A Look Back at Clay Shaw's Trial
The Baton Rouge Advocate Looked back on the trial of Clay Shaw in 1994
Columnist John McMillan said Garrison's case was "one of the biggest abuses of judicial power in the history of the country." He concludes "there may have been conspiracy, but I'll tell you one thing: Jim Garrison didn't know a damn thing about it if there was."
https://www.onthetrailofdelusion.com/post/a-look-back-at-clay-shaw-s-trial
What's a bit remarkable is that the major conspiracy theorists/proponents of that time - people like Lane, Lifton, Meagher, Weisberg, Epstein - all denounced or came to denounce Garrison's fraudulent investigation and abuse of power (although Weisberg was a bit late to the game, e.g., read his exchanges with Garrison during his grand jury testimony; they were having a ball).
But Garrison's is the only conspiracist name to, broadly speaking, survive; at least in terms of what he believed happened (sure, most people today likely have little or no idea who he was). Of course, this is all due to Stone's disgraceful lie of a movie. For the Garrisonites the ends justifies any means. If Shaw or others have to have their lies destroyed or smeared, well that's in service to the greater cause of exposing the evil people who killed JFK. To their credit, the other conspiracists had some standards, some principles they wouldn't toss aside. And Garrison's claims violated all of them.
Here is Weisberg's GJ testimony:
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=1210He's not putting up much of a fight with Garrison's reckless statements. He would do so later.