. In this case, the person would have to demonstrate command of the facts to explain and prove why the evidence from the civil trial is somehow “crazy” and easily refuted.

If the person can do this, it would be tremendously helpful in understanding the facts. However, we know from our experience that such statements almost always have zero factual support, and that the person making such a claim literally doesn’t know what they’re talking about.

We also know from our experience, a person making such a statement is really voicing an emotional reaction something closer to the spirit of, “The government killed Dr. King? Ok, I read and understood the paragraphs about the trial and evidence. I read Mrs. King’s and her son’s statement. I haven’t invested the time to verify how valid that information is. I’m not stupid, but because the implications of what that means is so disturbing, I’m going to deny anything about it could possibly be true as my first response. If I’m going to continue being in denial and refuse to discuss the evidence, I’ll attack the messenger.”

We also need to consider the lack of coverage by US corporate media of this compelling evidence, trial verdict, and King family testimony from over 30 years’ analysis of the facts. Recall the evidence of US corporate media reporting being infiltrated by CIA agents to propagandize Americans’ access to information. This included the Director of the CIA’s admission to Congress that they have over 400 agents working in corporate media to make the US public believe what the CIA wants them to believe.

In 2006, George Washington University used a Freedom of Information Act request to obtain the US military’s “Information Operations Roadmap.” This formerly secret and approved document details present US government strategies to generate propaganda, and then attack Internet alternative media that provides dangerous facts and discussion. The military promoted the term, “Fight the net.” [76]

Although I won’t enter the burden of proof here, you may know that there are similar and related bodies of evidence that the US government assassinated other American leaders who opposed key policies of an apparent violent faction within US government. The 1975 Senate Church Committee disclosed that the US government initiated and helped assassination attempts on multiple foreign heads of state. [77]

If we were discussing how the population of some other nation could employ critical thinking skills to understand current events from anytime in history, we would certainly understand the importance to anticipate disinformation from government, danger of controlled media, and assassination as a political weapon.

Failure to do so would appropriately elicit the label attributed to the first dictator of the Soviet Union, Vladimir Lenin. Such people who believe what their government tells them when the history and present have overwhelming objective evidence to explain, document, and prove that the government is typical of so many other historical self-serving oligarchies are:

“Useful idiots.”

To the extent the United States today is any different from all other nations and all other times is up to your exercise of critical thinking skills.

endnotes:

69 Conversation with Emmanuel, comte de Las Cases (20 November 1816), Mémorial de Sainte Hélène, v. 4, p. 251.

70 The Martin Luther King Jr. Center. Civil Case: King Family versus Jowers. Transcript of closing statement: http://www.thekingcenter.org/civil-case-king-family-versus-jowers/ .

71 Probe Magazine. The Martin Luther King Conspiracy exposed in Memphis. Douglass, J.: http://ctka.net/pr500-king.html . Mr. Douglass took what he learned from the MLK trial and wrote a book on the explanation and evidence that similar covert US government factions assassinated President Kennedy: JFK and the unspeakable: why he died and why it matters. Reviews for your consideration here and here. Because the evidence for JFK being murdered by interests in our own government is so strong, AP US History teacher John Hankey created this DVD: Dark Legacy.

72 One of many analyses: law.jrank. Media – The O.j. Simpson Case: http://law.jrank.org/pages/12147/Media-O-J-Simpson-Case.html

73 Documentation from the King family, trial information, and video resources: Examiner.com. Martin Luther King assassinated by US government: MLK civil trial decision. Herman, C. Jan. 15, 2011: http://www.examiner.com/la-county-nonpartisan-in-los-angeles/mlk-assassinated-by-us-government-martin-luther-king-civil-1999-decision . For further documentation of evidence: What Really Happened: The Death of Martin Luther King: http://whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/MLK/mlk.html

74 RevolutionNewz. MSM blackout – the US govt executed Martin Luther King…Proven in US court, 1999: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k383kA7p7vs

75 Global Research. Martin Luther King Day: King family statement on the Justice Department’s “Limited Investigation” of the MLK assassination. Jan. 15, 2007

