AJF street

Allan Favish is a Los Angeles-based attorney whose focus is on General Insurance Defense and Litigation Insurance Coverage/Reinsurance & Bad Faith Litigation.  A UCLA graduate, he received his J.D. at Hastings College of Law in 1981.

Contact me:
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.






ChatGPT makes false statements about Vince Foster's death

Article about how ChatGPT makes false statements about Vince Foster's death. (February 23, 2023)


Vince Foster's 'Suicide' and Brett Kavanaugh

Article about the discussion of the Vincent Foster death in Kenneth Starr's book. (October 4, 2018)


WaPo calls facts of Vince Foster and Kavanaugh newsworthy, then distorts and omits facts

Article about the Washington's Post's deception regarding Brett Kavanaugh's role in the investigation of the Vincent Foster death. (August 4, 2018)


There is something ‘fishy’ about one of Trump’s potential Supreme Court nominees

Article about possible Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh's role in the Vincent Foster death investigation. (June 28, 2018)


Donald Trump Is Right To Think That Something Is ‘Very Fishy’ About The Vincent Foster Death

Article about evidence in the Vincent Foster death justifying Donald Trump's comment that the death is "very fishy". (May 31, 2016)


Brief on the Merits

You can read the facts for yourself in my brief on the merits to the Supreme Court at the bottom of page 19 to the top of page 40. None of the facts were proven false, inaccurate or misleading. The documents cited in the brief are here (see the documents linked at the listings for May 30, 2001 & October 9, 2001). If you read it all, compare it to the one sentence in the entire Supreme Court opinion about the evidence you just read: “Favish has not produced any evidence that would warrant a belief by a reasonable person that the alleged Government impropriety might have occurred to put the balance into play.” This sentence is on page 17 of the opinion, which is here. Note that the parties' Supreme Court briefs do not contain the original source citations, but only citations to the "Excerpts of Record". You can see the original source citations in my Appellant's Opening and Reply briefs, which were filed April 13 and August 31 of 1998 with the Ninth Circuit, links to which are here.

My response to the Suprme Court opinion is here.

After my lawsuit concluded, two documents were discovered in the National Archives by citizen researchers Hugh Turley and Patrick Knowlton in 2009. I did not learn about it until February 2016. The documents were written by Miguel Rodriguez, who was an Assistant United States Attorney who led the Foster death investigation for Kenneth Starr's Office of Independent Counsel.The documents are Rodriguez's letter of resignation and a 31-page memorandum to his fellow prosecutors in the OIC explaining why the evidence does not support a conclusion of suicide in the park. Among those prosecutors was now United States Supreme Court Associate Justice Brett Kavanaugh, who was described by Kenneth Starr as “the principal architect of the Vince Foster death report.” At pages 18-20 of the memorandum Rodriguez states that he has seen two photographs of Foster's neck that show a wound on the neck. The Government's official conclusion was that there was no wound on the neck. Rodriguez states that one of the photos was an autopsy photo and the other was taken when Foster was in the park. The two documents are here, at the website maintained by Turley and Knowlton. In July 2016, I received a certified copy of the Rodriguez memorandum from the National Archives with this cover letter

I tried to take Rodriguez's deposition during my lawsuit, but the Federal District Court denied my request. During the course of the lawsuit, both the Ninth Circuit and the Supreme Court ignored my request for a review of the District Court's denial. The request to the District Court was contained in a motion that was filed January 19, 2001 to insure that any photos produced by the OIC are the pristine originals. The motion asked the court to compel the testimony of former OIC prosecutor Miguel Rodriguez and his former OIC assistant Lucia Rambusch regarding allegations of illegal conduct by OIC and FBI personnel as to one or more of the photos at issue in this case. The exhibits to the draft are omitted from this online version, but the pertinent portions are quoted in the motion.

WorldNetDaily published a story about the Rodriguez documents here on February 28, 2016.

Many of the original source documents used in my lawsuit were published in two volumes by the United States Senate in 1995, which are available at many libraries, and online here and here (scroll down to volumes 1 & 2). Video of hearings broadcast by C-SPAN on July 29, 1994 is here and here, and on July 20, 1995 is here.

On the weekend of December 13-14, 2003, I appeared on Geraldo Rivera's television show regarding the case.

Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote the Supreme Court's opinion in my case. Justice Kavanaugh was a clerk for Justice Kennedy before he worked on the Foster case for Ken Starr. My lawsuit was a direct attack on Kavanaugh's Foster report for Starr, yet Justice Kennedy did not recuse himself from my case. I did not request his recusal and I do not know whether Kennedy knew that Kavanagh was the author of Starr's Foster report.


Fostering A Lie

A shorter and less comprehensive presentation is my column (part 1 and part 2) published in 1999 before the Ninth Circuit's first decision in the case, which held 2-1 that "Favish, in fact, tenders evidence and argument which, if believed, would justify his doubts" about the official conclusion that Foster committed suicide in Fort Marcy Park. Of course, what evidence is not to be believed? The only evidence I gave the court was official government documents. My credibility was not the issue.


