The David Ferrie File 3 - Eastern's Case Against David Ferrie

the beginning of this file. I'm surprised it took me so long to get around to wrapping this thing up, considering David Ferry is like one of my primary focuses. So there's another file. It's about three hundred and fifty pages. We'll cover that. We might just do it next and knock it out. I don't know. I'll dig it up. I don't know how much overlap there is. There might be some duplication between the two files. It's not a completely separate file. It has a lot of stuff in it,

minus a lot of the Eastern Airlines stuff. So I'll dig that up and we'll get to that after this, maybe not immediately. I'll maybe I'll find something else to jump into. I kind of just picked these based on whatever I'm interested in that day, because remember this podcast is me researching and you researching along with me, right, So today we're going to pick up where we left off. We have a memorandum here. I don't know if we're done with the Eastern Airlines documentation. We might be, we

might not be. I'm not sure, but all this stuff really revolves around that era. So here we go. Memorandum April nineteenth, nineteen sixty seven to Jim Garrison from Andrew Sciambra, Assistant District Attorney. He was an employee of Garrison Reference Special Investigation. Al Landry interview with I talked with A. Landry at the New Orleans Athletic Club in the presence of Beau le Moyne, Perry Russo, Jim Alcock, Charlie Ward, and Lou Ivan, and it says in parentheses, this was

during your visit to Las Vegas. Al Landry told me that he first met David Ferry in nineteen sixty. He said that he was in the Cap in fifty nine and sixty and that at the time he was around fifteen years old. Landry said that Ferry was second in command in the cap and then a man named Morrell was in command. M R R. E LLL. Ferry at that time lived at the three point thirty one Atherton Drive, Metorie, Louisiana address. Landry stated that his mother also lived in

the house. That's interesting. This is really the first time I'm realizing this. M. Landry said that Leyton Martins used to stay there for two and three months at a time. Landry said to some of the people in the squadron at the time were Droe Pettini, Joe Howard, Carl Costa, Scott Sainz, Donnie Richards, Butch, marsh Al Sharem, Mike Cruschet, Johnny Espinnin Price, somebody named Price no first name lighton Martin's, Jim Landry, whose father was a mechanic for Eastern Airlines,

Johnny Johnston, and Rodney Williams. So Jim and Al Landry are not related, now that we've got that clarified. Landry said that Ferry has hypnotized him twice and that he can remember. He also said that Ferry never did take him out of the country, but he did leave home of his own accord around nineteen sixty. Landry said he met Ferry in the Balter building when he came back in from out of town. Landry said he went into the service in sixty two and was in the service

until well after the assassination. He says he knows Arcacha, but does not know Julian Buzznado. That's from Andrews Scamber. All right. Next page looks like a photocopy of a couple pages from a notebook. He's the spiral thing in the middle. It's got a bunch of dates and numbers here. I'm not sure exactly what these are. Maybe coordinates, I'm not sure. Maybe it's a photocopy from David Faerriy's book. All right. Next is a page with it's got a list of names and then it's got total class dates

and something. It kind of almost looks like a like a military roster document. I'm looking at the names here, I don't really see anything. See any that jump out as relevant to the investigation. Kenneth arch and Skipper, Allen Gerald, Orio, Frank Ben Foddy, Tom Baker, Bob Baker, Carlos Bertat, Jeremy Brown, Brian Birch, Bobby Carbahaal Willhelm, colmbe, Charles Coolan, Neil Couvian,

and James Kuran. Got a couple more as I scrolled down, Philip Dio, Grassius, Darvin, decant Or, d E. S c A n T, Keith Dufour, Cyril DuPont, Richard Dus, d u E S s E Jesse, Estapa, Charlie. I can't read. The last name begins with an F E FOA set f E w A s E T. Maybe Howard, Philby, John Flynn, Johnny Freelich, Don Fletterich, Tim George, Charles, George George, George, Harvey, Gustafsson, Spinando frayn Uh Coral Curls, Porsche, somebody else Porsche. Can't

read that somebody named best. All right, So we got page upon page of these names. I'm not gonna none of them jump out as to me as significant, so I will continue on. There's really there's not even a notation of what this is. There's a number here at the bottom with in parentheses Loyola. I don't know what that's referring to. I don't think this is a school roster. There's some kind of class something, because it hasn't everyone passed with an S like satisfactory and a date. Yeah,

I don't know what the fuck this is. It must be something related to David Ferry, because it's surrounded by pages of hand notes, handwritten notes in a spiral notebook. The notes are pretty erratic. Here it looks like it has some drawing, some rectangles with a bunch of circles in and then it has some math. He was doing some math on this page, and then some miscellaneous names and stuff written over it like it's all really just a bunch of scribbles. Who knows what the hell any

of this means. There's nothing really cohesive about it. Then here we have another list list of what I don't know, and then he says written on it says I make my own flight school. And then it says where underlined, So he's writing out some kind of plans last week champion, and then champion is underlined. Beneath that it says offense with a question mark in which parish did you am appear before the judge? That's written there with a question mark.