76 George Washington University. The National Security Archive. Rumsfeld’s Roadmap to Propaganda. Jan. 26, 2006: http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB177/ . BBC News analysis: US plans to ‘fight the net’ revealed. Brookes, A. Jan. 27, 2006: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4655196.stm

77 History matters. Church Committee Interim report: Alleged assassination plots involving foreign leaders: http://www.history-matters.com/archive/contents/church/contents_church_reports_ir.htm

This entry was posted in General. Bookmark the permalink.
  • Susan

    Thank you for the excellent article. Dr. King was a great man. Truly missed. The following book is a must read for anyone interested in who really murdered Dr. King. What type of a country do we really live in? Very sad when you wake up to the answer.

    An Act of State: The Execution of Martin Luther King by William Pepper
    http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Dstripbooks&field-keywords=act+of+state&x=0&y=0

    • spatrick

      Thanks susan, that book looks great! reading part of it on amazon :)
      Too many people pull the wool over their own eyes: the cold truth is jarring to the farcical story of American politics, and most seek refuge in materialism and passive entertainment. Lets hear it for evidence-based reason!

  • NadePaulKuciGravMcKi

    JFK 1963, Malcolm 1965, MLK 1968, RFK 1968, John Lennon 1980,
    September Eleventh 2001, Michael Jackson 2009. Sandy Hook 2012

    • http://www.facebook.com/glesniewski1 Gregory Lesniewski

      How can you even put that CLOWN MICHAEL JACKSON in such a n elite group? He was a “sicko”; a “nut-case”; a phoney!!!!

      • Katrina Cooke

        dont you get it?THEY LIE ABOUT EVERYTHING. u cant be half awake
        !!

    • http://www.facebook.com/david.wheeler.798 David Wheeler

      COLUMBINE 1999 ALSO. I have all the evidence compiled on that one. Most likely Virginia Tech also. Why would they want to kill MJ? he’s just a dumass he wasn’t a man of power so who really cares if they killed him lol

      • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=534498147 Kristi Segovia

        umm..NO! Columbine was because of the anti-Christian demon punks..and you can blame their pathetic parents if you want to point a finger!

        • david18500

          No., like i said, their is plenty of proof, proving their were more than two shooters (Including 1 in Every 4 of the 100 eye witnesses) In the cafateria footage you can see bullet flashes even when both are on screen not shooting.

    • BinaMarie

      Reasoning for putting MJ in the conversation…Before he died he was actually giving us information about what the government was up too. So why not get rid of him, if he becomes a problem for them!

  • Dr. Democracy

    don’t forget J.R. Ewing and Apollo mission. quack quack.and i’m not talking aflaac.

  • http://www.facebook.com/glesniewski1 Gregory Lesniewski

    Hmmmm…..wonder who they are going to try to blame next? Anything to get money, huh11//

    • lobo40

      The king family only asked for a $100 to show they weren’t after the money.

  • Randy Foxworthy

    Nothing that is presented as facts in a civil trial compares to what can be presented as facts in a criminal trial. If you can’t prove it in a criminal trial with all of it’s safe guards for including only provable facts, you can’t actually call it proof. Civil trials are for one thing and one thing only, to collect money from someone or some group or groups. You can claim all you want, but until you present proof that would stand up in a criminal trial, you have not really proved anything at all, except that you think or feel that you are right. So while you may have your theories and thoughts about what happened, you have no proof. That being said, I am not saying you are wrong in your theories, just that you have never proved them.

    • http://www.facebook.com/david.wheeler.798 David Wheeler

      But thats the thing the Gov. can blow two of the biggest building in NY up before peoples very eyes and their still too stupid or close minded to realize it. I honestly don’t think it would matter much how much theyre proven guilty becuz 75% of US iether don’t give a shit, rather continue like it never happened/doesn’t matter, brainwashed/close minded like to believe your own safe little world or just simply too dumb. Why we are all fuked and they will get away with whatever they are planning

      • Outrageous…

        from an investment point of view, destroying the world trade center from a US government agency would be practically one of the stupidest decisions ever made.