U.S. Supreme Court Oral Argument; Press Conference

Oral argument before the U.S. Supreme Court was heard on December 3, 2003.  My press conference occurred within an hour of my oral argument.


United States Supreme Court Opinion

The United States Supreme Court issued its opinion on March 30, 2004. I have written a response for the web site. My petition for rehearing to the Supreme Court, which was denied, makes the same points in an abbreviated form because of page limitations imposed by Supreme Court rules. Those documents, and the other case documents are posted below in the section entitled "Freedom of Information Act Lawsuit to Obtain Foster Investigation Photographs: Case Documents for Favish v. OIC". Note the entry in the table below for May 30, 2001 and October 9, 2001, which contains copies of the documents that comprised the evidence presented in this case. Also note that the Supreme Court stated, without any support, that “Favish has not produced any evidence that would warrant a belief by a reasonable person that the alleged Government impropriety might have occurred to put the balance into play.”


Response to The Supreme Court's Opinion Regarding the Vincent Foster Death Scene Photographs


On March 30, 2004, the United States Supreme Court issued its opinion in the case entitled National Archives and Records Administration v. Allan J. Favish. (The case was formerly entitled Office of Independent Counsel v. Allan J. Favish, but the OIC ceased operations in March of 2004 and transferred its documents to the NARA). The decision was 9-0 with Justice Anthony Kennedy writing the only opinion. The case arose from my Freedom of Information Act request seeking some of the photographs taken by the Government as part of its investigation into the death of President Bill Clinton’s Deputy White House Counsel Vincent Foster, who was found dead in Virginia’s Fort Marcy Park on July 20, 1993. The Government ruled that Foster committed suicide by firing a revolver into his mouth with the bullet exiting the back of his head.


Court Orders

On January 11, 2001, in a two-page order, a federal district court judge in Los Angeles ordered the OIC to release five original Polaroids of Vincent Foster's body as it laid in the park. On June 6, 2002, a 2-1 decision by the Ninth Circuit scaled back that order, but still ordered that four of the Polaroids be released. More documents from this FOIA lawsuit are on this Website in the section entitled "Freedom of Information Act Lawsuit to Obtain Foster Investigation Photographs, Case Documents for Favish v. OIC".


Court Documents Filed by Attorney John Clarke on Behalf of Witness Patrick Knowlton

The website in the weblink below contains links to purported audio recordings of Assistant United States Attorney Miquel Rodriguez, who was in charge of the Foster investigation for Kenneth Starr in late 1994 to early 1995. Publicly, we do not know why he quit that investigation, but two books purport to tell his story and are discussed in a motion I filed in an attempt to take his deposition in my case. I have no personal knowledge about whether the audio recordings purporting to be of Mr. Rodriguez are authentic, but John Clarke and Patrick Knowlton say that they are authentic, and I have the highest regard for John and Patrick's credibility. Additionally, others whom I trust have stated that they have spoken to Mr. Rodriguez and that the voice on the audio recordings sounds to them like it is the voice of Mr. Rodriguez.



FBI Memo Written Two Days After Foster's Death Saying That There Was "NO EXIT WOUND."

The document was obtained in late March 1998 by a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit for Reed Irvine's Accuracy in Media. The lawsuit was filed in the federal district court in Washington, D.C., as AIM v. FBI, Civil Action No. 97-CV-02107-GK.) The memo comes in two versions: a draft version and a final version. Both versions are included in this download. The numbers at the bottom right corners of the pages are exhibit numbers placed by the FBI as part of their document production to AIM and its attorney. The draft version of the memo is numbered 2-4 and the final version is numbered 260-262. Neither Kenneth Starr or Robert Fiske ever mentioned this memo, although it conflicts with the official conclusion of an exit wound in the back of Mr. Foster's head. A very good article dated April 7, 1998 was written about this memo by Paul Chesser for WorldNetDaily here. The memo first became public only about 5 months after the report on the Foster death by Kenneth Starr's Office of Independent Counsel was publicly released. The rest of the media ignored the memo despite the obvious newsworthiness of it and its presentation by me to the Federal District Court, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and the United States Supreme Court.


The Haut Report

The Haut Report consists of three (3) pages. The first page is a letter size declaration by Hugh Sprunt authenticating the Haut Report as the document he found in the National Archives with Patrick Knowlton. Pages 2 and 3 comprise the Haut Report, and are on legal size pages. The copies of the Haut Report from the Office of Independent Counsel and the Virginia Office of Chief Medical Examiner are on letter size paper. Here is an explanation of the Haut Report written before the release of the OIC's copy and the Virginia Medical Examiner's copy.


Explanation of The Haut Report

The official record contains unresolved contradictory information about whether Foster had a wound in the back of his head or somewhere on his neck, or both. The only medical doctor to examine Foster’s body at Fort Marcy Park, Dr. Donald Haut, wrote a two-page report, signed July 20, 1993, the day of death, that is internally contradictory. Page one of Haut’s report said that the death shot was "mouth-head;" but page two of Haut’s report said that the death shot was "mouth to neck."


