Talk:James Earl Ray

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:
This article has an assessment summary page.

If one pleads guilty, one does not need a trial. Adding that phrase is rather inflammatory. RickK 19:45 26 Jul 2003 (UTC)

I added some clarifying information: what Ray tried to do was withdraw his guilty plea. If that had been permitted, the trial would then have taken place. Ellsworth 17:01, 31 May 2004 (UTC)

This article should have information on James Earl Ray as a person, including his political beliefs, so that the reader can infer conclusions concerning his motives for assassinating King. --NoPetrol 23:56, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Retrial

Would it not be proper to mention in the "Retrial" section a significant implication of what was found in that 1999 retrial - namely that MLK was not killed by James Earl Ray? http://www.thekingcenter.org/news/trial.html Rpawn (talk) 10:18, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] NPOV notice

Additions to this article in the last few days appear to endorse Ray's claim about Raoul and his being framed for the murder. While the subject is encyclopaedic, its treatment here is far from neutral. David | Talk 14:04, 18 July 2005 (UTC)


While I believe in Rays innocence, he was not aquitted after his death. Lloyd Jowers, proprietor of jims grill was found guilty of conspiracy to murder in a civil case. -John Geraghty
I see factual material in this article. In fact I believe the POV tag should be removed. But I think the quote The King family does not believe Ray had anything to do with the murder of Martin Luther King is what brought you to bring the POV warning on this page. If this line was removed or a source cited would that suffice? If not then you need to point at the lines that are causing problems and offer suggestions as so that the warning can be removed.--Supercoop 20:53, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Time Travel?

Consider: "...confessing to the assassination on March 10, 1969, (though he recanted this confession three days later) and was sentenced to 99 years in prison. Ray, a presumed white supremacist and segregationist, had allegedy killed King because of the latter's extensive civil rights work. On the advice of his attorney Percy Foreman, Ray had taken a guilty plea to avoid a trial conviction and thus the definite possibility of receiving the death penalty although it was highly unlikely that he would have been executed even if he had been sentenced to death, as the US Supreme Court's 1972 decision in the case of Furman v. Georgia invalidated all state death penalty laws then in force."

How could the Supreme Court rule based on a precedent that hadn't even been set yet? Mike 02:14, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Being sentenced to death and being executed are different things. Generally it takes a good few years before the execution takes place.--Aim Here 18:47, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

The point is well made, though. The commentary about the likelihood of execution is rather tangential. The issue is did Ray and his attorney believe he was likely to be executed. The commentary is even more irrelevant when it relies on subsequent developments which they didn't know about. Hence it has to go.--Jack Upland 01:24, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Was he a Bisexual?

http://www.nndb.com/people/682/000034580/

"Occupation - assassin" Wow. How factual. H7dders 14:12, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Please, we need a disambiguation:

James Earl

James Earl Jones

James Earl Carter

James Earl Ray bob the builder

Hopiakuta 21:39, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "Confessed Assassin"?

I see what looks like a contradiction - it says that Ray appeared twice on the FBI's "Ten Most Wanted List", the second time as number 351. He would not be in the Ten Most Wanted if he was number 351. 69.134.203.4 22:21, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

I have removed this phrase from the article as it is simply and wilfully misleading. While it is obviously true that he did plead guilty, he spent the rest of his life denying this. His conviction is the important fact here.

I have also removed the comment that he was a 'presumed white supremacist'. Either claim - hopefully with citations - that he was or drop the topic.

The article implies that Ray's guilty plea is the main evidence against him. Obviously he was a suspect before this. His fingerprints were on the presumed murder weapon. This should be included in the article. The concentration on the retracted confession is illogical in that it bases everything on the word of an acknowledged liar and criminal!

On the other hand, Ray's claims about Raoul were more substantial than indicated in the article. They are dealt with at more length on the King page, which doesn't seem right since they are more relevant here.--Jack Upland 01:38, 8 October 2006 (UTC)


Lately I have seen on TV a black man I recognize from years ago. He mentions that Ray seemed to have the ability to travel all around the country and stay at fine hotels etc for some time while he trailed MLK. He also says that Ray hardly had the money to survive in one spot - any trth to this. More background on Ray personally would be nice also. If he was relatively poor and all of a sudden became a world traveller where did the money come from - this is how the cops catch most crooks or their handlers.

That's not particularly usefull information. Black people on TV are quite commonplace nowadays and without a name, I don't think there's any way of verifying the quote, let alone wether the information is true or not. H7dders 14:11, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Rewrite

I've added rewrite tag to the article. This article is full of runon and disjointed sentences, and the references could use some cleanup. I'm going to look into rewriting it. /Blaxthos 23:03, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

This is a horrible article. It tells the reader nothing about his life, the actual allegations, how he was supposed to have committed the act, his possible motivations, the evidence against him, nothing. I agree. It needs a serious rewrite.

Mister Jinxy 16:33, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree, it doesn't even include the assassination. It starts with his conviction. H7dders 14:08, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Kidneys & Liver

There seems to be a conflict over how he died. On the one hand he is said to have died of kidney disease, whereas there is an external link to "Autopsy confirms Ray died of liver failure". While I'm at it, how come there is no previous mention of a knife fight in the article, it's as if we just get "oh, by the way, he had a blood transfusion after a knife fight, I forgot to mention it earlier" added as an afterthought. H7dders 14:17, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Alias

James Earl Ray traveled under the name of Eric Stavros Gault. That fact needs to be added.64.49.3.135 (talk) 09:26, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Why?--Jack Upland (talk) 08:52, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Plastic surgery

His facial plastic surgery one month before the King assassination should be mentioned. Badagnani (talk) 07:18, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Armed robberies

His criminal history of armed robberies should be mentioned. Badagnani (talk) 07:19, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes - especially as his past as a career criminal with no political involvement casts doubt on his conviction as King's assassin.--Jack Upland (talk) 10:22, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Awarded $100

It says King family was awarded $100 thats pretty cheap don't you think--McNoddy (talk) 13:45, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Just Who Was Ray?

I'm ignorant of this topic and came here to learn more, yet this article tells almost nothing about Ray the man. Is he an engima, or do people know about his political beliefs, family background, etc.? I'm not as interested in the how of the assassination as in the WHY and I think this article does a very poor job of informing people in its present state. Can anyone provides answers?

Yes, this article lacks background information on Ray and this has been shown by previous discussions.--Jack Upland (talk) 10:19, 21 May 2008 (UTC)