General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Justice for JFK [View all]avebury
(10,951 posts)was a magazine approaching Mark Lane to handle the appeal of a defamation lawsuit initiated by Howard Hunt and won by Hunt in the initial suit. Lane included information on the original case which, upon reading makes you wonder why on earth Hunt won because he didn't have a valid case. I am not a lawyer but even as I read the background of the first trial I knew that Hunt had no case, unfortunately for the magazine, their lawyer was worse then Hunt's lawyer. Land initially turned down the request and then decided to take it on because he would be able to depose retired and current CIA employees, something that was too good to pass up. He won the appeal on the exact grounds that I figured out when I read the case synopsis. Hunt's own testimony tanked his case.
I have not read much about Mark Lane beyond hearing that he is interested in investigating the Kennedy assassination so I cannot comment on his truthfulness. However, if he was in a public forum where a retired CIA employee made a public statement regarding the fact that the CIA never had any proof that Oswald went to the Russian Embassy in Mexico City (Lane asked for a copy of the tape of the debate) then one would hope that this comment would be verifiable by someone with time and energy to research it as there would have been a roomful of witnesses to said statement.