They Huey P. Newton Reader

l081The Hue. P. Newton Reader
tantwitn:ses to the shooting ofHeanes and Frey. Up until then, there
had been considerable speculation about whether even the defense
lawyers knew the name of my companion that morning. Throughout
the trial reporters and newsmen had been asking Charles Garry
whether the mysterious witness would testify.
When McKinney took the stand, Garry rose and asked him first his
name and then whether he had been a passenger in the Volkswagen with
me at the corner of Seventh and Willow on the morning of October
28, 1967. "Yes, I was," McKinney answered. His response electrified the
courtroom. But those two questions were the only ones he ever answered.
When Garry asked, "Now, Mr. McKinney, at the time and place on that
morning, at approximately five o'clock in the morning, did you by chance
or otherwise shoot at Officer John Frey?" McKinney said, "I refuse to
answer on the grounds it may tend to incriminate me." Jensen was outraged.
He jumped to his feet and demanded that Judge Friedman direct
the witness to answer. "Inasmuch as he has already started to testifY,"
said Jensen, "saying he was there at the scene, he has obviously waived
[his right to silence]. Let's hear him tell what he knows. He said he was
there, and I ask that that question now be read to him and the court
direct him to answer."
Then followed a discussion between the prosecutor, Perry, and the
judge about McKinney's constitutional rights, with Perry claiming
McKinney need only be cross-examined on the two questions he had
chosen to respond to-his name and where he was on October 28.
Beyond that, Perry claimed, he was entirely within his rights to claim
the Fifth Amendment. When Jensen insisted on cross-examining him,
McKinney refused to answer. Here Garry was trying to raise the question
of "reasonable doubt"-doubt about whether there could have been
only one possible person who did the shooting-me, as the prosecution
claimed.
But Garry and Harold Perry were also using another brilliant strategy,
and Jensen understood immediately what was involved. The prosecution
believed that McKinney was inviting Judge Friedman to grant
him immunity in his testimony-the same immunity he had given to
Dell Ross-whereby nothing he said could be used against him. Then,
with this protection, he could say that he had killed Frey and shot at
Heanes, and that he had escaped with me. Because no evidence had