◆ SpookStack

td Comsaieatoner, Harry Avery. (except for a thin line circling soce writings the property seezed in order. x23 That prior to Plaintiffis transfer to the aforezentioned penitentiary, Connissioner Avery, the late Governor of Tennessee, lion. Buford Ellington, and Governor Ellington's adninistrative assistant, Mr,. Willies L. Barry, had decided and committed to writing (eee, avery testinony in, Ray va. Russ- ell, U.S. Dis. Ct. M.D. Ta. Civ. Action no. 5590, 1970)Plaintiff’s treat- ment upon entering said penitentiary,ie, arbitrary lodging of Plaintiff in solitary confinenent immediately upon his entering prisor. * 8. That thereafter on (March 13, 1969) when plaintiff commenced petitioning the trial court for a new trial under said indictoent, Comaisetoner Avery atteapted to persuade Plaintiff against seeking a trial uncer said indictaent and after failing that informed Plaintiff that he would hever be releasted - from solitary confinesent while he (Avery) was corrections commissioner. . 9. That in the succeeding years until the present Plaintiff hes been arbi- ; trarily locked in solitary confinenent/segregation for approxiaately five years, during which time their has been several eulcides by prisonera bece auss of the harshaent of the confinezent including two (2) who burned then= gelves to-death. Sea, FY..R. 10. That after the aforementioned plea by Plaintiff the trial Judge, Hon. Preaton Battle, departed from Memphis, Tennesses, for a vacation and while on said vacation the then Governor of Tennessee, Hon. Buford FLlington, upon learning of Plaintiff's effort to receive a jury trial under said in- @ictnent, dispatched State officials to located Judge Battle to offer hin p the next Appellate Judgehip vacancy if the Judges would deny Plaintiff a trial under the petition refered to in paragraph-5 above. _ 9%. Mat on or about March 12th 1969 in.the prison segregation building Plaintiff vas confronted through « ruse ey Geeta agent, Robert Jensen of the Menphis, Tennessee, federal bureau of investagation office. The thrust of “r. Jensen's conversation was aecking cooperation of Plaintiff 4m furthereing the Fat investigation of eaid cr. indictaent. ‘When Plaintiff refused the cocperation offer Mr. Jensen upon departing said Plaintiff could expect Plainti?f Brothers (John & Jerry Ray) to foin bin in prison, or words " €o that effect, thereafter: -183-