> 34. That the false allegations in said article: “that Plaintiff committed a holdup in London, ©mgland, and that George C. Wallace would pardon plaintif?, pp. 17 & 23 ‘respectively, were supplied to defendant MeMillian py defendant Hute as evidenced by statements made directly to Plaintiff by the above mentioned Percy Foreman (quoating Huie to Plaintiff) along with oral & written declarations by Defendat, Huie. See, elit wet le 35. That. defendant Huie in his ongoing media campaign against Plaintiff libeled Plaintiff in a CBS-TV interview hosted by, Dan Ratner, on or about January 2, 1976, by falsely alleging in effect that Plaintiff had ’ - murdered MLK Jr. and, robbed a loan company in London, England. 36, That the false allegations in reference to Adolph Hitler (p. 23 said article) was supplied to defendant _McMillian by Defendant, Fram, as ev~ didenced by statements made directly to plaintiff by Plaintiff's former - -Attorney (who was interviewed extensively by defendant, Frank) Robert Hill, of the Chattanooga Tennessee “bare 32. That defendant Huie has a history, for commercial reasons, of contentiousness with said, Gov. Wallace. 38. That defendant Frank has a history of defending Zionism even when ‘tt includes murder, eg, see Frank's novel, publisher in 1963, titled "THE DEED", and if allegations dn count 2-f above are substantiated in court proceeding Mr. Frank's intrusion into said cr. indictment asa Government advocate 4s readily explicable. 39. That an article in the BILALIAN NEWS published March 12, 1976, page 15, . : penultimate paragraph, reported MEK Jr. was shifting his political alli-~ , ances. ."Dr. King was shifting his political allinaces | and civil rights approach. To supvort this view observers point to Dr. King's views on the Viet Nam war and his growing support of the labor movement. Dr. King was also coming under the influence of the Teaching of the Honorable. ° Master Elijab Muhammad..." oe - 40. That Plaintiff filed a libel suit in the United States Dis. Ct. for the W.D. of Tennessee titled, Ray v. Frank, Civil Action no. C- 73-126, against herein defendant, Frank, in 1973, and had process served upon _ hin through his publisher, Doubleday company. ‘Mr. Frank was subsequently : -1894 J mw 55509 Docld: 327199576 Page 27153
releived by the Court as a defendant in said suit by falsely alleging { See, EX--6. p. 1) a process deficiency; Mr Frank's in effect falsely - alleged that he & Doubleday Company's affiliation was formal & transitory. eeeeneme . ~ in the communication incustry have ever offered live testimony in a court of law but on the contrary, they have utilized numerous ruses to avoid process and the subpoena while the record will evidence Plaintiff has not only given live testimony (in the aforementioned evidentiary hearing) but prior to the plea in said er. indictment was in contention with his cr. counsel in their insistence--in collusion with defendant, Huie--that plaint- iff not be a defense witness therein. Horeover, nothing of substance indicates that the legal systen— influencial publishing companies combine are not acting in concert to assu- re that their shall mever bea (jury) trial for Pleintiff, criminal or civil, that's related to said indictnent...apparently because it wouid nov % ~ be a “show trial",i.e., the Government could not sustain it's heretofore media case. a 2 And 4t would appear that a cr. defendant without the economic or political influence to effectively contest the above situation is not only subject to the denial of due process but can also expect his family members to be jailed and framed for crimincl offences while the same pub- lishing industries, sg, defendant, TIME, conplain self-rignteously about some distant country's coréctions or legal systen. hs Further, it seem's that, by chancd, the sdme media-political combine that coalesced in the Watergate investigation-prosecution and demanded full disclosure: are out-of the same sack as thoes who prosecuted plaintiff’ under said cr. 4ndictment and who are now opposed to dizclosures. IN SUMMARY: the above mentioned Percy Foreman has heretofore, since he & the Government maneuvered Plaintiff into said indictment plea, been giving a running commentary in the media on how he (Foreman) accon- plisned the feat. Now he has published analogously the evilogue to the feat in the STAR magazine wherein he pronounces: HW 55509 DBocld:321995276 Page 214
