The Clay Shaw trial testimony of Dean Andrews





1426 (30)

February 25, 1969



MR. OSER: At this time, Your Honor, the State wishes to offer, introduce and file into evidence that which has previously been marked for purposes of identification "S-67" and "-71," the two reports signed by Colonel Finck.

MR. DYMOND: I call Mr. Dean Andrews, please.

THE COURT: Mr. Zelden, have a seat like everybody else.

MR. ALCOCK: May we approach the bench?

THE COURT: Yes, you certainly may.

(Discussion off the record.)

THE COURT: Sheriff, take the Jury in my chambers for a few moments.

(Whereupon, the Jury was removed.)

MR. ALCOCK: Your Honor, I would respectfully request this Court to first ascertain whether or not Mr. Andrews has an attorney present in court with him, and if he has, to have his attorney advise him of his Constitutional rights, and if he has not, have the Court advise him as to his Constitutional rights or the fact that this man has been convicted for perjury on this matter, that case is presently before the Louisiana Supreme Court and there is pending another perjury case dealing with this same subject matter. In all fairness to Mr. Andrews, I think he should have advice of counsel.

THE COURT: Do you have an attorney you wish to be present with you before we proceed with this matter?

MR. ANDREWS: My attorney is present in court, Your Honor, Mr. Michael Barry. He is my associate in the practice of law.

THE COURT: Is he present in court?

MR. ANDREWS: Yes, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Step up, Mr. Barry. Just have a seat here for a moment. I would like to make a preliminary statement. As you well know -- just have a seat there, sir. As you know, the fact that you are called as a witness in a case, that does not all of a sudden take away from your Constitutional privileges under the State Constitution. You cannot be forced to incriminate yourself by answers. Under Louisiana jurisprudence, you cannot be asked have you been arrested or charged, you can only be asked have you been convicted. The fact that you are on appeal, I will not permit the question to be asked have you been convicted because it is not a final matter, it is still in the process of being appealed.

With respect to other matters that you know as a factual nature, that is the question to be determined whether you will or will not answer these questions. You may take the position on a given question that you refuse to answer on the grounds that it may incriminate you and subject you to a future criminal prosecution, I will have to rule on it whether it will or will not, but the question whether or not they can ask you, a question of character, of your credibility, they cannot ask you have you been charged or have you been indicted or have you been arrested, the only question they could ask you is have you been convicted, and I will advise both the State and Defense I will not permit that question to be asked of Mr. Andrews because the conviction is not final. It is on appeal to the State Supreme Court and could possibly be appealed from the State Supreme Court to the United States Supreme Court, so I would like to know if Mr. Barry would like to confer with you to add to anything I may have said.

MR. BARRY: We have previously conferred, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Do you feel that Mr. Andrews is ready to proceed with the trial?

MR. BARRY: Ready to proceed, Your Honor.

THE COURT: You will be in the Jury's place there, just have a seat here (indicating).

MR. DYMOND: We will have no objection to having Mr. Barry sit along the side of Mr. Andrews.

MR. ALCOCK: Before you bring the Jury back in, I would like one minor clarification. I will certainly abide by the Court's instruction that I may not ask this witness whether or not he has been convicted because this conviction is on appeal; however, the Court is not making a ruling to the fact that I may not go into the subject matter of that conviction?

THE COURT: I did not state that.

MR. ALCOCK: I just wanted to clarify that.

THE COURT: We can get another chair. Don't we have one here?

(Discussion off the record.)

THE COURT: Let the record show that out of the presence of the Jury the witness has been advised by the Court of his constitutional rights and is in attendance with his attorney, Mr. Michael Barry.

You may proceed, Mr. Dymond.

DEAN A. ANDREWS, JR. having been first duly sworn by the Minute Clerk, was examined and testified as follows:

Q: You are Mr. Dean Andrews?

A: I am.

Q: Mr. Andrews, are you an attorney here in the City of New Orleans?

A: I am.

Q: How long have you been engaged in the practice, sir?

A: About 18 years.

Q: Now, Mr. Andrews, referring to November of 1963, and more particularly the 22nd and the days immediately thereafter, did you have occasion to be confined in the hospital here in New Orleans?

A: I was confined to Hotel Dieu Hospital, I believe I had double pneumonia.

THE COURT: You don't have to volunteer too much, just simply yes or no.


Q: While in Hotel Dieu Hospital, Mr. Andrews, did you receive a telephone call of an unusual nature?

A: Well, I received a telephone call.

Q: Would you kindly tell us from whom you received this telephone call.

THE COURT: That presumes he knows, does it not?

Q: If you know, Mr. Andrews.

A: May it please the Court, I have to take two objections to that question. One --

THE COURT: Mr. Andrews, speak a little louder. We have to get it in the record and we have to hear it. You may make your statement.

THE WITNESS: One, the attorney-client privilege, and, secondly, an answer to this question in relationship to the charge that is pending, presently pending that I haven't been tried on yet, might, may, might, tend, would r could connect me with the link of circumstances which would incriminate me.

THE COURT: Let's see now. I have to rule on this. He refuses to answer, one it would violate the attorney-client relationship and secondly it could tend to possibly incriminate him in a presently pending charge. Is that it?


