The recent court battle between Independent Prosecutor Kenneth Starr and attorney James Hamilton over the confidentiality of notes taken in meetings with the late Vincent Foster has rekindled interest in the untimely demise of the Deputy White House Counsel.
According to a recent Zogby Poll, commissioned by the Western Journalism Center, an overwhelming majority of Americans no longer believe the official story of suicide. With good cause, Americans suspect much remains concealed.
Jim Hamilton’s claims that he is invoking “attorney-client” privilege solely to protect the good name of Vincent Foster from embarrassment looks good in print, but may be less than accurate. Especially when one considers that Jim Hamilton participated in one of the most clearly documented frauds of the investigation into Vincent Foster’s death; the manufacturing of Lisa Foster’s recognition of the gun found with Fosters body.
Vincent Foster was found with a .38 revolver made by Colt Arms. It was built from parts taken from two other guns, and as a result had two serial numbers. The Frame number was 355055, and according to the records of the Colt Arms Company, the gun was manufactured with a standard dark blue, almost black, finish.
In the Park Police record, the gun is described as black. The accompanying photographs in the Park police report show a black gun.
The photograph leaked by the White House to ABC-TV also shows a dark gun. Compare the reflectivity of the gun to Fosters gold ring on his finger, just an inch away.
In all the statements by the Fort Marcy Park witnesses, in the Park Police reports, in the reports by experts at the FBI and ballistics lab, the gun is never described as anything but dark blue or (more often) black. The photographs recently obtained in Allen Favish’s FOIA lawsuit clearly show a dark surface to the gun.
No connection exists between that gun and Vincent Foster. Foster’s fingerprints were not on the gun. Neither was any of his blood. The DNA traces on the gun, while “not inconsistent” with Foster, were more likely to have originated with a black or a Hispanic than with a Caucasian. No gunpowder or bullet fragments were found in Foster’s wounds that could be matched to the gun!
Despite this, Robert Fiske inserted a comment on page 38 of his report on Foster; a statement that Lisa Foster thought the gun found with her husband was one she had brought up from Little Rock, Arkansas.
This statement came from an interview of Lisa Foster conducted by the FBI on May 9, 1994, more than nine months after Vincent Foster’s death.
In the handwritten notes and final FD-302a report of the interview, the interviewing FBI agents describe the gun being shown to Lisa Foster as “silver colored,” not just once, but many times. The gun is never described as dark blue or black.
The FBI agents are not quoting Lisa Foster, they write down THEIR impressions of what is being said and done. In their own words, on the bottom of page 16 and the top of page 17 of the FD-302a form, “LISA FOSTER believes that the gun found at Fort Marcy Park may be the silver gun which she brought up with her other belongings when she permanently moved to Washington.”
In order for Lisa Foster to believe that the gun presented to her as the Fort Marcy Park gun might be the family silver gun, the gun presented as the Fort Marcy Park gun must also be silver. Lisa Foster doesn’t have to be a gun expert to know that silver is not black.
From the official record, it’s clear that Lisa Foster was shown a gun she recognized as the gun she brought up from Little Rock, but it’s equally clear that this is not the same gun as that found with Vincent Foster. Black is not silver.
This brings us back to Jim Hamilton. He was present at that interview in which Lisa Foster was shown a silver gun and told it was the gun found with her husband’s body. He never took issue with the color of the gun being described by the FBI agents. He never (as would be standard procedure to preserve the chain of evidence) requested that the gun’s serial number be recorded. This is an odd omission from the lawyer who purports to be looking out for the interests of the Foster family.
Jim Hamilton’s only comment during the whole proceedings, as recorded by the FBI notes, was a reminder to all parties regarding the so-called “suicide note”. Even though the text had already been published, Jim insisted that photographs of the “suicide note” (later determined to be a forgery by experts) were not to be released, not even under the Freedom Of Information Act!
Jim Hamilton claims his withholding of the Foster notes, as was the case with the withholding of photographs of the “suicide” note, is to protect the Foster name. But such claims fails to explain Hamilton’s obvious lack of due diligence in the matter of the silver gun! Are not the withholding of the Foster notes, the withholding of photos of the forged “suicide” note, and the lack of concern over Lisa Foster’s identification of the wrong gun, consistent with intentional concealment?
Michael Rivero’s website can be found at