A notation in the column says red light school speeding. I don't know what that means. Next page has there's a notation here Oswald and the and the numbers twelve dash three and the twelve dash three is circled. And this looks like a drawing. It almost looks like what it would look like if you were like in an amphitheater. He's got a bunch of circles like probably indicating people, and a bunch of long rectangles which kind of look

like benches set up before this stage. I can't really tell which way is the top because he's got stuff written from every angle here. Let me zoom out on this thing if I can. Yeah, I'm gonna screenshot this and post this on X so everyone can take a look at it. I don't know what the hell it is all about, all right, continuing on more lists, This looks like a phone book. This part here looks like a phone book. Doesn't have any phone numbers. Got a

bunch of names. It's got fo Cell and Frederick O'Sullivan. So he was a masad guy who actually was a cop in New Orleans who was involved with Oswald and Civil Air Patrol all the way back in fifty five. But this handwriting here is really really fucking neat. I just don't buy that. This is fucking I just don't buy that This could be fairies handwriting. It's so fucking neat. Next thing down looks like a telegram or some kind

of letter sent. Heading is Phil Lynch Aircraft Sales Inc. Sold to mister Marlos Merdia and Merda in Metairie, Louisiana. Looks like a sale of an aircraft for services rendered. Oh as for a service receipt for services rendered on three two five one y. Also the return of any tools instruments, brand new nosewheel tire Sesna one seven to two spinner and raincoat payment pass due one hundred and

fifty dollars. That's photocopied and in there. M M all right, So now we seem to be back to Eastern Airlines. Eastern Airlines, let me see how many pages this goes through? This here is all right? So we got like six seven pages on the summary. The finality I believe of the evidence against David Ferry as per Eastern Airlines. I do not believe we've read this. This does not look like a duplicate. It's very clean. It doesn't look like

anything that I've seen before. But as I'm reading it, if I get some deja vus, I will let you know and we can skip it. But I don't think that's going to be the case. So this is a chronology of events. Brief of Eastern Airlines, Inc. On grievance of David Ferry. Chronology of events. On August twenty sixth, nineteen sixty one, the company learned through an article in the New Orleans Times Picky Union at Ferry had been arrested on charges of committing a crime against nature and

in decent acts of juvenile boys. On August twenty ninth, after unsuccessful attempts to contact Ferry, the company suspended in for an indefinite period until such time as the charges against Ferry are cleared. There followed a series of attempts by the company to obtain some explanation from Ferry in regards to those charges. Finally, on October nineteenth, nineteen sixty one, Ferry sent a letter to Captain Griner based on reports

of reputable detectives. In quotes, the letter stated that quote my problem has been traced with certainty to a highly placed local official. We have positive evidence that this official is a communist and has been in charge of some highly important communistic activities involving the protection of communists in

the area. Fairry's status with Eastern was finalized in Captain Griner's letter of September sixth, nineteen sixty one, to the effect that quote, the company will be willing to continue you on your present status until such time as final determinations of these charges can be made, the time a final decision as to your future employment at Eastern will be made. Some eleven criminal charges were eventually brought against Ferry.

By letter of January eighth, nineteen sixty three, received by Eastern. On January tenth, nineteen sixty three, mister Gill informed the company that the last of the criminal charges against Ferry had been null prost. Although no prosequi is a technical term, does not finally dispose of a charge, since it can be refiled without prejudice, and even though the action was not final as contemplated in the Grinder letter, the company elected to treat the criminal case as finalized and to

proceed with its investigation. In parentheses, it says the effect of the noll prosequi will be discussed further in a later portion of the brief. Ferry, by letter of January tenth, nineteen sixty three, was directed to report to the office of Captain Stone on January seventeenth, to discuss the improprieties which led to your suspension and to determine what future action the company will take in your case. All right, so let's let's pause for a second. January tenth, nineteen

sixty three. Where are we at with the assassination January tenth, nineteen sixty three. Well, by my calculations, it is around this time, perhaps even late sixty two. I mean, the sentiment had been brewing. The rumblings I'm sure had been brewing, you know, for a long time, but I believe things

became concrete. You know. I read an article on Perman dex and somebody, the person who wrote this article attributed the beginning of the plot to the Spring meeting of permandex A. Now, the problem I have with that is that Spring starts when March twentieth, give or take. Oswald had already ordered the rifle by the time Spring rolled around, and so that's kind of out right. It could not have been determined that late. It had to have been

set up prior to the ordering of the rifle. The ordering of the rifle is the very first step in the setup. What else was going on at that time. You've got the Walker meeting, and you've got or well, the Walker meeting with Jerry Hemming and Lauren Hall, which happened in March also, right, that happened like the twenty third, twenty second of March something like that. It was towards the end of March. And then you had just a couple of weeks later the Walker shooting on April tenth.