Q: With respect to any telephone calls that you received --

THE COURT: I haven't ruled yet. I rule that the objections that he made are good. You may rephrase your question if you wish. You may pursue it in a different vein.

Q: The telephone call that you have said that you did receive, Mr. Andrews, was that a long-distance call or a local call?

A: A local call.

Q: And when did you receive it, sir?

A: I don't remember the time.

Q: Could you tell us approximately what date it was?

A: [sic] . . . president was assassinated, I believe it was a Saturday.

Q: That would be November 23. Is that correct?

A: That particular Saturday was November 23, that would be correct, yes.

Q: Was this call to your knowledge from the Defendant Clay Shaw?

A: No.

Q: Have you ever received a telephone call from Clay Shaw?

A: No.

Q: Have you ever known Clay Shaw?

A: No.

Q: Have you ever been introduced to him?

A: No.

Q: When was the first time that you ever saw Clay Shaw, Mr. Andrews?

A: When I saw his picture in the paper in connection with the investigation.

Q: Now, as a result of receiving the phone call which you said that you did receive, what if anything did you do, sir?

A: As I recall, I waited a while, I called my secretary, Mrs. Springer, to see if she could remember a file that we had on a Lee Oswald who was a walk-in to the office sometime in May or maybe the early part of June, I don't recall, Lee Oswald had consulted my office approximately four or five times in relation to some legal problems.

THE COURT: Speak into the microphone, please.

Q: After calling your office, did you do anything else?

A: I did not call my office; I called my secretary.

Q: Well --

A: She was at home.

Q: After calling your secretary, did you do anything else?

A: I believe my office investigator came to visit me and we talked about whether or not he remembered Lee Oswald.

Q: Did you make any other phone calls in connection with the call which you say you had received?

A: On what day?

Q: Either on the date that you received it or the

A: The following day, I believe it would be a Sunday, I believe I called Monk Zelden at the NOAC and spoke to Monk.

Q: What did you tell Mr. Zelden?

A: I don't recall, it was in connection with Lee Harvey Oswald, but I don't recall the context of the conversation.

Q: Could you tell us the purpose of your call to Mr. Zelden, sir?

A: I believe the purpose of the call was that if, since I was in the hospital, would Monk be interested in going to Dallas and possibly representing Lee Harvey Oswald.

Q: Now, at any time after receiving the call that you received while in the hospital, did you have occasion to have a conference with Mr. Regis Kennedy of the F.B.I.?

A: I don't recall it that way, Mr. Dymond.

Q: Will you tell us how you recall whatever happened in connection with Mr. Kennedy.

A: I think on Monday I called Mr. Kennedy to let him know that Lee Harvey Oswald had been in New Orleans during the summer or spring of 1963, and I don't recall his answer, I also called Mr. Rice, the head of the Secret Service, gave him the same information, they didn't appear too much interested.

Q: At any time after making these calls, did you see Mr. Kennedy?

A: I recall seeing Mr. Kennedy in my room in Hotel Dieu, I think about two, maybe two and a half hours after I made the phone call.

Q: Now, at the time that you saw Mr. Kennedy, what was your condition, that is, your physical condition as such?

A: He woke me up. I was under sedation, he woke me up from a sleep, I was under sedation.

Q: Do you recall seeing Mr. Kennedy any more than once?

A: All I recall is he said he wants -- he was apparently there more than once, but my memory was one time.

Q: The first time that you saw Mr. Kennedy was the first time that you were under sedation, or were you under sedating regularly after that?

A: Regularly.

Q: During the course of your conversation with Mr. Kennedy, did you furnish him with a fictitious name identifying the person from whom you had received the phone call while you were in Hotel Dieu?

A: I respectfully decline to answer that question for the reason that it may, might tend to link me up with the chain of circumstances that may result in being used as evidence against me in the pending charge.

MR. DYMOND: Does Your Honor want me to wait until you rule on that?

THE COURT: It is not attorney-client, it is -- this is claiming that there is a possibility his answer may or may not or could link him up with a chain of circumstances which could be used as evidence against him. I will sustain it, yes.

Q: In the course of your conversations with Mr. Kennedy, Mr. Andrews, did you ever use the name Clay Bertrand?

A: Yes.

Q: Is or was this Defendant Clay L. Shaw the Clay Bertrand to whom you were referring?

A: No.

Q: Without asking you who he was, do you know who the Clay Bertrand to whom you are referring is or was?

A: I believe I do.

Q: Did you know David Ferrie, Mr. Andrews?

A: I knew him slightly.

Q: Did you ever see David W. Ferrie in the company of Lee Harvey Oswald?

A: No.

Q: Did you ever hear Lee Harvey Oswald mention the name Clay Shaw?

A: No.

Q: Did you ever hear David W. Ferrie mention the name Lee Harvey Oswald or Lee Oswald?

A: No.

MR. DYMOND: We tender the witness.


Back to the top




Back to Shaw trial testimony

Search trial database chronologically

Additional resources on the trial of Clay Shaw


Search this site
    powered by FreeFind

Back to JFK menu

Dave Reitzes home page