| © ncerttlne publicity, appellate courts are reluctant to Teverse becausa it would bring down a heap of criticisa fron the public sho are not familiar with the rule-and regulation of law...to find a Judge or a group of Judges with ehought courage would on experience, be unexpected", See, EX--¥. 42. That the defendants, TIME inc., George McMillian, W. Henry Haile, Willian Bratford Huie, and Gerold Frank are guilty of the violation as follows: (a) of libeling plaintiff in said TIME article with malicios intent. 43.. That the defendants, TIME inc., George McMillian, ¥. Henry Haile, are guilty of the violation as follows: - (a) of acting in collusion, by the nature of said article and it's publishing date, to influence the U.S. 6th circuit court of appeals in, Ray v. Rose, ilo. 73-1543, adversely to herein Plaintiff, thus obstructing justice and violating plaintiff's civil rights. - 44.-That defendant, MeMillian,is in addition guilty of the violation «. 2 as follows: Oe oe (a) of receving & publishing malicious marerial from defendants, Huie & Frank, with a reckless disregard for the truth or falsity of said material thus compounding NeMillian's libel. 45s That defendant, Huie, is in addition guilty of the violation as follows: “(€a) of libeling with malicious inteny by falsely Charging on a -CBS-TV special dated January 2, 1976, and hosted by Dan Ratner, that “laint~ iff had in effect murdered, Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., and, robbed a loan company in, London, England. ; 46. That defendant, Haile, is guflty of the additional violationras ‘follows: (a) of violating Plaintiff's civil rights with malicious intant by aiding & abetting defendant, McMillian, in his (Mémilidan's) publisging Said article, through furnishing McMillan information from the files of _ tke Tennessee Attorney General's office waile he (Haile) was asst. Att. Gen, (b) of having direct knowledge resulting from his tenure in the Tennessea A.G. office and his association with the aforementioned, Percy Foreman & Willian L. Barry, of the trut'fulness of allegation made in count-~3 herein above, thus Violating Plaintiff's ciyil Tights. -191- } aw 55509 Docld: 327199576 Page 2715
47. That defendants, Judge McRae & Brenda Pellicciotti, are guilty of the civil rights violation as follows: e (a) of deliberately withholding relevant portions of Plaintiff's transcript from an appellate court, refered to in count-14 b above, and thus contributed substantially to that court--U.S. 6th circuit court of. appeals-~sustaining Judge McRae's earlier. ruling therein ageinst Plaintiff. 48. That defendant, Judge McRae, is in addition guklty of the civil right's violation as follows: (a) of refusing to act on a motion to take perpetuating testi- mony from defendant, Huie, in the aforementioned evidentiary hearing, re- fered to in count-14& ¢ above. &9.. That the Plaintiff is entitled to exemplary danages because cefendants, ' excluding Judge McRae & & Pellicciotti, should be taught that the culpabil- ‘Lty of defendants in cr. indictments were intended under the United States constitution to be decided in courts of law rather than through fraudulent two defendants that legal requirements precede political considerations or blasness against a particular litigant. 50. That as a result of the defendants actions cited herein the Plaintiff has not only been ligeled in a maligant fashion but thoes who have the responsibility of upholding litigants constitutional rights have by their collusive acts indirectly contributed to and encouraged the libel. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment fron defendants, ex- ‘eluding Judge McRae, punitive damages of Five hundred thousand dollars respectively. James E. Ray Station--A . . . Nashville, Tennessee. - Plaintiff (ZG ~192- HW 55509 nisrepresentations in the commercial communications industry; and ths cther Docld: 371995765 Page 716
. . - x : oe, - . - . ’ . Vee so. tele . Loe me ve ao : rere cee o' oat ae ay . . ey aus, Boe oe a) A arr pve meneat aur ‘ cee Received of Sheriie Mittian N. Mo: “ris, Jr. the . Said monias boing ssent : by mail to James Earl ‘Ray, with aliases, from ue who resides at 2S tore! Elio, p1g- kk BINS The above sum was received in the form of on . Ne, WS713- hee we etd ; cash, cheek rapes \ Wee ‘money ordor.: ZR Co a7 ” 7 7 earcTome: STSpProprsate) | . ORM: Ne Awe R ae r . . : . . wey ! 7 FL. - \ o nt ope . - ee . : Le c ‘ eg a By :( . me ‘ames Fard Ray, County Jail _ - 7 eee ae F10. ANN Aue, | aN Ms sieve bs ~ ? é a : oo mo yet . . re a “oy Ve a ” ‘ ‘ . Wet oy . io . ‘ ‘ . os "2193-25 HW 55509 Docld: 321995278 Page 717