So all this is brewing. So where's the assassination at January tenth? When this when ferries going through all this shit with Eastern airlines. Well, this has to be around the time that the plot was underway, right, It had to have been starting to filter down. It had to have been in a most certainly a pre planning phase. People were being they were probably analyzing the people they

had in place. You know, Clay Shaw, the obvious guy, the direct link to Permandex, centrimondiout, commercial, commercial, schlumberget who else? The mafia right, like all that stuff. So yes, do I think that Permandex was directly involved in the pre planning? One hundred percent, without question, without question. Now it just comes down to timing. When did they meet or when did they internally? Obviously it's not going to be paperwork

on it. It's not going to be the fact that we even know that there was a meeting of the board in uh spring of sixty three is amazing, right, So it had to the plan, the actual planning itself, the discussion and the decision making and the implementation of action had to have started around this time, a time prior to Faery being brought into the loop, right, So they're doing that and he still has this going on, and there Fairy has not been brought into the larger

plot as of yet. Now that big brings us to a bigger question, when does Ferry get brought into the plot? He's obviously directly brought into it by clay Shaw clearly h duh, right, And so when does that occur? That is just something I'm throwing out there for everybody to keep track of if we can determine when that occurred

at some point, So let me continue. Ferry, by letter of January tenth, nineteen sixty three, was directed to report to the Office of Captain Stone on January seventeenth to discuss the improprieties which led to your suspension and to determine what future action the company will take in your case and quote. This meeting was delayed at Ferry's request, and instead of attending the meeting on January seventeenth, he

filed Grievance fifteen sixty three. On that date. The grievance alleged that Eastern violated fairies' rights by not restoring him to flight status as of January ninth, nineteen sixty three. It should be noted that the company's action suspending Ferry in nineteen sixty one was never grieved. Thus, all the pending grievances relate only to the action taken by the company after January ninth, nineteen sixty three, as requested by the Board. All pending grievances will be covered in this brief.

The second date established for the Miami meeting was January twenty eighth, nineteen sixty three. This date was again postponed at the request of Ferry or his representative, and the first step hearing in Grievance's fifteen sixty three. It was also postponed by the agreement. On February eighteenth, nineteen sixty three.

Grievance twenty nine sixty three was filed by Ferry, alleging a refusal to quote air original grievance in accordance with Section thirty, refusal to provide quote pilot with written specifications of reason why he's being held out of service, an attempt to compel grievance to give testimony prior to any scheduled hearing, and quote otherwise preventing him from exercising any of his contractual rights or complying with a company request

for quote informal hearing. Finally, on February eighteenth, nineteen sixty three, the meeting was held in Miami. At that meeting, Fairy positively refused to answer any questions concerning the criminal charges which had been brought against him or any other matter that had come to the attention of the company. Ferry was specifically directed to answer these questions and was carefully warned that refusal to answer would be considered grounds for

disciplinary action. On March first, sixty three, by letter of from F. A. Stone, Vice President Flight Operations, Ferry was discharged on that same date. The first step hearing in Grievance fifteen sixty three was rescheduled for March eighth, nineteen sixty three. On March eleventh, nineteen sixty three, same week

the rifle is allegedly ordered. Ferry filed Grievance forty eight Dashed sixty three, which pertained Here's a question, was Carrie Thornley involved in the managing of the PO box that the rifle and stuff was sent to, because we don't have any evidence that Oswald ever had any contact with that PO box. In particular, there was another PO box that Oswald is documented his having, I believe, in a totally different building. So was Carrie Thornley managing the ordering

of the rifle around this time? And how close was he to David Ferry at this time? We know he had already been to David Ferry's house by the summer of sixty two. He wrote that in his Affidavid confession letter. And so here we get into March of nineteen sixty three. The rifle plot is complete. It hasn't been ordered yet, No it hasn't, but that's coming right, And so the

plot is well underway at this point. And oom, you know fuck that I had already concluded that, like Shaw and Thornley and Ferry, Ferry was the most subservient of all of them. If there was a hierarchy, Kerry Thornley clearly seemed to have a different line back to cia and and his handlers. I'd say he had a different

chain than clay Shaw did than Ferry did. Right. So if if and this is only a big if, we don't know this, If Carrie Thornley was the one who ordered the rifle, possibly using Marina to forge stuff, because we know she did, it's how much stuff did she forge? The question? Then if he was doing that in March of sixty three, how much of that was David Ferry? Even in on right, David Ferry might not have been in on any of it. He might not have known

any of that stuff unless it was discussed separately. But that seems like it would have been a compartmentalized operation, separate from the shooting itself, right, separate from Tippett and

all that stuff. You know, one thing that just jumped into my mind a couple of weeks ago that's been kind of pinging around ever since, is that in that Carrie Thornley letter to Jim Garrison, the fifty page aff of David there's one part that he writes that he who was it was it that or was this information might have come from him, or it might have come from somebody he spoke to, maybe broch Well, it came

from somebody somewhere in that area. But it said that Carrie Thornley said that he had to do two things for the company, which is cia we're assuming of duh. And he said he had to show that he could sleep with a man and that he could kill somebody, and that he had proven that he could do both. That's in there somewhere. It's either in the Brocheers stuff or in the Yeah, probably isn't in the Kerry Thorny main file or the letter to Garrison. It's probably in