        • Carl_Herman

          Nope. You need to discuss the evidence to make an argument; not some philosophical viewpoint.

      • Mr. X

        Another conspiracy-happy idiot. I’ve read through a million conspiracies about 9/11. Not one of them makes sense. There’s hardly any evidence to support the outrageous claims that some “all-powerful” sect of government blew up the twin towers. Nobody trusts anything told to them anymore, therefore, everyone assumes everything told to them is a lie. News flash: We don’t live in George Orwell’s 1984. Everyone who has more money/power than you is not trying to control or destroy you. In fact, I doubt they even think about you at all. Everybody just assumes that the government is an all-powerful entity that’s trying to take over the world. It’s not. It’s full of people; some good, some bad. But making a claim that the greatest national tragedy since Pearl Harbor is a hoax on the grounds that you think that our government is evil just because they are is completely stupid. What was the motive? To go to war and lose billions of dollars and human lives for oil that we’re sorely lacking even more than when we started? To create an economic crisis that would bury our country in debt and ruin people and corporations alike? And how could the Bush administration have pulled that off considering that most liberal conspiracist lunatics think he has the brain the size of a walnut? There’s not an illuminati-style group of men in suits that sit in a black room all day around a table smoking cigars and discussing how they’re going to rule the world. Paranoia and science fiction have poisoned your mind. But you think that I’m stupid. You constantly tell people like me to “wake up”. I was never sleeping! You need to wake up! Quoting Animal Farm and coming up with outrageous conspiracies based on dystopian fiction doesn’t make you enlightened. It makes you look fucking crazy! Yet, I’m a “sheep” because I chose to believe some of the things that people tell me. Most conspiracists believe that everything’s a lie anyway. Religion? Government? Business? They’re all just things that they accuse people of conforming to without thinking. We’ll guess what? I’m a critical thinker who analyzes all evidence presented before me and comes up with an answer that doesn’t involve everything being a lie. There’s truth in this world, but it’s not your version of truth. You need to “wake up”. I never went to sleep.

        • Carl_Herman

          No, Mr. X: you’re the idiot refusing to discuss the evidence.

          News flash, pal: when you say something, you have the burden of proof to take their strongest evidence and refute it. The emotional ranting you give would have you removed from any serious place of business if that’s what you insisted to provide for rational argument.

          All of us in any serious area of business recognize this. And so do you, pal. Choose who you really want to speak and work for: you’ll get what you deserve.

    • Carl_Herman

      Liar, Randy. Facts are facts, whether presented for damages in civil trial or criminal prosecution. The statement that “nothing that is presented as facts…” shows complete ignorance of what trial by jury means and does.

      Moreover, any criminal trial was denied by government. That means government has never submitted evidence for scrutiny to support their claims.

      The facts in the case were upheld in a legal venue for civil prosecution. The civil verdict is a fact.

      • Randy Foxworthy

        Carl you used a lot of space to say nothing at all. The facts are that evidence is allowed in civil trials that would never be allowed in a criminal trial. And plenty of civil trials are won on emotion, not evidence. And like those trials you offer no proof of what you claims, just your words and mere words are not even worth the air it takes to speak them.

        And by the way I know perfectly well what a triL by jury means. I don’t believe that you really do though. I have seen a lot of innocent people incarcerated by juries, and a lot of guilty ones go free. So to be fair what a trial by jury means is that the one with the best lawyers win, not nessiarrily that justice is done.

        As for all the smoke that you and other conspiracy nuts keep blowing up our asses regarding the government blowing up the WTC, get a life. There has been no proof offered only questionable statements and theories.

        • Carl_Herman

          Liar, Randy. Facts are evaluated by juries in both venues with admissible evidence following the same general rule of being relevant and foundation of credibility. It’s you who say nothing at all to document your claim of civil evidence not allowed in criminal court. But go ahead: we’re waiting for your documentation.

          And don’t change the subject: if you can refute the submitted evidence from this trial, go ahead. We all notice you do not attempt to do so.

