"There are, in the King case in particular, e names of confidential informants, persons to whom we promised confidentiality in return for their testimony. We have put their testimony in the public domain, but feel that their names should continue to be anonymous"
About this Quote
Stokes is doing the unglamorous work of democratic triage: balancing the public's right to know against the state’s obligation not to burn the people who helped it know. The sentence is built like a careful legal stitch. “In the King case in particular” narrows the scope, signaling that this is not a blanket excuse for secrecy but a targeted claim tethered to a uniquely combustible investigation. Then comes the core bargain: “promised confidentiality in return for their testimony.” He frames anonymity not as a favor but as a contractual instrument that makes truth-extraction possible.
The subtext is a warning to two audiences. To the public and press: transparency has a ceiling when lives, careers, or future cooperation are at stake. To potential informants: the government’s word still means something, even after testimony goes “in the public domain.” That phrase is crucial. Stokes concedes disclosure of content - the facts are out - while insisting that identity is different currency. It’s a strategic separation: accountability for what was said, protection for who said it.
Context matters. Stokes, as a congressional figure associated with high-stakes oversight (including the House Select Committee on Assassinations, which revisited the Martin Luther King Jr. case), is speaking from the fault line where conspiratorial public hunger meets institutional caution. The rhetoric is mild, even bureaucratic, because the stakes are not. He’s trying to preserve the legitimacy of an investigation without sacrificing the future witnesses every investigation depends on.
The subtext is a warning to two audiences. To the public and press: transparency has a ceiling when lives, careers, or future cooperation are at stake. To potential informants: the government’s word still means something, even after testimony goes “in the public domain.” That phrase is crucial. Stokes concedes disclosure of content - the facts are out - while insisting that identity is different currency. It’s a strategic separation: accountability for what was said, protection for who said it.
Context matters. Stokes, as a congressional figure associated with high-stakes oversight (including the House Select Committee on Assassinations, which revisited the Martin Luther King Jr. case), is speaking from the fault line where conspiratorial public hunger meets institutional caution. The rhetoric is mild, even bureaucratic, because the stakes are not. He’s trying to preserve the legitimacy of an investigation without sacrificing the future witnesses every investigation depends on.
Quote Details
| Topic | Justice |
|---|
More Quotes by Louis
Add to List