the Brochier stuff. But I remember that and it just jumped off the page for me, And so I think that's pretty interesting that he would say that. And who was the person that he would have killed? He didn't kill anybody when he was in the military. Who was that person he would have killed that he would have talked to Brochiers about years later? JD. Tippett. JD. Tippett, And who was the guy he slept with? Broch Ears right, So, yeah, that was my little tangent for today. Let me continue

on on March first, sixty three. I already read that part. On March eleventh, sixty three, Fairy filed grievance forty eight sixty three which pertained his discharge. Ferry was then provided with a more extensive breakdown of the items relied upon in discharging him review of evidence on behalf of the company. The Board, in considering this case should keep in mind the fact that the main energies of the grievance were devoted to the suppression of the pertinent facts about his behavior.

The hearing was probably the most technical in the long history of arbitrations under the Railway Labor Act, insofar as objections and rulings and proffered evidence time and time again, evidence was excluded which would normally be received. As a matter of course, the grievance efforts to suppress evidence and keep the board in the dark as to his activities were so successful that probably the majority of the company's

evidence was excluded. However, in the long run, the efforts of the grievance were unavailing for even the minor portion of the company's case which has succeeded in getting before the Board proved conclusively that these charges brought by the company were true, and that the company's actions were justified.

Sergeant Fourtya, the New Orleans police officer who conducted a major portion of the investigation that led to the filing of the eleven criminal charges, testified extensively concerning that investigation. His testimony showed a normal, conscientious police investigation which started with a routine investigation of the report that juvenile Alexander

Landry had run away from home. The only non routine aspect of the investigation was the fact that at every step of the police investigation of the runaway juvenile, evidence of the criminal activities on the part of Ferry were uncovered. Thus, the investigation grew in significance and the criminal charges against

Ferry multiplied. A review of Sergeant Fournier's testimony leads one inescapably at the conclusion that the criminal charges against Ferry were not the result of any sinister forces at work or the result of the activities of an outraged mother. The criminal charges resulted directly and solely from Fairiy's nefarious activities. There can be no doubt that Ferry was intimately connected

with Alexander Landry's runaway from home. It is even admitted that the first time Landry ran away, he went directly to Ferry. The second time he ran away, he did not return until his parents signed a statement agreeing not to prosecute Ferry again. This is admitted by Fairry. Nor can there be any doubt that Faerry was intimately connected with the al Chamei's runaway from home. Sergeant Fournier testified that as to Ferry visiting Charem in the youth Detention

center under the pretext of being a doctor. The connection is also confirmed by the passport obtained for Chamie by Ferry at approximately the time of the runaway. The evidence points directly to the fact that Fairy assisted that child in running away and that his visit to the child was for the purpose of ensuring that he would conceal

the part played by Ferry. Sergeant Fournier's testimony the charges that Ferry had purported to be a medical doctor and his connection with the Holy Apostle, the Catholic Church of North America and with the Yeah whatever medical equipment, a priest, robe and chalice were found when Faery's house were searched. Sergeant Fournier's testimony showed that the statements of the juveniles involved as to Fairie's sexual deviations were obtained freely involuntarily.

While this type of thing is not easy for a boy to admit, it must have been a great relief to get these matters off their conscienceness. Certainly, these are not the type of matters one makes up to tell about oneself merely out of sympathy for the mother of a friend. It should also be pointed out that the relatively brief cross examination of Sergeant Fournier did not reveal any inconsistencies in his testimony, nor did that cross examination reveal any hints of undue pressure brought to bear on

the sergeant during his investigation. Sergeant Fournier was allowed to allowed on the stand by James Joseph Landry. James Landry, who is now eighteen, testified that he met Ferry in August of nineteen sixty at the New Orleans Airport. Landry was sixteen at the time. The meeting was a result of a discussion between Ferry and Landry's father, who was

an Eastern Ramp serviceman. Ferry had inquired as to whether or not James Landry would be interested in joining a Civil Air Patrol Squadron known as the METAI Falcon Squadron. On meeting Ferry, James Landry joined squadron and was issued a membership card. Landry's testimony as to his understanding of the status of the squadron as an official part of the Civil Air Patrol was his follows, well, for a long time we did not have a charter. Then I

guess it was over a year. He finally showed up with a charter and said, we're officially in the CAAP. Who's he David Ferry. Landry went on to describe parties at Ferry's house during which Ferry supplied and served alcohol to miners who were in the CAAP. Landry then testified as to having sexual relations with Ferry on nights that

he stayed at Ferry's home. The Board's special attention is called to this witness's demeanor on the stand and the fact that vigorous cross examination and attempt to show a motive for the testimony failed to reveal any motive except that the testimony was true. Landry's testimony had the ring of truth in contrast to the false notes struck by the witnesses for the grievance. Landry was followed to the stand by doctor Yeger. Doctor Yeager testified concerning complaints received

about Fairry practicing medicine without a license. Ferry was called in by doctor Yeager and warned against such action, whereupon, through a forty minute interview, Ferry spun a fantastic web of lies about his background and activities. Note particularly the testimony about Ferry claiming to have several PhDs at page one forty four, and compare with Irion's testimony on the same subject. Unfortunately for Fairy, doctor Yeger was in a position to check many of these statements and found them

to be completely false. Doctor Yeager's testimony in regards to the complaints received should be considered in connection with company Exhibit four, which shows that Ferry had himself listed in the telephone directory as doctor, with Sergeant forty a's testimony in regard to the medical instruments found in Ferry's home, and with the testimony of Irion, a witness called by Ferry, who testified the Fairy often treated him for various sicknesses.

The next witness on behalf of the company was John Roger Espinen, mister a Spinnin's son had been a member of Fairies's unauthorized CAAP Metarie Falcon squadron. Mister Spinin testified as to having become suspicious of the squadron's authenticity, of Fairy's statements that it was an authorized squadron, and of his obtaining the forged certificate and taking it to the Air Force CAAP sergeant, who confirmed a suspicion of its

being invalid. He Esponon also testified that the supposed certificate was on a form used for CAAP certificates. After mister A. Spinin's testimony, there could be no doubt that Ferry organized a bonus, a bogus CAAP squadron and deceived the parents and members as to its status. To why, at the

questions about its status he forged a CAAP certificate. Mister A. Spinnin's testimony was of course, completely confirmed by the records of the CAAP and particularly the sergeant's memo to file regarding A. Spinnin's visit to the headquarters with the Ford's certificate. The Board should particularly note the representations of mister Gill and Ferry that appear on page three h two to

three oh four of the transcript. Both gentlemen assured the board there was a state charter which was obtained in nineteen sixty one and which would be introduced in evidence by them. These representations proved to be completely false, as no such document was ever tendered by them. There was no state charter issued until nineteen sixty two, long after Fairy's arrest and the breakdown on the breakup of the squadron. Moreover, they knew they could not produce any charter issued in

nineteen sixty one. The company did produce the only state charter issued. It was in nineteen sixty two and it was signed by Ferry. This attempt to mislead the board was typical of the Grievance case from beginning to end. The next witness for the company was Ronald Hubner. Three exhibits were introduced during his testimony. The first exhibit was a letter from the American Vice Consul in Italy, and it exploded completely Faerry's contention that he had a PhD

from Phoenix University in Barr, Italy. The second exhibit was the minutes of the New Orleans Chapter of the Military Order of World Wars meeting of July twenty fourth, nineteen sixty one, at which Ferry made a speech which inflamed the membership. This record of the meeting shows that Ferry was indulging in these activities as an Eastern Airlines captain,

not as a private individual. The third exhibit was a letter from Colonel Christiansen of the U. S Air Force detailing some of the difficulties Ferry got into in the CAP during the period that he was a legitimate member. The remainder of the company's case consisted of a series of exhibits. Exhibits forty four to fifty four were records of the Civil Air Patrol regarding Ferry. They showed that from nineteen fifty five to nineteen fifty nine Ferry was

out of the Civil Air Patrol. Apparently, he was put out in nineteen fifty five against his wishes, and it took him approximately one year starting in nineteen fifty eight to obtain permission to return. He was in the Civil Air Patrol from approximately September fifty nine until June of nineteen sixty. He was then again forced out because of his misbehavior. Company Exhibit forty eight shows that he used his claim to have a PhD in gaining readmission to

the Civil Air Patrol Company. Exhibits fifty one to fifty four show that it was generally believed in New Orleans that Ferry had an authorized squadron in sixty one, and these misrepresentations had reached the point that the Civil Air Patrol was considering obtaining newspaper coverage of their denials of any connection to Ferry. Exhibits seventy two and seventy three

were rebuttal exhibits of Fairy's testimony regarding Italian universities. They show the actual methods of accreditation, the requirements for attendance of foreign students, the degrees awarded in that Phoenix University is not a recognized Italian university. You don't say these exhibits should be compared to the Faery's testimony on the subjects.

The result is that Fairi's testimony regarding the Italian system of higher learning, molded by him to fit his claimed alma mater, is completely refuted by the impartial documentary exhibits introduced by the company. Other company exhibits were Fairiy's application for employment and the physical record he filled out when applying for employment. Most of the company's testimony showing that many facts were concealed by Fairy and making out these

forms was excluded. However, Fairy testified about these matters, and his testimony alone convicts him of omitting many derogatory items. His explanation for not listing his total educational and employment record is certainly amazing, but hardly persuasive. The health records introduced by Fairy himself show mental and physical problems which should have been revealed to the company, especially the record of the Cleveland Clinic, which was introduced after a demand

for its production by the company. Mister Gill explained this medical report as being due to Fairies tender age at the time. At the time, Fairies's tender age was twenty six. Review of testimony on behalf of grievant, it would be a kindness to Fairy if the board simply ignores all the testimony introduced on his behalf. Unfortunately, for Ferry, the board must consider the entire record. It is submitted that the grievance side of the case standing alone, is sufficient

to justify the board in upholding the discharge. Ferry, on the stand, testified that everyone knew his squadron was not part of the Civil Air Patrol, and that in early sixty one he had obtained a state charter for a nonprofit corporation. An unsworn, unsigned deposition in absentia of Martin's was offered as an exhibit at this time by Ferry to support his testimony. According to mister Gill, this deposition was based on a letter written by mister more Martin's. Mysteriously,

