Howard P. Willens

==Early career==

==Early career==

In late 1958, Willens joined the law firm of [[Kirkland & Ellis|Kirkland, Ellis, Hodson, Chaffetz & Masters]] in Washington, D.C. At that time, the U.S. Senate's [[McClellan Committee]] was engaged in public hearings led by [[Robert F. Kennedy]] concerning the influence of organized crime in the [[International Brotherhood of Teamsters]] (IBT) and possible criminal conduct by the IBT president, [[Jimmy Hoffa]]. Separately, a lawsuit filed in 1957 by dissident union members resulted in a [[consent decree]] requiring Hoffa and other IBT officials to address evidence of corruption.[https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp/175/764/1381960/ Cunningham v. English] 175 F. Supp. 764 (D.D.C. 1958), aff'd, 269 F.2d 517 (D.C. Cir. 1959), aff'd as modified, 269 F.2d 539 (D.C. Cir. 1959), cert. denied, 361 U.S. 905 (1959) The court created a three-member Board of Monitors to supervise and enforce the implementation of the consent decree.[https://web.archive.org/web/20021025174637/http://ipsn.org/court_cases/cleaning_labors_house_goldberg.htm Michael J. Goldberg, "Cleaning Labor's House: Institutional Reform Litigation in the Labor Movement,"] Duke Law Journal (Sept. 1989), pp. 985-86

In late 1958, Willens joined the law firm of [[Kirkland & Ellis|Kirkland, Ellis, Hodson, Chaffetz & Masters]] in [[Washington, D.C.]] At that time, the U.S. Senate's [[McClellan Committee]] was engaged in public hearings led by [[Robert F. Kennedy]] concerning the influence of organized crime in the [[International Brotherhood of Teamsters]] (IBT) and possible criminal conduct by the IBT president, [[Jimmy Hoffa]]. Separately, a lawsuit filed in 1957 by dissident union members resulted in a [[consent decree]] requiring Hoffa and other IBT officials to address evidence of corruption.[https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp/175/764/1381960/ Cunningham v. English] 175 F. Supp. 764 (D.D.C. 1958), aff'd, 269 F.2d 517 (D.C. Cir. 1959), aff'd as modified, 269 F.2d 539 (D.C. Cir. 1959), cert. denied, 361 U.S. 905 (1959) The court created a three-member Board of Monitors to supervise and enforce the implementation of the consent decree.[https://web.archive.org/web/20021025174637/http://ipsn.org/court_cases/cleaning_labors_house_goldberg.htm Michael J. Goldberg, "Cleaning Labor's House: Institutional Reform Litigation in the Labor Movement,"] Duke Law Journal (Sept. 1989), pp. 985-86

In 1960, the Board of Monitors hired Kirkland Ellis to handle several disputes between the Board and the IBT concerning the union's compliance with the consent decree.[http://www.ipsn.org/court_cases/cleaning_labors_house_goldberg.htm Michael J. Goldberg, "Cleaning Labor's House"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080517035033/http://www.ipsn.org/court_cases/cleaning_labors_house_goldberg.htm |date=2008-05-17 }} pp. 986-88 Willens joined a team of lawyers headed by Herbert J. ("Jack") Miller, Jr. to investigate various allegations against Hoffa relating to the disappearance of IBT records and the misuse of union funds.[https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F2/284/283/427035/ Hoffa v. Letts], 284 F.2d 283 (D.C. Cir. 1960); Dorsey v. Cunningham, 282 F.2d 842 (D.C. Cir. 1960)

In 1960, the Board of Monitors hired Kirkland Ellis to handle several disputes between the Board and the IBT concerning the union's compliance with the consent decree.[http://www.ipsn.org/court_cases/cleaning_labors_house_goldberg.htm Michael J. Goldberg, "Cleaning Labor's House"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080517035033/http://www.ipsn.org/court_cases/cleaning_labors_house_goldberg.htm |date=2008-05-17 }} pp. 986-88 Willens joined a team of lawyers headed by Herbert J. ("Jack") Miller, Jr. to investigate various allegations against Hoffa relating to the disappearance of IBT records and the misuse of union funds.[https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F2/284/283/427035/ Hoffa v. Letts], 284 F.2d 283 (D.C. Cir. 1960); Dorsey v. Cunningham, 282 F.2d 842 (D.C. Cir. 1960)

Following President Kennedy's election, Robert Kennedy was appointed [[United States Attorney General|Attorney General]] in 1961. He selected Jack Miller to serve as head of the Criminal Division of the [[United States Department of Justice|Justice Department]], and Willens became Second Assistant Attorney General in the Criminal Division.[https://www.jfk.org/oral_histories/howard-p-willens/ The Sixth Floor Museum at Dealey Plaza] They hired more lawyers to handle several investigations of Hoffa that were already underway in the Justice Department based on information collected by the McClellan Committee and the FBI. These investigations resulted in several indictments against Hoffa and his affiliates.[https://books.google.com/books?id=T07ox3p8bh4C ''Some of It Was Fun: Working with RFK and LBJ''] Nicholas Katzenbach, 2008, p. 98[https://books.google.com/books?id=AXKNDwAAQBAJ ''In Hoffa's Shadow: A Stepfather, a Disappearance in Detroit, and My Search for the Truth''] [[Jack Goldsmith]], Farrar, Straus and Giroux (2019).

Following President Kennedy's election, Robert Kennedy was appointed [[United States Attorney General|Attorney General]] in 1961. He selected Jack Miller to serve as head of the Criminal Division of the [[United States Department of Justice|Justice Department]], and Willens became Second Assistant Attorney General in the Criminal Division.[https://www.jfk.org/oral_histories/howard-p-willens/ The Sixth Floor Museum at Dealey Plaza] They hired more lawyers to handle several investigations of Hoffa that were already underway in the Justice Department based on information collected by the McClellan Committee and the FBI. These investigations resulted in several indictments against Hoffa and his affiliates.[https://books.google.com/books?id=T07ox3p8bh4C ''Some of It Was Fun: Working with RFK and LBJ''] Nicholas Katzenbach, 2008, p. 98[https://books.google.com/books?id=AXKNDwAAQBAJ ''In Hoffa's Shadow: A Stepfather, a Disappearance in Detroit, and My Search for the Truth''] [[Jack Goldsmith]], Farrar, Straus and Giroux (2019).

When Justice Department lawyers learned that Hoffa attempted to tamper with the jury in one of those cases, Robert Kennedy sent Willens to Tennessee to handle the Government's response. Hoffa was convicted of [[jury tampering]] in 1964 and sentenced to eight years in prison. When Hoffa appealed his conviction to the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, Willens represented the Government and obtained an order affirming the conviction in 1965.[https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/268758/united-states-v-james-r-hoffa-united-states-of-america-v-thomas-ewing/?q=&court_ag=on&order_by=score+desc U.S. v. Hoffa] 349 F.2d 20 (6th Cir. 1965)

When Justice Department lawyers learned that Hoffa attempted to tamper with the jury in one of those cases, Robert Kennedy sent Willens to Tennessee to handle the Government's response. Hoffa was convicted of [[jury tampering]] in 1964 and sentenced to eight years in prison. When Hoffa appealed his conviction to the [[United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit|Sixth Circuit]] Court of Appeals, Willens represented the Government and obtained an order affirming the conviction in 1965.[https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/268758/united-states-v-james-r-hoffa-united-states-of-america-v-thomas-ewing/?q=&court_ag=on&order_by=score+desc U.S. v. Hoffa] 349 F.2d 20 (6th Cir. 1965)

==Warren Commission==

==Warren Commission==

Willens reports in his book that the commission's attorneys knew from the beginning of the investigation that the FBI had made serious errors in its initial report of the assassination.Willens, ''History Will Prove Us Right'', p. 28 As the investigation continued, it became clear that the FBI was withholding important information about Oswald. Among other things, the FBI misled the Commission concerning its surveillance of Oswald in Dallas and New Orleans before the assassination, and failed to disclose Oswald's encounter with [[FBI Agent]] [[James Hosty]]. Further, in an act of "inexcusable dishonesty," Hoover concealed from the commission his own decision to discipline Hosty and 16 other FBI agents for their failure to identify Oswald as a security risk and to inform the Secret Service before the president's arrival in Dallas.Willens, ''History Will Prove Us Right'', pp. 79, 119, 155 Willens notes that later investigations examined the hidden FBI evidence "and no facts have come to light that challenge our fundamental conclusions regarding the identity of the assassin and the absence of any conspiracy."Willens, ''History Will Prove Us Right'', p. 294