iN TH ATMGNAL COURT OF SHELSY COUNTY, TE if DIVISION ryy STATE OF TENNESSEE | YS. . NO. 16645 "JAMES EARL RAY ; DEFENDANT PETITION FOR WAIVER OF TRIAL AND REQUEST FOR ACCEPTANCE OF PLEA OF GUILTY That my true full neme is TAMES EARL RAY and I ossert that sll proceedings against me should be had in the neme which I hereby declare to be my true none, ; i . My attorney in the cause is PERCY FOREMAN » who was se- "" leeted and retsined by me,/who was appointed by the Court Rk waxxeaeet, to represent me in this cause. and Hugh Stanton, Sr., Public Defender, . I have received a copy of the indictment tevore being called upon to plead, and I have read and discussed it with my attorney, and believe end feel that I under- stand the accusation made against me in this cese and in each case listed herein. I hereby waive the formal reading of the indictment. ~ toe IT have told my attorney the facts and surrounding circumstances ss known _ {. to me concerning the matters mentioned in the indictments, and believe and feel that my attorney is fully informed as to all such matters. My ottorney has informed ne , at to the nature and cause of each accusation against me, end as to any end all |, possible defenses I might have in this cause. .. My attorney has advised me as to the punishnent provided by law for the , |’ offenses charged and embraced in the indictment egsinst me. My attorney has further | '~ advised that punishuent which the law provides for the erime with which I an charged in the indictment is as follows: . L- deat 1 ocution or confinement in the State Penitentiary for ‘~ life or for some period of time over twenty (20) years and if accepted by the Court and Jury my sentence on a plea of guilty will be: [_ i € in the State Penitentiary for ninety-nine years (99). re Loe It has been fully explained to me and I understand that I mey, if I so choose, ‘plead "Not Guilty" to any offense charged sgainst me, and that if I choose to plesd "Not Guilty” the Constitution guarantees and this Court wili provide me the right to s speedy i. ond public trial by jury; the right to see and hear all witnesses against me; the right to use the power ond process of the Court to comp21l the production of any evidence, ( Ancluding the sttendance of any witness, in my favor; and the right to have the assis- tance of counsel in my defense at all steges of the proceedings. In the exercise of my own free will end choice and without any threats or meessure of any kind or promises of gain or favor from any source whatsoever, and being op, ety aware of tne action I am taking, I do hereby in open Court request the Court to +i“ steept cy plea of guilty to the charges outlined herein. I hereby walve any right I wv 7 may or could have to a Motion for o New Trial, and/o an eppeal. Pot re Sink _ ern __- ~-195- HW 55509 DBocld:32199526 Page 220
Nt THO CREIATUAL COURT OF She LEY count PENNSSSEE I. - - . -DIVISION III pe ~ STATE OF TENNESSEE. - - . - . an | vs NO. 16645 , a 7 . ; f | DEFENDAWT . | | . - yt ORDER AUTHORIZING WAIVER OF TRIAL AND ACCEPTING | - | " PLEA OF GUILTY ‘This cause came on for hearing before the Honorable W. PRESTON BATTLE ss Judge of Division JIT » of the Criminel Court of Shelby County, Tennessee, on the petition of the . ' , - - defendant, _ JAMES EARL RAY _, for Waiver of triel by jury and | request for scceptsnce of a plea of guilty, seid petition being attached . . hereto and incorporated by reference herein; upon statements msde in L. the District Attorney General open Court by the defendsnt herein; his attorneysof record ; /the Assistant . AttorneysGeneral representing the State of Tennessce; and from questioning _ by the Court of defendent and his counsel in open Court; and La Ir APPEARING TO THE COURT efter careful consideration thst the . ; i ‘defendsnt herein has been fully edvised and understands his right to a trial by jury on the merits of the indictment against him, and thot the defendent herein does not elect to heave a jury determine his guilt or . { innocence under a plea of Not Guilty; end has waived the forzal reading : ; or of the indictment, AND: | - a IT FURTHER APPEARING TO THE CCURT thet the defendant intelligently | and understendingly waives his right to a trisl and of his own free wilt and choice end without eny threets or pressure of ony kind or promises, other that the recommendation of the State as to punishment; and does desire to | a ‘enter a plea of guilty end accept the recomendation of the State as to - | punisknent, waives his right to a Motion for a New Trial end /or én appegl, IT IS THEREFORE, ORDERED, ADJUODGED AND DECREED that the petition filed herein be snd the suze is hereby gronted. a ath 7 Enter this the [C — day of » 1969. Wits Arm , JUDGE 7 oo 7 . | -196- HW 55509 Docld:32199526 Page 221