Martin's had not had an opportunity to sign it. The deposition stated that a charter for a nonprofit corporation was obtained in early nineteen sixty one and was kept at Faerry's house. The deposition went on to state that this was the document mister Espinin has said and the sergeant

of the Civil Air Patrol examined. Unfortunately, this explanation was doomed to fall apart practically before it was offered for To assist the board, the company at this point produced a copy of the only state charter for a nonprofit corporation obtained by Ferry. This charter was applied for in sixty two, not nineteen sixty one. The date is, of course, long after Fairiy's arrest, even longer after mister Espinin had

checked and forged checked the Forge Caap charter. Moreover, the nineteen sixty two document was signed by Ferry, which establishes beyond question his knowledge that no previous charter existed. Of course, this nineteen sixty two charter or also exploded the unsworn,

unsigned deposition in absentia of Martin's. Indeed, when it was pointed out the deposition contained parenthetical portions indicating that Martin's was being handed various documents for inspection while his deposition was in progress, mister Gill found it necessary to explain further that the deposition was not alone based on upon a letter from Martin's after all, but was also based upon a personal interview in his office, sort of a

mixture of the two. That's funny. As Martin's is giving a deposition, Gill's handing him papers to read, Fairy's story changed rapidly. He next claimed that, despite being the leader of the squadron, he did not check details such as a charter that was the responsibility of the young boys

in the squadron. He ignored completely the fact that when he signed the nineteen sixty two charter he had to know there was no previous charter in that name, and that when he introduced the Martins deposition, he knew the facts stated therein were untrue. Fairy proceeded with testimony to the effect that the Landry accusation originally related to April twenty sixth, nineteen sixty one. He testified about visiting one Prince, an Eastern crew scheduler, and obtained absolute proof that he

was not in New Orleans on April twenty sixth. The information supposedly obtained from Prince was to the effect that Fairry was on a flight, as shown by flight records. Ferry then implied that the district Attorney was tipped off to this proof, and the date on the indictment was changed to April twenty eighth, nineteen sixty one. The on cross examination, he first refused to answer any questions about

the proof obtained from Prince. He then became vague and could not remember what the proof was or whether the proof regarding April twenty six was even obtained from Prince. This initial refusal to testify and the subsequent vagueness is understandable in view of the proof offered by the company in the form of pay records showing he was on vacation the last half of April nineteen sixty one. Fairry's other testimony was as wild and unconvincing as the first

two instances noted. First, he had good solid PhD. Then, after cross examination on red direct by his attorney, he took the position that, regardless of its validity, he felt he had benefited by obtaining it. Of course, the board should not forget his testimony that he obtained this PhD to impress Harvard professors with his ability in the area of air safety. Also noteworthy was his testimony that he listed himself in the telephone book as doctor for the

same purpose. Ferry left to the board's imagination how the Harvard professors were going to be impressed by his listening in by his listing in the New Orleans telephone Book. It would serve no useful purpose, and space scarcely permits a discussion of all the inconsistencies and inaccuracies in Faerry's testimony. One other aspect of his testimony is so important that it must be touched upon. Ferry had some eleven criminal

charges brought against him. On direct examination, he did not attempt any detailed explanation of why this should happen to him, other than implications that it was done by Missus Landry. He had previously explained in a letter to Captain Grennier that it all happened because he was hot on the trail of communists and some worked for Eastern Airlines. On cross examination, he was offered the chance to explain along.

Statement was made that based on investigations by private detectives, it could be shown that his troubles with the law were due to communists and Missus Landry. However, when details were requested, it became apparent that there was no evidence to support this explanation. A district attorney was supposed to be the key figure. However, Ferry testified this district attorney refused to have anything to do with the charges, and the majority of the charges were actually brought in an

entirely different parish. No connection was shown between this district attorney and Missus Landry and the individuals who signed statements. The net result of Faerry's testimony on this subject was that he had no explanation at all. Thus, Sergeant Fournier's testimony, such as he was allowed to give involving his normal impartial police investigation stands completely unrefuted. The other witnesses called by Ferry contributed more to the company's case than to

