Is It True That A Jury Concluded Howard Hunt Had Been Involved In The Kennedy Assassination?

It's debatable. Hunt, a veteran CIA operative, brought a libel action against Spotlight magazine after it published an article claiming he had been in Dallas around the time Kennedy was assassinated. The magazine lost the case and then appealed it, bringing in a completely different lawyer, Mark Lane, who was a veteran of JFK conspiracy theories (having been appointed Lee Harvey Oswald's lawyer at one point) and who had published a number of conspiratorially-themed books on the case.

Lane decided to attempt to win the case on the basis of the essential truth of the claim. Hunt claimed, in his suit, that the allegation had caused tension within his family, with some of his own family members wondering whether there could possibly be any truth to it. In the courtroom, Hunt denied having been in Dallas at all on the month of Kennedy's assassination and recalled being at home with his family, watching the aftermath of the assassination on television together. Lane asked Hunt why, if this was true, Hunt claimed his own family members were now suspicious of him. This point seemed to make an impression on the jury and Hunt lost the case. Afterwards, some of the jury members were quoted saying that Lane had convinced them that Kennedy had been murdered by the organs of his own governments.