          All you have is denial and distraction. Those of us with some experience in law and those of us paying attention in Life recognize denial, making claims without evidence, and distraction as lies of omission and commission to distract the light of truth shining on the best facts.

          • Randy Foxworthy

            I was trying to be nice Carl, but you constant hot air just shows you are nothing more than a pile of horse shit!!! You tell me to present facts, when it is you who is making the claims of evidence not me. I simply stated that the rules of evidence in civil trials are much more ” relaxed” than in a criminal trial. That my dear fellow is a fact and any lawyer will readily admit to that fact. So until you present me with facts proving “your” case, I will lump you with the rest of the conspiracy theorist who claim to know all, but can’t produce a single shred of credible evidence. You can bellow all you want, but I have nothing more to say beyond my assessment of you and your knowledge. HS!!!!!

          • Carl_Herman

            Liars are not nice, Randy. Your statement that evidentiary rules are more “relaxed” somehow in civil trials is a lie, your “factual claim” that when challenged you fail to support. Instead, you insult, distract, and resort to foul language. That’s not nice, pal.

            You make claims as if you understand law and don’t support them. I state that your claims are refuted easily with any examination of basic law information, like this basic legal definition that there is zero difference between evidence for civil and criminal trial:

            http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/admissible_evidence

            You have yet to address a single piece of evidence from this trial.

            You have yet to admit that the government’s claims of evidence have never been challenged in a criminal trial.

            But I appreciate your contribution to help the public determine for themselves what is horse shit and what is not.

          • Randy Foxworthy

            Here you go Carl, just a few facts to illustrate your “lies” about the jury system and how it “works”. http://listverse.com/2013/03/27/10-people-who-were-wrongfully-accused-of-heinous-crimes/ so tell me again how winning a case proves that your “facts” are the ones we should believe. Go back to your ivory tower where everything is exactly as you see it through your smudged glass. My main problem with you besides your arrogant ignorance is that you began every response to my post with “Liar” . So in your view anyone who does’t agree with you is a liar. Nice way to “win” your arguments.

            btw this time you can rightfully call me a liar because I said I wouldn’t respond to you anymore, but here I am doing exactly that, so yes in this case I lied, or at least changed my mind. Something that I don’t believe you to be capable of even when staring the facts in the eyes.

          • Carl Herman

            What you provide is an article arguing about people wrongfully accused, and NOT ON THE TOPIC YOU ASSERTED AS FACT: that evidence permitted in civil trial is somehow less than for criminal process.

            That’s what makes you a liar: saying something is true without evidence, and then presenting irrelevant information (that is something not admissible in criminal and civil law, btw).

            And again, we all see:

            You have yet to address a single piece of evidence from this trial.

            You have yet to admit that the government’s claims of evidence have never been challenged in a criminal trial.

            And again: I appreciate your demonstration to interested readers that you represent the quality of evidence the government has in their case of the assassination of Dr. King. The civil law jury saw straight through this type of lies and distractions for their lawful verdict.

            But go ahead, choose who you want to be: argue on the side of Martin’s assassins and protect their lies with your own. You’re welcome to join the side of truth and justice when you’re ready.

  • kuhnkat

    That’s really cute. You turn a totally CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE case into the statement the the US Government assassinated MLK.

    Who pulled the trigger?? Who gave the orders?? NADA!! Yet you KNOW they did. Pitiful.

    • Carl_Herman

      Then refute the evidence, kuhnkat. Go ahead.

      It’s not me, it’s a jury under civil law. Go ahead and walk through the evidence and explain how the jury’s conclusion is wrong.

      But you won’t because you can’t.

      Better be careful about who you choose to serve, pal. You’ll have what you work for.

      • kuhnkat

        Carl you MORON, quote from the transcript where the court stated that the findings included that the US Government was found guilty of assassinating MLK. You cannot or you would have already.

        HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

        • Carl_Herman

          You, kuhnkat, don’t/won’t read. Better choose carefully who you laugh with and at, pal. Life has justice to place you with those exact “friends.” From the court transcript:

          (Verdict form passed to the Court.)

