THE BOOK / 1991

Silent Coup: Dean, the call girls and the lawsuits

The 1991 theory, Maxie Wells, and Dean v. St. Martin’s.

RECORD / AT A GLANCE

UNPROVEN

No court found the Dean theory true. Dean settled with the publisher in 1997; a jury found that Liddy did not defame Wells in 2002. The private people named in the book all denied the allegations.

THE EVENTS / THE CLAIM / THE RECORD

The chronology.

READ THE FILE

Evidence & assessment.

Open an article for its evidence, labeled AI assessment and numbered sources. Read the complete static edition ↗

WHAT PEOPLE SAY ABOUT THIS FILE

The claims, rated.

3 claims people make about this file, each rated documented, partly true, disputed, unproven or false. Think a rating is wrong? Use Dispute or Support, or join the Discussion.

DOCUMENTED The alternative theories

“A jury found Liddy did not defame Maxie Wells.”

After a 2001 hung jury and an appeal, a 2002 jury found for Liddy. It was a defamation verdict, not a finding on the call-girl claim.

Who says it: Court records.

The evidence in this file ↗ · On the full claims board ↗

All 99 rated claims ↗

OPEN THE RECORD

Sources & limits.

Numbered citations in each article identify the relevant sources. These records have different purposes and evidentiary weight.

  1. John Dean’s response to Silent Coup, History News Network, 2006 ↗

    An accused participant’s rebuttal. Useful for identifying disputed claims, but not independent corroboration of his own account.

  2. Wells v. Liddy, 186 F.3d 505 (4th Cir. 1999) ↗

    Appeals court opinion summarizing Secret Agenda, Silent Coup and Liddy’s call-girl account, and holding that Ida “Maxie” Wells was a private figure. Its summaries describe the books’ claims; they are not findings that the claims are true.

  3. Wells v. Liddy: published district-court opinion, March 19, 2001 ↗

    A defamation ruling addressing fault, sources and evidence, not a final history of Watergate. This 2001 procedural stage was followed by an appeal and a later 2002 jury verdict; no historical truth ruling is inferred.

  4. Spokesman-Review (Washington Post story): “Libel suit settled over Watergate book”, 10 August 1997 ↗

    Reports the Deans’ settlement with St. Martin’s Press over Silent Coup. Terms were confidential.

  5. Wells v. Liddy, 37 F. App’x 53 (4th Cir. 2002), unpublished ↗

    Reversed the district court’s ruling that no reasonable jury could find Liddy negligent, and ordered a new trial. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent.

  6. Associated Press in the Los Angeles Times: “Liddy Did Not Defame DNC Aide, Jury Finds”, 4 July 2002 ↗

    Report of the Baltimore retrial verdict for Liddy and the jury foreman’s comments. A defamation verdict, not a finding on what the burglars wanted.

← The Watergate Files hub: the history, the full timeline and every file

Discussion

Comment, dispute or support a claim, submit a source or rate this page through a short Google Form. It asks you to sign in with Google so we know you are a real person; your email is never shown. Nothing appears here until it has been reviewed. Conversation on X tagged #AIFiles #AIFilesWatergate shows up below after the daily refresh.

CommentSubmit a sourceRate this pageStart a discussion on XFull forum topicSee all disputesFollow updates (Google Group)

Reader comments

Approved reader comments and ratings appear here when JavaScript is on.

On X

Posts from the daily snapshot appear here when JavaScript is on. You can read this subject’s threads on the forum: Forum: #AIFilesWatergate.

Reader comments are shown only after review, and rows removed from the form’s sheet disappear at the next refresh. X posts are a read-only daily snapshot; posts deleted or made private there are removed at the next refresh. Inclusion is not endorsement. A submitted source stays pending review until a page update says otherwise.