Wednesday, November 7, 2007

Who killed Dr. King?

On April 4th, 1968, America’s greatest Civil Rights Leaders, Dr. Martin Luther King was assassinated in Memphis, Tennessee. Being the most visible leader of the Civil Rights Movement, King was a clear and visible target for those that opposed his views and his mission. His assassination sparked international outcry, near universal condemnation and an immediate FBI investigation. The intense media coverage and the investigation resulted in the conclusion that one James Earl Ray was the lone assassin responsible for his killing.
At the time, there were many that were skeptical of the conclusions of the investigation. 24 years later, in the 1992 documentary: Who Killed Martin Luther King?, the question is still being asked. The documentary doesn’t conform to a classical story telling narrative. It doesn’t explore conspiracy theories, or come to any solid conclusions. Rather, it starts by exploring King’s background. An important emphasis is made on his role as a Civil Rights leader, his personal significance to the movement, and most important: the animosity that existed between him and the FBI. The fact that the FBI Director at the time, J Edgar Hoover loathed King, and had been conducting round the clock surveillance on him is mentioned, along with the extraordinary fact that the FBI has documented records on King just up until the time of the assassination. Then the movie introduces the accused killer, James Earl Ray. The movie discusses his background, and the fact that he is now claiming his innocence.
The mix of archival footage, interviews with witnesses, interviews with those directly involved, along with historical recreations are all used very effectively by the film makers. Archival footage is used to introduce the important actors, and to set the solemn mood for the film. It is also used to explore different theories and holes in the official story. An example of this would be when the film discusses one witnesses’ testimony that he may have seen Dr. King’s real shooter hiding behind a white sheet across the street from the Lorraine hotel. Archival footage from the day after does confirm the presence of the sheet. Another example of archival footage would be the examination of the presence of an unexplained man who was pictured to be ducking the same time Dr. King was assassinated. The fact that the man could not be found since and was allegedly a CIA agent or an informer, is just one example of the many mysteries surrounding King’s death.
The interviews with the witnesses and those directly involved are the strongest components of the film. The extensive use of both allows the filmmakers to avoid unneeded controversy and speculation in their investigation. It is also, of course, powerful to see the witnesses, and the accused himself relive the moments of Dr. Kings death along with its aftermath. It is also invaluable that a former FBI agent who was personally involved in investigating and monitoring Dr. King was personally able to testify to his actions. This is one of the more hidden and forgotten facts about the time period, and to have someone confirm it, only gives the filmmakers more credibility.
The limited reliance on secondary sources and the significant focus on primary sources is essential if the filmmakers wanted to seriously investigate and document such a high-profile assassination, use their skeptical tone and still be able to walk away with a convincing documentary. The mix of primary and secondary sources, combined with the excellent narration combines to create a good balance during the film.
Another factor that adds to the strength of the film is the filmmaker’s inclusion of a fairly accurate and depiction of Dr. King. Where as school textbooks and other mainstream information sources downplay King’s anti-war stance, Who Killed Martin Luther King? emphasizes that fact. One can also praise them for including the fact that it was these anti-war views that particularly infuriated FBI director Hoover.
The final interview, with of Grace Walden is the most powerful and interesting part of the film. The fact that her testimony is corroborated by other people in regards to the fact that Charles Stevens was lying about seeing James Earl Ray shortly after the assassination is incredible. But when it is revealed that she was subsequently institutionalized for the following ten years with absolutely no justification absolutely is mind-boggling for the viewer.
Although the movie does cover King fairly well, if I was showing this movie to a class, I would give a greater context then the film provides. By far the most important fact is that it was totally within the norm of government action of the time to assassinate political opponents. The film’s limited scope prevents the film makers from delving into this topic, but one could bring up anyone of the dozens of foreign assassinations, military coups and sponsored plots to overthrow unfavorable regimes.
Of course, one cannot forget the state-violence that was carried out right in the United States itself. One could bring up the killing and infiltration of the Black Panthers, the killing of Malcolm X and any number of other leaders to develop this context. With this all in the viewers mind, it would be very clear why the filmmakers take a skeptical tone with the government’s official explanation. In fact, one could go as far as saying, if the government was in some way not responsible it would be an exception to the overall trend of how it treated its political opponents at the time.
Finally, the film concludes by pointing out the finding of House Select Committee on Assassinations, and their classified conclusions over who they believe was responsible for King’s death, which again unbelievably will not be declassified until 2029. Of course, the filmmakers could not know in 1992 that James Earl Ray would die in prison in 1998 or that King’s family would come out and publicly say that they do not believe him to be responsible for the killing.



AAS 314: The Civil Rights Movement
Who Killed Martin Luther King? Dir. Sygma Plaisance. West Long Branch, NJ : White Star, 1992.
(I found an alternate way to cite it using MLA, so I included both)
Plaisance, Sygma, Michel Parbot, and James Earl Ray. Who Killed Martin Luther King? West Long Branch, NJ: White Star, 1992.

No comments: