Posted on 08/21/2002 9:54:52 AM PDT by Samizdat
When Olson got the job, wife BKO was not yet dead. Seems to me circumstances have changed.
And I kind of doubt whether Olson's superiors would enforce any such bargain, in view of the changed circumstances.
Howlin's got his murder's mixed up - he's thinking of JFK!
Like JFK's murder, the "authorities" are part of the cover-up conspiracies, for what ever reason. We the people will be denied the truth, and treated to theatrical investigations and fictional official reports for any troublesome event. If only one plane had been involved in 9/11, taking out one of the WTC towers - it would have been a tragic accident caused by some microburst or malfunctioning instrument or flight controls on the A/C, I betcha!
"The Ninth Circuit in Favish, in attempting to balance the interests involved in nine photographs of the scene of Deputy White House Counsel Vincent Foster's suicide, remanded the case to the district court for it to view the photographs in camera (34) -- doing so even though those very photographs had been held to be protected by Exemption 7(C) in a previous case. (35) The district court on remand, following the Ninth Circuit's instructions, evaluated the family's privacy interests by employing an incorrect tort law standard -- i.e., whether the photographs were "'graphic, explicit, or extremely upsetting.'" (36)
Further, in analyzing the public interest in disclosure in Favish, the Ninth Circuit purported to follow Reporters Committee, yet based its finding of public interest in disclosure of the photographs merely upon plaintiff's "doubts" regarding the adequacy of the government's investigation into the suicide. (37) This departs radically from the narrow definition of public interest set forth in Reporters Committee. (38) This departure was compounded further when, on remand, the district court failed to employ the proper public interest standard -- i.e., whether disclosure of the photographs would shed light on the operations of the government -- and instead employed a more general, and unorthodox, public interest standard: Are the photographs "probative of the public's right to know?" "
Bingo.
When you consider the implications if he did not commit suicide, and the mass of evidence that mitigates against suicide -- and then scratch your head in amazement at how anyone could conclude that it was suicide (let alone that it become the official conclusion), there is a compelling reason for not keeping these photographs secret.
I do worry, however, that either some would be quietly withheld, or, released after being touched up. The stakes are suffiently high to make these possibilities valid concerns.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.