Ferri's case. Irion's testimony on cross examination was about the most damaging testimony the Fairies presented during the hearings. He stated that during nineteen fifty five through nineteen sixty, Ferry participated in CAAP meetings and wore a captain's uniform. Of course, the previously introduced CAAP documents proved conclusively that Ferry was not an official member of the CAP during most of

this period. Hmm wow Arian also testified that it was unlawful to wear this uniform unless you were an official member of the CAAP. His prejudice was shown on his testimony that his opinion of Fairy would not be changed even if it were proven to him that Ferry was not a member of the CAAP and was not authorized to wear a uniform during most of the nineteen fifty

nineteen fifty five to nineteen sixty period. Despite approximately a half hour of leading questions and prompting by Grievance attorney on redirect Struck to his story about Fairies, wearing a CAP uniform during periods when he, by his own admission, was not a member of the Cap. His other testimony directly supported the position of the company. It was directly contrary to Fairiy's testimony. He testified that Ferry had medical instruments in his home prior to his mother's coming to

live with him. Fairry had testified that they were only for his mother, That Fairry had three college degrees, that Ferry was supposedly studying to be a medical doctor, that Fairry hypnotized some of the boys, and that Ferry had a chalice at his home. Lewallen's testimony on behalf of Ferry was totally unpersuasive. Apparently, the main purpose of calling LewAllen was to support Fairy's account of how he filled out his inaccurate employment application form in Cleveland just before

being hired by Eastern. Since Luallen was in the Air Force at the time, many miles away in the Carolinas, he explained his presence in Cleveland by testimony that his superior had given him three or four days off in the middle of the week. According to Llewellyn, he was not on lever On pass. He was just given some time off and just happened to be in Cleveland and looking over Fairy's shoulder at the time. The form was filled in and signed as true. He remembered the exact

details vividly. That's fucking hilarious, Jesus lleu. Allen also confirmed Irian's testimony about fairies participating in the Civil Air Patrol during nineteen fifty five to nineteen sixty, although under extensive prompting. He later changed his testimony and attempted to come in

line with the story that Ferry had previously given. When mister Banister took the stand, the board was treated to the rare experience of having one attorney for the grievance elicit testimony, while the other attorney for the grievance objected to the testimony and had it stricken ha about the only conclusion that could be drawn from mister Banister's testimony was that he had interviewed Fairy's friends and his friends had spoken well of him. From all indications, he interviewed

only people whose names Ferry had supplied. Mister Banister testified about his investigation of fairies speech before the Veterans Organization in the role of an Eastern fairy must have spoken before that organization twice and had both speeches stopped. Either that or mister Banister's investigation was woefully inadequate, for he testified as the fairies attacking the then President Eisenhower. The company's evidence all related to a speech attacking President mister Kennedy.

Here's the last I think this is the last part discussion. It would seem obvious that the evidence introduced on behalf of the company or the evidence introduced on behalf of the grievan, either or both establishes beyond any doubt the company's discharge of Ferry was justified. The only real defense set forth on behalf of the grievment was that he is smart enough to stay out of jail, so he is certainly good enough to be an Eastern captain. Truly,

this is an amazing defense. That's wild. One might expect to hear it offered in defense of a janitor, but it grates on the sensibility is to hear it offered on behalf of an Eastern captain. An Eastern captain holds a highly paid, highly respected, highly responsible position. He is responsible for the lives of thousands of passengers and millions on millions of dollars of equipment during the course of

a year. If Eastern is to secure passenger revenue with which to pay its thousands of employees, it its pilot group must retain the respect and trust of the traveling public. The general public is in no position to judge the flying ability of a pilot. It makes its judgments on the appearance and general reputation of an airlines pilot personnel. One does not lightly put one's life in the hands of another, and certainly not in the hands of a

man like Ferry. The Airline Pilot's Association has long been in accord with these principles. It has worked for years to create a professional status for the airline pilot. Each base has its professional standards committee, which is interested in far more than just a pilot's flying ability. Neither the company nor the ALPA would ever be satisfied to have a standard set at the level necessary for the board

to find in favor of Fairy. Contrary to Fairy's contention, one is not proven that his behavior meets the standards for an airline captain. By merely proving one has not been sentenced to jail. During the course of the hearing, there were many discussions on the effect of the case being null pross. Fairry would have had the Board believe that in some ways this completely clears his record, that it is in effect a finding of not guilty. Actually, it amounts to nothing more than a decision by the

district Attorney not to proceed at the time. This is spelled out in Title fifteen of the Louisiana Revised Statute, Section in fifteen three twenty eight, which reads, a null pross simply discharges a particular indictment or part thereof, and is no bar to a subsequent prosecution for the offense

as to which the null pross was entered. Thus, if the statute of limitations, a procedural rule having nothing to do with whether or not a person is guilty of a charge, has not run, ten of the original cases could be refiled in Louisiana in the future. Certainly, in such circumstances, the entry of a null pross is no bar to this board's looking into the actions of Fairy.

Faerry Blandly took the position that the not guilty verdict in the criminal case relating to James Landry prohibited this board from considering any of his activities in connection with landry. This is not even the rule in connection with the courts of law, let alone action by an administrative board

under the Railway Labor Act. A Professor Prosser in the Law of Torts a second Edition, nineteen fifty five, page seven points out quote the same act may be both a crime against the states and a tort against an individual. In such a case, since the interests invaded are not the same and the objects to be accomplished by the two suits are different, there may be both a civil tort action and a criminal prosecution for the same offense.

The two may be conducted successively or at the same time, and a decision for or against the defendant in one is not conclusive as to the other and quote. Perhaps the most common example of this is in automobile accident cases.