Willens reports in his book that the commission's attorneys knew from the beginning of the investigation that the FBI had made serious errors in its initial report of the assassination.Willens, ''History Will Prove Us Right'', p. 28 As the investigation continued, it became clear that the FBI was withholding important information about Oswald. Among other things, the FBI misled the Commission concerning its surveillance of Oswald in Dallas and New Orleans before the assassination, and failed to disclose Oswald's encounter with [[FBI Agent]] [[James Hosty]]. Further, in an act of "inexcusable dishonesty," Hoover concealed from the commission his own decision to discipline Hosty and 16 other FBI agents for their failure to identify Oswald as a security risk and to inform the Secret Service before the president's arrival in Dallas.Willens, ''History Will Prove Us Right'', pp. 79, 119, 155 Willens notes that later investigations examined the hidden FBI evidence "and no facts have come to light that challenge our fundamental conclusions regarding the identity of the assassin and the absence of any conspiracy."Willens, ''History Will Prove Us Right'', p. 294

From the outset of the investigation, the commission's lawyers believed that evidence of a conspiracy was most likely to be found in Mexico, where Oswald traveled in September 1963. In April 1964, Willens went to Mexico to meet with FBI and CIA agents and to speak to witnesses concerning Oswald's interactions with Soviet and Cuban personnel in Mexico City. The agents indicated that Oswald's activities in Mexico were limited to efforts to obtain visas for travel through Cuba to the Soviet Union, and no evidence suggested that his visit was related to President Kennedy.Willens, ''History Will Prove Us Right'', pp. 121-27, 134

From the outset of the investigation, the commission's lawyers believed that evidence of a conspiracy was most likely to be found in Mexico, where Oswald traveled in September 1963. In April 1964, Willens went to Mexico to meet with FBI and CIA agents and to speak to witnesses concerning Oswald's interactions with Soviet and Cuban personnel in [[Mexico City]]. The agents indicated that Oswald's activities in Mexico were limited to efforts to obtain visas for travel through Cuba to the Soviet Union, and no evidence suggested that his visit was related to President Kennedy.Willens, ''History Will Prove Us Right'', pp. 121-27, 134

In his book, Willens describes the genesis of the [[single-bullet theory]] in informal meetings of the commission attorneys as they tried to determine the number of bullets fired at the presidential car and who was hit by each bullet. One attorney, [[David Belin]], focused his efforts on trying to prove that a second shooter had participated in the assassination, but detailed work by the FBI and analysis of the [[Zapruder film]] suggested that all of the shots that hit President Kennedy and [[John Connally|Governor Connally]] originated from Oswald's position in the book depository. Based on that work, the staff lawyers decided to test the hypotheses that the first bullet to hit the president also caused Connally's wounds.Willens, ''History Will Prove Us Right'', pp. 85-87 Over the objection of the FBI and Secret Service, they organized a reenactment of the shooting in Dallas on May 24, 1964. The reenactment "produced convincing evidence" supporting the single-bullet theory, and that evidence was confirmed by expert review of the medical and ballistics evidence.Willens, ''History Will Prove Us Right'', pp. 166-68 However, because Gov. Connally testified that he was hit by the second bullet – not the first bullet that hit the president – the Commission decided not to take a position on the single-bullet theory. Instead, the Commission concluded that "there is no question" that all of the shots were fired from the sixth floor of the book depository.Willens, ''History Will Prove Us Right'', pp. 270

In his book, Willens describes the genesis of the [[single-bullet theory]] in informal meetings of the commission attorneys as they tried to determine the number of bullets fired at the presidential car and who was hit by each bullet. One attorney, [[David Belin]], focused his efforts on trying to prove that a second shooter had participated in the assassination, but detailed work by the FBI and analysis of the [[Zapruder film]] suggested that all of the shots that hit President Kennedy and [[John Connally|Governor Connally]] originated from Oswald's position in the book depository. Based on that work, the staff lawyers decided to test the hypotheses that the first bullet to hit the president also caused Connally's wounds.Willens, ''History Will Prove Us Right'', pp. 85-87 Over the objection of the FBI and Secret Service, they organized a reenactment of the shooting in Dallas on May 24, 1964. The reenactment "produced convincing evidence" supporting the single-bullet theory, and that evidence was confirmed by expert review of the medical and ballistics evidence.Willens, ''History Will Prove Us Right'', pp. 166-68 However, because Gov. Connally testified that he was hit by the second bullet – not the first bullet that hit the president – the Commission decided not to take a position on the single-bullet theory. Instead, the Commission concluded that "there is no question" that all of the shots were fired from the sixth floor of the book depository.Willens, ''History Will Prove Us Right'', pp. 270