Freedom of Information Act Lawsuit to Inspect Original Version of The Haut Report

This is a lawsuit filed in the United States District Court, Central District of California, by Allan J. Favish against the Office of Independent Counsel, to inspect the original version of the Haut Report.


Freedom of Information Act Lawsuit to Inspect Original Version of The Haut Report with Links to Exhibits

This is a lawsuit filed in the United States District Court, Central District of California, by Allan J. Favish against the Office of Independent Counsel, to inspect the original version of the Haut Report.


Thomas Sowell on the Vincent Foster Death

After years of seeing twisted conspiracy theories about the assassination of John F. Kennedy, I was very skeptical when I found a copy of "The Strange Death of Vincent Foster" in my mail. In fact, I was less interested in reading it than in seeing what off-the-wall publisher had put it out.


Freedom of Information Act Lawsuit to Obtain Foster Investigation Photographs

Case documents in the Favish v. Office of Independent Counsel action.


Reporter's Official Transcript of Summary Adjudication/Summary Judgment Motions

[Note from AJF: Except for minor nonsubstantive format changes, this is an accurate copy of the reporter's official transcript of the hearing on motions for summary adjudication and summary judgment that preserves the page and line numbers of the original.]


Transcript of Mandatory Status Conference

[Note from AJF: Except for a minor spelling change, elimination of double spaced lines, and line and page numbering, this is an accurate copy of the reporter's official transcript. A mandatory status conference is the initial meeting with the judge. In addition to setting the schedule for the case, many judges try to learn more about the case and give some of their initial impressions.

At one point in the transcript I mention the date of July 1995.  I should have said July 1994.

The U.S. Attorney makes reference to a "Vaughn index." This is an index of the requested documents prepared by the government that gives a detailed explanation about why each requested document is allegedly exempt from disclosure. The index is named after an old FOIA case that imposed the requirement of making such an index.]


Anatomy of the Head Wound, an analysis of Robert Bracci's Discovery (with explanatory anatomical diagram)

Comment by AJF: The autopsy doctor reported an entrance wound in the back of the throat, but also reported an exit wound in the middle-back of the head that does not line-up with an entrance wound in the back of the throat. Despite the autopsy report's location of the entrance wound, the Fiske and Starr reports placed the entrance wound in the roof of the mouth, apparently so it would line-up with the autopsy report's exit wound. This proves three things: the truth about the wounds is uncertain, the autopsy report and the Fiske and Starr reports have no credibility, and since it should have been very easy to accurately report the wound information, the government's failure to do so strongly indicates lying and obstruction of justice.

Further analysis of the Foster death by Mr. Sprunt, including his February 1999 version of his full analysis of Ken Starr's report on the Foster death, is also on this Website.


Will Starr Find a Smoking Gun in the Vincent Foster Case?

This article contains links to full page images of the cited documents. While they can be viewed with your web browser in sections using the scroll bars, your browser cannot print a full page copy on a single page. To print single full page copies, download the image file and use an image viewer program to view and print it. Also note that the arrows drawn on the copies of the official documents were drawn by me to aid in locating the quoted text.


Interview with James B. Stewart, April 30, 1996

Courtesy of radio talk show host Ray Briem in Los Angeles, I now have a tape of his interview with "Blood Sport" author James B. Stewart that was broadcast live on April 30, 1996, at approximately 4:00 p.m. (PST) on radio station KRLA 870-AM out of Glendale, California (formerly KIEV). Here is a transcript of the most important parts of the show, including (along with other goodies) my call to Stewart discussing the Foster death gun color issue.


Byron York Letter Exchange

This letter was originally published in the Weekly Standard magazine on November 10, 1997, at pp.8-9. Following the letter is a reply from Byron York, which also was published in the Weekly Standard. Following Mr. York's reply is my reply to Mr. York, which has yet to be published by the magazine.


Hugh Sprunt on Vincent Foster

Note the following statement from Dr. Thomas Sowell:

Any number of things might have happened on July 20, 1993, when Vincent Foster's body was discovered in Marcy Park. The hardest thing to reconcile with the evidence is that he committed suicide in that park.


Hugh Sprunt's Analysis of Kenneth Starr's Report on the Foster Death

Hugh Sprunt's analysis of Kenneth Starr's report on the Vincent Foster death is here in Microsoft Word format.

Downloadable documents:

Medical Examiner’s Report (676 KB)

Autopsy Report (185 KB)

FBI Memo (180 KB)


Vincent Foster Death - Additional Materials

Kenneth Starr's report on the Foster death (with appendix) is available online, courtesy of John Clarke, Hugh Turley and Patrick Knowlton at: http://fbicover-up.com/starr/starrreport.htm


BilerChildrenLeg og SpilAutobranchen