Individual A may be criminally charged with speeding which caused an accident which injured B. If A is found not guilty of speeding in the criminal case, the jury in a later civil action for damages may still find that A was speeding and award damages to B. Indeed, it would be a reversible error to permit the jury in the civil action to be told that a had been found not guilty of speeding in the criminal case, as they must be left free to decide the issue for themselves.

This same theory carries over to the instant case. In the criminal case involving Ferry, the interest of the state was involved. The issue was whether or not Ferry had violated state statute on the date set forth in the charges. In this case, the interest of Eastern is involved. This board is concerned with the question of whether or not Faerry's conduct was such that Eastern had the right to

discharge him. The decision by Judge Jason Berkman, sitting as neutral with these mechanical system Board of Adjustment in the Clements case is direct authority for the proposition that Eastern may discharge an employee for the same behavior upon which the employee has successfully defended himself on a criminal case. There's no distinction between the Clements case and Ferry case in this question. It has been settled off for some thirteen years that only a system Board of Adjustment may

decide an issue involving reinstatement and back pay. The leading case establishing that principle and holding that only adjustment boards under the Railway Labor Act have jurisdiction of such disputes. Are Slocom v. Delaware and Railway Conductor's v. Southern Railway

three nine nine US two fifty five. Those Supreme Court decisions extend the doctrines announced in Railway Conductors versus Pitney to the effect that the administrative agency created under the Railway Labor Act to decide just matters of contract interpretation and applications should be given primary jurisdiction of such matters.

In the Slocom case, which involved interpreti and collective agreements with respect to job assignments and backpay, the Court concluded, we hold that jurisdiction of the board to adjust grievances and disputes of this type is exclusive. The doctrine of the Slocum case has been followed in many cases, including cases involving airline adjustment boards. See for example will Leavy

Eastern Airlines. It lists a whole bunch of cases here. Thus, no court, whether state or federal, criminal or civil, has the right to determine the issue presented to this system board as to whether or not Ferry is entitled to reinstatement and backpay. This system board should and make should and must make its own independent decision and on the

record before it. One of the company grounds for the discharge of Ferry was that he refused to cooperate when the company was conducting its investigation in January of nineteen sixty three to determine what action, if any, of the company should take. The transcript of that hearing, wherein Ferry refused to answer even simple preliminary questions, is clear proof

of the charge. No defense whatsoever was offered by the agreement on this point, justifying the company action on this ground alone, Ferry took the position that the company had no right to require him to cooperate in that investigation, and making this contention, he relies on Section twenty nine

A of the agreement. According to Ferry, the company must first take some action, and then at the first step hearing he could be required for the first time to offer some explanation or be required to cooperate with the company's investigation. A brief example in another context should be sufficient to show the absurdity of this contention. An aircraft may be severely damaged in a landing and there or at least three possibilities exist. There are, of course, others

as to the captain's responsibility. One the captain was a hero who saved the lives of the passengers. Two the captain was caught in an unusual circumstance and neither contributed to the accident nor could he prevent it. And three

the captain was careless and caused the accident. According to Fairy's contention, in order to get to the captain's side of the story, in order to determine whether he was a hero or a victim of circumstance or careless, the company must first discharge him and then discuss the matter with him at the first step hearing. Of course, Faery's interpretation is absurd. The company has an absolute right to investigate in question and employee about things that might affect

his employee status. The employee must cooperate or lose his employment. As every individual realizes, when you take a job, you must give up a portion of your right of privacy or face the consequence of being discharged. This is the effect of the decision of Judge Keyho in the O'Neill case. Um, all right, so I don't think I need to read the rest of this. You know why David Ferry got fired because he's a weirdo pedophile and he didn't want

to cooperate. And that's basically what they're saying here, Umm continuing on just to see if there's anything I'm missing, It doesn't really appear to be that way, so fairy. He tried to use like legal ease and you know, the letter of like the statements in the contracts and whatnot, to get around having to cooperate with Eastern Airlines. But

it's you know, it's just like police. You know, let's say you're getting to a police ie investigation and you get let's say a cop gets arrested for some bs, but then the charges get dropped, right internal affairs at his own agency. If he went in there and said, oh, well the charges were dropped, so we're good here, the agency he works for would be like no, no, no, no, no, no, I don't think so what the fuck happened? Right? And that's exactly what Eastern Airlines did, and they had an

absolute right to investigate. But he's trying to like legal ease his way out of it. And the last paragraph here conclusion on the evidence introduced at the hearings. The Board should and must find that grievances fifteen sixty three, twenty nine sixty three, and forty eight sixty three must be denied, respectfully. William G. Belt Junior or September ninth, nineteen sixty three. So this didn't even wrap up to

like two months before the assassination, right. I wonder how much that played a part in David Ferri's persona, because both of these things were overlapping at the time. That motherfucker must have been under some stress, all right. So next, it looks like we get onto the Alexander Landry stuff and we will talk about this on the next Corey Hughes Bloody History. Thanks for tuning in, everybody,