          THE COURT: I have authorized
          this gentleman here to take one picture of
          you which I’m going to have developed and
          make copies and send to you as I promised.
          Okay. All right, ladies and
          gentlemen. Let me ask you, do all of you
          agree with this verdict?
          THE JURY: Yes (In unison).
          THE COURT: In answer to the
          question did Loyd Jowers participate in a
          conspiracy to do harm to Dr. Martin Luther
          King, your answer is yes. Do you also find
          that others, including governmental agencies,
          were parties to this conspiracy as alleged by
          the defendant? Your answer to that one is
          also yes. And the total amount of damages
          you find for the plaintiffs entitled to is
          one hundred dollars. Is that your verdict?
          THE JURY: Yes (In unison).

          • kuhnkat

            Thank you for confirming my point MORON!!!

            “Do you also find
            that others, including governmental agencies,
            were parties to this conspiracy as alleged by
            the defendant? Your answer to that one is
            also yes.”

            No where does it state that the US Government or Government agencies murdered Dr. King. The verdict states Government Agencies were involved in a conspiracy to kill him. Now, show me where those agencies are detailed and WHO in those agencies were involved so they can be held accountable.

            Especially show me where those agencies were not acting ROGUE as the Mafia was also claimed to be involved.

            Strange thing, very similar accusations have been made about JFK’s assassination.

          • Carl_Herman

            Nah, we all read what you wrote, and the court found the US government guilty as from the evidence of US government agency involvement such listed in the article:

            “The overwhelming evidence of government complicity introduced and agreed as comprehensively valid by the jury includes the 111th Military Intelligence Group were sent to Dr. King’s location, and that the usual police protection was pulled away just before the assassination. Military Intelligence set-up photographers on a roof of a fire station with a clear view to Dr. King’s balcony. 20th Special Forces Group had an 8-man sniper team at the assassination location on that day. Memphis police ordered the scene where multiple witnesses reported as the source of shooting cut down of their bushes that would have hid a sniper team. Along with sanitizing a crime scene, police abandoned investigative procedure to interview witnesses who lived by the scene of the shooting.”

            You want to argue I’m the moron for pointing this all out?

            Really? That’s your statement of the importance of this story?

            Ok. Defend what you most value. Hope your choice makes you proud.

          • kuhnkat

            Thanks again MORON!!! You show that there is no evidence of actual CONSPIRACY. Only circumstantial evidence that they COVERED UP whomever did kill him!!!

            Y’all are certainly setting low standards for those who believe with you.

            Again, who was the trigger man?? What are the names of the conspirators?? Where is the documentation, tapes, videos of the conspiracy. Where is the PROOF that this group was there on orders of higher authority to conspire in Killing Dr. King??

            I know, Conspiracy Theorists don’ need no stinking evidence.

          • Carl Herman

            Covering-up an assassination is conspiracy after the fact, and under our laws fully complicit in the guilt of that act.

            Thanks, kuhkat, for showing the difference between the “evidence” those who attack us actually have versus what we explain and document.

            This helps the public choose who they find credible and virtuous.

            Again, pal: better choose who you support with care to your future. You’ll have what you support and work for.

        • Carl_Herman

          You, kuhnkat, don’t/won’t read. Better choose carefully who you laugh with and at, pal. Life has justice to place you with those exact “friends.” From the court transcript:

          (Verdict form passed to the Court.)

          THE COURT: I have authorized
          this gentleman here to take one picture of
          you which I’m going to have developed and
          make copies and send to you as I promised.
          Okay. All right, ladies and
          gentlemen. Let me ask you, do all of you
          agree with this verdict?
          THE JURY: Yes (In unison).
          THE COURT: In answer to the
          question did Loyd Jowers participate in a
          conspiracy to do harm to Dr. Martin Luther
          King, your answer is yes. Do you also find
          that others, including governmental agencies,
          were parties to this conspiracy as alleged by
          the defendant? Your answer to that one is
          also yes. And the total amount of damages
          you find for the plaintiffs entitled to is
          one hundred dollars. Is that your verdict?
          THE JURY: Yes (In unison).

  • Carl_Herman

 

 

Twitter