gE FS ina | f WW 55509 JUDGE JUDGE. _ DEFENDANT JUDGE DEFENDANT f° JUDGE tI DEFENDANT ' JUDGE "James Earl Ray, stand.” “Have your lawyers explained all your rights to you and do you understand them?" "Yes" . . . "Do you know that you have a right to a trial by jury on the charge of Murder in the First Degree against you, the punish- ment for Murder in the First Degree ranging from Death by Electrocution to any time over twenty years? The burden of proof is on the State of Tennessee to prove you guilty be- yond a reasonable doubt and to a moral certainty and the de- cision of the Jury must be unanimous both as to guilt and punishment? . In the event of a jury verdict against you, you would have the right to file a Motion for a New Trial addressed te the trial judge? In the event of an adverse ruling against you on your Motion for a New Trial, you would have the right to successive appeals to the Tennessee Court of Criminal Ap- peals and the Supreme Court of Tennessee and to file a pe- tition for review by the Supreme Court of the United States? Do you understand that you have all these rights?" "Yes" "You are entering a plea of Guilty to Murder in the First Degree as charged in the Indictment and are compromising and settling your case on agreed punishment of ninety-nine years in the State Penitentiary. Is this what you want to do?" "Yesit "Do you understand that you are waiving, which means "giving up", a-formal trial by your Plea of Guilty although the laws of this State require the prosecution to present certain evi- dence to a jury in all cases of Pleas of Guilty to Murder in the First Degree? ; ‘\ oT a ed Co 2 ai, a Docld: 327199526 Page 222
~ DEFENDANT Voir Dire ‘DEFENDANT JUDGE DEFENDANT JUDGE DEFENDANT JUDGE of Defé._/ant on Waiver and Order : © By your plea of guilty you are also waiving your rights to (1) Motion for a New Trial; (2) Successive Appeals to the Tennessee Court of ‘Criminal Appeals ‘and the Supreme Court of Tennessee; (3) Petition.for Review by the’ Supreme “Court.of the United. States. - By your plea of guilty you are also abandoning and waiving your objections and exceptions to all the Motions and Petitions in which the Court has heretofore ruled’ against you in whole or in part, among them being: - + 1. Motion to withdraw plea and quash -indictment 2. Motion to inspect evidence 3. Motion to remove lights and cameras fron jail _ . ‘Motion for private consultation with ‘attorney 5. Petition to authorize defendant to take depositions 4 5 6. Motion to permit conference with Huie 7. Motion to permit photographs 8. Motion to designate court reporters 9. Motion to stipulate testimony 10. Suggestion of proper name" "Yes" “Has anything besides this sentence of ninety-nine years in the penitentiary been promised to you to get you to plead guilty? Has anything else been promised you by anyone?" "No" | "Has any pressure of any kind, by anyone in any way been used on you to get you to plead guilty?" MWNgM “Are you pleading guilty to Murder in the First Degree in this case because you killed Dr. Martin Luther King under such circumstances that would make you legally guilty of Murder in the First Degree under the law as explained to you by your lawyers?" ''¥es'! - ~198- fH WW 55509 Docld:321995298 Page 223
O  -. °° Oo | ' Page 5 . re Voir Dire of Defendant on Waiver and Order t JUDGE "Is this Plea of Guilty to Murder in the First Degree with agreed punishment of ninety-nine years in the State’ Peni- ; ; tentiary, freely, voluntarily and understandingly made and. is entered by you?" DEFENDANT "Yes" ; JUDGE "Is this Plea of Guilty on your part the free act of your free will, made with your full knowledge and understanding of its meaning and consequences?" DEFENDANT "Yes" JUDGE "You may be seated," t 4 ‘ >a H | - : ry aie a a . | foo a . . | forse, -199- i HW 55509 DBocld:321995276 Page 224