diff options
Diffstat (limited to '44004-0.txt')
| -rw-r--r-- | 44004-0.txt | 45992 |
1 files changed, 45992 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/44004-0.txt b/44004-0.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..70f3ce7 --- /dev/null +++ b/44004-0.txt @@ -0,0 +1,45992 @@ +*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK 44004 *** + +Transcriber's Note: Stylized "S", "U", and "V" symbols are denoted as +=S=, =U=, and =V=. Italicized words are denoted with _underscores_. + + + + + INVESTIGATION OF + THE ASSASSINATION OF PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY + + HEARINGS + Before the President's Commission + on the Assassination + of President Kennedy + +PURSUANT TO EXECUTIVE ORDER 11130, an Executive order creating a +Commission to ascertain, evaluate, and report upon the facts relating +to the assassination of the late President John F. Kennedy and the +subsequent violent death of the man charged with the assassination and +S.J. RES. 137, 88TH CONGRESS, a concurrent resolution conferring upon +the Commission the power to administer oaths and affirmations, examine +witnesses, receive evidence, and issue subpenas + +_Volume_ IV + + +UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE + +WASHINGTON, D.C. + + +U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON: 1964 + +For sale in complete sets by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. +Government Printing Office Washington, D.C., 20402 + + + + + PRESIDENT'S COMMISSION + ON THE + ASSASSINATION OF PRESIDENT KENNEDY + + + CHIEF JUSTICE EARL WARREN, _Chairman_ + + SENATOR RICHARD B. RUSSELL + SENATOR JOHN SHERMAN COOPER + REPRESENTATIVE HALE BOGGS + REPRESENTATIVE GERALD R. FORD + MR. ALLEN W. DULLES + MR. JOHN J. McCLOY + + + J. LEE RANKIN, _General Counsel_ + + + _Assistant Counsel_ + + FRANCIS W. H. ADAMS + JOSEPH A. BALL + DAVID W. BELIN + WILLIAM T. COLEMAN, Jr. + MELVIN ARON EISENBERG + BURT W. GRIFFIN + LEON D. HUBERT, Jr. + ALBERT E. JENNER, Jr. + WESLEY J. LIEBELER + NORMAN REDLICH + W. DAVID SLAWSON + ARLEN SPECTER + SAMUEL A. STERN + HOWARD P. WILLENS[A] + +[A] Mr. Willens also acted as liaison between the Commission and the +Department of Justice. + + + _Staff Members_ + + PHILLIP BARSON + EDWARD A. CONROY + JOHN HART ELY + ALFRED GOLDBERG + MURRAY J. LAULICHT + ARTHUR MARMOR + RICHARD M. MOSK + JOHN J. O'BRIEN + STUART POLLAK + ALFREDDA SCOBEY + CHARLES N. SHAFFER, Jr. + + +Biographical information on the Commissioners and the staff can be found +in the Commission's _Report_. + + + + +Preface + + +The testimony of the following witnesses is contained in volume IV: +Sebastian F. Latona, a fingerprint expert with the Federal Bureau of +Investigation; Arthur Mandella, a fingerprint expert with the New +York City Police Department; Paul Morgan Stombaugh, a hair and fiber +expert with the Federal Bureau of Investigation; James C. Cadigan, a +questioned document examiner with the Federal Bureau of Investigation; +Drs. Robert Roeder Shaw and Charles Francis Gregory, who attended +Governor Connally at Parkland Hospital; Governor and Mrs. John Bowden +Connally, Jr.; Jesse Edward Curry, chief, Dallas Police Department; +Capt. J. W. Fritz and Lts. T. L. Baker and J. C. Day of the Dallas +Police Department, who participated in the investigation of the +assassination; Lyndal L. Shaneyfelt, a photography expert with the +Federal Bureau of Investigation; Robert Inman Bouck, special agent in +charge of the Protective Research Section of the Secret Service; Robert +Carswell, Special Assistant to the Secretary of the Treasury; Winston +G. Lawson, a Secret Service agent who worked on advance preparations +for the President's trip to Dallas; Alwyn Cole, a questioned document +examiner with the Treasury Department; and John W. Fain, John Lester +Quigley, and James Patrick Hosty, Jr., agents of the Federal Bureau of +Investigation who interviewed Oswald, or people connected with him, at +various times during the period between Oswald's return from Russia in +1962 and the assassination. + + + + +Contents + + + Page + Preface v + + Testimony of-- + Sebastian F. Latona 1 + Arthur Mandella, accompanied by Joseph A. Mooney 48 + Paul Morgan Stombaugh 56 + James C. Cadigan 89 + Robert Roeder Shaw 101 + Charles Francis Gregory 117 + Gov. John Bowden Connally, Jr 129 + Mrs. John Bowden Connally, Jr 146 + Jesse Edward Curry 150 + J. W. Fritz 202, 248 + T. L. Baker 248 + J. C. Day 249 + Lyndal L. Shaneyfelt 279 + Robert Inman Bouck 294, 300 + Robert Carswell 299 + Winston G. Lawson, accompanied by Fred B. Smith 317 + Alwyn Cole 358 + John W. Fain 403 + John Lester Quigley 431 + James Patrick Hosty, Jr 440 + + +COMMISSION EXHIBITS INTRODUCED + + Exhibit No.: Page + 142 15 + 364 93 + 626 3 + 627 6 + 628 6 + 629 6 + 630 7 + 631 7 + 632 7 + 633 8 + 633-A 8 + 634 10 + 634-A 12 + 635 16 + 636 17 + 637 23 + 638 25 + 639 25 + 640 25 + 641 31 + 642 32 + 643 33 + 644 34 + 645 34 + 646 36 + 647 37 + 648 37 + 649 38 + 650 40 + 651 40 + 652 41 + 653 42 + 654 42 + 655 45 + 656 45 + 657 46 + 657-A 46 + 657-B 46 + 657-C 46 + 658 46 + 659 46 + 659-A 46 + 659-B 46 + 660 46 + 661 46 + 662 55 + 663 57 + 664 60 + 665 61 + 666 62 + 667 62 + 668 63 + 669 63 + 670 64 + 671 68 + 672 64 + 673 74 + 674 85 + 675 86 + 676 86 + 677 90 + 678 95 + 679 115 + 680 115 + 681 108 + 682 108 + 683 115 + 684 115 + 685 115 + 686 115 + 687 115 + 688 115 + 689 115 + 690 119 + 691 119 + 692 123 + 693 123 + 694 125 + 695 125 + 696 125 + 697 131 + 698 131 + 699 142 + 700 142 + 701 159 + 702 202 + 703 202 + 704 173 + 705 184 + 706 202 + 707 202 + 708 202 + 709 194 + 710 194 + 711 194 + 712 241 + 713 241 + 714 241 + 715 273 + 716 273 + 717 273 + 718 273 + 719 273 + 720 273 + 721 273 + 722 273 + 723 273 + 724 273 + 725 273 + 726 273 + 727 273 + 728 273 + 729 273 + 730 273 + 731 273 + 732 273 + 733 273 + 734 273 + 735 273 + 736 273 + 737 277 + 738 277 + 739 277 + 740 277 + 741 277 + 742 277 + 743 277 + 744 277 + 745 277 + 746 280 + 747 281 + 748 281 + 749 283 + 750 284 + 751 285 + 752 285 + 753 286 + 754 290 + 755 294 + 760 317 + 761 317 + 762 300 + 763 317 + 764 317 + 765 317 + 766 317 + 767 320 + 768 320 + 769 320 + 770 323 + 771 349 + 772 349 + 773 360 + 774 360 + 775 360 + 776 360 + 777 360 + 778 360 + 779 360 + 780 361 + 781 361 + 782-A 361 + 782-B 361 + 782-C 361 + 783 361 + 784-A 365 + 784-B 365 + 784-C 365 + 785 365 + 786 367 + 787 368 + 788 373 + 789 374 + 790 375 + 791 377 + 792 377 + 793 379 + 794 379 + 795 380 + 796 381 + 797 381 + 798 382 + 799 384 + 800 384 + 801 384 + 802 385 + 803 386 + 804 386 + 805 387 + 806 389 + 807 389 + 808 389 + 809 390 + 810 390 + 811 391 + 812 391 + 813 394 + 814 395 + 815 395 + 816 396 + 817 397 + 818 398 + 819 398 + 820 399 + 820-A 401 + 821 409 + 822 413 + 823 419 + 824 429 + 826 439 + 827 439 + 828 440 + 829 445 + 830 458 + 831 469 + 832 469 + + + + +Hearings Before the President's Commission + +on the + +Assassination of President Kennedy + + + + +_Thursday, April 2, 1964_ + +TESTIMONY OF SEBASTIAN F. LATONA AND ARTHUR MANDELLA + +The President's Commission met at 9 a.m. on April 2, 1964, at 200 +Maryland Avenue NE., Washington, D.C. + +Present were Chief Justice Earl Warren, Chairman; Representative Hale +Boggs, Representative Gerald R. Ford, and Mr. Allen W. Dulles, members. + +Also present were Melvin Aron Eisenberg, assistant counsel; Norman +Redlich, assistant counsel; Samuel A. Stern, assistant counsel; and +Charles Murray and Charles Rhyne, observers. + + +TESTIMONY OF SEBASTIAN F. LATONA + +The CHAIRMAN. The Commission will be in order. + +Mr. Latona, the purpose of today's hearing is to take your testimony +and that of Arthur Mandella. Mr. Mandella is a fingerprint expert from +the New York City Police Department. We are asking both of you to give +technical information to the Commission. + +Will you raise your right hand and be sworn? + +Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to give will be +the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? + +Mr. LATONA. I do. + +The CHAIRMAN. You may be seated. Mr. Eisenberg will conduct the +examination. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Latona, could you state your full name and give us +your position? + +Mr. LATONA. My full name is Sebastian Francis Latona. I am the +supervisor of the latent fingerprint section of the identification +division of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. + +Mr. EISENBERG. What is your education, Mr. Latona? + +Mr. LATONA. I attended Columbia University School of Law, where I +received degrees of LL.B., LL.M., M.P.L. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And could you briefly outline your qualifications as a +fingerprint expert? + +Mr. LATONA. Well, I have been with the Federal Bureau of Investigation +for a little more than 32 years. I started in the identification +division as a student fingerprint classifier, and since that time I +have worked myself up into where I am now supervisor of the latent +fingerprint section. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Could you approximate the number of fingerprint +examinations you have made? + +Mr. LATONA. Frankly, no. There have been so many in that time that I +would not be able to give even a good guess. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Would the figure run in the thousands or hundreds? + +Mr. LATONA. So far as comparisons are concerned, in the millions. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Have you testified in court? + +Mr. LATONA. I have testified in Federal courts, State courts, +commissioners' hearings, military courts, and at deportation +proceedings. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chief Justice, I ask that this witness be accepted +as an expert. + +The CHAIRMAN. The witness is qualified. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Latona, could you briefly outline for us the theory +of fingerprint identification? + +Mr. LATONA. The principle of fingerprint identification is based on +the fact primarily that the ridge formations that appear on the hands +and on the soles of the feet actually are created approximately 2 to 3 +months before birth, on the unborn child, and they remain constant in +the same position in which they are formed until the person is dead and +the body is consumed by decomposition. + +Secondly, the fact that no two people, or no two fingers of the same +person, have the same arrangement of these ridge formations, either on +the fingers, the palms, or the soles and toes of the feet. Plus the +fact that during the lifetime of a person this ridge formation does not +change, it remains constant--from the time it is formed until actual +destruction, either caused by voluntary or involuntary means, or upon +the death of the body and decomposition. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Latona, do you have any personal experience +indicating the uniqueness of fingerprints? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes; I do. My experience is based primarily upon the work +which I have actually done in connection with my work with the FBI. I +have had the experience of working on one case in particular in which +millions of comparisons were actually and literally made with a small +portion of a fingerprint which was left on a piece of evidence in +connection with this particular case, which was a kidnapping case. + +This fragmentary latent print which we developed consisted of +approximately seven to eight points. Most fingerprints will have in +them an average roughly of from 85 to about 125. + +This fragmentary latent print was compared with literally millions +of single impressions for the purpose of trying to effect an +identification. And we were unable, over a lengthy period while we were +making these millions of comparisons, not able to identify these few +fragmentary points. + +The important thing is simply this; that on the basis of that +fragmentary print, it was not possible to determine even the type of +pattern that the impression was. Accordingly, we had to compare it with +all types of fingerprint patterns, of which there are really four basic +types--the arch, tented arch, loop, and whorl. And we are still making +comparisons in that case, and we have not been able to identify these +few points. + +Now, that means simply this--that the theory that we are going on an +assumption that people do not have the same fingerprints--and we find +it not necessary to compare, say for example, a loop pattern with a +whorl pattern, and as there is a possibility that, it is contended by +some of these so-called authorities, that maybe the points that you +find in a loop may be found in the same arrangement in a whorl--is not +true. I think that that case, a practical case we have actually worked +on, disproves that theory so strongly in my mind that I am convinced +that no two people can possibly have the same fingerprints. + +Mr. EISENBERG. That is, you had a print with seven points, and these +same seven points appeared in none of the millions---- + +Mr. LATONA. Of the millions that we actually compared over a +period--well, since 1937. You may recall the case. It was the Matson +kidnapping case out in Tacoma, Wash. That is one of only three major +kidnapping cases the FBI has not yet solved. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Are palmprints as unique as fingerprints? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes; palmprints are. They are not as useful for purposes of +setting up a file in order to conduct searches, for the simple reason +that there are not as many variations of patterns occurring with any +frequency in the palms as occur on the tips of the fingers. That is +primarily why the fingertips are used--because you have 10 digits, and +there is a possibility of finding variations of the four basic pattern +types which can be additionally subdivided by utilizing certain focal +points which occur in those particular patterns, which enable us to +actually subdivide our files into millions of groups. Accordingly, when +you make a search in the fingerprint file, it can be reduced actually +to a matter of minutes, whereas to attempt to set up a palmprint file +to the extent of the size of the fingerprint file we have in the FBI +would be a practical impossibility, much less a waste of time. + +The CHAIRMAN. Approximately how many fingerprints do you have these +days? + +Mr. LATONA. At the present time, we have the fingerprints of more than +77 million people, and they are subdivided in this fashion: we have two +main files; we have the criminal files and we have what are referred to +as civil files. + +As the names imply, in the criminal files are the fingerprints of +criminals, people who have had a prior criminal record or whose +fingerprints have been received in connection with an investigation +or interrogation for the commission of a crime. In that file we have +approximately 15 million sets of fingerprint cards, representing +approximately 15 million people. + +In our civil files, in which are filed the fingerprints of the +various types of applicants, service personnel and the like, we have +fingerprints of approximately 62-1/2 million people. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Returning to palmprints, then, as I understand +your testimony, they are not as good as fingerprints for purposes +of classification, but they are equally good for purposes of +identification? + +Mr. LATONA. For purposes of identification, I feel that the +identifications effected are just as absolute as are those of +fingerprints. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Are experts unanimous in this opinion, Mr. Latona? + +Mr. LATONA. As far as I know, yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, Mr. Latona, I hand to you an object which I will +describe for the record as being apparently a brown, homemade-type of +paper bag, and which I will also describe for the record as having been +found on the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository Building +near the window, the easternmost window, on the south face of that +floor. + +I ask you whether you are familiar with this paper bag? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes, I am. This is a piece of brown wrapping paper that we +have referred to as a brown paper bag, which was referred to me for +purposes of processing for latent prints. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And you examined that for latent prints? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes; I did. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, may I have this admitted into evidence as +Commission Exhibit 626? + +The CHAIRMAN. It may be admitted. + +(The item referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 626 and +received in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Latona, do your notes show when you received this +paper bag? + +Mr. LATONA. I received this paper bag on the morning of November 23, +1963. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And when did you conduct your examination? + +Mr. LATONA. I conducted my examination on that same day. + +Mr. EISENBERG. When you had received it, could you tell whether any +previous examination had been conducted on it? + +Mr. LATONA. When I received this exhibit, 626, the brown wrapper, it +had been treated with black dusting powder, black fingerprint powder. +There was nothing visible in the way of any latent prints on there at +that particular time. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Were you informed whether any fingerprints had been +developed by means of the fingerprint powder? + +Mr. LATONA. No; I determined that by simply examining the wrapper at +that particular time. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Could you briefly describe the powder process? + +Mr. LATONA. The powdering process is merely the utilizing of a +fingerprint powder which is applied to any particular surface for +purposes of developing any latent prints which may be on such a +surface. + +Now, we use powder in the FBI only on objects which have a hard, +smooth, nonabsorbent finish, such as glass, tile, various types of +highly polished metals, and the like. + +In the FBI we do not use powder on paper, cardboard, unfinished wood, +or various types of cloth. The reason is that the materials are +absorbent. Accordingly, when any finger which has on it perspiration or +sweat comes in contact with an absorbent material, the print starts to +become absorbed into the surface. Accordingly, when an effort is made +to develop latent prints by the use of a powder, if the surface is dry, +the powder will not adhere. + +On the other hand, where the surface is a hard and smooth object, with +a nonabsorbent material, the perspiration or sweat which may have some +oil in it at that time may remain there as moisture. Accordingly, when +the dry powder is brushed across it, the moisture in the print will +retain the powder giving an outline of the impression itself. + +These powders come in various colors. We utilize a black and a gray. +The black powder is used on objects which are white or light to give a +resulting contrast of a black print on a white background. We use the +gray powder on objects which are black or dark in order to give you a +resulting contrast of a white print on a dark or black background. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, Mr. Latona, how did you proceed to conduct your +examination for fingerprints on this object? + +Mr. LATONA. Well, an effort was made to remove as much of the powder +as possible. And then this was subjected to what is known as the +iodine-fuming method, which simply means flowing iodine fumes, which +are developed by what is known as an iodine-fuming gun--it is a very +simple affair, in which there are a couple of tubes attached to each +other, having in one of them iodine crystals. And by simply blowing +through one end, you get iodine fumes. + +The iodine fumes are brought in as close contact to the surface as +possible. And if there are any prints which contain certain fatty +material or protein material, the iodine fumes simply discolor it to a +sort of brownish color. And of course such prints as are developed are +photographed for record purposes. + +That was done in this case here, but no latent prints were developed. + +The next step then was to try an additional method, by chemicals. This +was subsequently processed by a 3-percent solution of silver nitrate. +The processing with silver nitrate resulted in developing two latent +prints. One is what we call a latent palmprint, and the other is what +we call a latent fingerprint. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Can you briefly explain the action of the silver nitrate? + +Mr. LATONA. Silver nitrate solution in itself is colorless, and it +reacts with the sodium chloride, which is ordinary salt which is found +in the perspiration or sweat which is exuded by the sweat pores. + +This material covers the fingers. When it touches a surface such as an +absorbent material, like paper, it leaves an outline on the paper. + +When this salt material, which is left by the fingers on the paper, +is immersed in the silver nitrate solution, there is a combining, an +immediate combining of--the elements themselves will break down, and +they recombine into silver chloride and sodium nitrate. We know that +silver is sensitive to light. So that material, after it has been +treated with the silver nitrate solution, is placed under a strong +light. We utilize a carbon arc lamp, which has considerable ultraviolet +light in it. And it will immediately start to discolor the specimen. +Wherever there is any salt material, it will discolor it, much more so +than the rest of the object, and show exactly where the latent prints +have been developed. It is simply a reaction of the silver nitrate with +the sodium chloride. + +That is all it is. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Do you frequently find that the silver nitrate develops +a print in a paper object which the iodine fuming cannot develop? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes; I would say that is true, considerably so. We have +more success with silver nitrate than we do with the iodine fumes. + +The reason we use both is because of the fact that this material which +is exuded by the fingers may fall into one of two main types--protein +material and salt material. The iodine fumes will develop protein +material. Silver nitrate will develop the salt material. + +The reason we use both is because we do not know what was in the +subject's fingers or hands or feet. Accordingly, to insure complete +coverage, we use both methods. And we use them in that sequence. The +iodine first, then the silver nitrate. The iodine is used first because +the iodine simply causes a temporary physical change. It will discolor, +and then the fumes, upon being left in the open air, will disappear, +and then the color will dissolve. Silver nitrate, on the other hand, +causes a chemical change and it will permanently affect the change. So +if we were to use the silver nitrate process first, then we could not +use the iodine fumes. On occasion we have developed fingerprints and +palmprints with iodine fumes which failed to develop with the silver +nitrate and vice versa. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, Mr. Latona, looking at that bag I see that almost +all of it is an extremely dark brown color, except that there are +patches of a lighter brown, a manila-paper brown. Could you explain why +there are these two colors on the bag? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes. The dark portions of the paper bag are where the +silver nitrate has taken effect. And the light portions of the bag +are where we did not process the bag at that time, because additional +examinations were to be made, and we did not wish the object to lose +its identity as to what it may have been used for. Certain chemical +tests were to be made after we finished with it. And we felt that the +small section that was left in itself would not interfere with the +general overall examination of the bag itself. + +Mr. EISENBERG. That is, the small section of light brown corresponds to +the color which the bag had when you received it? + +Mr. LATONA. That is the natural color of the wrapper at the time we +received it. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And the remaining color is caused by the silver nitrate +process? + +Mr. LATONA. That is correct. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Does paper normally turn this dark brown color when +treated by silver nitrate? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes; it does. It will get darker, too, as time goes on and +it is affected by light. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Latona, does the silver nitrate process permanently +fix the print into the paper? + +Mr. LATONA. Permanent in the sense that the print by itself will not +disappear. Now, it can be removed, or the stains could be removed +chemically, by the placing of the object into a 2 percent solution of +mercuric nitrate, which will remove the stains and in addition will +remove the prints. But the prints by themselves, if nothing is done +to it, will simply continue to grow darker and eventually the whole +specimen will lose its complete identity. + +The CHAIRMAN. May I ask a question here? + +So I understand from that that this particular document that you are +looking at, or this bag, will continue to get darker as time goes on? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes; it will. + +The CHAIRMAN. From this date? + +Mr. LATONA. That's right. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Returning to the prints themselves, you stated I believe +that you found a palmprint and a fingerprint on this paper bag? + +Mr. LATONA. That is correct. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did you find any other prints? + +Mr. LATONA. No; no other prints that we term of value in the sense +that I felt that they could be identified or that a conclusion could +be reached that they were not identical with the fingerprints or +palmprints of some other person. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did you attempt to identify the palmprint and +fingerprint? + +Mr. LATONA. The ones that I developed; yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Were you able to identify these prints? + +Mr. LATONA. I--the ones I developed, I did identify. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Whose prints did you find them to be? + +Mr. LATONA. They were identified as a fingerprint and a palmprint of +Lee Harvey Oswald. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, Mr. Latona, what known sample of Lee Harvey +Oswald's prints, finger and palm, did you use in making this +identification? + +Mr. LATONA. The known samples I used were the ones forwarded by our +office at Dallas, the Dallas office. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Do you have those with you? + +Mr. LATONA. I do. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Latona, you have handed me three cards, one of which +appears to be a standard fingerprint card, and the other two of which +appear to be prints of the palms of an individual. All these cards are +marked "Lee Harvey Oswald." + +Are these the cards which you received from your Dallas office which +you just described as being the prints of Lee Harvey Oswald? + +Mr. LATONA. They are. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, I would like these admitted into evidence +as 627, 628, and 629. I would like the standard fingerprint card, +10-print card, admitted as 627. + +The CHAIRMAN. It will be admitted. + +(The item referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 627 and +received in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. I would like the card which is--which appears to be the +left palm admitted as 628. + +The CHAIRMAN. It will be admitted. + +(The item referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 628 and +received in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. I would like the card which is the right palm admitted +as 629. + +The CHAIRMAN. That may be admitted. + +(The item referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 629 and +received in evidence.) + +Mr. LATONA. May I ask a question, please? Would it be possible to +accept copies instead of the originals? + +The CHAIRMAN. They are identical? + +Mr. LATONA. These are true and faithful reproductions of the originals +which Mr. Eisenberg has. + +The CHAIRMAN. The originals, then, may be withdrawn, and the copies +substituted for them. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Shall I mark those 627, 628, and 629 in the same manner +as the originals? + +The CHAIRMAN. Exactly. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Latona, do you know how the known samples we have +just marked 627, 628, and 629 were obtained? + +Mr. LATONA. How they were obtained? + +Mr. EISENBERG. Yes. Can you tell the process used in obtaining them? + +Mr. LATONA. You mean in recording the impressions? + +Mr. EISENBERG. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LATONA. Fingerprints are recorded by the use of a printer's ink, +heavy black ink, which is first placed on a smooth surface, such as +glass or metal, and it is rolled out in a smooth, even film. Then +the subject's fingers are brought in contact with the plate by a +rolling process, rolling the finger from one complete side to the +other complete side, in order to coat the finger with an even film of +this heavy ink. Then the finger is brought in contact with a standard +fingerprint card and the finger again is rolled from one complete side +to the opposite side in order to record in complete detail all of the +ridge formation which occurs on the tip of the finger, or the first +joint, which is under the nail. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did you received a second submission of known prints? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes; we did. + +Mr. EISENBERG. When did you receive those? + +Mr. LATONA. Those were received in the identification division on +November 29, 1963. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did this include two palms, or was this simply---- + +Mr. LATONA. No; it did not. It was simply a fingerprint card. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Do you know why the second submission was made? + +Mr. LATONA. The second submission was made, I believe, in order to +advise us formally that the subject, Lee Harvey Oswald, had been +killed, and it has the notation on the back that he was shot and killed +11-24-63 while being transferred in custody. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And did you examine that second submission? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes, I did. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And is it in all respects identical to the first? + +Mr. LATONA. The fingerprints appearing on this card are exactly the +same as those that appear on the card which you have previously +referred to as Commission Exhibit 627. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Latona, do you have a copy of the second submission? + +Mr. LATONA. No; I do not. + +Mr. EISENBERG. I wonder whether you could supply one to us at a later +date. + +Mr. LATONA. Yes; I could. If you feel it necessary, you can take this +one. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Well, it is up to you. We will accept a copy. + +The CHAIRMAN. If you wish, you may substitute a copy for it later. + +Mr. LATONA. All right. + +The CHAIRMAN. And then you may withdraw it. + +Mr. EISENBERG. May I mark that as 630, with the understanding that it +can be substituted for by a copy? + +The CHAIRMAN. Yes. + +(The item referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 630 and +received in evidence.) + +(At this point, Representative Ford entered the hearing room.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Latona, could you tell us what portion of the palm +of Lee Harvey Oswald was reproduced on the paper bag, Exhibit 626? + +Mr. LATONA. The portion of the palm which was identified was of the +right palm, and it is a portion which is sometimes referred to as the +heel. It would be the area which is near the wrist on the little-finger +side. I have a photograph here which has a rough drawing on it showing +the approximate area which was identified. + +The CHAIRMAN. Which hand did you say? + +Mr. LATONA. The right hand. + +Mr. EISENBERG. That little finger, is that sometimes called the ulnar +side? + +Mr. LATONA. The ulnar side; yes, sir. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Is this a true photograph made by you? + +Mr. LATONA. This is a true photograph of one of the exhibits you have +received. + +Mr. EISENBERG. That is to say, the exhibit showing the right palmprint, +which is marked 629? + +Mr. LATONA. That's correct. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, may I have this photograph admitted into +evidence as 631? + +The CHAIRMAN. It may be admitted. + +(The item referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 631 and +received in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. Do you have another photograph there? + +Mr. LATONA. I have here a photograph which is a slight enlargement of +the latent palmprint developed on the bag. It has a red circle drawn +around it showing the palmprint which was developed. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Is that a true photograph made by you? + +Mr. LATONA. This is. It is approximately a time-and-a-half enlargement +of the palmprint which I developed on the paper bag. + +Mr. EISENBERG. May I have that admitted, Mr. Chairman, as 632? + +The CHAIRMAN. It may be admitted by that number. + +(The item referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 632 and +received in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. Having reference to the paper bag, Exhibit 626, Mr. +Latona, could you show us where on that bag this portion of the palm, +the ulnar portion of the palm, of Lee Harvey Oswald was found? + +Mr. LATONA. This little red arrow which I have placed on the paper bag +shows the palmprint as it was developed on the wrapper. + +The CHAIRMAN. Is it visible to the naked eye? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes; it is. I think you can see it with the use of this +hand magnifier. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Latona, could you mark that arrow "A"--the arrow you +have just referred to on Exhibit 626, pointing to the portion of the +palmprint of Lee Harvey Oswald? + +The CHAIRMAN. What is the number of the exhibit that it is on? + +Mr. EISENBERG. That is 626. + +Mr. LATONA. May I--I tell you, I am going to furnish you a copy of +this, but I cannot make a copy unless I have it. + +Mr. EISENBERG. We can lend it to you for that purpose. + +The CHAIRMAN. You may have it to make the copy. + +Mr. LATONA. And I will send you the copy. Thank you. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, I believe you said you also found a fingerprint of +Lee Harvey Oswald on this paper bag, 626. + +Mr. LATONA. Yes; I did. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Can you tell us what finger and what portion of the +finger of Lee Harvey Oswald you identified that print as being? + +Mr. LATONA. The fingerprint which was developed on the paper bag was +identified as the right--as the left index fingerprint of Lee Harvey +Oswald. I also have a slight enlargement of it, if you care to see it. + +Mr. EISENBERG. You are showing us a true photograph of the actual +fingerprint? + +Mr. LATONA. As it appeared on the bag, slightly enlarged. + +Mr. EISENBERG. May I have that admitted as 633, Mr. Chairman? + +The CHAIRMAN. It may be admitted. + +(The item referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 633 and +received in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. You are holding another photograph, Mr. Latona? + +Mr. LATONA. I have here a photograph of the fingerprint card, of the +one which I just took back, and it is actually a true reproduction of +the front of the card. That was Exhibit 630. This one here is a true +reproduction of the front of Exhibit 630. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And have you circled on that, the photograph which you +are holding, the left index finger? + +Mr. LATONA. That's right. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And would you show that to the Chief Justice? That is a +true reproduction, Mr. Latona? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes; it is. + +Mr. EISENBERG. I would like that admitted as 633A. + +The CHAIRMAN. It may be admitted. + +(The item referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 633A and +received in evidence.) + +Mr. LATONA. Could that take the place of this? + +Mr. EISENBERG. I think our exhibits would be confused. + +Mr. LATONA. Very well. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, what portion of the left index finger was that, Mr. +Latona? + +Mr. LATONA. That is the area which is to the left, or rather to the +right of the index finger. + +Mr. EISENBERG. On which joint? + +Mr. LATONA. On the first joint, which is under the nail. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Is that known as the distal phalanx? + +Mr. LATONA. That's right. + +Mr. EISENBERG. So it is the right side of the distal phalanx of the +left index finger? + +Mr. LATONA. That is correct. Now, that would be looking at an +impression made by the finger. If you were to look at the finger, you +would raise the finger up and it would be on the opposite side, which +would be on the left side of the distal phalanx. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, when we were talking before about the palmprint, +and you said that it was on the right side--you said it was on the +ulnar portion of the palm? + +Mr. LATONA. That is correct. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And that is looking at the palm itself? + +Mr. LATONA. Looking at the palm itself. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, I would rather---- + +Mr. LATONA. That would still be the ulnar side when you look at the +print. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Why don't we use ulnar and radial then when we refer +to portions of fingerprints, ulnar referring to the little-finger +side, and radial to the thumb side? So referring to the left index +fingerprint now, that would correspond to the ulnar side of the left +index finger of Lee Harvey Oswald? + +Mr. LATONA. That is correct. + +The CHAIRMAN. Congressman Ford, I'm going to leave now to attend a +session of the Court. If you will preside in my absence, Mr. Dulles +will be here in a few moments, and if you are obliged to leave for your +work in the Congress, he will preside until I return. + +(At this point, Mr. Dulles entered the hearing room and the Chairman +left the hearing room.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Latona, could you show us where on the paper bag, +Exhibit 626, this left index finger was developed by you? + +Mr. LATONA. The left index fingerprint was developed in the area which +is indicated by this small red arrow. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Could you put a "B" on that arrow to which you are +pointing? Mr. Latona, did you make comparison charts of the known and +latent or the inked and latent palmprints of Lee Harvey Oswald which +you have been referring to as found on this paper bag, 626? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes; I did. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Could you---- + +Mr. DULLES. Shouldn't you change that question a little bit? I don't +think you should say Lee Harvey Oswald at this point. + +Mr. EISENBERG. He has identified the print as being that of Lee Harvey +Oswald. + +Mr. DULLES. Excuse me. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Latona, could you show us that chart and discuss +with us some of the similar characteristics which you found in the +inked and latent print which led you to the conclusion that they were +identical? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes. I have here what are referred to as two charted +enlargements. One of the enlargements, which is marked "Inked Left +Index Fingerprint. Lee Harvey Oswald" is approximately a 10-time +enlargement of the fingerprint which appears on Exhibit 633A. The other +enlargement, which is marked "Latent Fingerprint on Brown Homemade +Paper Container," is approximately a 10-time enlargement of the latent +fingerprint which was developed on the brown wrapping paper indicated +by the red arrow, "B." + +Mr. EISENBERG. And that also corresponds to the photograph you gave us, +which is now Exhibit 633? + +Mr. LATONA. That's correct. + +Representative FORD. And the arrow, "B," is on Exhibit 626? + +Mr. LATONA. That's correct. Now, in making a comparison of prints +to determine whether or not they were made by the same finger, an +examination is made first of all of the latent print. + +An examination is made to see if there are in the latent print any +points or characteristics which are unique to the person making the +determination. In other words, in looking at the latent print, for +example, this point, which is marked "1," is a ridge. The black lines +are what we term ridges. They were made by the ridge formations on the +fingers. That is, when the finger came in contact with the brown paper +bag, it left an outline in these black lines on the brown paper bag. + +Now, in looking at the latent print in the enlargement you notice there +is one black line that appears to go upward and stop at the point which +has been indicated as point No. 1. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Latona, may I interrupt you there for a second. + +Mr. Chairman, I would like to introduce this chart, this comparison +chart, as an exhibit. + +Representative FORD. It may be admitted. + +Mr. EISENBERG. That will be 634. + +(The item referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 634 and was +received in evidence.) + +Mr. LATONA. Looking further we notice---- + +Mr. DULLES. Could I just ask a question about this? This is referring +to Exhibit 634. I want to make sure what line we are talking about. You +are talking about a black line that goes up as though two rivers came +together there, and here is the point where this line stops. + +Mr. LATONA. That's correct. + +Mr. DULLES. No. 1. This is the latent? + +Mr. LATONA. This is the imprint. This is the print on the bag. + +Mr. DULLES. Yes. + +Mr. LATONA. The contrast here is not as good as it is here. + +Mr. DULLES. This goes up here, and these two lines come in there, so +there is the point where your black line stops? + +Mr. LATONA. Right at the end of the red line which is marked "1." + +Mr. DULLES. Thank you. + +Mr. LATONA. Now, looking further we find this point that has been +indicated as No. 3. And No. 3 is located---- + +Mr. DULLES. Why do you skip 2? + +Mr. LATONA. I am going to come to that. + +Mr. DULLES. I see. + +Mr. LATONA. I am going to tie these three in. Point No. 3 is above and +to the left one ridge removed from--one black line--there is No. 3. Now +looking further, we can look over to the right, or rather to the left, +and we notice that one ridge removed from No. 3 are two ridges that +come together and give you a point which has been indicated as No. 2. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Is that what you might call a bifurcation? + +Mr. LATONA. That is referred to, generally speaking, as a bifurcation. + +Mr. EISENBERG. That is No. 2? + +Mr. LATONA. And No. 1 is what is referred to as a ridge end. + +Now, keeping those three points in mind, and the relationship they have +to each other, if this print here, the inked print, were made by the +same finger which left the print on the brown paper bag, we should be +able to find those three points in the same approximate area, having +the same relationship to each other. + +Now, at this point we have not made a determination of any kind as to +whether they are or are not identical. Examining the inked fingerprint, +bearing in mind the general formation of this print that we see here, +the latent print, we would examine the inked print and that would +direct us to this approximate area here. And looking, we find sure +enough there is point No. 1--or rather there is a point which appears +to be the same as point No. 1 here. Bearing in mind how we located +points Nos. 2 and 3, we would then check the inked print further and +say to ourselves, "If this print were the same, there should be a point +No. 2 in exactly the same relationship to No. 1 as there was in this +latent print." We look over here--one, two, three, four--there is point +No. 2. + +Mr. EISENBERG. That point, or that count that you are making, is of +ridges between the first and second point? + +Mr. LATONA. Between the points, that's right. Then we have over here +one, two, three, four. And bearing in mind again how point No. 3 +bears a relationship to point No. 2, we should find point No. 3 in +the same relative position in the inked print that it occurs in the +latent print. Counting over again--one--we find a point which could be +considered No. 3. + +Now, at this time we have coordinated three points. We have tied +three points together. On that basis, by themselves, we would not +give a definite determination. Accordingly, we would pursue a further +examination to determine whether there are other characteristics which +occur. + +Mr. DULLES. How many times is that magnified? + +Mr. LATONA. This is magnified approximately 10 times. + +Then we would pick up point No. 5. We notice point No. 5 is again one +of those bifurcations which occurs above and slightly to the left of +point No. 3. We also notice that it envelops point No. 1--as we go +down further, slightly to the right of point No. 5, we notice that +bifurcation envelops point No. 1. So we would look around for such a +characteristic in the latent print. + +If the same finger made those two prints, we have to find point 5. And +looking over here we find such a formation, we look at it, and sure +enough it envelops point No. 1--exactly the same relationship to each +other appears in the latent print, and in the inked print. It has the +same relationship to point No. 3 that occurs in the latent print as +occurs in the inked print. Then we would pick up point No. 4--one, two, +three, four. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Again you are counting ridges? + +Mr. LATONA. Counting ridges again, from point No. 5--one, two, three, +four. There is a so-called ridge end, which occurs above, above and +almost slightly to the left of point No. 5, point No. 5 enveloping No. +1. Point No. 5. + +Mr. DULLES. Is 5 a ridge-end? + +Mr. LATONA. Five is what we term a joining, forking, or bifurcation. +These two come together at point 5. Over here, together at point 5. + +Mr. DULLES. Is that where the two ridges come together there and encase +it? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes, sir. From point No. 5 we pick up point No. 7, which is +another one of those so-called bifurcations. One, two, three, four. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Again a ridge count? + +Mr. LATONA. Ridge counting from 5 to 6. That is in the latent print. We +must find the same situation in the inked print. Counting from point +No. 5 the ridges which intervene, one, two, three, and then we count +four, the point itself. There is the bifurcation right here. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Latona, in making these ridge counts, do you also +pay attention to the so-called, let's say, geographical relation, the +spatial relation of the two points? + +Mr. LATONA. Very definitely. Now, it does not always follow that the +so-called geographical position will coincide exactly the same. That +would be caused because of variations in the pressure used when the +print was made. For example, when you make a print on a fingerprint +card: when the inked print was made, the print was made for the +specific purpose of recording all of the ridge details. When the print +was left on the paper bag, it was an incidental impression. The person +was not trying to leave a print. In fact, he probably did not even know +he left one. So the pressure which is left, or the position of the +finger when it made the print, will be a little different. Accordingly +the geographical area of the points themselves will not always +coincide. But they will be in the general position the same. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Latona, without going into detail, there are some +apparent dissimilarities on the two sides of that chart. Can you +explain why there should be apparent dissimilarities? + +Mr. LATONA. The dissimilarities as such are caused by the type of +material on which the print was left, because of the pressure, because +of the amount of material which is on the finger when it left the +print. They would not always be exactly the same. Here again there +appears a material difference in the sense there is a difference in +coloration. This is because of the fact that the contrast in the latent +print is not as sharp as it is in the inked impression, which is a +definite black on white, whereas here we have more or less a brown on a +lighter brown. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, Mr. Latona, when you find an apparent dissimilarity +between an inked and a latent print, how do you know that it is caused +by absorption of the surface upon which the latent print is placed, or +by failure of the finger to exude material, rather than by the fact +that you have a different fingerprint? + +Mr. LATONA. That is simply by sheer experience. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Would you say, therefore, that the identification of +a fingerprint is a task which calls for an expert interpretation, as +opposed to a simple point-by-point laying-out which a layman could do? + +Mr. LATONA. Very definitely so; yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. How much training does it take before you can make an +identification? + +Mr. LATONA. Well, I cannot tell you exactly how much in terms of time, +insofar as what constitutes an expert. I can simply tell you what we +require of our people before they would be considered experts. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Yes, could you do that? + +Mr. LATONA. We require our people before they would be---- + +Mr. DULLES. This is the FBI? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes; this is the FBI. It would be 10 years of practical +work in connection with the classifying and searching and verifying +of regular fingerprint cards which bear all 10 prints. Those prints +would be searched through our main fingerprint files. That means that +that person would have to serve at least 10 years doing that. Of +course, he would have to progress from the mere searching operation +to the operation of being what we call unit supervisor, which would +check--which would be actually the checking of the work of subordinates +who do that work. He would be responsible for seeing that the +fingerprints are properly searched, properly classified. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And how long will he work in the latent fingerprint +section? + +Mr. LATONA. He would have to take an adaptability test, which would +take 3 or 4 days, to determine, first of all, do we feel he has the +qualifications for the job. Then if he passed the adaptability test, +he would receive a minimum of 1 year's personal training in the latent +fingerprint section--which means that he would have to serve at least +11 years in fingerprint work constantly, day in and day out, 8 hours a +day in fingerprint work, before we would consider him as a fingerprint +expert for purposes of testifying in a court of law. + +Mr. EISENBERG. So that when you show us this chart, this is actually, +or I should say, is this actually a demonstration, rather than a chart +from which we could make an identification? + +Mr. LATONA. That's right. The purpose is simply a hope on my part +that by my explanation you may have some idea as to how a comparison +is made, rather than for me to prove it to you through these charts, +because unquestionably there are certain points that you will not see +which to me are apparent. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, Mr. Latona---- + +Mr. DULLES. May I ask a question? Is this ridge formation, sort of two +ridges coming together, is that one of the most distinctive things you +look for? I note on these charts, Exhibit 634, the various examples you +have given us have been of one type so far. + +Mr. LATONA. Two. + +Mr. DULLES. I did not get the two. I get the two ridges coming +together with sort of the ending of a valley. You were saying there +were two distinctive things. I have only caught so far one distinctive +thing--that is the two ridges coming together in a kind of valley with +no exit. + +Mr. LATONA. Two that come together, like a fork. And the other one was +the one that just ends by itself--does not join. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Which is an interrupted ridge? + +Mr. DULLES. I do not get the distinction. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Is that an interrupted ridge you just described? + +Mr. LATONA. What we call an ending ridge. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Off the record. + +(Discussion off the record.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. Back on the record. Mr. Latona, could you prepare a +diagram which would show some of the characteristics, in broad outline, +which we have been discussing, and have those labeled, and could you +submit that diagram to us at a future date? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes; I could. + +Mr. EISENBERG. We will append it to your testimony, so that your +testimony may be more easily followed in the record--with the +permission of the Chairman. + +Representative FORD. It will be prepared and submitted and included in +the record. + +(The item referred to was later supplied and was marked Commission +Exhibit No. 634A.) + +Mr. LATONA. Well, if you could give me your indulgence, I could do it +right here as fast as I did it on the board. + +Representative FORD. Off the record. + +(Discussion off the record.) + +Representative FORD. Back on the record. + +Mr. DULLES. These, I understand, are the particular distinguishing +points, the points that you would look for to determine whether the +latent print---- + +Mr. LATONA. Not so much the looking for the points, as to finding +points having a relationship to each other. It is the relation that is +the important thing, not the point itself. In other words, all of us +would have to a certain extent these points. + +Mr. DULLES. They have to be in the same relation to each other. + +Mr. LATONA. That is correct. For example, on the illustration I have +here---- + +Mr. EISENBERG. This is an illustration on the blackboard. + +Mr. LATONA. The mere fact that this is an ending ridge and bifurcation +and another ending ridge and a dot in themselves mean nothing. This +is a type of pattern which is referred to as a loop, which is very +common. These comprise approximately 65 percent of pattern types. It +has four ridge counts, for example. You can find hundreds of thousands +and millions of four-count loops. But you would not find but one loop +having an arrangement of these characteristics in the relation that +they have. For example, the enclosure is related to this ending ridge. +This ending ridge is related by one ridge removed from the dot. This +bifurcation is next to the so-called core which is formed by a rod, the +ending ridge. + +The points themselves are common. The most common type of points are +the ending ridge and the bifurcation. Those are the two points we have +covered so far. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Latona, I see that you have marked nine +characteristics on your chart. Are these all the characteristics which +you were able to find---- + +Mr. LATONA. On this particular chart; yes. They were the only ones that +bore--actually, there is still one more characteristic--there could +have been 10. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, is there any minimum number of points that has to +be found in order to make an identification, in your opinion? + +Mr. LATONA. No; in my opinion, there are no number of points which are +a requirement. Now, there is a general belief among lots of fingerprint +people that a certain number of points are required. It is my opinion +that this is an erroneous assumption that they have taken, because +of the fact that here in the United States a person that qualifies +in court as an expert has the right merely to voice an opinion as to +whether two prints were made by the same finger or not made. There are +no requirements, there is no standard by which a person can say that a +certain number of points are required--primarily because of the fact +that there is such a wide variance in the experience of men who qualify +as fingerprint experts. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Latona, you said that not all experts are in +agreement on this subject. Is there any substantial body of expert +opinion that holds to a minimum number of points, let's say, 12? + +Mr. LATONA. In the United States, to my knowledge, I know of no group +or body that subscribe to a particular number. Now, quite frequently +some of these departments will maintain a standard for themselves, +by virtue of the fact that they will say, "Before we will make an +identification, we must find a minimum of 12 points of similarity." + +I am quite certain that the reason for that is simply to avoid the +possibility of making an erroneous identification. Now, why they +have picked 12--I believe that that 12-point business originated +because of a certain article which was written by a French fingerprint +examiner by the name of Edmond Locard back in 1917, I think--there +was a publication to the effect that in his opinion where there were +12 points of similarity, there was no chance of making an erroneous +identification. If there were less than 12, he voiced the conclusion +that the chances would increase as to finding duplicate prints. + +Now, today we in the FBI do not subscribe to that theory at all. We +simply say this: We have confidence in our experts to the extent that +regardless of the number of points, if the expert who has been assigned +to the case for purposes of making the examination gives an opinion, +we will not question the number of points. We have testified--I +personally have testified in court to as few as seven points of +similarity. + +Mr. DULLES. But you would not on two, would you? + +Mr. LATONA. No, sir; because I know that two points, even though they +would not be duplicate points, could be arranged in such a fashion that +it might possibly give me the impression that here are two points which +appear to be the same even though they are are not. + +Mr. DULLES. But it is somewhere between two and seven--somewhere in +that range? + +Mr. LATONA. That is right. Where that is, I do not know. And I would +not say whether I would testify to six, would I testify to five, would +I refuse to testify to four. + +Mr. DULLES. You say you would--or would you? + +Mr. LATONA. I don't know. That's a question I could not answer. I would +have to see each case individually before I could render a conclusion. + +Now, going outside of the United States, we have been approached--I +mean the FBI--have been approached by other foreign experts in an +attempt to set a worldwide standard of 16 characteristics, a minimum of +16, as opposed to 12, which is generally referred to by people in this +country here. Now of course we would not subscribe to that at all. And +I think---- + +Mr. DULLES. That would be 16 on the fingerprint of the same finger? + +Mr. LATONA. That's right. + +Mr. DULLES. Obviously, if you have two fingers that would alter the +number--if you had three on one and two on the other, would you +consider that five? + +Mr. LATONA. We would. + +Now, whether the foreign experts would not, I don't know. In other +words, if we were to go along with this European theory of 16 points, +we would not testify to this being an identification. That is really +what it would amount to. Yet to me, in my mind, there is no question +that these prints here---- + +Mr. EISENBERG. Which is what exhibit? + +Mr. LATONA. The enlargements in Exhibit 634--are simply reproductions +of the left index fingerprint of Lee Harvey Oswald. + +Representative FORD. There is no doubt in your mind about that? + +Mr. LATONA. Absolutely none at all. The fact that there are only the +nine points charted--and I feel this way, it is purely a matter of +experience. They simply do not have the experience that we have in +the FBI. The FBI has the world's largest practical fingerprint file. +We receive on an average of 23,000 to 25,000 cards a day which are +processed within a 3-day period. + +Mr. DULLES. In a 3-day period? + +Mr. LATONA. In a 3-day period. + +Mr. DULLES. And by processed do you mean they are filed according to +certain characteristics? + +Mr. LATONA. They are. At first they are recorded as having been +received from a particular agency, as to the number that we have +received, as to the type of the card. Then they are checked to see if +the impressions which are on the fingerprint card are complete and +legible, that they are placed in their proper sequence, that is they +are properly classified. + +Then they are checked through our files to see if the person has or has +not a prior criminal record. Then a reply is prepared and forwarded to +the contributor. That is done in a 3-day period. + +Mr. DULLES. How old is the art, roughly? + +Mr. LATONA. Insofar as this country is concerned, I would say back to +1903, when the first fingerprint file for purposes of classification +and filing was set up in this country in New York. + +Mr. DULLES. Did it start in France? + +Mr. LATONA. No. Really, I daresay the English were probably as early as +any, or even down to South America--you have in Argentina the setting +up of fingerprint files as early as 1891. For a long time we never +recognized the fact that Argentina had a fingerprint file. I think it +is primarily because all of the works on fingerprinting were written +in Spanish, and it was just a question of finding somebody to take the +time and effort to translate it into English. + +The French are credited with the so-called Bertillon system, which is a +measurement of the bone structure of the body. Alphone Bertillon was a +French---- + +Mr. DULLES. Didn't Bertillon go into fingerprints later? + +Mr. LATONA. Very reluctantly. He was very reluctant to accept it. He +was a sort of diehard. He felt that his method, the measurement of +certain bones of the body, would not change after a person reached +the adult stage. But we know that that is not true. There is a +change--because of age, disease, dissipation. A person that was +once 6'2" may, because of the fact he is getting older, hump down a +little more and instead of being 6'2" he might be 5'11". Certain bone +structures over the years make certain changes--plus the fact that his +system was not a good system in that certain allowances had to be made +because of the way that people were measured. + +Sometimes one operator might measure the bones of the arm, for example, +too tight, and another too loose. And they used the metric system of +measurement, which in terms of their measuring might sometimes mean +that the same person would not measure the same bone the same way twice. + +We have the celebrated case here which we refer to as the Will West +case, here in the United States, in which a man was sentenced to the +penitentiary in Leavenworth. He was a colored man by the name of Will +West. The operator there, going through the mechanics of taking the +various measurements and his photograph, said, "I see you are back +here again." The man said, "No, this is the first time I have been to +Leavenworth." The operator was certain he had measured and photographed +this man before. He went to check his records and he came up with a +prior record which disclosed a Will West who had practically the same +Bertillon measurements as the man currently being examined. + +He said, "Isn't this you?" And he showed him a picture. He looked at +the picture and recognized the picture as being one of himself. He +said, "Yes, that is me, but I have never been here before." + +They checked the records and found still there in the penitentiary was +another Will West who looked almost exactly like a twin. But they were +not even related. Their features were the same, their measurements were +the same, but then their fingerprints were completely different. + +If they made that error that one time, how many other times could the +same error have been made? And accordingly, we here in the United +States, around 1903--the Bertillon method was slowly put out of use. It +became obsolete. + +Bertillon, before he died, conceded that fingerprints was a good means +of identification, and he very reluctantly conceded that the two +systems, his method and fingerprints together, would be an absolute +means of identification. + +We completely did away with the Bertillon system. In fact, the FBI +never used it. We started our fingerprint work years after all that had +been resolved, back in 1924. + +On July 1, 1924, that is actually when the FBI went into the +fingerprint business. + +Mr. DULLES. Thank you very much. I found that very interesting. + +Representative FORD. Go ahead, Mr. Eisenberg. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Latona, did you also prepare a chart showing a +comparison of the latent and known left-index fingerprint of Lee Harvey +Oswald found on the paper bag, Exhibit 626? + +Mr. LATONA. The left index finger. That is the one we just discussed. + +Mr. EISENBERG. I'm sorry--the right palmprint. + +Mr. LATONA. Right. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And before we go any further, I should state for the +record that the exhibit we have been referring to as 626 was earlier +introduced as 142, and it is 142. + +Mr. DULLES. Off the record. + +(Discussion off the record.) + +Mr. DULLES. Back on the record. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Also, before we get to the palmprint---- + +Mr. DULLES. Just a moment. It seems to me it would be well to have for +the files of the Commission copies of the earlier fingerprints of Lee +Harvey Oswald that were taken, and the time that they were taken. + +Mr. EISENBERG. I agree, sir. Mr. Latona---- + +Mr. LATONA. Do I understand you are asking---- + +Mr. EISENBERG. I will develop this on the record. + +Mr. Latona, you had earlier submitted to us, and we had marked as an +exhibit, copies of fingerprint cards and two palmprint cards which were +made up by the Dallas police and forwarded to you, received by you from +your Dallas office; is that correct? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes, sir. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, in addition, did the Federal Bureau of +Investigation have in its files prints of Lee Harvey Oswald which it +had received at some earlier date, prior to November 22? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes, sir; I believe there is a Marine Corps print. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Would these prints have been taken by the FBI? + +Mr. LATONA. No; they would not. + +Mr. EISENBERG. They were taken by---- + +Mr. LATONA. The regular service. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And forwarded to the FBI? + +Mr. LATONA. That's right. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did you compare the 10-finger card which you received +from the Dallas office of the FBI and compare it with the Marine +fingerprint card? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes, sir. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Were they identical? + +Mr. LATONA. They were the same. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Were the palmprints taken by the Marines? + +Mr. LATONA. No; not to my knowledge. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Could you submit to us a copy of the 10-print card which +you received from the Marine Corps? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes; I could. + +Mr. EISENBERG. With the Chairman's permission, that will be appended as +an exhibit to Mr. Latona's testimony. + +Representative FORD. Do you wish to identify it by a number at this +time? + +Mr. EISENBERG. Yes. If we could give it a number in advance of +receiving it, I would like to give it Commission Exhibit No. 635. + +(The item referred to was later supplied and was marked Commission +Exhibit No. 635.) + +Representative FORD. It will be admitted. + +Mr. DULLES. Do you know whether any fingerprints were taken after Lee +Harvey Oswald returned from the Soviet Union? + +Mr. LATONA. Those after he was arrested in connection with this +particular offense. + +Mr. DULLES. Apart from the fingerprints obtained in connection with the +assassination. + +Mr. LATONA. I do not. + +Mr. DULLES. Do you have a right to go to anybody and demand their +fingerprints? + +Mr. LATONA. No. + +Mr. DULLES. Under law? + +Mr. LATONA. No, sir; only persons taken into custody for Federal +violations as such. Now, the FBI has actually no authority at all, +except in cases of making an arrest. + +Mr. DULLES. There is nothing done in connection with the census or +anything of that kind? + +Mr. LATONA. No, sir. Some persons are ordered, by virtue of being +aliens, to be fingerprinted--those that are domiciled here in the +United States must register under the Alien Registration Act. + +Mr. DULLES. And fingerprints then are taken of aliens in connection +with their registration? + +Mr. LATONA. That's right. + +Mr. DULLES. Otherwise there is no general procedure for the taking of +anybody that you may happen to want to take? + +Mr. LATONA. The Services, of course, require it. Applicants for certain +positions are required by law. For example, all civil service, Federal +civil service applicants must be fingerprinted. Locally, there are +certain local cases. For example a man may in some localities, if he +even applies for a chauffeur's license, has to be fingerprinted. If he +desires a gun permit, he has to be fingerprinted. In some places, if he +applies for certain jobs he must be fingerprinted. + +Mr. DULLES. As I recall, I gave a fingerprint when I got my automobile +license. Is that general throughout the United States? + +Mr. LATONA. What State was that? + +Mr. DULLES. Here in the District. Didn't I give that? + +Mr. LATONA. No, sir. To my knowledge, there are none that require +it--fingerprinting--for an automobile license. In California I believe +it is voluntary--to place the finger, if you desire to, on your card. + +Mr. DULLES. Thank you very much. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Latona, Exhibit 630, which is one of the known +10-print cards submitted by the Dallas office, is marked "Refused +to sign" in the box with the printed caption "Signature of person +fingerprinted." Do you recall whether Lee Harvey Oswald signed the +Marine Corps card? + +Mr. LATONA. Offhand, I do not. + +Mr. EISENBERG. I think it would be interesting, for the record, to see +if that is signed, and, of course, as we read the record and get the +card, we will be able to note that information. + +We were discussing whether you had made a chart of the known and latent +right palmprint of Lee Harvey Oswald found on Exhibit 142, as I will +refer to it from now on. + +Mr. LATONA. I believe I have already furnished you smaller photographs. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Yes; you have. Those have been marked into evidence. + +Mr. LATONA. This is the inked--the right inked palmprint, a photograph +of the right inked palmprint of Lee Harvey Oswald. + +Mr. EISENBERG. You say "this." Can you identify that exhibit? It is 631. + +I am handing you Exhibit 632. + +Mr. LATONA. Exhibit 632 is approximately a time and a half enlargement +of the latent palmprint which was developed on the brown wrapper. + +Mr. EISENBERG. That is Exhibit 142. + +Mr. LATONA. Exhibit 142--which is indicated by the red arrow A. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did you prepare this chart, Mr. Latona? + +Mr. LATONA. Not personally, no. This was made under my personal +direction and supervision. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And is it an accurate reproduction of the known and +latent prints which were earlier introduced into evidence? + +Mr. LATONA. It is. It is a true and faithful reproduction of these +areas, enlarged to approximately eight times the originals. + +Mr. EISENBERG. May I have this introduced into evidence as 636, Mr. +Chairman? + +Representative FORD. It will be introduced. + +(The item referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 636 and +received in evidence.) + +Mr. DULLES. May I ask whether this was discovered immediately after the +assassination--at what time did you discover this particular palmprint? + +Mr. LATONA. It was on the 23d of November, the day after. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Using this chart, 636, Mr. Latona, could you demonstrate +to us some of the points which led you to the conclusion that the +latent palmprint on 142 was the palmprint of Lee Harvey Oswald? + +Mr. LATONA. The procedure in making this comparison was exactly +the same as the procedure followed in connection with making the +prior examination of the fingerprint. Now, the area which shows +in approximately an eight-time enlargement, and is marked "Latent +Palmprint Developed on Brown Homemade Paper Container," which is +Exhibit 636, is roughly outlined on Commission Exhibit 631 in red, +which is a photograph of the inked right palmprint of Lee Harvey Oswald. + +This area below the little finger, or what we referred to as the ulnar +portion of the palm--now, in making the examination or comparison, +here again--first of all I would like to point out that there is a +black line that goes right through--in an upward fashion--through the +enlargement of the latent fingerprint. That line is caused by virtue of +the fact that the palmprint which is developed is partially on a piece +of tape as well as the wrapper itself. In other words, a part of the +print is on a piece of tape and the other part is on the paper itself. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Latona, could you show how the palm lay on the paper +to produce that impression? + +Mr. LATONA. The palm lay in this fashion here. + +Mr. EISENBERG. You are putting your right hand on the paper so that the +fingers are pointing in the same direction as the arrow A? + +Mr. LATONA. That's right. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And it is at approximately right angles to the paper bag? + +Mr. LATONA. That's right. + +Here again, in making the comparison, a check is made for the location +of certain points. + +Now, we notice here that the points appear to be much closer than they +were in the fingerprint, and that is probably because of the pressure +which was exercised, possibly in holding the object which was in this +paper container. + +Now, you notice this point No. 1 here, which we term the ending ridge. +Point No. 2 is also an ending ridge. And you notice in between these +points there is a ridge. Point No. 2 is to the left of point No. 1. + +Then we find there is a point No. 3 which is a point which is similar +in character to point No. 2 and is almost directly below, but there +are two intervening ridges. Then there is a point No. 4 which is below +point No. 3, and going in a direction opposite from point No. 3. + +If we bear those four points in mind--and if the latent palmprint was +made by the same palm that made the inked palmprint--then we should +find these four points in that position over there. + +Now, in order to first of all find the particular area where we +would look to see if those points exist, we would bear in mind the +general formation of the print itself. We notice the so-called looping +formation in the inked print. We see that there is a looping formation +here. Definitely it is not as pronounced in the latent print as it is +in the inked print. But to the experienced eye, it is right here. + +Accordingly, bearing in mind where these points would occur, we would +generalize in the area to the extreme right of the enlargement, and +find that there is a point which is somewhat similar to the point which +appears in the inked impression, which momentarily we would say appears +to be the same point as No. 1. + +Now, bearing in mind how No. 2 is related to point No. 1, does such a +point appear in the latent print? And making the check, exactly in the +same fashion and relationship that occurred in the inked print, we find +that there is such a point. + +Does a third point appear in the same relationship to point No. 2 as it +appears in the inked print? + +Counting down one, two, and then the three point being the point +itself. And in the same general flowing direction we count here, one, +two, three--there it is. + +Bearing in mind again that we found point No. 4 is what we refer to as +a bifurcation going in the opposite direction from No. 3, which was +directly below and to the left, do we find such a point here? Sure +enough, there it is. + +Now, an additional test would be this: At this point here we notice +there is an abrupt ending of a ridge at this point here. It was not +even charted. The fact is, it also occurs here. You see this point +here, through which there is no line drawn, here it is right here---- + +Mr. EISENBERG. You are pointing above 4? + +Mr. LATONA. Directly above 4 to a ridge going--what we term flowing to +the right. Now, at this point here, to a fingerprint examiner of any +experience at all, he would start saying these prints were probably +made by the same fellow. To satisfy himself, he would continue to point +No. 5--one, two, three, four--there is point No. 5. Then there is No. +6, and there is No. 6 here, having exactly the same relationship to +each other. + +On the basis of those six points alone, I would venture the opinion +that these palmprints were made by the same person. But for purposes +of carrying it out further, here is point No. 7. Point No. 7 is +obliterated to a certain degree to the inexperienced eye by virtue of +the fact that it almost coincides with that line there. You probably do +not see that. + +And here is point No. 8, which is related to point No. 7 by the +separation of those ridges in the same way. One, two, three, four--one, +two, three, four. In its relationship to No. 9 here--just above and to +the left, flowing in the same general direction. Here it is here. + +Then your point No. 10, which is tied into point No. 11 in this fashion +here, and 12 and 13. All of them have the same relationship insofar as +the intervention of ridges is concerned, the same general area, plus +the fact that they all flow in the same general direction. + +Picking up No. 14, which is going upward, to point No. 15, which stands +out rather easily--15 here. To throw in just one point extra--see this +little point here, that ends here? + +Mr. EISENBERG. That is to the upper right of 15? + +Mr. LATONA. To the right and upward of 15. + +Mr. DULLES. So you really have 16 points there? + +Mr. LATONA. Actually, there are more than that in here, which I have +not even bothered to chart. The opinion here, without any question at +all, this latent print, which was developed on the brown bag marked +"A"--142--was made by the right palm of Lee Harvey Oswald. And in my +opinion, this identification is absolute. There is no question at all +that only the right palm of Lee Harvey Oswald made this print, or could +have made it. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Are there any further questions on the prints appearing +on this bag? + +Representative FORD. Mr. Murray? + +Mr. MURRAY. May I suggest this, Mr. Chairman? Since the print on the +bag may become obliterated, and since members of the Commission have +already seen it, it might be advisable to put on the record that they +have seen it, because in time to come it may not be visible to anybody. + +Representative FORD. Well, I for one would be willing to state that I +have personally seen that fingerprint through a glass on the bag--both +the finger and the palm. + +Mr. DULLES. I would be glad to concur that I also have seen the +fingerprint and the palmprint to which Congressman Ford refers. + +Mr. EISENBERG. In that general connection, Mr. Latona, do you commonly +make your fingerprint identifications on the basis of the object on +which the latent print appears, or on the basis of a photograph of that +object? + +Mr. LATONA. Normally it is made on the basis of photographs. We work +more or less like an assembly-line basis, and we do not have the time +or the opportunity to work from the originals, as was done in this +case--this being quite an exceptional case. So the usual identification +would be made--this was made on the basis of the bag itself, rather +than to wait and get finished photographs from our photographic +laboratory. + +If I recall correctly, this was on a Saturday--the 23d? + +Mr. EISENBERG. Yes; it was. + +Mr. LATONA. We did not have our full staff there. We were called in to +handle this case specially. There were no photographers available at +that time for that particular purpose. Frankly, under the circumstances +it would not have made any difference whether they were available +or not. This had a priority over everything we were working on and +naturally we had to proceed as fast as we could, in a sense, to render +conclusions and opinions at that time. + +Accordingly, the original comparisons were made directly from the +wrapper, rather than a photograph, which was prepared subsequently to +this. + +Representative FORD. The suggestion has been made, Mr. Murray, that +perhaps you would like to look at that palmprint and the fingerprint on +the wrapping, and you might make a statement the same as Mr. Dulles and +I have made. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Could you point out to Mr. Murray, Mr. Latona, the two +prints? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes, sir. "A" is the fingerprint. + +Mr. DULLES. And the witness certifies that these are true photographs +of the fingerprint and the palmprint that you have exhibited? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes, sir. + +Mr. MURRAY. May I say for the record, Mr. Chairman, that I definitely +and clearly saw what appeared to me to be a palmprint in the part of +Exhibit 142 which was designated with a "B," and less clearly, but +nevertheless I did see, the fingerprint on the other portion of the bag. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Latona---- + +Mr. LATONA. "B" is the finger, and "A" is the palm. + +Mr. MURRAY. Yes; that's correct. And the palm "A"--there I definitely +saw what appeared to be a palmprint, and more faintly I saw a +fingerprint in the portion marked "B." + +Mr. DULLES. And these are exhibits---- + +Mr. EISENBERG. This is Exhibit 142. + +(At this point Representative Boggs entered the hearing room.) + +Mr. DULLES. Both the palmprint and the fingerprint are on Exhibit 142. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Yes--marked "A" and "B" respectively. + +Mr. Latona, one further question on this subject. When you testify in +court, do you frequently testify on the basis of the photographs rather +than the original object? + +Mr. LATONA. If the originals are available, I would prefer that they be +brought into court. If they are not, then photographs are used--plus +the original negative of the latent prints which were photographed. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, Mr. Latona, I hand you Commission Exhibit 139 +which, for the record, consists of the rifle found on the sixth floor +of the TSBD building, and which was identified yesterday as the +rifle--and the day before yesterday--as the rifle which fired the fatal +bullets, and I ask you whether you are familiar with this weapon? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes; I am. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And did you examine this weapon to test--did you examine +this weapon to determine whether there were any identifiable latent +fingerprints on it? + +Mr. LATONA. I examined the weapon to determine whether there were any +identifiable latent prints on the weapon. + +Mr. EISENBERG. When did you receive the weapon? + +Mr. LATONA. On the morning of November 23, 1963. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And when did you proceed to make your examination? + +Mr. LATONA. I proceeded to make my examination that same day that I +received it. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Can you tell us what techniques you used? + +Mr. LATONA. Well, the technique that I used first was simply to +examine it visually under a magnifying glass, a hand magnifying glass, +primarily for the purpose of seeing, first of all, whether there were +any visible prints. I might point out that my attention had been +directed to the area which we refer to as the trigger guard on the left +side of the weapon, Commission Exhibit 139. + +Mr. EISENBERG. The trigger-guard area? + +Mr. LATONA. The trigger-guard area. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Which actually, in the case of this particular weapon, +is the area in which the magazine is inserted at the top; is that +correct? You are looking at the weapon now, and the magazine comes out +the bottom of what is called the trigger-guard area, which would be a +trigger guard on another weapon. + +Mr. LATONA. That's correct. There had been placed over that area a +piece of cellophane material. My attention had been directed to it, to +the effect that a prior examination had been made of that area, and +that there were apparently certain latent prints available--visible +under that area. + +I first examine most prints to see---- + +Mr. DULLES. Who placed the cellophane material there, in your opinion? + +Mr. LATONA. Well, I was told--my information was simply that the Dallas +Police Department had done so. I have no personal knowledge as to who +did it, other than information that the Dallas Police had examined the +weapon and they had found these visible marks on there, that they had +developed the prints. + +Now, by what means they did it, I do not know, but I would assume they +used a gray powder. + +Mr. DULLES. What was the purpose of putting the cellophane there? + +Mr. LATONA. To protect the prints while the rifle was intransit to the +FBI. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, when you received it with the cellophane cover, +what portion did it cover? + +Mr. LATONA. Closest to the trigger area. + +Mr. EISENBERG. On the trigger guard, closest to the trigger area? + +Mr. LATONA. That's right. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Was that on the right or left side of the weapon? + +Mr. LATONA. Left side. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And was there a print visible to you underneath the +cellophane? + +Mr. LATONA. I could see faintly ridge formations there. However, +examination disclosed to me that the formations, the ridge formations +and characteristics, were insufficient for purposes of either effecting +identification or a determination that the print was not identical +with the prints of people. Accordingly, my opinion simply was that the +latent prints which were there were of no value. + +Now, I did not stop there. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Before we leave those prints, Mr. Latona, had those been +developed by the powder method? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes; they had. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Was that a gray powder? + +Mr. LATONA. I assumed that they used gray powder in order to give them +what little contrast could be seen. And it took some highlighting and +sidelighting with the use of a spotlight to actually make those things +discernible at all. + +Representative FORD. As far as you are concerned. + +Mr. LATONA. That's right. + +Mr. DULLES. Is is likely or possible that those fingerprints could have +been damaged or eroded in the passage from Texas to your hands? + +Mr. LATONA. No, sir; I don't think so. In fact, I think we got the +prints just like they were. There had, in addition to this rifle and +that paper bag, which I received on the 23d--there had also been +submitted to me some photographs which had been taken by the Dallas +Police Department, at least alleged to have been taken by them, of +these prints on this trigger guard which they developed. I examined the +photographs very closely and I still could not determine any latent +value in the photograph. + +So then I took the rifle personally over to our photo laboratory. +In the meantime, I had made arrangements to bring a photographer in +especially for the purpose of photographing these latent prints for +me, an experienced photographer--I called him in. I received this +material in the Justice Building. My office of operations is in the +Identification Division Building, which is at 2d and D Streets SW. So +I made arrangements to immediately have a photographer come in and see +if he could improve on the photographs that were taken by the Dallas +Police Department. + +Well, we spent, between the two of us, setting up the camera, looking +at prints, highlighting, sidelighting, every type of lighting that we +could conceivably think of, checking back and forth in the darkroom--we +could not improve the condition of these latent prints. + +So, accordingly, the final conclusion was simply that the latent print +on this gun was of no value, the fragments that were there. + +After that had been determined, I then proceeded to completely process +the entire rifle, to see if there were any other prints of any +significance or value--any prints of value--I would not know what the +significance would be, but to see if there were any other prints. I +completely covered the rifle. I also had a firearms man---- + +Representative BOGGS. What do you cover it with? + +Mr. LATONA. Gray fingerprint powder. + +Representative BOGGS. What is that powder? + +Mr. LATONA. It is usually a combination of chalk and mercury, or +possibly white lead and a little bit of resin material to give it some +weight. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And you testified earlier that that adheres---- + +Mr. LATONA. To the moisture that was left by the finger, the fingers or +the hands, when it came in contact with the surface. + +Representative BOGGS. How long will that condition remain? + +Mr. LATONA. Going from one extreme to the other, it may remain for +years; under other circumstances, it may not even last for 15 or 20 +minutes. + +Representative BOGGS. Why the difference? + +Mr. LATONA. Because of the amount of material which was left and the +condition of the material which was left. Basically, the material may +be made up of protein material and salt and water--primarily water. If +it is totally water, with very little salt or oily material, when the +evaporation is effected, then it is complete--there will be nothing +left. + +Representative BOGGS. You mean that it is gone? + +Mr. LATONA. Right. On the other hand, if there is an oily matter there, +we know that latent prints will last literally for years on certain +objects. + +Representative BOGGS. Well, just for purposes of information, if I make +fingerprints there on the table, how long would they normally last? + +Mr. LATONA. I don't know. + +Representative BOGGS. Well, would there be any way to know? + +Mr. LATONA. No, sir. + +Mr. DULLES. It depends on temperature, on the amount of moisture +involved? + +What does it depend on? + +Mr. LATONA. First of all, I saw him touch it, but I am not even sure he +left a print there. + +Representative BOGGS. Well, I can see it. + +Mr. LATONA. As to the quality of the print, there again it is simply a +matter of what material you have in your hands that made that print, as +to how long it will last, how long it will take for it to evaporate. + +Actually, when it dries out, it may, in itself, leave a print with such +clarity that it would not--even though it would not accept the powder, +still by highlighting it, the way you did to see that the print was +there, we could photograph it so it would come out just as clear as +though it were black on white. + +Representative BOGGS. Does the material that one touches have any +effect? + +Mr. LATONA. Very definitely. It depends on how hard or smooth the +material is. + +Representative BOGGS. Now, does a weapon lend itself to retaining +fingerprints? + +Mr. LATONA. This particular weapon here, first of all, in my opinion, +the metal is very poorly finished. It is absorbent. Believe it or not, +there is a certain amount of absorption into this metal itself. It is +not finished in the sense that it is highly polished. + +Representative BOGGS. So this would be conducive to getting a good +print, or would it? + +Mr. LATONA. It would not. + +Representative BOGGS. I see--because it would absorb the moisture. + +Mr. LATONA. That's right. Now, there are other guns--for example, +Smith and Wesson, which have exceptionally nice finishes, the blue +metal finishes are better surfaces for latent prints. Where you have a +nickel-plated or silver-plated revolvers, where it is smooth--they are +much more conducive to latent prints than some of these other things, +say like the army type, the weapons used in wartime that are dull, to +avoid reflection--things of that type--they are not as good. + +Mr. DULLES. I wonder if you would like to look at the fingerprints we +have gone over. They are quite apparent there with the glass. + +Representative BOGGS. I would like to look at them. That is all I want +to ask right at the moment. + +Mr. DULLES. I would like to ask a general question. + +Mr. LATONA (addressing Representative Boggs). This is one of the +fingerprints developed on the brown wrapper. It is this print here. + +Mr. DULLES. You can see these prints quite clearly, and the palmprint. + +Representative BOGGS. This is a photograph of that? + +Mr. LATONA. This is approximately a time and a half enlargement. This +is the left index finger. Here is the palmprint that was developed. + +Representative FORD. Mr. Boggs--each of us here, Mr. Dulles, Mr. +Murray, and myself, have said on the record that we have seen the +prints on the wrapping. We did this because, as Mr. Latona has +indicated, such prints may disappear over a period of time. We thought +it might be well for the record to indicate that we saw them. If you +wish to do the same---- + +Representative BOGGS. I would like to do the same, having just seen it. + +Mr. DULLES. The witness has certified to the fact that these are true +photographs of the prints that we have seen. + +Representative BOGGS. And the witness has also certified that those are +Oswald's prints? + +Mr. LATONA. No; I cannot certify to that. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Do you want to explain that? + +Mr. LATONA. As I am not the one that fingerprinted Oswald, I cannot +tell from my own personal knowledge that those are actually the +fingerprints of Lee Harvey Oswald. + +Mr. EISENBERG. But you can certify that those prints are identical with +the prints on the card which bears the name of Lee Harvey Oswald which +was furnished to you? + +Mr. LATONA. That is right. + +Mr. EISENBERG. We will get other evidence in the record at a subsequent +time to show those were the prints of Oswald. Mr. Latona, you were +saying that you had worked over that rifle by applying a gray powder to +it. Did you develop any fingerprints? + +Mr. LATONA. I was not successful in developing any prints at all on the +weapon. I also had one of the firearms examiners dismantle the weapon +and I processed the complete weapon, all parts, everything else. And no +latent prints of value were developed. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Does that include the clip? + +Mr. LATONA. That included the clip, that included the bolt, it included +the underside of the barrel which is covered by the stock. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Were cartridge cases furnished to you at that time? + +Mr. LATONA. They were, which I processed, and from which I got no +prints. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Therefore, the net result of your work on Exhibit 139 +was that you could not produce an identifiable print? + +Mr. LATONA. That's correct. + +Mr. DULLES. May I ask one question? Does the Secret Service do +fingerprinting work, or do they turn it over to you--turn to you for +all of that? + +Mr. LATONA. I think they do some of their own, and on occasion we +will do some for them, too. Primarily I think they do their own. I am +not too familiar with the Secret Service as to how elaborate their +laboratory is. + +Mr. EISENBERG. So as of November 23, you had not found an identifiable +print on Exhibit 139? + +Mr. LATONA. That is right. + +Mr. EISENBERG. I now hand you a small white card marked with certain +initials and with a date, "11-22-63." There is a cellophane wrapping, +cellophane tape across this card with what appears to be a fingerprint +underneath it, and the handwriting underneath that tape is "off +underside of gun barrel near end of foregrip C 2766," which I might +remark parenthetically is the serial number of Exhibit 139. I ask you +whether you are familiar with this item which I hand you, this card? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes; I am familiar with this particular exhibit. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Can you describe to us what that exhibit consists of, +that item rather? + +Mr. LATONA. This exhibit or this item is a lift of a latent palmprint +which was evidently developed with black powder. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And when did you receive this item? + +Mr. LATONA. I received this item November 29, 1963. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Before we go any further may I have this admitted into +evidence? + +Representative FORD. It will be. What is the number? + +Mr. EISENBERG. That will be No. 637. + +(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 637, and +received in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Latona, could you describe to us what a lift is? + +Mr. LATONA. A lift is merely a piece of adhesive material which is used +for purposes of removing a print that has been previously developed +on an object, onto the adhesive material. Then the adhesive material +is placed on a backing, in this case which happens to be the card. +The adhesive material utilized here is similar to scotch tape. There +are different types of lifting material. Some of them are known as +opaque lifters, which are made of rubber, like a black rubber and white +rubber, which has an adhesive material affixed to it, and this material +is simply laid on a print which has been previously developed on an +object and the full print is merely removed from the object. + +Mr. EISENBERG. When you say "the print" is removed, actually the +powder---- + +Mr. LATONA. The powder that adhered to the original latent print is +picked off of the object. + +Mr. EISENBERG. So that the impression actually is removed? + +Mr. LATONA. That is right. + +Representative FORD. Is that a recognized technique? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes; it is. + +Representative FORD. In the fingerprinting business? + +Mr. LATONA. It is very common, one of the most common methods of +recording latent prints. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Who did you get this exhibit, this lift from? + +Mr. LATONA. This lift was referred to us by the FBI Dallas office. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And were you told anything about its origin? + +Mr. LATONA. We were advised that this print had been developed by the +Dallas Police Department, and, as the lift itself indicates, from the +underside of the gun barrel near the end of the foregrip. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, may I say for the record that at a subsequent point +we will have the testimony of the police officer of the Dallas police +who developed this print, and made the lift; and I believe that the +print was taken from underneath the portion of the barrel which is +covered by the stock. Now, did you attempt to identify this print which +shows on the lift Exhibit 637? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes; I did. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did you succeed in making identification? + +Mr. LATONA. On the basis of my comparison, I did effect an +identification. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And whose print was that, Mr. Latona? + +Mr. LATONA. The palmprint which appears on the lift was identified by +me as the right palmprint of Lee Harvey Oswald. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, Mr. Latona, as I understand it, on November 23, +therefore, the FBI had not succeeded in making an identification of +a fingerprint or palmprint on the rifle, but several days later by +virtue of the receipt of this lift, which did not come with the weapon +originally, the FBI did succeed in identifying a print on Exhibit 139? + +Mr. LATONA. That is right. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Which may explain any inconsistent or apparently +inconsistent statements, which I believe appeared in the press, as to +an identification? + +Mr. LATONA. We had no personal knowledge of any palmprint having been +developed on the rifle. The only prints that we knew of were the +fragmentary prints which I previously pointed out had been indicated +by the cellophane on the trigger guard. There was no indication on +this rifle as to the existence of any other prints. This print which +indicates it came from the underside of the gun barrel, evidently the +lifting had been so complete that there was nothing left to show any +marking on the gun itself as to the existence of such--even an attempt +on the part of anyone else to process the rifle. + +Mr. DULLES. Do I understand then that if there is a lifting of this +kind, that it may obliterate---- + +Mr. LATONA. Completely. + +Mr. DULLES. The original print? + +Mr. LATONA. That is right. + +Mr. EISENBERG. So that you personally, Mr. Latona, did not know +anything about a print being on the rifle which was identifiable until +you received, actually received the lift, Exhibit 637? + +Mr. LATONA. On the 29th of November. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Seven days after the assassination. + +And in the intervening period, correspondingly, the FBI had no such +knowledge? + +Mr. LATONA. As far as I know. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Latona, could you tell us what portion of the palm +of Lee Harvey Oswald you identified that print as being? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes. Here again I have a photograph that will show the +approximate area involved, which is on the ulnar side of the lower +portion of the palm. + +Mr. EISENBERG. The ulnar---- + +Mr. LATONA. Down near the base of the palm toward the wrist. + +Mr. EISENBERG. This is the right palm? + +Mr. LATONA. The right palm. + +Mr. EISENBERG. As it was in the case of the paper bag, Exhibit 142? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes, sir. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Could you display that photograph, please? This is a +photograph which you took of the inked print which was furnished to you +by the Dallas office? + +Mr. LATONA. I didn't personally prepare the photographs. They were +prepared at my personal direction. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Was it prepared under your supervision? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes, sir. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Is it an accurate reproduction? + +Mr. LATONA. It is. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, may I have this admitted as 638? + +Representative FORD. It shall be admitted. + +(The photograph referred to was marked as Commission Exhibit No. 638, +and received in evidence.) + +Mr. LATONA. I might point out that you have the original of this which +has been previously admitted. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Yes; but this photograph shows a red circle around the +portion which you identified---- + +Mr. LATONA. That is right. + +Mr. EISENBERG. As being the latent found on the lift, is that right? + +(Discussion off the record.) + +(The reporter read the last question.) + +Mr. LATONA. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Latona, now you are showing me another photograph +which appears to be a photograph of the lift itself, Exhibit 637, but +an enlargement thereof? + +Mr. LATONA. Slightly enlarged; yes, sir. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Was this prepared by you or under your supervision? + +Mr. LATONA. It was. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And there is a red circle around this, on this +photograph, that is around the print, the latent print? + +Mr. LATONA. That is right. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, may I have this photograph admitted as 639? + +Representative FORD. It shall be admitted. + +(The photograph referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 639, and +received in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Latona, did you also prepare a chart showing an +enlarged portion of the inked and latent palmprint? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes, sir; I did. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Illustrating some of the points which you used in making +your identification? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes, sir; I did. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Was this chart prepared by you or under your supervision? + +Mr. LATONA. This was prepared under my direct supervision. + +Mr. EISENBERG. May I have this admitted as 640? + +Representative FORD. It shall be admitted. + +(The chart referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 640, and +received in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. What is the enlargement of this chart? + +Mr. LATONA. Approximately an eight-time enlargement of the latent print +which appears on the lift, Commission Exhibit---- + +Mr. EISENBERG. 637? + +Mr. LATONA. 637. And the inked right palmprint enlargement is +approximately eight times an enlargement of the Exhibit 638. + +Mr. EISENBERG. The inked print? + +Mr. LATONA. Which is encircled in red, a portion of that area. + +Mr. EISENBERG. I wonder whether you could put that up on this easel +here so that we can all see it, and explain to us some of the points +which led you to your conclusion. + +Mr. LATONA. Here again the approach insofar as making a comparison +is concerned is exactly the same. That never changes. In making a +comparison of fingerprints or palmprints, the mechanics are exactly the +same. + +First to look for what might be considered as points which are easy to +see to the fingerprint man. + +Representative FORD. May I ask first was the lift a good print for +technical purposes? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes; to the extent that the identification was made. There +is no question as to the identity. + +Now, insofar as quality is concerned, I believe that is what you have +in mind, we don't, in fingerprint circles, don't say that this is a +good latent as compared to a bad latent. If it is valuable for purposes +of identification, so far as we are concerned it is good. + +Now, that may not appear to the inexperienced eye possibly as being as +clear as some of those others which you have already seen, but for the +purpose of identification the points are here. That is the main thing. + +Now, in making the comparison here it is easy to see the inked print. +There is very little question here. This print was made on purpose for +purposes of recording the ridges. This was made more or less incidental +or possibly accidental. + +Mr. DULLES. How does the left one differ? I thought you told us before +it was 10 times. + +Mr. LATONA. No; those were the others. + +Mr. DULLES. That was the fingerprint that was 10 times? + +Mr. LATONA. That is right. + +Mr. DULLES. And the palm has always been eight times? + +Mr. LATONA. That is right, because of the fact to make it 10 times it +would have been enlarged to the extent that maybe you wouldn't be able +to see the significance as to what it purports to be. + +If you enlarge a fingerprint too much, it loses its identity. I have +seen them where they were enlarged so big that you couldn't tell what +they were, and if somebody would tell you it is a fingerprint you would +say, if you say so it is, but it doesn't look like it to me. + +Now, in some other sciences, for example, like handwriting and things +of that kind, you can enlarge them pretty good size, typewriting and +things of that type, but a fingerprint because of the poorness in +contrast plus the fact that in themselves these black marks have no +particular significance, they might lose their identity, you won't +reconcile a palmprint with a palmprint. + +So, actually for purposes of making comparisons we never make a +comparison from an enlargement. The best way to make a comparison, the +more complete, is to make it from the actual size, utilizing a regular +fingerprint glass which enlarges approximately four diameters. + +We would never think of enlarging the prints for purposes of making our +initial comparison. We make them on the basis of the actual size, just +like you see it here, utilizing a fingerprint, which gives you a better +picture. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Fingerprint glass, you mean? + +Mr. LATONA. Fingerprint glass, because you get a much better view of +the impression than you do where it is enlarged because in enlarging +you have a tendency to distort the dissimilarities, to exaggerate what +may be considered as dissimilarities. + +Now, looking at these marks here again, which are very apparent here in +the ink print, this No. 1 which is a black line which flows over to +the right, then one ridge directly below it and off to the left is this +point No. 2. Then by counting down 1, 2, 3, 4 we come to this portion, +a short-ending ridge, which is similar to this short-ending ridge in +the illustration drawn on the board, is No. 3. + +Now, here again the fingerprintman simply mentally says to himself, "If +these palmprints were made by the same palm I should be able to find +three such points in approximately the same area of this palmprint as +was found here." + +The manner of isolating the area is by virtue of the fact that you see +this looping formation, the looping formation is right in here, rather +vague but it is there. + +Looking in that approximate area, you notice faintly this black line +that comes over to this area and stops at the point there. Now, is this +point No. 1 the same as this point No. 1? If it is, then there should +be a point No. 2 in the latent print which is in the same relative +position as point No. 2 occurs in the ink print. By looking in such a +position by this one ridge removed and to the left, there is this point +No. 2. + +Then looking down to point No. 3, we notice one, two, three, four, +there is this so-called short-ending ridge which to me shows up very +clearly here in the enlargement of the latent print. + +Point No. 4 is this black line which is coming toward point No. 3, and +right within the same area or line, there is point No. 4. + +Point No. 5 is picked up in this position over here, which is another +one of these short-ending ridges. It is removed by one ridge or rather +to the left of point No. 6 as is seen here. + +Then we pick up point No. 7, which is this point showing a cluster of +ridge formation here. + +Point No. 8 is tied in. You can tie in point No. 8 to point No. 4, +point No. 5 to point No. 7, and that coincides with point No. 8 here. +In that way we pick up point No. 9, showing the relationship of one, +two, three and over here one, two, three, always the same formation, +the same general area, the same relationship to each other. In that way +we pick up point No. 10, point No. 11, and point No. 12, which have +exactly the same formation. + +Here is point No. 10 coming this way, point No. 11 going that way, +these two ridges are in between. It checks perfectly. The same way with +point No. 12 which is just below point No. 11, and having the same +relationship to point No. 10, the same general areas, identically the +same type of characteristics, and exactly the same relationship to each +other. + +On the basis of those points, the obvious conclusion to an experienced +fingerprintman is simply that the same palm made both of these prints. +Only one palm could have made it, and that palm is the one which is +alleged to be of Lee Harvey Oswald, his right palm. + +Representative BOGGS. Is it true that every fingerprint of each +individual on earth is different? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes, sir; that is my sincere belief. I say that not only on +earth but all those that have died before and all those to come. There +will never be duplication. + +Mr. DULLES. The same is true of palmprints, isn't it? + +Mr. LATONA. Absolutely; yes, sir; fingerprints and palmprints and +footprints. + +Representative BOGGS. Can they be distorted, destroyed? + +Mr. LATONA. They can be destroyed in the sense that---- + +Representative BOGGS. Cut your finger off, that is right? + +Mr. LATONA. Sure, you can cut your finger off. You can resort to what +is known as--they can be transferred. You can slice off a pattern from +one finger and place it on another but you will see the scar. They can +have what is known as surgical planing. + +Representative BOGGS. That is what I was thinking about. + +Mr. LATONA. That can be done, too. + +Representative BOGGS. What happens then? + +Mr. LATONA. What happens is that you lose the ridge area and you will +simply have a scar. There will be no more pattern. Now, the pattern +is formed by what are known as dermal papilla, which is below the +epidermis or outer layer of skin. As long as you only injure the outer +surface the ridge formation will grow back exactly the same as it was +before. If you get down to the dermal papilla, which lay like this---- + +Mr. EISENBERG. You are drawing an illustration on the board which shows +short, broad, downward strokes. + +Mr. LATONA. If you destroy or injure these to the extent that there is +actual bleeding, you will get a permanent scar. + +Fingerprints can be destroyed or scarred in such a fashion that we +would not be able to successfully classify them. + +Mr. DULLES. Do criminals do that? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes; they do. We have had one case, probably the most +successful was known as the so-called Roscoe Pitts case. This was a +fugitive who in order to avoid identification went to an unscrupulous +doctor who performed an operation and he did so by virtue of first +cutting five slits on one side of his chest. Then he removed the +pattern areas, what we call the pattern areas, which would consist of +removal of the whole core area down to the delta area, sliced that off. + +Representative BOGGS. How much would that be? + +Mr. LATONA. He would literally have to draw blood. He would have to get +down and just slice that off completely. He did that with five fingers. +Then he taped the five fingers to the side of his chest and he kept +them there for about 2 weeks. The same procedure was gone through with +the other hand, and at the end of that time they were taken down and +bound up individually. When they finally healed, all he has now is scar +tissue for his pattern areas; but all we did in order to identify him +was to drop down to the second joint. We made the identification from +the second joint. + +Now, at that particular time---- + +Representative BOGGS. After all that business. + +Mr. LATONA. It didn't do him any good. Literally, the easiest person in +our files to identify is Roscoe Pitts. He is the only one that has scar +patterns like that. As soon as they see anything like that, everybody +that knows anything about our files knows--Roscoe Pitts. + +Representative BOGGS. Develop, if you will, please, that point that no +two human beings ever have similar prints. Why is that, in your opinion? + +Mr. LATONA. Well, earlier we went through a case which we have in the +FBI, in which we literally have compared millions, millions of single +prints with a fragmentary latent print which we developed on a demand +note in a kidnapping case, one of our major kidnapping cases which +occurred back in 1937, and we have compared this fragmentary print. + +Now, ordinarily in fingerprints there are four basic pattern types. You +have an arch, tented arch, a loop, and a whorl. + +Now in making a comparison, naturally if you can tell the type of +pattern you are going to restrict your comparison to the particular +type. + +In this instance we cannot tell what type of pattern this fragment that +we developed is. We know that it is from a finger. And in attempting +to identify the subject of this kidnapping case, we have compared it +literally with millions of cards. + +Now, existing in this fragmentary print there are only about seven +to eight points that can be found, it is so fragmentary. We cannot +determine the pattern. Accordingly then, when you compare it, you have +to compare it with a person's 10 fingers regardless as to the pattern +types. Bearing in mind that the average fingerprint has from 85 to 125 +points--identifying characteristics--we have literally made millions +of comparisons with only a portion of a finger, and we have failed to +identify these 8 points in all types of patterns. + +Isn't it sufficient to say then that people simply will not have the +same fingerprints? Yet you have authorities, so-called authorities, who +say that it is possible to find all 10 prints duplicated in 1 chance +out of 1 followed by 60 zeros, if you can figure out what that figure +is. + +Representative BOGGS. Who are these authorities? + +Mr. LATONA. They are really in my opinion mathematicians who on the +basis of the so-called characteristic points have said 5 points times +125 times 125 times 125 to about the 10th power and wind up something +like 1 followed by 60 zeros. They are mathematicians but they are not +fingerprint people. + +Mr. DULLES. What is your card system like? If this is too confidential +I don't want to get anything in the record here that is too secret. + +We can take it off the record. + +Mr. LATONA. Nothing is secret about our files. + +Mr. DULLES. How many characteristics do you file on a card so that when +you find these characteristics you can go to the right cabinet and the +right filing drawer and then pull out the right card in time? + +Mr. LATONA. Literally they can break down into hundreds of thousands of +groups. + +Representative BOGGS. How many do you have on file? + +Mr. LATONA. We have the fingerprints of 77-1/2 million people? + +Representative BOGGS. That includes all of those who were in the Army, +Navy---- + +Mr. LATONA. 15 million criminals and about 62.5 million what we call +civil. I explained earlier that our files consist of two main files, +it is criminal files and the civil files. In the civil files are the +fingerprints of individuals, those prints that we have retained, +who have been fingerprinted in connection with some civil affair +like the services, for example, security, sensitive jobs, all types +of applicants, alien registrations. Then we also will accept the +fingerprints of just a private citizen who would like to have his +prints on record for simply identification purposes. + +They are in the category of 62.5 million. Criminal prints, 15 million. + +(Discussion off the record.) + +Representative FORD. I have to leave, Mr. Dulles, will you take over as +Chairman for the rest of the time that you can be here? + +Mr. DULLES. I will do so. + +Representative BOGGS. May I ask a question which is not particularly +pertinent to this particular witness, but how many prints on various +things like these boxes and other paraphernalia that the Commission may +now have in its possession have been identified as those of Oswald? + +Mr. LATONA. Six all told. + +Representative BOGGS. Six altogether? + +Mr. LATONA. Six. + +Representative BOGGS. That includes these? + +Mr. LATONA. That is right. + +Representative BOGGS. How many, three? + +Mr. LATONA. Three so far. + +Mr. DULLES (addressing Mr. Eisenberg). You have dealt with three so far? + +Mr. EISENBERG. Three so far. We should modify this. We are only +introducing this morning evidence associated with the crime, directly +with the crime. Now, there were many papers submitted to the +identification division. I believe you did identify---- + +Mr. LATONA. Personal effects, wallet, pictures, papers, and things of +that kind which in themselves bear Oswald's prints, which they should +because they belong to him. + +Representative BOGGS. May I ask another question in this connection. +A weapon of this type, in your examination do you find a lot of other +prints on it as well? You do not? + +Mr. LATONA. No. First of all the weapon itself is a cheap one as you +can see. It is one that---- + +Representative BOGGS. Is what? + +Mr. LATONA. A cheap old weapon. The wood is to the point where it won't +take a good print to begin with hardly. The metal isn't of the best, +and not readily susceptible to a latent print. + +Representative BOGGS. Was this weapon picked up first by the police? + +Mr. EISENBERG. Yes, sir. + +Representative BOGGS (addressing Mr. Eisenberg). Did anyone touch it as +far as you know? + +Mr. EISENBERG. No, no. It was picked up by a police officer attached to +the Dallas police force first. + +Mr. DULLES. It came to you directly then from the Dallas police and not +through the Secret Service? + +Mr. LATONA. No; the FBI turned it over to me, the Dallas office of the +FBI flew it up here. + +Representative BOGGS. What I am trying to determine is, the average +police officer when he would pick up a weapon of that kind would take +steps to secure whatever prints might be on that and also prevent the +addition of prints, is that right? + +Mr. LATONA. I would assume so. + +Representative BOGGS. I mean this is part of his training, isn't it? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes, sir; especially if he is--yes; I would say so. That +is almost elementary today. There are so many schools today going that +an officer that doesn't give some thought to latent fingerprints, he +hasn't been to school. + +Representative BOGGS. Of course not. But do you have that problem in +your normal examination? + +Mr. LATONA. Well, a lot of times that all depends. Sometimes they don't +realize the significance of a latent examination, and it is unavoidable +that an object has been contaminated. And then a lot of times it is +simply because of the circumstances. Sometimes possibly in an instance +of this kind because of the crime itself which was involved, I dare say +there must have been a lot of panic there at that time. That is just +pure conjecture on my part. I don't know whether they were thinking in +details as to the examination. I don't think they sat down and just +figured very calmly what they were going to do. + +Representative BOGGS. Of course not. + +Mr. LATONA. I imagine everybody just poured into that room where they +found the thing, somebody would say, "Was this the gun?" and he handed +it to someone else and then he would look at it. Lord knows what went +on down there. + +By the time the gun got there--on the other hand, if the right officer +was there he would have protected it from the beginning and that is +unquestionably what happened here. + +Mr. DULLES. I have to make a telephone call. I will be right back. + +Mr. EISENBERG. I believe that the print showing in the lift was taken +from an area which had been covered by the wooden stock so that it was +protected even against---- + +Mr. LATONA. Promiscuous handling, yes. If that were on the underside, +if that was covered by the wood then very obviously those people there +never did touch that. + +Mr. EISENBERG. At any rate, we are going to find out exactly what they +did. + +Representative BOGGS. Yes. Go ahead. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, just to elaborate on some questions which Mr. Boggs +was asking earlier, Mr. Latona, referring specifically to this weapon, +do you believe that a determination could have been made as to the age +of the print found on the weapon which you have identified as being +Oswald's print, and a lift of which is Exhibit No. 637? + +Mr. LATONA. No; I don't. + +Mr. EISENBERG. You don't? + +Mr. LATONA. No; I don't. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Are experts unanimous in this opinion? + +Mr. LATONA. No; they are not. There are some experts who contend that +they can determine from the way the print develops, and they will use +the term "fresh." + +Now, on the other hand, so far as the definition of "fresh," then it +resolves itself into an hour, a day, a week, a month. What is "fresh" +as aside from an "old" one? And my opinion simply is this. That on the +basis of the print itself, on the basis of the print itself I cannot +determine how old it is. + +Mr. EISENBERG. At least specifically on this type, or in particular +focusing on this type of weapon? + +Mr. LATONA. Particularly on that weapon. + +Mr. EISENBERG. That is 139? + +Mr. LATONA. That is right. + +Mr. EISENBERG. If there are no further questions on Exhibit 139, +Commissioner Boggs, I will move on to another exhibit. + +Mr. Latona, I hand you now a small cardboard carton which has written +on it "Box A" in red pencil and has various other marks which I won't +go into, and I ask you whether you are familiar with this box, this +carton? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes; I am. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And did you examine this carton, Mr. Latona, to +determine whether there were any identifiable latent fingerprints +present? + +Mr. LATONA. I did not personally process this box, but I was present at +the time that the box was, and I had occasion to examine that during +the course of its being processed while it was being done. + +Mr. EISENBERG. It was processed in your presence? + +Mr. LATONA. In my presence and under my direction. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, I would like this admitted as a Commission +exhibit with your permission. + +Representative BOGGS. It will be admitted. + +Mr. EISENBERG. That will be 641. + +(The box referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 641, and +received in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Latona, when you received this box which is now 641, +did it bear any evidence that it had been dusted or otherwise tested +for fingerprints? + +Mr. LATONA. No; it had not, just a plain cardboard box. + +Mr. EISENBERG. So far as you could tell then it had not been? + +Mr. LATONA. That is right; it had not been processed. + +Mr. EISENBERG. How was it processed in the FBI laboratory? + +Mr. LATONA. First by the iodine fume and subsequently by chemical means. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did the iodine fume develop any identifiable prints? + +Mr. LATONA. It did not. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did the chemical means? + +Mr. LATONA. The silver nitrate did develop a latent fingerprint. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Just one? + +Mr. LATONA. A latent fingerprint; yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Just one identifiable print? + +Mr. LATONA. One identifiable print; yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Do you want to check your notes on that, Mr. Latona? + +Mr. LATONA. There was another print identified on that. There were two +prints, one palmprint. There was developed on Box A, Exhibit No. 641, +one palmprint and one fingerprint. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Were those the only identifiable prints, Mr. Latona? + +Mr. LATONA. No; there were other fingerprints developed on this box. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Do you recall how many there were? + +Mr. LATONA. On Box A, in addition to these two prints there were +developed eight fingerprints and three palmprints. + +Mr. EISENBERG. That is, a total of 13? + +Mr. LATONA. Nine fingerprints and four palmprints. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Thirteen identifiable prints? + +Mr. LATONA. That is right. + +Mr. DULLES. Could I just get caught up. What is this box we have here? + +Mr. EISENBERG. This is a box which was found near the window in the +TSBD from which the assassin apparently fired, that is, the easternmost +window or the south face of the TSBD. Yesterday, cartridge cases--and +the day before--cartridge cases were discussed which were also found +near that window. This box is labeled on there, I believe---- + +Mr. LATONA. "A." + +Mr. EISENBERG. Yes; and I think it also says "top box": yes; it says +"top box." + +Mr. DULLES. This is the "Rolling Reader?" + +Mr. EISENBERG. That is right. + +Mr. DULLES. The Rolling Reader has played quite a role in our testimony. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Yes; now, this particular box is labeled "top box," and +I believe this particular box was on the top of the three boxes, two of +which were Rolling Reader boxes, which were found near the window and +which may have been used as a rest by the assassin for his rifle. + +Mr. DULLES. As I recall, previous testimony indicates that the Rolling +Reader box had been moved from its normal place---- + +Mr. EISENBERG. Apparently so. + +Mr. DULLES. With the other Rolling Reader boxes, and put in a position +near the window from which it was alleged the shot was fired. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Apparently so, and, apart from the two boxes--the two +Rolling Reader boxes which were found near the sixth floor window--the +regular storage area for the Rolling Reader boxes was a distance away +from the sixth floor window. + +Mr. DULLES. Yes; I recall that testimony. + +Mr. EISENBERG. So you found 13 identifiable prints, Mr. Latona. Were +you able to identify any of these prints as belonging to a specific +individual? + +Mr. LATONA. We were able to identify one fingerprint and one palmprint. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And whose prints were they? + +Mr. LATONA. The fingerprint was identified as Harvey Lee Oswald. + +Mr. EISENBERG. That is Lee Harvey Oswald? + +Mr. LATONA. That is right. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And the palm? + +Mr. LATONA. The palmprint was identified also as Harvey Lee Oswald. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Again Lee Harvey Oswald? + +Mr. LATONA. That is right. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, again you used, did you, the known print which was +marked into evidence earlier? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And you used those in all your identifications, I +believe? + +Mr. LATONA. That is right. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Latona, can you tell us what portion of the palm +of Lee Harvey Oswald is reproduced on this box, this carton 641, as a +latent print? + +Mr. LATONA. I have here a photograph of the palmprint which has an area +indicated by a rough red circle showing the approximate area, which is +the ulnar area of the left palm. + +Mr. EISENBERG. That is the area closest to the little finger? + +Mr. LATONA. On that side; yes, sir. + +Mr. EISENBERG. This is a true photograph which was prepared by you or +under your supervision? + +Mr. LATONA. A true reproduction of the original, which you already have. + +Mr. EISENBERG. May I have this admitted as 642, Mr. Chairman? + +Mr. DULLES. May I ask a question. Apparently the red mark on this +exhibit on the palm is in a different place, isn't it, a slightly +different place? + +Mr. LATONA. It is a different palm. This is the left palm. + +Mr. EISENBERG (addressing Mr. Dulles). This is the left palm. The other +two are right palms. + +Mr. DULLES. Good, that straightens me out. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Actually they were both on the ulnar side of the palm? + +Mr. LATONA. That is correct. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And they were both taken on what is commonly called the +heel of the palm? + +Mr. DULLES. This is a different hand. This is the left hand, and what +we have had so far is the right hand on the palmprints. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Yes, sir. + +Mr. LATONA. Previously we had two palmprints on the right hand. This +third one is from the left. + +Mr. EISENBERG. May this photograph be admitted as 642, Mr. Chairman? + +Mr. DULLES. This will be admitted. + +(The photograph referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 642, and +received in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Latona, do you have another photograph in your hand +there? + +Mr. LATONA. Here I have another photograph, a slight enlargement time +and a half, which is a latent palmprint found on the cardboard box +marked "A," which is the Commission's Exhibit 641. This is indicated by +a red arrow. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Let's hold that just a second and get the photograph +admitted. + +Representative BOGGS (addressing Mr. Eisenberg). Where did these boxes +come from? + +Mr. EISENBERG. These boxes were located in front of the window from +which the assassin apparently fired. There were three boxes stacked +immediately in front of the window, of which this Exhibit No. 641 +was the topmost box, and these were apparently used as a rest by the +assassin for positioning his rifle. + +As you can see, there are several other boxes in the room which will be +introduced shortly. + +Mr. DULLES. I may say that there was testimony, I don't recall whether +you were here at the time, about some boxes called Rolling Reader, +Hale. Do you recall the testimony on the Rolling Reader? + +Representative BOGGS. No. + +Mr. DULLES. These boxes were moved from a place on the sixth floor room +where a great many Rolling Reader boxes were placed, and they were put +near the window, and a Rolling Reader--apparently these are cubes, and +they are for small children and they roll them out on the floor and +they learn how to read the letters of the alphabet and other things +from these Rolling Readers. + +These boxes, because of their nature--do you know what the blocks are +made of? + +Mr. EISENBERG. No; I don't. + +Mr. DULLES. They weren't solid wood but they were light cubes and +therefore presumably these boxes were moved because they were a good +deal lighter and easier to handle than other boxes. Is that consistent +with the testimony as you recall it? + +Mr. EISENBERG. Yes. + +Representative BOGGS. Were they full when you got them? + +Mr. EISENBERG. You will have to ask Mr. Latona. + +Mr. LATONA. They were empty. They had been opened and the books removed +or the contents, whatever it was. + +Mr. DULLES. The contents were apparently these cubes, as we were told, +and small children use them and roll them on the floor and then they +got the A's and the B's and the C's. + +Representative BOGGS. In the opening process, this would not have any +effect on the fingerprints or the palmprints? + +Mr. LATONA. It could. I mean in the sense that somebody else's prints, +the people opening them if they didn't take the time and effort to +protect themselves, they could have left their prints there. I don't +know how that was done. + +Mr. DULLES. Do you recall whether the testimony shows whether the boxes +were presumably filled when they were originally moved from their +normal place in the Book Depository to the window? + +Mr. EISENBERG. I think they were, although I haven't read the testimony. + +Mr. DULLES. I am not sure there is testimony on that point but I think +that is the general assumption. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Based on reproduction photographs we have seen---- + +Mr. LATONA. That is the understanding that we have, that this was the +depository for new material. I think there was new material in these +boxes. They were simply stored there. + +Representative BOGGS. They wouldn't have acted as a very good rest had +they been empty. + +(Discussion off the record.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. Back on the record. + +Mr. Chairman, may I have this photograph of the latent palmprint +admitted as 643? + +Mr. DULLES. It shall be admitted. + +(The photograph referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 643, and +received in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. Can you show us where on the box, the box 641, this +latent palmprint appears? + +Mr. LATONA. The latent palmprint appears on box A, Commission's Exhibit +641. It has been indicated by a red arrow. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Can you mark that arrow with an "A"? + +Mr. LATONA. The red arrow is being marked "A." + +Mr. EISENBERG. That points to the palmprint of Lee Harvey +Oswald--identified by you as being Lee Harvey Oswald's, is that right? + +Mr. LATONA. That is right. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Let the record show that Mr. Dulles and Mr. Boggs and +Mr. Murray are looking at the actual print marked "A," or marked with +an arrow next to which is written the letter "A." + +Mr. MURRAY. I see what appears to be a print; yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Dulles and Mr. Boggs? + +Mr. DULLES. I also see what appears to be a print. + +Representative BOGGS. I see the same thing. + +Mr. DULLES. And it is too big in my opinion to be a fingerprint. + +Mr. EISENBERG (addressing Mr. Latona). Did you prepare a photograph +also of the fingerprint which appears on this box---- + +Mr. LATONA. Yes; I did. + +Mr. EISENBERG. 641, Mr. Latona? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes; I did. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And is this a true photograph of that fingerprint? + +Mr. LATONA. It is. + +Mr. EISENBERG. May I have this admitted, Mr. Chairman, as 644? + +Mr. DULLES. This is a fingerprint now? + +Mr. EISENBERG. Yes; which also appears on the box that Mr. Latona just +testified as to, 641. + +Mr. DULLES. Has he identified what fingerprint? + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did you testify that this was the fingerprint---- + +Mr. LATONA. No. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did you identify this fingerprint as belonging to a +given individual? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes; I did. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And that individual was? + +Mr. LATONA. Lee Harvey Oswald, and it is the right index fingerprint. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman---- + +Mr. DULLES. The right index finger. + +Mr. EISENBERG. That will be 644. + +Mr. DULLES. Admitted. + +(The fingerprint referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 644, and +received in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. You also have a photograph of a 10-finger card showing +that print encircled? + +Mr. LATONA. I do. + +Mr. EISENBERG. It is a red circle, and you are handing that to me now? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. May I have that admitted, Mr. Chairman, as 645? + +Mr. DULLES. It may be admitted. + +(The photograph referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 645, and +received in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. What portion of the finger of Lee Harvey Oswald does +that print represent? + +Mr. LATONA. It represents what is referred to as the distal phalanx of +the right index finger. + +Mr. EISENBERG. That is the phalanx or the tip furthest away from the +wrist? + +Mr. LATONA. The palm. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Or from the palm? + +Mr. LATONA. That is right. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Is that a full or partial print of the distal phalanx? + +Mr. LATONA. That is a partial print. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And does it take on the center, or the ulnar or the +radial portion of the phalanx? + +Mr. LATONA. No, that takes actually the central portion of the print. + +Mr. EISENBERG. The central portion? + +Mr. LATONA. The so-called pattern area is disclosed by the latent print. + +Mr. DULLES. Off the record. + +(Discussion off the record.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. Could you show us, Mr. Latona, on 641, where the +fingerprint impression that you have just identified is? + +Mr. LATONA. That appears on one of the ends of the box indicated by a +red arrow. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Could you mark that arrow, "B"? + +Mr. LATONA. Marked "B." + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Dulles, would you care to take a look at that? + +Mr. LATONA. Here you are going to see several clear prints but it is +only one that we have identified, and that is the one directly under +the arrow. + +Mr. DULLES. I see four there, or five. + +Mr. LATONA. It is the little one here in the middle, right here. + +Mr. DULLES. Is it this one here, right there? + +Mr. LATONA. No; the one next to it. + +Mr. DULLES. That one there? + +Mr. LATONA. That is right. + +Mr. DULLES. What are all these other fingerprints? + +Mr. LATONA. They are all other fingerprints. + +Mr. EISENBERG. There were a total of 13 identifiable prints on the box, +did you say? + +Mr. LATONA. That is right. Those are not Oswald's prints. + +Representative BOGGS. Those may have been other people opening the box? + +Mr. DULLES. The box was carried around probably. + +Mr. LATONA. Yes. + +Mr. DULLES. When it was first put there and moved. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Could you put your finger on that box, Mr. Latona, in +the way that the finger was placed? + +Mr. DULLES. How do you think he was carrying that box? + +Mr. LATONA. I don't know. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Is your finger now placed in the way the finger was +placed to create the impression? It is pointing with the fingernail +towards the arrow and in the same line as the arrow, with just the tip +of the finger on the box. + +Mr. DULLES. Everybody seems to have held that box. + +Mr. LATONA. It is a little one right there. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Murray, do you want to take a look? + +Representative BOGGS. You have not identified any of these others? + +Mr. LATONA. No. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Let the record show that Commissioners Dulles and Boggs +and Mr. Murray are looking at that fingerprint, and have apparently +satisfied themselves---- + +Mr. MURRAY. The portion shown to me appears to be part of a fingerprint. + +Mr. EISENBERG. They have satisfied themselves that the print is on the +box. + +Now, therefore, to recapitulate: You found on this carton 641 the left +palmprint and the right index fingerprint of Lee Harvey Oswald? + +Mr. LATONA. That is correct. + +Mr. EISENBERG. One other thing. Getting back to the palmprint, marked +"A," could you show us how a hand would lie to produce that print? + +Mr. LATONA. In the position of the palm pointing towards the arrow. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Pointing towards the arrow, that is, in the opposite +direction that the arrow points? + +Mr. LATONA. That is right. + +Mr. EISENBERG. But in the same line as the arrow. Your hand is parallel +with the line but covering that completely? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And although it covers it, I would say that the arrow +would fall in the midline of the palm, is that right? + +Mr. LATONA. That is right. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, Mr. Latona, did you prepare a chart showing some of +the points which led you to the conclusion that the latent palmprint +found on 641 was identical with the inked palmprint submitted to you by +the Dallas police? + +Mr. LATONA. I had charts prepared; yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. These were prepared under your supervision? + +Mr. LATONA. They were. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, may I have that chart admitted as 646? + +Mr. DULLES. It will be admitted. + +(The chart referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 646, and +received in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. What is the magnification? + +Mr. LATONA. Approximately eight times. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Is the magnification equal on both sides? + +Mr. LATONA. Both sides; the inked palmprint and latent palmprint both +the same. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Is that true of all of the charts that you have +submitted and will be submitting this morning? + +Mr. LATONA. That is true. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Latona, could you point out some of these points? I +think in the interest of time it would be better if you took several of +the points instead of all 13 points you have marked. + +Mr. LATONA. I believe you will find this will be a little bit more +difficult to see in view of the fact that the ridge formations are cut +up a little bit more. However---- + +Mr. DULLES. Would you put that over there. You have identified 13 +points of similarity? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes; 13 have been drawn but there are quite a few others. + +Mr. EISENBERG. You have marked 13 in other words, is that it, Mr. +Latona? + +Mr. LATONA. Sir? + +Mr. EISENBERG. You have marked 13? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes. + +Mr. DULLES. On this exhibit? + +Mr. LATONA. That is right. Here, for example, is an easy one to +show up, this point No. 1 as compared to point No. 1 here, and its +relationship to point No. 2, the relationship of point No. 2 to point +No. 3. + +Looking over here we find that there is a relationship between points +Nos. 1 and 2, one, two, three, four, five, one, two, three, four, five. + +Then there's a relationship of one ridge between point 1--or rather +between point 2 and point 3, both points going in the same general +direction. + +Point No. 3 is below point No. 2. Also the point No. 2 is what is +referred to as a short ending ridge. We look over here and we see that +point No. 2 is a short ending ridge. + +Point No. 3 is below that. Then we notice that there is another point +which is one point removed--one ridge removed--from point No. 3 which +we have not charted, which shows up very definitely in that position +there. Then there is point No. 4, which is another piece of a ridge, +point No. 4 here. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Latona, when you testify in court do you generally +discuss every marked point? + +Mr. LATONA. No. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Just the more salient points? + +Mr. LATONA. Just to give a general idea as to how these comparisons +are made, more or less for demonstration purposes, because the actual +comparison is the same, the relationship is a determination of the +relationship with the others, and just by an examination, that would be +borne out if each and every point was gone into in detail. + +Mr. EISENBERG. With you permission, Mr. Chairman, I would like to move +on to the next chart since we do have witnesses waiting who have to +return to New York. + +Mr. DULLES. Right. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did you prepare a chart, Mr. Latona, of the +fingerprint---- + +Mr. LATONA. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Which was found on the carton 641? + +Mr. LATONA. Here is the chart, which is of the right index fingerprint +of Lee Harvey Oswald. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Was this prepared by you or under your supervision? + +Mr. LATONA. They were. The enlargement here is approximately 10 times +both in the inked print and in the latent print. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, may I have this admitted as 647? + +Mr. DULLES. It shall be admitted. + +(The chart referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 647, and +received in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. Would you discuss again just a few of the more salient +points, Mr. Latona? + +Mr. LATONA. Here, starting first of all with the apparent pattern type +itself, it is readily discernible. You can see that these are what we +term whorl-type prints. This point No. 1, for example, is a small ridge +which terminates at this point which has been indicated by the figure +No. 1. + +It is related by being joined onto point No. 2, which is the end of the +black line going upward. Then one ridge to the left, one ridge removed +and to the left and a little bit above is point No. 3. Here the same +thing occurs in the inked print. + +Point No. 4 is related to point No. 3 by one ridge removed and is +upward and one ridge to the left. + +Mr. DULLES. And similarly you have identified up to 10 points of +similarity? + +Mr. LATONA. These you can see rather easily that they appear. + +Mr. EISENBERG. If there are no further questions on the carton 641 I +will move on to another exhibit. + +I now hand you a carton, somewhat larger in area than the 641 which +we were just discussing, with various markings on it which I won't +discuss, but which is marked Box "D" in red pencil at the upper +left-hand corner of the bottom of the box. + +Are you familiar with this carton, Mr. Latona? + +Mr. DULLES. Has that been admitted? + +Mr. EISENBERG. It has not so far been admitted. + +Mr. LATONA. This Box D, I received this along with Box A for purposes +of examining for latent prints. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Was that examined by you or under your supervision for +that purpose? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes, it was. + +Mr. EISENBERG. When was that received? + +Mr. LATONA. That was received on the 27th of November 1963. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, may I have this admitted as 648? + +Mr. DULLES. What date? + +Mr. LATONA. 27th. + +Mr. EISENBERG. That is 5 days after the assassination? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. May I have this admitted as 648? + +Mr. DULLES. It shall be admitted. + +(The box referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 648, and +received in evidence.) + +Mr. DULLES. Can you identify it in some further way? I think there are +some markings on here. + +Mr. EISENBERG. There is "Box D." It is a little hard to read. It says +"1 40 N TH&DO"---- + +Mr. DULLES. "New People and Progress." + +Mr. EISENBERG. Apparently referring to the name of the textbook. This +is not a Rolling Reader carton. + +Mr. DULLES. No. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Latona, when you received this box, could you tell +whether it had been previously examined for latent fingerprints? + +Mr. LATONA. A portion of it had. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And can you tell us what portion had been? + +Mr. LATONA. The bottom evidently, because a piece had been cut out. + +Mr. EISENBERG. You are pointing to a place on the bottom of the box +which is to the left of the point at which I have affixed the sticker +"Commission Exhibit No. 648," immediately to the left of that point? + +Mr. LATONA. That is correct. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Was that portion of the box given to you? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes, it was. + +Mr. EISENBERG. With the box? + +Mr. LATONA. At the time we got the box. + +Mr. EISENBERG. I think I have that. + +I now hand you what appears to be a portion of a cardboard carton and a +piece of tape with various writings, included among which is "From top +of box Oswald apparently sat on to fire gun." + +Do you recognize this piece of paper, Mr. Latona? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes, I do. This is a piece of paper that evidently had been +cut from the box. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Does that fit into the box? + +Mr. LATONA. It does. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, may I have this admitted as 649? + +Mr. DULLES. It shall be admitted as 649. + +(The piece of carton referred to was marked commission exhibit no. 649, +and received in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Latona, did you find any identifiable prints on the +cardboard carton 648? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes; in addition to this one which has been cut out and +which had been covered by a piece of lifting tape, there were two +fingerprints developed in addition to that one. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Two Identifiable Fingerprints? + +Mr. LATONA. That is right. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Palmprints? + +Mr. LATONA. No; they were fingerprints. + +Mr. EISENBERG. I mean were there any palmprints? + +Mr. LATONA. There were no palmprints. + +Mr. EISENBERG. How did you process this box? + +Mr. LATONA. By the use of iodine fumes and silver nitrate solution. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did you find evidence of processing prior to your +receipt apart from the exhibit which is now 649? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes; this particular area which has been cut out had been +processed with powder. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Was there powder on other areas of the box? + +Mr. LATONA. I don't believe there was. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did you identify any of the prints on the carton 648 as +belonging to a specific individual? + +Mr. LATONA. The two fingerprints which were developed on commission +exhibit 648 by silver nitrate are not identified as anyone's, but the +print which appears on the piece which was cut out has been identified. + +Mr. EISENBERG. That is 649? + +Mr. LATONA. Of exhibit 648--which is exhibit 649---- + +Mr. EISENBERG. Yes? + +Mr. LATONA. Which came from exhibit 648 has been identified as a +palmprint of Harvey Lee Oswald, the right palmprint. + +Mr. EISENBERG. That is Lee Harvey Oswald, Mr. Latona? + +Mr. LATONA. That is right. Lee Harvey Oswald. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, Mr. Latona, can you tell how this was developed, +this print on 649? + +Mr. LATONA. The appearance is it was developed with black powder. + +Mr. EISENBERG. You testified before concerning the aging of +fingerprints. Considering the material on which this print was +developed, 649, do you think you could form an opinion, any opinion at +all, concerning the freshness or staleness of this print? + +Mr. LATONA. Bearing in mind the fact that this is an absorbent +material, and realizing, of course, that a print when it is left on a +material of this type it starts to soak in. Now, the reason that we in +the FBI do not use powder is because of the fact that in a short period +of time the print will soak in so completely that there won't be any +moisture left. + +Accordingly when you brush powder across there won't be anything +developed. + +Under circumstances, bearing in mind that here the box was powdered, +and a print was developed with powder, the conclusion is that this is +comparatively a fresh print. Otherwise, it would not have developed. + +We know, too, that we developed two other fingerprints on this by +chemicals. How long a time had elapsed since the time this print was +placed on there until the time that it would have soaked in so that the +resulting examination would have been negative I don't know, but that +could not have been too long. + +Mr. EISENBERG. When you say "not too long," would you say not 3 weeks, +or not 3 days, or not 3 hours? + +Mr. LATONA. Very definitely I'd say not 3 days. I'd say not 3 weeks. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And not 3 days, either? + +Mr. LATONA. No; I don't believe so, because I don't think that the +print on here that is touched on a piece of cardboard will stay on a +piece of cardboard for 3 days. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Would you bring that any closer? + +Mr. LATONA. I am afraid I couldn't come any closer. + +Mr. EISENBERG. 3 days? + +Mr. LATONA. That is right. + +Mr. EISENBERG. That would be the outermost limit that you can testify +concerning? + +Mr. LATONA. We have run some tests, and usually a minimum of 24 hours +on a material of this kind, depending upon how heavy the sweat was, to +try to say within a 24-hour period would be a guess on my part. + +Mr. EISENBERG. I am not sure I understand your reference to a minimum +of 24 hours. + +Mr. LATONA. We have conducted tests with various types of materials as +to how long it could be before we would not develop a latent print. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Yes? + +Mr. LATONA. Assuming that the same print was left on an object or a +series of similar prints were left on an object, and powdering them, +say, at intervals of every 4 hours or so, we would fail to develop a +latent print of that particular type on that particular surface, say, +within a 24-hour period. + +Mr. EISENBERG. So that is a maximum of 24 hours? + +Mr. LATONA. That is right. + +Mr. EISENBERG. You would not care, you say, though---- + +Mr. LATONA. No. + +Mr. EISENBERG. To employ that here, but your experiments produced a +maximum time of 24 hours. + +Mr. LATONA. Bear that out; yes. Like I say, undoubtedly this print was +left on there--between the time that the print was left and the time +that it was powdered could not have been too long a time. Otherwise, +the print would not have developed with the clarity that it did. + +Mr. EISENBERG. You identified that, I believe, as the right palmprint +of Lee Harvey Oswald? + +Mr. LATONA. That is right. + +Mr. EISENBERG. What portion of the right palm was that, Mr. Latona? + +Mr. LATONA. It happens to be the center part of the palm close to the +wrist. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Can you show how the palm must have lain on the 649, the +part of the 648 carton, to produce that print? + +Mr. LATONA. It would have been placed on there in this fashion. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, you are pointing so that your hand is parallel with +the long axis of the box, and at right angles to the short axis? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And just the bottom of the palm rests on the box, isn't +that correct? + +Mr. LATONA. That is right. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, before going to this fingerprint or this palmprint +rather, Mr. Latona, we have palmprints, a palmprint here on this 649, +and a finger and a palm on 641, and those are the only identified +prints on these two objects. + +Is it possible that Lee Harvey Oswald could have touched these two +cartons at other places without leaving identifiable prints? + +Mr. LATONA. He could have. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And how would that come about? + +Mr. LATONA. Simply by the fact that he did not have any material on his +finger at the time he touched the box. + +Mr. EISENBERG. So that you can touch a carton at one point and leave a +print, and at another point not, is that right? + +Mr. LATONA. Very definitely, that is true. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And when you say he doesn't have any material, how would +that come about? Will he have used his material up, or not produced +material with the particular finger? + +Mr. LATONA. He could have used it up and failed to produce it fast +enough to have left anything at the time he touched that. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Is it uncommon or common for you to find an object which +a person has touched more than once but only left one identifiable +print? + +Mr. LATONA. It is very common. + +Mr. EISENBERG. It is common? + +Mr. LATONA. Especially in, for example, the reading of a letter, a long +letter where the person would run his finger and index finger down the +edges. You might find prints at the top and then you don't find any at +the bottom. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Of course. I am not asking you to draw an inference +whether or not Oswald touched the box in more than one place, but I +just want to explore whether he could have touched the box in more than +one place---- + +Mr. LATONA. Yes; he could. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And not left a second imprint? + +Mr. LATONA. He very definitely could have and not left one. + +Mr. DULLES. May I add for the record, Commission Exhibit 648 apparently +contained books of Scott Foresman and Co., from Scott, Foresman & Co., +"Building for Today, Pioneering for Tomorrow." + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Latona, did you take a photograph of the lift, or +the print rather, which we see in 649? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And this is an accurate photograph? + +Mr. LATONA. It is, it is a true reproduction of the print which appears +on Commission Exhibit 649 and it is enlarged about a time and a half. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, may I have this admitted as 650? + +Mr. DULLES. It will be admitted. + +(The photograph referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 650, for +identification and received in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did you take a photograph of the known palmprint and +make a red circle around it, as you had in previous cases? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. To show what portion of the palm of Oswald that was? + +Mr. LATONA. Showing a portion of the right palm. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, may I have that admitted? + +Mr. DULLES. It will be admitted as 651. + +(The photograph referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 651, and +received in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. By the way, Mr. Latona, on 649 there seems to be a +scotch tape or cellophane tape over the fingerprint, is that right? + +Mr. LATONA. That is right. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, apparently there was no attempt at a lift being +made here? + +Mr. LATONA. No. This evidently was a print which was developed directly +on the paper itself. The employing of that adhesive material like +scotch tape was to protect the print itself. + +Had they tried to lift that up I am afraid they would have spoiled that +because they would have lifted the fibers of the cardboard along with +it. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Is that why, you think, they didn't lift it? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes; very definitely. + +Mr. EISENBERG. By the way, did the Dallas police take photographs of +the lift which we had earlier, the lift which was apparently taken from +Exhibit 139, or to put the question--actually I am not interested in +whether they took photographs of the lift; do you know whether they +took photographs of the print? + +Mr. LATONA. I don't know. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Is it normal to take a photograph of a print before it is +lifted? + +Mr. LATONA. If it is fairly visible, yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. What is the purpose of the lift, as opposed to a +photograph reproducing the print? + +Mr. LATONA. The purpose of the lift is simply to insure the probability +of getting a good record of the print, because a lot of times when you +photograph a print, you have to go through the process of having it +developed and then printed and at the same time by lifting it you may, +that would be an additional security that you are getting the best +results. + +Then you take your choice as to which result turns out the best. + +Mr. EISENBERG. So these are alternative routes? + +Mr. LATONA. That is right. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Lifting and photographing? + +Mr. LATONA. That is right. Well, primarily our recommendation in the +FBI is simply every procedure to photograph and then lift. Then you +choose the one which you feel gives you the best results in your final +photograph. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Returning to the palmprint on 649, taken from the carton +648, did you make up a chart showing some of the points---- + +Mr. LATONA. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Which led you to your conclusion that that print was the +print of Lee Harvey Oswald? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes, I did. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And was that prepared by you or under your supervision? + +Mr. LATONA. Prepared by me--under my supervision. + +Mr. EISENBERG. May I have this chart admitted as 652? + +Mr. DULLES. It will be admitted as Exhibit 652. + +(The chart referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 652, for +identification and received in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. Again, without going into detail, Mr. Latona, could +you show us some of the more salient points which led you to your +conclusion that the print on 649 was the palmprint of Lee Harvey Oswald? + +Mr. LATONA. The easiest points visible here, right offhand, point +No. 11 which is a black line that goes upward and its relationship +to point No. 10. This is known as the short ending ridge as is seen +here. Its relation to point No. 8. Point No. 11 is a black line going +upward. Point No. 8 is a black line going downward and there are one, +two, three, ridges which are between the two. Over here in the latent +print you find No. 11 which is a black line going upward. It is a short +line to the other end of the point No. 10, and three ridges intervene +between that and point No. 8, which is going downward. + +One ridge to the right and going in an upward direction is point No. +7--7, 8, 9, 10, 11. + +Mr. DULLES. And you identified 11 points of similarity? + +Mr. LATONA. That is right. + +Mr. DULLES. Between the inked palmprint of Lee Harvey Oswald and this +palmprint taken from this cardboard carton? + +Mr. LATONA. That is right. + +Mr. DULLES. What is this white line that goes up through each? + +Mr. LATONA. This is a crease in the center of the palm, a flexure +crease of that area. + +Mr. DULLES. The palm did not touch the carton at that point? + +Mr. LATONA. That is right. + +Mr. DULLES. And those two creases are in approximately the same +location in the photograph and in the latent palmprint? + +Mr. LATONA. Very definitely. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Latona, I now hand you two further cartons, which +are labeled Box B and Box C, the B box being a 10 Rolling Reader, and +the C box being also a Scott, Foresman box with printing on the back, +"The Three Pre-primers," apparently the name of the book contained in +this box. + +Mr. DULLES. Primers. + +(Discussion off the record.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Latona, did you examine Box B, which I have handed +to you, to determine whether it had on it any identifiable latent +fingerprints? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes, sir; I did. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, I would like that box admitted as 653. + +Mr. DULLES. It shall be admitted. + +(Commission Exhibit No. 653 was marked and received in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. How many identifiable prints did you find on this carton? + +Mr. LATONA. There were seven fingerprints and two palmprints developed +on Commission Exhibit 653. + +Mr. EISENBERG. That is, identifiable prints? + +Mr. LATONA. Identifiable prints. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did you identify any of those prints as belonging to a +specific person? + +Mr. LATONA. I did not. + +Mr. EISENBERG. May I have 654 marked, Box C, Mr. Chairman? Did you also +examine Box C? + +Mr. LATONA. Box C, yes, sir. + +Mr. EISENBERG. May I have that admitted as 654? + +Mr. DULLES. It shall be admitted as Commission Exhibit 654. + +(Commission Exhibit No. 654 was marked and received in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did you find any latent identifiable prints on 654? + +Mr. LATONA. I found two fingerprints and one palmprint. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did you identify them as belonging to a specific +individual? + +Mr. LATONA. I did not identify them. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, did you attempt to identify them with Lee Harvey +Oswald's known prints? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes; and they are not Lee Harvey Oswald's prints. + +Mr. EISENBERG. When did you receive cartons 653 and 654? + +Mr. LATONA. I received cartons 653 and 654 November 27. + +Mr. EISENBERG. That is, with the earlier cartons, Boxes A and D, which +have received Commission exhibit numbers? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Had they been processed? Could you tell whether they had +been processed for latent fingerprints? + +Mr. LATONA. I couldn't tell whether they had been or not. + +Mr. EISENBERG. You could not tell? + +Mr. LATONA. Could not tell. They had the appearance of not having been +processed. + +Mr. EISENBERG. How did you process them in your laboratory, Mr. Latona? + +Mr. LATONA. Iodine fumes and chemicals. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did the prints react to the iodine fumes at all? + +Mr. LATONA. No. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Just to the chemicals? + +Mr. LATONA. The silver nitrate prints which were developed. + +Mr. DULLES. Do you mean that the prints were of such a caliber and +character that you couldn't make anything out of them, or that you +couldn't identify them with any known---- + +Mr. LATONA. They are not identical with those that they have been +compared with. + +Mr. DULLES. But the prints themselves were perfectly good prints? + +Mr. LATONA. Oh, yes; the prints are good but they are not Lee Harvey +Oswald's. + +Mr. EISENBERG. At any subsequent time have you attempted to identify +any of these prints on the boxes as belonging to any person other than +Lee Harvey Oswald? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And how did you proceed with this attempt? + +Mr. LATONA. An effort was made to locate the fingerprints of all people +employed in that building in which these cartons were found, on the +basis of the names and birth dates which were furnished, and we located +the fingerprints of 16 of those people who work in that building. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Yes? + +Mr. LATONA. And the fingerprints of those 16 employees were compared +with all of the latent prints which were developed on these boxes. They +do not belong to any of those 16 people. + +Mr. DULLES. May I ask for my information here, Mr. Eisenberg, were all +of these cartons, including the last two admitted in evidence, were +they found in the general area of the sixth floor of the building from +which it is believed the shot was fired? + +Mr. EISENBERG. Yes; Mr. Chairman. I believe that the two boxes which +were just admitted into evidence as 653 and 654 were two of the three +boxes which were apparently used as a rest by the assassin. They were +apparently either the two bottom boxes, or there might have been an +arrangement such as that one was stacked on top of the other, and the +box earlier admitted into evidence was some evidence of that. + +Mr. DULLES. And in any event, does our evidence indicate that these +boxes were moved from their normal position on the sixth floor to a new +position near the window? + +Mr. EISENBERG. Again I believe it does indicate that at least the 10 +Rolling Reader carton was moved. There was some other movement of boxes +that morning, and I think they are still in the process of tracing down +all of the movements. + +Mr. DULLES. Thank you. + +Mr. EISENBERG. I have a letter, Mr. Latona, from Mr. Hoover to Mr. +Rankin, the general counsel of our Commission, setting forth the names +of the employees of the TSBD whose prints were compared in this recent +attempt you mentioned. Would you recognize the names? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes; I would because I believe that report is based on my +report. + +Mr. EISENBERG. If I read the name could you verify whether these +individuals were the ones whose prints you checked out against the +latents? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Haddon Spurgeon Aiken? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Jack Charles Cason? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Warren Cason? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Jack Edwin Doughterty? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Charles Douglas Givens? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mary Madeline Hollis? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. James Earl Jarman? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Spaulden Earnest Jones? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Herbert L. Junker? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Billy Nolan Lovelady? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Joe R. Molina? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Edward Shields? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Joyce Maurine Stansberg? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Roy Sansom Truly? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Lloyd R. Viles? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Troy Eugene West? + +Mr. LATONA. Correct. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now as I understand it, these employees were not +selected because any particular suspicion fell on them, but merely +because of all the employees, those were the ones whose cards you knew +you had in your files? + +Mr. LATONA. That is right. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And it was just accidental---- + +Mr. LATONA. That is right. + +Mr. EISENBERG. That those employees were picked? + +Mr. LATONA. That is right. + +Mr. EISENBERG. There is no inference that there was any suspicion +whatsoever attaching to any of these employees? + +Mr. LATONA. That is right. + +Mr. DULLES. We believe all these employees had access to the sixth +floor of the building? + +Mr. EISENBERG. We are still looking into that question. This is a +recent effort on your part? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes. + +Mr. DULLES. Is that letter to be admitted as evidence or not? + +Mr. EISENBERG. I think not---- + +Mr. DULLES. Right. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Since I don't think the witness could identify the +actual letter. + +Mr. DULLES. It will be in the files, though? + +Mr. EISENBERG. Yes; it is a Commission document in the files. + +Mr. Latona, I believe that out of the total number of six prints +you have identified today as being Lee Harvey Oswald's, four were +palmprints, is that correct? + +Mr. LATONA. Three. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Three? + +Mr. LATONA. Three, two rights and one left, three palms and three +fingers. + +Mr. EISENBERG. There was a palm on---- + +Mr. LATONA. The bag. + +Mr. EISENBERG. A palm on the weapon? + +Mr. LATONA. One on the gun and on this box. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Four and two then? + +Mr. LATONA. Three. + +Mr. EISENBERG. There was a palm on each box? + +Mr. LATONA. That is right. + +Mr. EISENBERG. That is two palms? + +Mr. LATONA. One off the gun. + +Mr. EISENBERG. That is three palms, and the palm on the wrapping paper +bag. Here is the wrapping paper bag. + +Mr. LATONA. One palm and one finger. + +Mr. EISENBERG. That is four palms all together? + +Mr. LATONA. Four palms, okay. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Is that correct? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, is the proportion of recovered fingerprints here +an unusual one in your estimation? That is, we usually hear about +fingerprints rather than palmprints, whereas here we have four palm and +two finger prints. Is there anything unusual in this? + +Mr. LATONA. Well, in that manner there is because--well no, I guess +not. It is just as logical to assume that a person will leave a +palmprint as a fingerprint. It depends upon primarily the way he +handles it. Objects of this type being so large you can probably expect +to get a palmprint. + +Mr. DULLES. And what he is handling? + +Mr. LATONA. That is right. On the other hand, if the object is small +there is probably no reason for the palm to touch it. For example, in a +rearview mirror; ordinarily on a rearview mirror of these stolen cars +we process you get mostly fingerprints. + +On the other hand if you get back into the trunk, the chances of +something of a large nature, a stolen wheel, or something of that type, +you will get finger and palm prints. Cartons like this, where you have +to use both hands to pick it up because of its weight, the probability +is that you will get a palmprint as well as a fingerprint. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Would the same thing be true of a heavy rifle? + +Mr. LATONA. Sure, very definitely. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And if the bag contained a heavy object inside? + +Mr. LATONA. That is right, it would take more than just the finger area +of the hand to hold on to it. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Latona, did you prepare at my request a series +of photographs for transmission by me to the New York City Police +Department--photographs of finger and palm prints found on some of the +evidence we have been looking at? + +Mr. LATONA. I furnished you photographs of all of the remaining +unidentified latent prints from these cartons. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And also did you furnish me a photograph--just of the +remaining unidentified prints? + +Mr. LATONA. No; including the ones which I identified. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did you also furnish me with a photograph of the +two prints you identified--which parenthetically were the only two +identifiable prints--on the brown wrapping paper bag? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Which is Exhibit 142. And of the lift from the weapon +139? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes; I did. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And you also furnished me with photographs of the finger +and palmprints of Lee Harvey Oswald---- + +Mr. LATONA. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. As transmitted to you by the Dallas office of the FBI? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Can you identify these as the photographs you furnished +to me? + +(Discussion off the record.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. Have you identified the envelope marked "two photos Box +D"? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes; I have. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, may I have that admitted as 655? + +Mr. DULLES. Yes. + +(Commission Exhibit No. 655 was marked and received in evidence.) + +Mr. DULLES. I think there ought to be some cross-identification inside +the envelope. Because obviously if you take that envelope and put +anything in it, we ought to have the others identified properly. + +Mr. EISENBERG. There are two photographs within this. Let the record +show there are two photographs within this envelope, marked "7" and +"13," and I believe these are the only photographs so marked. Each +photograph is marked with an individual number, so these are the only +two photographs in the entire set marked "7" and "13." + +Mr. DULLES. Excellent. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now I have an envelope marked "10 photos Box A." Have +you identified these photographs Mr. Latona? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes; I have. + +Mr. EISENBERG. May I have these photographs admitted as group 656? + +Mr. DULLES. It shall be. + +(Commission Exhibit No. 656 was marked and received in evidence.) + +Mr. DULLES. How many enclosures in that? + +Mr. EISENBERG. There are 10 enclosures and numbered as follows: 25, 26, +27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 34, 35. + +Mr. DULLES. There is no 33? + +Mr. EISENBERG. No, sir. + +Mr. DULLES. It shall be admitted as Commission Exhibit---- + +Mr. EISENBERG. 656. + +Mr. DULLES. That is 656 with the enclosures as noted and identified. + +Mr. EISENBERG. I have here photographs--an envelope--labeled +"Photographs, Fingerprints, and Palmprints, Lee Harvey Oswald." These +are accurate reproductions? + +Mr. LATONA. They are. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, with your permission I will later put +subnumbers on these. + +Mr. DULLES. Seven numbers with seven enclosures? + +Mr. EISENBERG. No, sir; three enclosures. + +Mr. DULLES. With three enclosures? + +Mr. EISENBERG. And I will number the 10-print card--first may I have +the envelope with the photographs admitted as 657? + +Mr. DULLES. The envelope shall be admitted with---- + +Mr. EISENBERG. I will subnumber the cards with your permission at a +later time. + +Mr. DULLES. How many enclosures in it, three? + +Mr. EISENBERG. Three. I will subnumber the 10-print card 657-A, the +right palm 657-B, and left palm 657-C. + +Mr. DULLES. It shall be admitted. + +(Commission Exhibits Nos. 657-A, 657-B, and 657-C were marked, and +received in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. I have an envelope with photos marked "one photo of lift +'underside of gun barrel.'" Is this a photograph which you provided me? + +Mr. LATONA. It is. + +Mr. EISENBERG. May I have this admitted as 658, Mr. Chairman? + +Mr. DULLES. 658 with how many enclosures? + +Mr. EISENBERG. Just one. + +Mr. DULLES. Just one enclosure. + +(Commission Exhibit No. 658 was marked, and received in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, an envelope marked "two photos brown bag (wrapping +paper)." + +This is the two photos, Mr. Latona, which you gave to me? + +Mr. LATONA. It is. + +Mr. EISENBERG. May I have that admitted as 659, Mr. Chairman? + +Mr. DULLES. It shall be admitted as 659 with one enclosure in the +envelope. Is it one or two? + +Mr. EISENBERG. There are two enclosures. + +Mr. DULLES. With two in the envelope. + +Mr. EISENBERG. One has printing on it and with your permission I will +mark that "659-A," and the other has no printing and I will mark it +"659-B." + +Mr. DULLES. It will be so admitted. + +(Commission Exhibits Nos. 659-A and 659-B were marked, and received in +evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now an envelope marked "eight photos Box B." This is, +Mr. Latona, the photographs you provided me? + +Mr. LATONA. It is. + +Mr. EISENBERG. May I have this admitted as Exhibit 660, Mr. Chairman, +collectively? + +Mr. DULLES. It shall be admitted as Commission Exhibit No. 660 with---- + +Mr. EISENBERG. With eight enclosures---- + +Mr. DULLES. Eight enclosures. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Marked "15"--the next one has 17 scratched out and also +18 appearing on it--19 for the third enclosure, 20, 21, 22, 23, and 24. + +Mr. DULLES. With the numbers as indicated in the record. + +(Commission Exhibit No. 660 was marked, and received in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. And finally an envelope of the same size, marked "three +photos, Box C." Mr. Latona, these are the photos you gave me? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes; they are. + +Mr. EISENBERG. May I have these admitted as 661, Mr. Chairman? + +Mr. DULLES. It will be admitted as Exhibit 661, with how many +enclosures? + +Mr. EISENBERG. There are three enclosures. + +Mr. DULLES. And the three enclosures; are they identified in any way? + +Mr. EISENBERG. Yes, sir; they are subnumbered 10, 11 and 12. + +Mr. DULLES. With the subnumbers 10, 11 and 12. + +(Commission Exhibit No. 661 was marked, and received in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. Are all these photographs accurate reproductions of +the prints appearing on the objects whose name is on the front of the +envelope in which the photographs are stored? + +Mr. LATONA. They are. + +Mr. EISENBERG. They were taken by you or under your supervision? + +Mr. LATONA. They were. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Can you identify by number, Mr. Latona, the photographs +of box A which contain prints of Lee Harvey Oswald? + +Mr. LATONA. I will have to do it in a negative fashion and tell you +that it is not 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, or 35. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Then it would be No. 25 which is in that sequence? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And did you mention 34? + +Mr. LATONA. I did not. + +Mr. EISENBERG. So 34 would also be an identified print in that sequence? + +Mr. LATONA. That is right. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did you print anything on the back of these photographs, +Mr. Latona? + +Mr. LATONA. At the time I gave you the photographs I marked nothing on +them. + +Mr. EISENBERG. So that any printing here would have been put on +subsequent to the time you prepared them? + +Mr. LATONA. That is correct. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Referring specifically to a photograph I take at random, +which is No. 35, is this your handwriting? + +Mr. LATONA. It is not. + +Mr. EISENBERG. None of the printing appearing on the back of that +photograph? + +Mr. LATONA. It is not. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Let the record state that, as will be dealt with +later, this printing was put on by Mr. Mandella of the New York +Police Department. Now in the case of box D, of which there are two +photographs, 7 and 13, could you state which was the photograph of +Oswald's print? + +Mr. LATONA. Thirteen. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Just to reiterate, in no case did you put writing on the +back of these photographs? + +Mr. LATONA. I did not. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Latona, did anyone else in the FBI examine the +objects which you have been discussing today---- + +Mr. LATONA. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. To determine whether the fingerprints of Lee Harvey +Oswald appeared on them? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. What was that person's name? + +Mr. LATONA. His name is Ronald G. Wittmus. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Was his examination conducted independently of yours? + +Mr. LATONA. It was. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Who conducted the examination first? + +Mr. LATONA. In the case of the wrapping paper, I did. In the case of +the boxes I believe he did. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And the rifle? + +Mr. LATONA. I conducted the examination of the rifle. + +Mr. EISENBERG. The lift from the rifle? + +Mr. LATONA. Yes; directly. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And the---- + +Mr. LATONA. Brown wrapping paper. + +Mr. EISENBERG. In any case when you conducted your examination first +did you tell Wittmus of your conclusions? + +Mr. LATONA. I did not. + +Mr. EISENBERG. When Mr. Wittmus conducted his examination first did he +tell you of his conclusions? + +Mr. LATONA. No. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Were his conclusions the same as yours? + +Mr. LATONA. Ultimately, yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. When you say, "ultimately"? + +Mr. LATONA. When the whole thing was completed. + +Mr. DULLES. There was no difference of views between you at any stage? + +Mr. LATONA. No, sir. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did anyone who examined these various objects--as to +which you have testified--in the FBI laboratory come to a conclusion +different from the one you did? + +Mr. LATONA. They did not. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Were there any identifications of fingerprints as being +Lee Harvey Oswald's in addition to the ones which you have given us? + +Mr. LATONA. There were a number of identifications effected with latent +prints developed on personal effects. + +Mr. EISENBERG. No, sir; on the material you have testified as to today. + +Mr. LATONA. No; there were no others. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Were any prints found--were the three fragmentary +prints found on the rifle, which were not sufficient for purposes of +identification, in any way inconsistent with the prints of Oswald which +you found? + +Mr. LATONA. Very definitely, no. I might point out that actually +what was visible was consistent, in the sense that even though there +were no ridge formations available for purposes of making a positive +conclusion, the indications were that the pattern types were there, +were consistent with the pattern types which were on the hands of Lee +Harvey Oswald. + +Mr. DULLES. As far as you know the conclusions of the Texas police +authorities who examined these objects, were your conclusions the same +as theirs, or was there any differences between you on this subject? + +Mr. LATONA. Frankly, I don't know what there conclusion was. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, I have no further questions. + +Mr. DULLES. Have you any questions, Mr. Murray? + +Mr. MURRAY. I have not. + +Mr. DULLES. I have no further questions. Thank you very much indeed, +Mr. Latona. You have been very helpful. I have learned a great deal +myself. + +Mr. LATONA. Thank you very much. + + +TESTIMONY OF ARTHUR MANDELLA, ACCOMPANIED BY LT. JOSEPH A. MOONEY, NEW +YORK POLICE DEPARTMENT, BUREAU OF CRIMINAL IDENTIFICATION + +Mr. DULLES. Mr. Mandella, will you raise your right hand. + +Do you swear that the testimony you give before this Commission will be +the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? + +Mr. MANDELLA. I do. + +Mr. DULLES. Thank you. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Mandella, could you give us your full name and +position? + +Mr. MANDELLA. Arthur Mandella. I am a detective on the New York Police +Department and I work at the bureau of criminal identification in that +department. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Could you briefly outline your qualifications as a +fingerprint identification expert, Mr. Mandella? + +Mr. MANDELLA. In 1945 to 1948 I was a fingerprint technician in the +U.S. Navy. My principal duties were the classification and filing of +fingerprints, the developing and photographing of latent fingerprints +found at crime scenes, the comparison of latent fingerprints with +suspects, and the searching of fingerprint files in general. + +From 1948 to 1953 I was employed by the U.S. Government as a criminal +investigator. However, my principal duties were the lifting and +developing and identification of latent fingerprints, also the +preparation of fingerprint exhibits for court presentation. From 1955 +to the present I have been employed by the New York Police Department +and assigned to the bureau of criminal identification as a fingerprint +technician and performing the same duties that I just outlined. During +these past 17 years I have been examining not only fingerprints but +palmprints and infant footprints as well. + +I graduated from the following fingerprint schools: in 1945, the U.S. +Naval Air Station; in 1948 I graduated from the Institute of Applied +Sciences, which is a fingerprint school, fingerprint and identification +school; in 1955 I graduated from the New York Police Fingerprint School +at the police academy; and in 1958 I attended an advanced latent +fingerprint course conducted by the FBI at the New York Police Academy. + +I am a fingerprint instructor for the New York Police Department Bureau +of Criminal Identification and lecture at various hospitals relative to +the proper techniques involved in footprinting the newborn. + +I am a qualified fingerprint expert and have testified in New York +State and Federal courts, including court-martials, relative to all +phases of fingerprints, palmprints, and footprints. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Could you venture a guess as to how many identifications +you have been called upon to make in the course of your work? + +Mr. MANDELLA. General identifications, I suppose, it runs into many +thousands. It is hard to pick a number. But it is certainly well into +the thousands of examinations. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, may this witness be permitted to testify +as an expert witness on the subject of fingerprints? + +Mr. DULLES. Yes; he may. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Mandella, did you at my request examine certain +photographs of latent prints and compare them with photographs of inked +or known prints to determine whether there were identities between the +known and latent prints? + +Mr. MANDELLA. Yes; I did. + +Mr. EISENBERG. I hand you Commission Exhibits 656, 658, 659, 655, +657, 661, and 660. Could you briefly look through these and determine +whether these are the photographs which you examined? As you finish an +item, could you take a look at the Commission number and verify that +you looked at the photographs in that Commission envelope? + +Mr. MANDELLA. Yes; I have examined the photographs contained in +Commission Exhibit No. 656. + +Mr. DULLES. I wonder if you would just state the number, in each case, +in each envelope? + +Mr. MANDELLA. In Commission Exhibit 656 there are 10 photos, 10 +photographs. And I have also examined Commission Exhibit No. 658, which +is one photograph. I also examined Commission Exhibit No. 659, which is +two photographs. I have also examined Commission Exhibit No. 655, which +is two photographs. I have examined Commission Exhibit No. 661, which +contains three photographs. I have examined Commission Exhibit No. +660, which contains eight photographs. I have also examined Commission +Exhibit No. 657, which contains three photographs. + +Mr. EISENBERG. 657 contains photographs of inked prints, is that +correct? + +Mr. MANDELLA. That is correct. + +Mr. EISENBERG. The standard 10-finger chart and a right and left +palmprint? + +Mr. MANDELLA. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Which you have been informed by me and you see on the +writing on these charts are the prints of Lee Harvey Oswald? + +Mr. MANDELLA. That is correct. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Do you have any other knowledge that these are the +prints of Lee Harvey Oswald? + +Mr. MANDELLA. No; none whatsoever. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And the remaining prints are photographs of what you +would call latent prints? + +Mr. MANDELLA. Yes; they are. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did you make markings on the backs of these prints, Mr. +Mandella? + +Mr. MANDELLA. Yes; on quite a few of them I did. However, not all of +them. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And you made those markings on the basis of--in your own +hand printing? + +Mr. MANDELLA. My own hand printing, for certain observations I wanted +recorded. + +Mr. DULLES. What is the nature of the marking? + +Mr. EISENBERG. Let's take a sample. I will pull one out at random +from Commission Exhibit 660. The topmost card says "Box B," which +corresponds to the label or the envelope 660--and that is No. 17. + +Mr. DULLES. Will you show those to the witness and see if he identifies +his own writing? + +Mr. MANDELLA. Yes; I have made these notations. Yes; I do recognize +these. + +Mr. EISENBERG. The next one says "Box B" and "Negative--same as box 'D' +No. 7." + +Mr. MANDELLA. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. You have seen these as you flipped through to identify +that these are the same photographs? + +Mr. MANDELLA. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Let the record show that these photographs are +photographs of latent prints taken by or under the supervision of Mr. +Sebastian Latona, and he has just testified that these photographs +were taken of objects which were identified earlier in Commission +proceedings. Mr. Latona transmitted these photographs to me directly, +and I in turn transmitted them to Mr. Mandella and Mr. Mooney, who is +also present in this hearing room. + +Mr. Mandella, do you know what total number of identifiable +latent prints were contained in these exhibits that you just +identified--exclusive of 657, which contained the inked or known finger +and palm prints? + +Mr. MANDELLA. No; but I have this outline here. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Just approximately would you say how many identifiable +prints there were? + +Mr. MANDELLA. Thirty. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Some 30 odd prints? + +Mr. MANDELLA. Some 30. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And did you identify certain of those prints as being +the finger or palm prints of Lee Harvey Oswald? + +Mr. MANDELLA. Yes; I did. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Could you tell us which of those prints you so +identified? + +Mr. MANDELLA. There was a photograph, a photograph of the underside of +the gun barrel, Commission Exhibit No.---- + +Mr. EISENBERG. That is Commission Exhibit No. 658, and I will hand you +that photograph now. You are referring to this photograph? + +Mr. MANDELLA. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And can you read the writing on the back of that? + +Mr. MANDELLA. "Right palm Oswald underside gun barrel." + +Mr. EISENBERG. Is that in your handwriting? + +Mr. MANDELLA. Yes; it is in my handwriting. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did you determine what portion of the right palm that +was, Mr. Mandella? + +Mr. MANDELLA. Yes; it is the right side of the right palm, this area +right here. + +Mr. EISENBERG. That is the ulnar portion? + +Mr. MANDELLA. Pardon? + +Mr. EISENBERG. Is that sometimes called the ulnar portion? + +Mr. MANDELLA. Yes; the ulnar side, or the small-bone side; yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did you make any other identifications? + +Mr. MANDELLA. Yes; I did. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Could you give the next one, please? + +Mr. MANDELLA. The photo marked "brown bag wrapping paper" Exhibit +No.---- + +Mr. EISENBERG. That is Exhibit 659, and that exhibit contains two +photographs which I now hand you, which are marked 659-A and 659-B? + +Mr. MANDELLA. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And did you identify the prints in those photographs? + +Mr. MANDELLA. Yes; on photograph No. 1---- + +Mr. EISENBERG. Could you refer to the print on the back, 659-A or B? + +Mr. MANDELLA. On 659-B, as I called it, photo 1, is the No. 7 finger +which is the left index finger of Lee Harvey Oswald. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And do you have a note on the back of that picture? + +Mr. MANDELLA. Yes; I do. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Can you read us that? + +Mr. MANDELLA. "Left index, Oswald brown bag wrapping paper." + +Mr. EISENBERG. And that is in your handwriting? + +Mr. MANDELLA. Yes; it is. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Can you say what portion of the left index finger of Lee +Harvey Oswald that is? + +Mr. MANDELLA. It is the bulb of the finger, a little to the right. + +Mr. EISENBERG. That is, by bulb you mean the central portion of the +distal phalanx? + +Mr. MANDELLA. The central portion to the right. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Of the distal phalanx? + +Mr. MANDELLA. Yes; the flesh joint; yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And 659-A? + +Mr. MANDELLA. Commission Exhibit No. 659, as I call it, photo No. 2, is +a palmprint and I identified this as the right side of the right palm +of Lee Harvey Oswald. + +Mr. EISENBERG. The right side would again be the ulnar? + +Mr. MANDELLA. It would be the ulnar side, yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. The little finger side? + +Mr. MANDELLA. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. That also has writing on the back of it, does it? + +Mr. MANDELLA. Yes; it does. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Can you read that to us? + +Mr. MANDELLA. "Right palm, Oswald brown bag wrapping paper." + +Mr. EISENBERG. And that is in your own handwriting? + +Mr. MANDELLA. Yes; it is. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Was there any handwriting when you got any of these +prints, by the way? + +Mr. MANDELLA. No; there wasn't. + +Mr. EISENBERG. All the prints were blank on the reverse side? + +Mr. MANDELLA. They were blank on the reverse side. There was +handwriting within the photographs but not---- + +Mr. EISENBERG. That is on the face of the photographs? + +Mr. MANDELLA. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Would you proceed, Mr. Mandella? + +Mr. MANDELLA. Box A, photo No. 25. + +Mr. EISENBERG. That is Commission Exhibit 656, and I will hand you +photo No. 25. + +Mr. MANDELLA. What was that number, 656? Numbers 25 and 34. + +Mr. EISENBERG. I now hand you Nos. 25 and 34. Could you identify No. 25 +first Mr. Mandella? + +Mr. MANDELLA. No. 25, Commission Exhibit No. 656, contains three +identifiable fingerprints, one of which, located in the center in a +whorl-type pattern, is the No. 2 finger or the right index finger of +Lee Harvey Oswald. The fingerprints on the right and the left do not +belong to Lee Harvey Oswald but the one in the center, the whorl-type +pattern, is his No. 2 finger. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Which is that now again, the right-hand index finger? + +Mr. MANDELLA. The No. 2 finger, which is the right index finger, and +again the first joint, the bulb of the finger. + +Mr. EISENBERG. The bulb of the distal phalanx? + +Mr. MANDELLA. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Of the right index finger? + +Mr. MANDELLA. Yes. + +Mr. DULLES. For clarity, where were these taken? What were these taken +from? + +Mr. EISENBERG. This was taken from box A---- + +Mr. DULLES. Box A? + +Mr. EISENBERG. Which I believe is a 10 rolling reader carton. Is there +printing or handwriting on the back of that photograph 25? + +Mr. MANDELLA. Yes; there is. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Could you read it to us? + +Mr. MANDELLA. "Center impression No. 2 finger Oswald from Box +A photo--latent on left unidentified--Photo Nos. 25 and 27 +identical--Negative with Oswald unidentified." + +Mr. EISENBERG. "Negative with Oswald," are you referring now to two +of the three photographs--two of the three prints appearing on the +photograph? + +Mr. MANDELLA. That is right, two prints, exactly, the one in the +center, of course I am not in reference to the one in the center, which +is his. The two on the right and left are unidentified. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And No. 34, Mr. Mandella? + +Mr. MANDELLA. No. 34, Commission Exhibit 656, is a palmprint from the +left palm of Lee Harvey Oswald, the left palm section of course, the +ulnar side again of the left side of the left palm. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And do you have a note on the back of that? + +Mr. MANDELLA. Yes; I do. "Oswald's left palm--left side." + +Mr. EISENBERG. And that again is in your own handwriting, is it Mr. +Mandella? + +Mr. MANDELLA. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Any other identifications? + +Mr. MANDELLA. Yes; there is one more on box D, photo No. 13. + +Mr. EISENBERG. That is Exhibit 655, which contains two photographs, and +I will extract the photograph labeled "13." + +Mr. MANDELLA. Commission Exhibit 655, photo No. 13, the right palmprint +of Lee Harvey Oswald. The section here is at the heel of the palm in +the center. + +Mr. EISENBERG. In the center of the palm? + +Mr. MANDELLA. Yes, sir. + +Mr. EISENBERG. You were just pointing to the lower portion of the palm, +which you refer to as the heel? + +Mr. MANDELLA. Yes; this is the portion of Oswald's palm. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Is there handwriting or printing on the back of that +photograph? + +Mr. MANDELLA. Yes; there is. "Right palm--Oswald--heel of hand." + +Mr. EISENBERG. And that is your handwriting, is it, Mr. Mandella? + +Mr. MANDELLA. Yes; it is. + +Mr. EISENBERG. So you made a total of six identifications? + +Mr. MANDELLA. Yes; I did. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now when you made these identifications--or, I +should say, when you received the photographs and when you made the +identifications, did you have any knowledge of any kind as to how many, +if any, prints of Oswald's were found among the many impressions which +were given to you? + +Mr. MANDELLA. I had no idea, sir. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Were you aware in any way of the conclusions of any +other body concerning these impressions? + +Mr. MANDELLA. I knew nothing about any examination by anyone. + +Mr. EISENBERG. At an unofficial level, had you seen anything in the +newspapers which would indicate any information on these? + +Mr. MANDELLA. In the newspaper several months ago there was reference +to a--I don't even recall whether it was fingerprints or palmprints or +both but there was some reference in the newspaper I had seen, and that +is all. + +Mr. EISENBERG. That is all you recall about it? + +Mr. MANDELLA. That is all I recall. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did you pay any attention to that in making your +identifications? + +Mr. MANDELLA. No; it didn't affect me at all, nothing to do with the +identifications. + +Mr. EISENBERG. What is your general attitude toward items you see like +this in the newspapers, by the way? + +Mr. MANDELLA. In the newspapers? It doesn't mean a thing. Attitude +relative to fingerprints? + +Mr. EISENBERG. I am trying to determine how far this might influence +you in your evaluation, and I wonder as a police officer what your +opinion is when you read accounts in newspapers of evidence in crimes. + +Mr. MANDELLA. No; it doesn't affect me other than for general +information purposes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did I transmit to you any information whatsoever +concerning these prints? + +Mr. MANDELLA. You did not, other than giving me the photographs. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did I tell you that any of these prints might be Lee +Harvey Oswald's? + +Mr. MANDELLA. You made no indication as to that it could have been his. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Do you know now, apart from your own identification, +have you acquired any information at this point, subsequent to your +identification but prior to your appearance here, as to these prints, +other than your own identifications? + +Mr. MANDELLA. I have no knowledge as to what has been done with these +prints at all by anyone. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Are you absolutely sure as to each of these +identifications, Mr. Mandella? + +Mr. MANDELLA. I am positive. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Mandella, are you familiar with the contention of +some persons that 12 points are needed for identification of finger or +palm prints? + +Mr. MANDELLA. No I am not, no. Positive identifications are effected by +the expert himself; 12 points are not necessary. A sufficient amount +determined by the expert is the important factor. + +Mr. DULLES. About how many? Have you any test as to how many points? + +Mr. MANDELLA. I can't give a definite number, but I'd say in +generalities five or six or seven points certainly should be enough, +depending on their uniqueness and frequency. + +Mr. EISENBERG. What is the lowest number to which you have testified in +court, Mr. Mandella. + +Mr. MANDELLA. The lowest that I can recall I testified to, five points. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Was there a conviction secured in that case? + +Mr. MANDELLA. Yes; there was. Of course, I don't recall if the +fingerprint was the thing that caused the conviction, but it was part +of the testimony. + +Mr. DULLES. In most of these cases where you have made an +identification, have there been more than five points of identity? + +Mr. MANDELLA. Well, it seems to run between, somewhere between 6, 7, +8, 9, 10 and 11, and in some cases more. It depends on how much of the +finger or palm that you have, how many characteristics are contained in +that area. + +Mr. DULLES. My question was directed to the specific prints that you +have, photographs of prints that you have examined. + +Mr. MANDELLA. Yes; it usually verges on 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12. + +Mr. DULLES. In the cases of these identifications that you have made? + +Mr. MANDELLA. Oh, no. Some--we have many more characteristics in some +of these identifications here today. + +Mr. EISENBERG. I think Commissioner Dulles is referring to cases +previous to this. + +Mr. DULLES. I was referring to both. First I was asking you in general +how many do you consider are necessary, and secondly how many did you +find in these particular cases that you have examined in the Oswald +case? + +Mr. MANDELLA. Oh. Would you like me to---- + +Mr. EISENBERG. Do you have that information? + +Mr. MANDELLA. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Fine. + +Mr. MANDELLA. Of course these characteristics that I point out are the +ones that I see and in some cases there is a few more, but these are +the ones that are very definite and outstanding. + +On the gun barrel, I forget the Commission exhibit number, there was 11 +points of identity. + +Mr. EISENBERG. That is 658? + +Mr. MANDELLA. Commission Exhibit 658. There was 11 points of identity +on that particular palmprint. + +Mr. DULLES. That is exactly what I wanted. + +Mr. MANDELLA. Yes; now the brown wrapping paper bag, Commission's +Exhibit 659---- + +Mr. EISENBERG. There is 659-A and B here. The one you have marked "left +index Oswald"? + +Mr. MANDELLA. Is that A? + +Mr. EISENBERG. That is what I have marked "B." That is Commission +Exhibit 659-B. + +Mr. MANDELLA. Then No. 2, 659-A is the palmprint. + +Mr. EISENBERG. That is marked "right palm"? + +Mr. MANDELLA. Right palm, and there is 18 points, 18 characteristics +that are very outstanding and in this case possibly more too. + +Now in Commission's Exhibit 659-B---- + +Mr. EISENBERG. That is marked "left index Oswald"? + +Mr. MANDELLA. It is the left index finger--Lee Harvey Oswald, there is +11 points of identity and possibly a few more. In Commission Exhibit +656 which is the No. 2 finger or the right index finger of Lee Harvey +Oswald, there is 11 points, that is the whorl-type pattern. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Excuse me a second Mr. Mandella. That is No. 25 center +impression, marked by you "center impression No. 2 finger--Oswald," is +that correct? + +Mr. MANDELLA. Yes; that is correct. And there is 11 points of identity +or characteristic. + +Mr. EISENBERG. On No. 34? + +Mr. MANDELLA. No. 34, the palmprint. + +Mr. EISENBERG. That is marked by you "Oswald left palm--left side"? + +Mr. DULLES. Palmprint on the box is it? + +Mr. EISENBERG. Yes; box A. + +Mr. DULLES. Box A? + +Mr. MANDELLA. Yes; 18 points of identity I found on that particular +exhibit. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Can you check your notes on that? + +Mr. MANDELLA. I can explain this. On the reverse side I have 13 to 16 +points. + +Mr. EISENBERG. That is the reverse side of number---- + +Mr. MANDELLA. It is the reverse side of Commission Exhibit 656. +However, after going over this and looking at it again I found several +more. Of course in this case it is still more than 18. But 18 that can +be readily seen and recognized. And then Commission exhibit finally---- + +Mr. EISENBERG. 655? + +Mr. MANDELLA. 655. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Box D. + +Mr. MANDELLA. Photo No. 13, the right palmprint of Oswald, and there is +eight points of identity on that one. + +Mr. DULLES. Thank you. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Mandella, do you have any opinion concerning the +ability to determine the freshness of a fingerprint? + +Mr. MANDELLA. It is very difficult to tell. However, you can determine +if it was left within say a few days, but certainly you can't pinpoint +it. You can't say it was there so many hours or so many days. How many +days I don't know, but in the developing of fingerprints we will say +on an ashtray on this Commission desk here, if we just touch it now, +as opposed to a fingerprint being left there several days ago, the +impression that we recently left, as we applied powder to it to bring +it about would naturally come out sooner because of the freshness of +the oils on our fingers. + +The others would come out, if we kept processing or powdering it with a +brush. They would later come out too. So this is the only indication to +me then, that the first ones that appear then were recently left. And +in this you can't even say this definitely either. It is very difficult +because at certain times it could be a little more oil on someone's +fingers and this could last longer and appear to be fresher. So it is +very difficult to tell positively. + +Mr. EISENBERG. What you are describing is freshness, relative +freshness, between one print and another, rather than absolute +freshness of any given print? + +Mr. MANDELLA. Yes; that is true. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now I give you Commission Exhibit No. 139, which is a +rifle, and ask you whether you think if you developed a print on a +steel portion of the rifle you could testify as to whether this was a +fresh or a stale print? + +Mr. MANDELLA. No; I couldn't tell. I couldn't tell especially on steel +or on wood here whether it is fresh or not. By itself of course too, +with nothing around it, you couldn't tell. It is impossible, as a +matter of fact. + +Mr. EISENBERG. I hand you Commission Exhibit No. 649, which consists +of a piece torn off of a cardboard type of box, and appearing on that +is a powder impression under a tape, of which you have seen actually a +photograph, Mr. Mandella. + +Mr. MANDELLA. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. If you had developed that impression, do you think you +would testify as to relative freshness? + +Mr. MANDELLA. In this case, with this cardboard, in my own +experience--I assume the medium used here is powder---- + +Mr. EISENBERG. Yes; I believe so. + +Mr. MANDELLA. To develop it. If it comes out this fresh, I would have +to assume that it was left there recently. But how recently I can't +pinpoint that. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Within 3 days? + +Mr. MANDELLA. Oh, definitely I would say within 3 days. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Within 2 days? + +Mr. MANDELLA. Yes; I would say within about a day, a day and a half, +because the cardboard is very porous and it would normally draw the +oils, the perspiration, and it would disappear. + +However, we do have an impression here with powder. That means that it +was quite fresh, in my own opinion anyway. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Mandella, I can see that you have taken notes, +numerous notes on the fingerprints, including those you didn't +identify. I wonder whether we could introduce those as a Commission +exhibit, rather than going through those one by one. Would you part +with those? We could supply you with a copy later. + +Lieutenant MOONEY. I have the rough. It will only take us a couple +minutes to---- + +Mr. DULLES. We would be very glad to give you a photograph copy of it. + +Mr. MANDELLA. That is all I need. That is fine. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. You are handing me two pages, and these contain your +original notes concerning the fingerprints? + +Mr. MANDELLA. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. These contain your notes not only as to the fingerprints +you identified, but those which you did not identify against a known +print which you were given? + +Mr. MANDELLA. That is right. There were quite a few fingerprints that +didn't belong to Oswald. However, they belonged to one another. + +Mr. EISENBERG. That is to say, you found two prints which were +identical to each other? + +Mr. MANDELLA. That is right. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Two latents which were identical to each other? + +Mr. MANDELLA. That is right, but to whom they belong I have no idea. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, may I have these notes admitted as +Commission Exhibit No. 662? + +Mr. DULLES. It shall be admitted as Exhibit 662. + +(Commission Exhibit No. 662 was marked for identification, and received +in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Mandella, is there anything you would like to add to +your testimony here? + +Mr. MANDELLA. Nothing other than what I already mentioned. + +Mr. EISENBERG. I have no further questions. + +Mr. DULLES. We thank you then Mr. Mandella, very much. I didn't catch +your name. + +Lieutenant MOONEY. Lieutenant Mooney. Glad to have been of service. + +Mr. DULLES. Would you please express to the Commissioner on behalf +of the Chief Justice and the Commission our grateful thanks to you +for the work that you have done, and it is greatly appreciated, and +also express on my own personal behalf--I know the Commissioner--my +appreciation for the cooperation he has given to the Commission. + +Lieutenant MOONEY. Thank you, sir. We are glad to have been of service. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, may I say that these two gentlemen both +interrupted their vacation to come here, and they have been working +practically night and day in order to meet with our time demands for +testimony. + +Mr. DULLES. We deeply appreciate that. + +Mr. MANDELLA. Glad to have helped in any way. + +Mr. DULLES. The Commission will stand adjourned until tomorrow morning +at 9 o'clock. + +(Whereupon, at 1:10 p.m., the President's Commission adjourned.) + + + + +_Friday, April 3, 1964_ + +TESTIMONY OF PAUL MORGAN STOMBAUGH AND JAMES C. CADIGAN + +The President's Commission met at 9:10 a.m. on April 3, 1964, at 200 +Maryland Avenue NE., Washington, D.C. + +Present were Chief Justice Earl Warren, Chairman and Mr. Allen W. +Dulles, member. + +Also present were J. Lee Rankin, General Counsel; Melvin Aron +Eisenberg, Assistant Counsel; and Charles Murray, Observer. + + +TESTIMONY OF PAUL MORGAN STOMBAUGH + +The CHAIRMAN. The Commission will come to order. The purpose of today's +hearing is to take the testimony of Paul Stombaugh and James C. +Cadigan. Mr. Stombaugh is a hair and fiber expert with the FBI, and Mr. +Cadigan is a questioned documents expert with the FBI. They have been +asked to provide technical information to assist the Commission in its +work. + +This is just to advise you of the nature of the interrogation today. + +Will you rise: Do you solemnly swear the testimony you are about to +give before this Commission will be the truth, the whole truth, and +nothing but the truth, so help you God? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. I do. + +The CHAIRMAN. You may be seated. Mr. Eisenberg, you may proceed with +the examination. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Stombaugh, could you state your full name and your +position? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Paul M., for Morgan, Stombaugh. I am a Special Agent of +the Federal Bureau of Investigation, assigned to the hair and fiber +unit of the FBI laboratory as a hair and fiber examiner. + +Mr. EISENBERG. What is your education, Mr. Stombaugh? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. I have a Bachelor of Science degree in Biology from +Furman University, Greenville, S.C., and I received a 1-year period +of specialized training in the hair and fiber field in the laboratory +under the supervision of the other experts. + +Mr. EISENBERG. How long have you been in the hair and fiber field? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Since 1960. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Could you approximate the number of examinations you +have made in this field? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. I have made several thousand hair examinations and about +twice as many fiber examinations. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Have you testified in court? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes, sir; I have testified in approximately 28 States, +both federal and local courts, as an expert. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, I would like permission to examine the +witness as an expert in this area. + +The CHAIRMAN. The witness is qualified. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Stombaugh, I now hand you Commission Exhibit No. +140, which for the record consists of a blanket which was found in +the garage of Mr. and Mrs. Paine, and a piece of string marked Paine +Exhibit No. 2, and I ask you whether you are familiar with these items? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes, sir; I am. My mark is here on the blanket, and +when this was received in the FBI laboratory this string was around a +portion of it. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Could you tell us what your mark is exactly, Mr. +Stombaugh? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Due to the fact this was a piece of fabric and hard to +mark, I put a piece of evidence tape on the blanket, stapled it to the +blanket, and put my initials "PMS" with the date 11-23-63 thereon. + +Mr. EISENBERG. When did you receive this blanket, Mr. Stombaugh? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. This was approximately 7:30 a.m., on the morning of +November 23, 1963. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Can you describe the shape of the blanket and the +position of the string, Paine Exhibit 2, when you received it? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. May I use this? + +Mr. EISENBERG. What you are holding up is a piece of paper which--will +you describe it, please? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. This is a piece of kraft paper approximately the same +shape as this blanket. When I received the blanket, it had been folded +together with both ends even; a slight triangle had been folded into +one corner of the blanket, and another fold had been taken into the +blanket thus. + +Mr. EISENBERG. When you say "thus," you are folding the piece of kraft +paper, and is the paper now folded into approximately--in a manner +approximating the way the blanket was folded when you received it? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. That is correct. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, may I have permission to introduce the +piece of paper which the witness has so folded? + +The CHAIRMAN. It may be so admitted. + +Mr. EISENBERG. That will be Commission Exhibit 663. + +(Commission Exhibit 663 was marked and received in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. There is a safety pin inserted into Exhibit 663, Mr. +Stombaugh. Was there an equivalent safety pin on the blanket? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes, sir; there was a much larger safety pin attached +to the blanket in approximately the same place as the small pin in the +piece of paper. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, the blanket is folded so as to approximate +approximately a right angle triangle, and the safety pin is at one +angle of that triangle opposite the right angle, is that correct? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. The safety pin would be at the vertex of the right +angle---- + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now---- + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Of the triangle. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Were there any distinctive creases in the blanket? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes; there were. There was one crease at the base, which +would be the base of the right triangle, a very slight crease. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Could you mark that with the letter "A" please, on the +Exhibit 663? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. This is opposite--this is the side facing the angle at +which the safety pin is inserted, is that correct? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. That is correct. It would be the base of the triangle. + +Mr. EISENBERG. The base of the triangle---- + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. There was also another crease I found upon removing the +safety pin and opening the blanket; I found that one end of the blanket +had been folded in approximately 7 inches. + +Mr. EISENBERG. What is the relationship between that and the end which +you have just marked "A," is that the opposite side? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. That would be the opposite side of the blanket. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Could you mark that "B"? + +What was the relationship between the amount which the blanket was +folded on the side "A" and the amount which it was folded on side "B," +that is, were the folds approximately equal, or if different, how +different, in length? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. The one, the fold marked "A" was not as great as the +fold marked "B." The fold marked "B" was approximately 7 inches, the +fold marked "A" was less than 7 inches. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Proceed. + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. There was one other crease in the blanket which was more +or less a hump approximately 10 inches long, located approximately +midway between the blanket, between--it is very difficult to describe +the location. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Could you point to it, and maybe we can describe it? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Approximately in this area. + +Mr. EISENBERG. This is, approximately midway between the side at which +the fold marked "A" appears and the side at which the fold marked "B" +appears? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. That is correct, approximately midway. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Could you mark that fold or crease "C"? Was this a fold +or a crease, Mr. Stombaugh? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. This was a very slight crease. It appeared as a hump in +the blanket. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Was there any item in the blanket, any object in the +blanket, which might have been causing that hump? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Not when I opened it, sir. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did you form an opinion as to what might cause that hump +to exist in the blanket? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes, sir; it would have had to have been a hard object, +approximately 10 inches in length, which protruded upward, causing the +yarns in the blanket to stretch in this area, and it would have had to +have been tightly placed in the blanket to cause these yarns to stretch. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, when you say the object was 10 inches long, do you +mean that the object itself was 10 inches long or that there was an +object 10 inches--an object protruding at a point 10 inches from the +place you have marked "A"? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. No, sir; the object itself would have had to have been +approximately 10 inches long to have caused this hump. + +Mr. EISENBERG. It couldn't have been longer than 10 inches? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Not at this point; no, sir. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Could it have proceeded past that point marked "C," that +is, could the object have been placed so that its base was at "C"--so +that its base was at "A"? Is it possible that the object as it lay in +the blanket passed "C" but with a protrusion at "C"? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes, sir; this is quite possible. + +Mr. EISENBERG. That is possible? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. This is quite possible. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Were there any other folds or creases, Mr. Stombaugh? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes, sir. + +At the upper, call it the upper portion of the triangle, there were +some creases in the blanket which had been caused by a piece of string +which had been securely wrapped around the blanket at this point. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Could you mark the area "D," where those creases +occurred? + +Is the string you are referring to the Paine Exhibit 2 which you +earlier identified? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. That is correct. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Was that wrapped around the blanket when you received it? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes, sir; this was loosely wrapped around the blanket +at this point. From an examination of the blanket itself and these +creases, it was apparent that this string had been tied around the +blanket while something was inside this blanket, and the string had +been tied rather tight in order for these creases to have remained in +the blanket. + +Mr. EISENBERG. In other words, the creases remained in the blanket +although there was no object in it when you received it---- + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Correct. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Which would account for the creases, is that correct? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. That is correct. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And you therefore deduced there had been an object in +the blanket preceding your examination? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. That is correct. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did you notice anything else about the blanket which you +would like to relate, Mr. Stombaugh? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. The blanket exhibited much wear. + +Mr. EISENBERG. We are just talking now about the shape, of course. We +will be getting into composition later. + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. No, sir; I cannot think of anything else at this time. + +Mr. EISENBERG. In your opinion, would the blanket have made a secure +package wrapped in the way and manner that it appeared to you? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes, sir; it would have. With the crease at fold "A," +had it been folded down, it would have made a very snug and secure +package containing some type of item in it. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, Mr. Stombaugh, was there anything about the string, +Paine Exhibit 2, which would make an identification possible? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. No, sir; the string is just common white cotton string. +It is found in most stores throughout the country, and used for, well, +many uses. There is nothing distinctive about the string itself which +could be traced as to manufacturer or any definite use it was made for. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Any distinctive accidental markings on it? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. No; I found none. + +Mr. EISENBERG. What kind--was it tied in a knot? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes, sir; it was tied in a granny knot, and also a bow +knot. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Could you illustrate that for us? You are holding up a +piece of string? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. This is another piece of string, not the original. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Not the original. + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. A granny knot is a common knot, tied with two simple +thumb knots. It is a very hard knot to open as opposed to the boy scout +knot, or the square knot rather, which is tied in this manner. This +knot is very easy to open because all one has to do is to pull one free +end of it and the other free end slides out. + +Mr. EISENBERG. You are referring to the so-called "boy scout" knot? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. It is actually not a boy scout knot but a square knot. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And you tie that left over right, right over left, is +that the formula? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes; left over right and right over left. + +Mr. EISENBERG. How do you spell that, by the way? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. G-r-a-n-n-y. + +Mr. EISENBERG. The granny knot, Mr. Stombaugh, is this a common or an +uncommon knot? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. It is a very common knot. I believe that knot is tied +more than any other knot because it is right over right, right over +right, and it is usually used by people wrapping packages who want it +tied securely so the package will not come open. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did you say there was also a bow knot? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes, sir. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Could you illustrate that? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. This is the type of knot we use when we tie our shoe +strings. It is made by forming a loop with the one free end, and +wrapping the other free end around it and pulling it through. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Is that a hard or an easy knot to slip out, Mr. +Stombaugh? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. This is very easy, because you just take one of the +loose ends and pull it and the knot falls apart. + +Mr. EISENBERG. What was the relationship between the granny knot and +the bow knot? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. I don't know. I have seen this numerous times, on +numerous different occasions when one would either tie a granny knot or +a square knot and follow it up with a bow knot. The granny knot would +be to secure the package so it would not come loose. The bow knot is a +temporary knot tied by one who wants the string to come off easily. + +Now why they would tie a granny knot and follow this up with a bow knot +I don't know, unless they had some long loose ends which they wanted to +slacken up, shorten up, rather, so as they would not be hanging down. + +Mr. EISENBERG. The Exhibit Paine No. 2 is tied into a knot at this +point. Can you tell us what kind of a knot that is? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. This was a simple bow knot which I put into it. + +Mr. EISENBERG. You put it into it? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes, sir. + +Mr. EISENBERG. So the knot does not reproduce the knots as you found +them originally? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. No; they do not. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Stombaugh, I wonder if you could tie the +demonstration piece of string you have been using into the granny knot +and bow knot, in the manner in which you received it. + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. There is the granny knot and here is the bow knot. + +Mr. EISENBERG. You are not here trying to approximate the diameter or +the circumference of the string, but only the knots? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. No. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, may I admit this string as an illustrative +exhibit? + +The CHAIRMAN. It may be done. + +Mr. EISENBERG. That will be 664, Mr. reporter. + +(The item referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 664, and +received into evidence.) + +Now, Mr. Stombaugh, did you examine this blanket to determine its +composition? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes; I did. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Can you give us your conclusions? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. The blanket is composed of a very small percentage of +brown and green woolen fibers; an average of about 30 percent to 40 +percent of brown and green cotton fibers, and the remaining portion +brown and green delustered viscose fibers. + +Mr. EISENBERG. When you say "a very small portion of brown and green +woolen fibers," could you be more specific; was it in the neighborhood +of 1 percent or 10 percent? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. I was unable to obtain a definite percentage. This is a +rather long, involved, and inaccurate method of determination because +one would need a brand new blanket to get a good quantitative analysis. + +However, in the samples of the fabric that I made, I found +approximately 1 to 2 percent woolen fibers, 20 to, I would say, 30, 35 +percent cotton fibers, and the remainder of it viscose fibers. This is +just an approximation from the microscopic slide that I made. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Would you have any reason to believe that the +approximation was not made from a fair sample of the blanket? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. No; I wouldn't. I took the sample myself. + +However, the blanket is very well worn. Most of the nap has been +worn off of it. It has had a lot of use, and much of the original +composition has been worn off. Now, whether or not this same percentage +of composition is missing from use or not I wouldn't be able to +determine, but I would say that the approximation that I had given is +fairly accurate for the blanket in its present condition. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Stombaugh, could you explain to us briefly how you +were able to distinguish the three fibers, cotton, wool, and viscose? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes, sir. This chart shows the difference in the textile +fibers when one observes them under a microscope. A cotton fiber +appears to be, or rather, might be compared with an ordinary soda straw +which has been flattened. You can see here that the fiber is hollow. +The hollow is known as the lumen in cotton. The fiber is flattened and +twisted much as teenagers do to soda straws in drug stores when they +twist and crush the soda straws. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Pardon me, Mr. Stombaugh: this chart is a chart labeled +"Textile Fibers," and having three illustrations labeled "Cotton," +"Wool," and "Viscose"? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. That is correct. + +A woolen fiber actually is a hair which originates from an animal and +is composed of three basic parts, the outer part being the scales +which are the rough area on the outside of the hair, the inner portion +known as the cortex, and a center portion known as the medulla. +Microscopically this is what you would look for to identify wool. + +Viscose is a synthetic fiber that is made by man. It is composed of +chemicals, and is very rough around the outside area, having many +striations running through it. The viscose fiber I have drawn here is +what we would term a lustrous fiber. It does not have the delustering +agent added to it, to cut down the luster. If this were a delustered +fiber then we would have millions of small spots on the outside of this +fiber which have been placed there chemically so as to cut down the +luster of the fiber. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Was the viscose in the blanket that we have been +examining lustered or delustered? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. This was delustered. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, may I introduce the chart which the +witness has been discussing as 665? + +This chart was prepared by you or under your supervision, Mr. Stombaugh? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. It was prepared by me. + +The CHAIRMAN. What is the number? + +Mr. EISENBERG. That will be 665. + +(Commission Exhibit No. 665 was marked, and received in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Stombaugh, did you examine this blanket to determine +whether any debris was present? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes; I did. I scraped the blanket and removed all the +foreign textile fibers and hairs and placed them into a pillbox. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Can you describe to us how this scraping was performed? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes, sir. We suspend the blanket from a rack in the +laboratory, place a clean sheet of kraft paper on a table directly +under it and, using a spatula, thoroughly scrape it down. This knocks +all the foreign material adhering to the blanket from the blanket, +and it falls down to the paper. After we have thoroughly cleaned the +blanket, then we scrape up all the debris and place it in the pillboxes +for a microscopic examination. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Why do you use this scrape method, as opposed to a +fine-filter vacuum cleaner? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. We have found that the fine-filtered vacuum cleaner +pulls all of the dirt and old debris from a blanket which are embedded +on the inner portion of the fabric. We are not interested in this +material. We are interested only in what is adhering to the top +surface, which has been put there most recently. Through experience in +the laboratory we have found this method to be the best so far. + +Mr. EISENBERG. So that by use of the scrape you gathered the more +recent debris, as opposed to the older debris? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. That is correct. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And what type of debris did you find, Mr. Stombaugh? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. I found numerous foreign textile fibers of various types +and colors, as well as a number of limb and pubic hairs. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did you draw any conclusions as to those hairs upon your +initial examination of them? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes; I did. They all had originated from a person of the +Caucasian race and I compared these hairs with hair samples obtained +from Harvey Oswald---- + +Mr. EISENBERG. That is Lee Harvey Oswald? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. That is, Lee Harvey Oswald, and I found that of the limb +and pubic hairs I removed from the blanket, several matched Oswald's in +all observable microscopic characteristics and could have originated +from Oswald. + +Mr. EISENBERG. You said these hairs were from a person of Caucasian +race. Can you explain how you can tell the difference between hairs of +the various types of races? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes, sir. Going back to my charts, I have a chart here +which contains a diagram of a hair. This isn't any particular hair, +this is a type of hair that could be animal or human. I am just using +this to give one an idea of what a hair looks like. + +First, we have the root, which is the portion of the hair embedded in +the scalp or in the skin, whichever type hair it might be. + +(At this point, Mr. Dulles entered the hearing room.) + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. And from the root, extending out and growing, is the +shaft of the hair, and the very distal end of that is the tip. + +If we were to take this hair and place it under a microscope, this +is what we would see. We find that the hair basically consists, in +the shaft area, of scales composing the outside portion of the hair. +Directly under the scales is the cortex. Now the scales vary in size +and shape among animal and human hairs. The cortex also varies. Running +through the center of the hair shaft, much as the lead in the center of +a lead pencil, is what is known as the medulla. + +The medulla is nothing more than air cells running through the center +of the hairshaft. + +In the cortex of the hair are small granules which appear under a +microscope like tiny grains of sand. These are known as the hair +pigment. This is the part of the hair that gives the hair its color, +whether it is blond, dark brown, black, or what-have-you. + +Also present in the cortex you will occasionally find air spaces +located among the pigment granules which are known as cortical fusi. +These will vary in size, shape, form, and location on the hair. Many +hairs do not have any. + +Basically that is what a hair looks like, and the basic component parts +of the hair. + +Mr. EISENBERG. May I have this admitted as 666, this diagram of the +hair? + +The CHAIRMAN. Yes; it may be admitted. + +(Commission Exhibit No. 666 was marked, and received in evidence.) + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Now, keeping the diagram of the hair on the side +where we can refer to it, our first differentiation in the hair, of +course, would be separating the human from the animal hairs. These are +photomicrographs of human hairs which I took through a microscope. + +Here are the animal hairs. + +The first thing we look for, of course, would be the color, length, +and texture of the hair. This comes from experience from looking at +thousands of hairs, and we can usually pick one up and tell by the +naked eye whether it is animal or human. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Pardon me. You are referring to a chart which has on the +upper right, "Human Hairs" and on the upper left, "Animal Hairs" as +captions? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. That is correct. + +However, when we place these hairs under a microscope we find that +animal hairs vary from human hairs in many different aspects. + +One, the medullary structure. In animal hair the medullary structure +is much wider than that in a human hair. You will find that it exceeds +more than one-third of the width of the hair shaft. + +Secondly, the shape of the medulla, as in this rabbit hair, varies +greatly. You can see the individual medullary cells very distinctly. In +this chart I have some photographs of human hairs in which a medulla is +not present. But the medulla in a human hair would look just about like +this, very thin. + +We move down to the pigmentation of the hair, which is located in the +cortex. In the human hair the pigmentation is very fine and granular, +and in this animal hair it is very coarse and elongated. + +The size and shape of a root on the animal hair differs from the size +and shape of the root in the human hair. Here we see the root of a dog +hair which is very long and very thin. The root of a human hair is more +or less shaped similar to a light bulb. The scales of animal hairs are +very large. The scales of the human hairs are much smaller. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, may I have this chart which the witness +has been using introduced as 667? + +The CHAIRMAN. It may be admitted. + +(The chart referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 667, and +received in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. You are looking at a new chart called "Racial +Determination of Hairs" with the subcaption "General Appearance of +Shaft"? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. That is correct. + +Once we have separated the animal hairs from the human hairs, our +next problem is determining the race of the individual from whom the +particular human hairs in which we are interested originated. + +Looking at the hair under low power--under a low-power microscope--we +find that a Caucasian hair differs from the hair of the Negroid or +Mongoloid race in diameter fluctuation. The hair shaft varies in width +through its entire length. I might take, for instance, this yellow or +this black pencil. Here we find that the diameter of the pencil is +uniform through the entire length. Now, if we would twist this pencil +we would change the diameter of the pencil slightly. This would be so +in a Caucasian hair, where there might be slight fluctuations in a +hair, such as a person with wavy hair would have a slight fluctuation. +The person with straight hair has hair shafts which for all practical +purposes, are uniform in diameter the entire length. + +In Negroid hair, there is great fluctuation. Their hair is very curly +and kinky. This is caused by the great fluctuation present in their +hairs. + +Mr. EISENBERG. You mean in the diameters? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes; diameters. + +In Mongoloid hair, which includes Asiatic and North American Indians, +there is little or no fluctuation present in their hairs. + +Going back to the Caucasian hair, the color of the Caucasian +individual's hair differs from black to blond and, of course, white. + +Negroid hairs are dense black usually; some are white. There are a few +exceptions here where we find some redheaded persons of this race. The +Mongoloids are always black, but not quite as dense black as those of +the Negroid race. + +The texture of the hair: Caucasian head hairs, are very soft, flexible; +Negroid hairs are very stiff and wiry; and Mongoloid hairs are +flexible, but not as soft and flexible as the Caucasian. + +Now, as to the general width, or rather diameter, of the shaft, we find +Caucasian is medium, the Negroid is medium, the Mongoloid hairs are +much larger than either the Negroid or the Caucasian. + +Mr. EISENBERG. May I have this chart which the witness has been +discussing marked as 668, Mr. Chairman? + +The CHAIRMAN. Yes. + +(Commission's Exhibit No. 668 was marked, and received in evidence.) + +The CHAIRMAN. May we take a recess at this time just for a few moments. + +(Short recess.) + +Mr. DULLES. Mr. Eisenberg, would you proceed? + +Mr. EISENBERG. Yes, sir. Mr. Stombaugh, you were discussing the +characteristics of Caucasian as opposed to Negroid and Mongoloid hair. +Could you proceed with that discussion? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. I have another chart here. + +Mr. EISENBERG. That is labeled "Racial Determination of Hairs" and +unlike chart 668 it has no subcaption under that general caption, is +that correct? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. That is correct. In the previous chart I used I had +taken some photographs of hairs under relatively low power, 100 +diameters. + +In this chart I have enlarged the hairs, taking them under +approximately 400 diameters, so we can look into the hair. Here we +begin to see the real differences between the hairs among the various +races. + +In the Caucasian race, the cuticle, in other words, the layer of scales +around the outside of the hair, is medium to thick. + +In the Negroid hair the cuticle is very thick. In the Mongoloid hair +the cuticle is very thick. + +Pigmentation in the cortex, which gives the hair the color, in +Caucasian hair is very fine to coarse and is very evenly distributed +throughout the cortex of the hair. In Negroid hair the pigment is +medium to coarse, but the big difference is that the pigment granules +are clumped together, leaving large white-gapped areas throughout the +cortex of the hair. + +In the Mongoloid hair, the pigment is medium to coarse but it is +very heavily distributed throughout the hair. As you can see, in the +Caucasian hair the cortex is relatively light. In Negroid hair it is +clumped, and in Mongoloid hair it is dense. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, may I have this chart admitted as 669? + +Mr. DULLES. It is admitted as 669. + +(Commission Exhibit No. 669 was marked, and received in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. You have a chart here "Racial Determination of Hairs," +and no subcaption, is that right? + +Mr. DULLES. You haven't asked for this other to be admitted, have you? + +Mr. EISENBERG. No; I will ask after he has finished with it. + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Occasionally we will run into situations in hairs, +where we cannot determine with any certainty whether or not the hairs +are of the Caucasian or Negroid or Mongoloid race, by examining it +longitudinally, and we have to make a cross-section of the hair. If +we make a cross-section of the hair it is the same as taking a banana +and cutting off a very thin slice of the banana and placing it under a +microscope and examining it. We find in the Caucasian race the hairs +are oval in shape. In the Negroid race the hairs are flat, and have +a flattened appearance, and in the Mongoloid race they are perfectly +round. This is another characteristic which we use in determining the +racial origin of hair. + +Mr. EISENBERG. May I have this chart admitted as 670? + +Mr. DULLES. Yes. + +(Commission Exhibit No. 670 was marked, and received in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. Was it definitely established in your mind as a result +of the various characteristics you have explained that the hairs found +in the blanket were Caucasian hairs? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes, sir; they were all Caucasian hairs. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did you examine those hairs and compare them with any +known samples to determine whether they might have come from any +specific individual? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes; I did. + +Mr. EISENBERG. What was your conclusion on that score? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. I examined the hairs found on the blanket and determined +that most of them were limb and pubic hairs. In other words, they +originated either from the leg or the arm or from the pubic area. I +found several head hairs on the blanket also. + +These hairs I compared with known hair samples from Lee Harvey Oswald. +I found several of the limb hairs from the blanket and several of the +pubic hairs from the blanket matched in all observable microscopic +characteristics, and concluded these hairs could have come from Oswald. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Where did you get the known sample, Mr. Stombaugh, of +Lee Oswald's hair? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. These were obtained and were sent to the laboratory by +the FBI office in Dallas. + +I do not know whether the agent in Dallas personally took the samples +or had a member of the Dallas Police Department take the samples. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Were these hairs taken from one area or were they a +representative sample? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. It was a fairly good representative sample. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Could you review the microscopic characteristics which +led you to your conclusion, Mr. Stombaugh? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. This chart contains a photomicrograph of Oswald's pubic +hairs. This is just a very small area taken of a glass microscope slide +containing the hairs. There were numerous other hairs. The photograph +on the right shows one of the hairs I removed from the blanket, and one +of the hairs from Oswald, showing, generally, the match. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, did you take these photographs on the left and +right side yourself? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes; I did. + +Mr. EISENBERG. This chart is captioned on the left "Photomicrograph +of Oswald's Pubic Hairs" and on the right "Hair from the Blanket" and +"Hair from Oswald"? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes, sir. + +Mr. EISENBERG. May I have it admitted? + +(The item referred to was marked as Commission Exhibit No. 672, and +received into evidence.) + +Mr. DULLES. May I ask a question? The one on the right seems darker +than the one on the left, the hair itself. + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. This one and this one? + +Mr. DULLES. What is it? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Are you referring---- + +Mr. EISENBERG. The hair shown on the right appears darker. + +Mr. DULLES. There are two specimens there or two---- + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Two. + +Mr. DULLES. That is what I thought. + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. You are thinking this hair looks darker than this one? + +Mr. DULLES. No; I was thinking that both the hairs on the right, which +I understand were taken from Oswald---- + +Mr. EISENBERG. One hair was actually from the blanket, one from Oswald. + +Mr. DULLES. Seems darker than the ones taken from the blanket. Is the +left the blanket? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. This portion here is one separate hair. This was taken +from the blanket. + +Mr. DULLES. That was taken from the blanket. The right-hand is taken +from the blanket and the left-hand hairs were taken from Oswald himself? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes, sir; these are from Oswald. + +Mr. DULLES. Yes. + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. This is a comparison shot. This photograph was taken +through two microscopes simultaneously showing how this portion of a +pubic hair from the blanket matched a pubic hair from Oswald, which is +this portion of the photograph. + +Mr. EISENBERG. You are pointing to the right side of the chart 672? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes; this photograph was taken at 100 diameters and this +photograph was taken at 400 diameters. There is a difference there also. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Could you state that again please? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. The photograph on the left was taken approximately at +100 diameters. + +Mr. EISENBERG. That is Oswald's pubic hairs, a known sample? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes; this is a general shot of his known sample. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And the one on the right? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. The one on the right was taken at approximately 400 +diameters. + +Mr. DULLES. This is the blanket sample? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. This is a hair from the blanket compared with Oswald's. + +Mr. EISENBERG. You have three photographs on this chart, of which two +are known Oswald hairs, the photograph on the left and one of the two +photographs on the right? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Actually, this is one photograph taken through a +comparison microscope. We are looking at two different hairs at the +same time. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Yes. Well, when you say this is one photograph you +are pointing to the one on the right but, as I understand it, the +photograph on the right shows two different hairs? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. That is correct. + +Mr. EISENBERG. One of which is Oswald's hair, a known sample? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And the other of which was obtained from the blanket? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And the photograph on the left shows known samples of +Oswald's pubic hairs? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. That is correct. + +Mr. EISENBERG. So we have in effect two views of Oswald's pubic hairs, +one on the left and one half of the composite photograph on the right? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Following up on Mr. Dulles' question, the photograph on +the right seems to have a much coarser and somewhat darker structure +in both the known and the questioned sample than the photograph on the +left, which is simply a known sample. + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. That is correct. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And you said that was because of the enlargement? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. The difference in the enlargement. The photograph on +the left was taken with the microscope set to magnify the specimen 100 +times. The photograph on the right was taken with the microscope set +to magnify the specimen 400 times. + +Mr. EISENBERG. The photograph on the right does not seem to show a hair +four times larger, so I don't understand it. + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. It was on the enlarging of the photograph itself. + +Had these two prints been enlarged at the same enlarging factor, the +hairs on the left, would be much, much smaller than the ones on the +right. This was just blown up to this size so the hairs could be seen. + +For instance, had we not blown these up, here we see them magnified 400 +times, and this other photograph is a natural shot. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, here you are pointing to photograph 669, and the +second shot which you call "natural" is 668? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes, sir. You can see the difference in the diameter and +the difference in the detail of the photograph. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Were those photographs of the different magnifications? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes; they were. + +Mr. EISENBERG. What was 669, do you recall? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. I believe it was approximately 400. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And 668? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Approximately 100. + +Mr. EISENBERG. So it corresponds to the difference in the right- and +left-hand portions of 672? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes; it would. + +Now, the characteristics we look for in making a hair match. First +would be the color. + +The matches I found in Oswald's hairs. His hairs vary from light brown +to a medium brown shade. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Are you talking about the known samples now? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. This is his known sample. In this particular match the +color was medium brown, and looking at the hair throughout its entire +length, it ranged from a medium brown, and this color remained constant +to the tip, where the color changed to a light brown and the very tip +of it was transparent, it was clear, had no color at all. There were no +color pigments in the tip of the hair. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Are you referring now to the pubic hair which you +illustrate on the right-hand side of 672? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes; I am referring to the pubic hair. + +This is the gross appearance. I looked at it under low power where I +could see the entire length of the hair. + +Next, the thickness of the hair, or the diameter of the hair shaft. I +found this diameter to be rather narrow for pubic hairs. Pubic hairs +ordinarily are rather thick. Oswald's hairs were relatively narrow. +Pubic hairs also have what we term nobbiness. You can see a nob right +here, it is twisted---- + +Mr. EISENBERG. Could you circle that with a pen, and mark it "A" on +chart 672? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Here we see that it twists and it is very uneven. The +shaft of the hair is generally very uneven in pubic hairs. + +However, in Oswald's pubic hairs we had very little of this. The hairs +were very smooth. They lacked this nobbiness. The upper two-thirds were +extremely smooth for pubic hairs. This was an unusual characteristic. + +The tips of Oswald's pubic hairs were not worn. They had a very sharp +tip and very clear. Ordinarily pubic hairs are rounded at the tips, and +not pointed--this is from wearing against clothing--at all. This would +indicate to me that his pubic hairs were rather strong, much tougher +than the average persons. + +The cuticle, in other words the very thin layer of scales covering his +hairs, is very thin for pubic hairs. The scales exhibited a very small +protrusion on the outside. The distance they protruded from the shaft +of the hair is very slight. + +Mr. EISENBERG. When you talk about the protrusion, do you mean the +distance between the point of the scale and the balance of the cuticle, +the center of the cuticle? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. That is correct. Some hairs will have a sawtooth effect, +will look just like saw teeth do when you look at the blade of a saw. + +Mr. EISENBERG. From the protrusion of the scales? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. From the protrusion of the scales. Others will be very +small, have a slight protrusion. + +Mr. EISENBERG. How was Oswald's? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. It was a very small protrusion. The gapping of Oswald's +hair was very slight. In other words, between the cuticle and the +cortex, the cortex of course containing the color pigment in the hair, +occasionally you will find hairs where there will be no color pigment +in areas up near the cuticle. There will be a gap there. + +Oswald's hairs, as you can see here, have some gapped areas in there +but not too many. They are very irregular, and the gapping does not go +down too deeply into the cortex. + +Pigmentation of his hairs was very fine, equally dispersed, and there +was some chaining together of the larger pigment granules noted. +In other words, three or four of the pigment granules were chained +together. Instead of being dispersed such as they are in Exhibit No. +666, you would have five or six of them chained together, forming a +slight irregular-appearing streak. + +Cortical fusi, the air spaces present in the hairs such as I have drawn +here on Exhibit 666, were for the most part absent in his hairs. I +found very, very few of them, and would term them absent in his hairs. + +The medulla in the hairs, those that contained a medulla, was constant. +It was a continuous streak for the most part. There were some slight +broken areas in it. The hairs of Oswald, that did not have a medulla, +there was not a trace of one present. It was completely absent. This is +unusual. Usually, you will find that the hairs will contain a medulla +and if not in the ones that appear not to, you can find traces of a +medulla present. In his I didn't find any medulla at all in several of +the hairs. + +The root area of his hairs was rather clear of pigment and there was +only a fair amount of cortical fusi present. As in drawing No. 666, in +the root area, you ordinarily would find a large amount of cortical +fusi which rapidly diminish as you proceed out the hair shaft, and in +his there was just a relatively few cortical fusi in the root area. I +found this characteristic also in some of the hairs removed from the +blanket. + +Basically, that is the--those are the characteristics I used in +matching Oswald's pubic hairs with pubic hairs from the blanket. + +Mr. EISENBERG. You have been discussing the characteristics of Oswald's +pubic hairs. In each case were the characteristics of the pubic hairs +you found in the blanket the same as those you have noted as being +present in Oswald's pubic hairs? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes, sir; they were all identical. + +Mr. EISENBERG. That is as to protrusion of scale, absence of cortical +fusi, chaining together to some extent of pigments, and so forth? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. That is correct. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Without going through every item, every item you have +named was identical? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Every item I have found in hair from the blanket? + +Mr. EISENBERG. Yes, sir. + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Could you go on, please? + +Mr. DULLES. Just one second, off the record. + +(Discussion off the record.) + +Mr. DULLES. Back on the record. + +Mr. EISENBERG. You have presented at this point a chart labeled +"Microphotograph of Oswald's Limb Hairs" on the left, and on the right +two subcaptions, "Hair from Blanket" and "Hair from Oswald," and do +these--were these photographs taken by you or under your supervision? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. They were taken by me. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Are they accurate reproductions of the material which +according to the captions they are photographs of? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes; they are. + +Mr. EISENBERG. I would like this admitted as 671, Mr. Chairman. + +Mr. DULLES. It will be admitted as 671. + +(Commission Exhibit No. 671 was marked, and received in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. Could you briefly discuss this exhibit? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Exhibit 671 is similar to Exhibit 672 in that both +contain two photographs. The photograph on the left is an overall shot +of Oswald's limb hairs. + +Mr. EISENBERG. That is the known? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. That is the known from Oswald. + +The photograph on the right contains photographs of two hairs, in this +same photograph, the hair on the right being a limb hair from Oswald, +and the hair on the left being a hair removed from the blanket. + +Mr. EISENBERG. What is the magnification there, Mr. Stombaugh? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. The magnification of these is approximately the same as +in the previous submission, the one on the right being approximately +400 diameters and the one on the left 100 diameters. + +Now, the one on the right is a limb hair. A limb hair is much smaller +in diameter than a pubic hair. That is why there will appear to be some +slight change in the size of these hairs. + +I compared the limb hair from the blanket with the limb hair from +Oswald which matched in all observable microscopic characteristics. The +characteristics I found in this match were the color of the hair was +light brown through its entire length, and the width of the hair shaft +or the diameter was very fine. There was no fluctuation that one could +readily see. The diameter of the hair shaft remained constant to the +tip, where it diminished down to a point. + +The tips of the hairs were very sharp and no abrasion was noted. In +other words, the tips of these limb hairs were not rounded as one +ordinarily finds. This would indicate the hairs were very tough, the +same as the pubic hairs were. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Are you describing now the known hairs? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. These are known hairs and the match I made; both. + +Mr. EISENBERG. All right. + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. The scales were of medium size, had very slight +protrusion, and there was very slight gapping in the pigmentation +located in the cortex right against the cuticle of the hair. There was +a fair amount of cortical fusi equally distributed throughout the hair +shaft. + +This is not unusual in itself, but the amount of cortical fusi that I +did find present is unusual. + +The medulla was discontinuous, granular, very bulbous, and very uneven. +It was not a constant, smooth straight line such as one might find over +here in this pubic hair on 672. + +There was nothing unusual noted about the root area of these hairs. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And again you are describing the characteristics of both +hairs, and they were identical in all these characteristics? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. That is correct. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Were there any characteristics in which they were not +identical? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. No; not on the limb hair, as I found it matched. I did +find limb hairs and pubic hairs and head hairs in this blanket which +were dissimilar to Oswald's and definitely did not come from him +but the hairs I have talked about here matched in all microscopical +characteristics. + +Mr. EISENBERG. The other hairs, Mr. Stombaugh, could you make a +determination as to race? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes; they were all Caucasian. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Could you make a determination as to sex or age? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. No; it is not possible to determine sex or age from an +examination of a hair. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Could you make a determination as to the number of +individuals who had contributed these hairs? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. No; I couldn't. You would have to have a hair sample +from any suspected person, and hairs vary tremendously. Even on the +same individual head hairs from the same individual can vary from one +head area to another. + +I have found as many as 12 to 15 different types of hair on the same +person's head. + +So, therefore, it would not be possible to estimate the number of +different people whose hairs have appeared on this blanket. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, Mr. Stombaugh, are you able to say that the limb +hairs and pubic hairs which you found in the blanket and which you have +matched with Oswald's in observable microscopic characteristics came +from Oswald to the exclusion of any other individual? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. No; I couldn't say that. I could say that these hairs +could have come from Oswald. I could not say they definitely came from +him to the exclusion of all other Caucasian persons in the world. + +In order to say this, one would have to take hair samples from all of +these people and compare them and this, of course, is impossible. + +Mr. EISENBERG. What degree of probability do you think there is that +these hairs came from Oswald? And without putting a precise number on +it, let's suppose you took head hairs from 100 Caucasian individuals, +how many matches would you expect to find among those hundred different +hairs on the basis of your experience? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. On the basis of my experience I would expect to find +only one match. + +Mr. EISENBERG. That is to say that the 100 hairs would be different +from each other? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes, sir. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Is your experience, therefore, that the hairs of +different individuals do not match in observable microscopic +characteristics--within the basis of your experience? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Within the basis of my experience, I have examined +thousands of hairs and I have never found Caucasian hairs from two +different individuals that match. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, when you say that, Mr. Stombaugh, have you been +presented with hairs in your laboratory from Caucasian individuals +which you knew before the examination came from two or more individuals? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes. + +We have obtained samples of hairs from a hundred different people, and +would select one hair, give it to an examiner and ask who it originated +from, and invariably he would be able to find in the hundred different +samples the individual the hair originated from. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, when a specimen comes into your laboratory, does +it frequently come in--and I am talking now about specimens that come +in from a crime--does it frequently come in such, so that you have two +specimens, two or more specimens, which you know before you begin are +from two different people? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. You are told before you begin that they come from two +different people? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes, sir; ordinarily a case such as a murder or a rape, +you will obtain the clothing of the victim, the clothing of the suspect +in the case, as well as hair samples from the victim and hair samples +from the suspect. + +Mr. EISENBERG. How many types of cases like this do you think you have +processed? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Processed approximately 500 a year. + +Mr. EISENBERG. For how many years? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Four years--no, three years. + +Mr. EISENBERG. In any of these approximately 1,500 cases, have you +found a case involving Caucasian hairs in which the hairs from the +known two different individuals matched in observable physical +characteristics microscopically? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. No, sir; I have never found hair from two different +Caucasian persons that matched. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Have you found any in non-Caucasian hairs, by the way? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. I have found several cases in which hairs from two +different persons of the Negroid race, although the hairs did not match +completely, the characteristics were such that I felt that I could not +go further with the examination because I could not exclude the hairs. +The hairs were too similar. When I make a hair match. I know that any +case might go to court, and of course I want to be absolutely certain +in my mind. + +In these cases I am referring to right now, the hair sample from the +victim and the hair sample from the suspect were pubic hairs. They were +so similar to each other that I could not find any pubic hairs that I +could match with the suspect's pubic hairs, and be certain in my mind +that these hairs came from him rather than her. I couldn't do this. + +So, therefore, I sent the evidence back without further conclusion. +This has happened in approximately three cases. However, I would like +to point out that I could not take his, the suspect's pubic hairs, +and the victim's pubic hairs and completely match them up under a +microscope slide such as the match shown in the chart. They did not +absolutely match, but they were too similar for a good determination to +be made. + +Mr. EISENBERG. What proportion of the 1,500 cases that you have +described--approximately 1,500 cases--have involved Negroid as opposed +to Caucasian hairs, just roughly? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. I would say about approximately a third. Of course, a +lot of these cases we don't know the race. They don't list the race, +but in examining the hairs I can tell the race---- + +Mr. EISENBERG. So in 1,000-odd cases of the Caucasian hair examinations +you haven't 2 matches between hairs from different individuals? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. That is correct. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And in the 500-odd cases of Negroid, 500-odd cases +involving hairs from two different Negroid individuals, you have found +three cases where although the hairs were not identical they were so +close that you felt you didn't want to go further in your examination, +is that correct? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. That is correct. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Is that a fair recapitulation? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes. + +Mr. DULLES. Could I just ask a question here? + +There is a distinction then, as I gather from your testimony, an +understandable one, between the comparison of hairs and, say, the +comparison of fingerprints, because obviously the hair that you find on +the victim has left the assailant and, therefore, you are not looking +at the same hair but you are looking at a different hair? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. That is correct. + +Mr. DULLES. And that, therefore, distinguishes testimony in regard to +hair, we will say, with regard to fingerprint examination? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes, sir; that, and also a fingerprint will remain the +same throughout one's life. It will never change. A hair will. + +Mr. DULLES. I see. + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. You can see my hair, I am starting to get white at the +temples. Mine is changing characteristics. + +Mr. DULLES. We all do. + +But is there--let's say you examine 100 hairs, let's say, that +are found on the victim, and 100 hairs that are different hairs +that are found on the assailant; let us say that there are certain +characteristics common to all of these hairs. + +Do you get my question? Let's say 10, not 100, whatever number you want +to take. + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Ordinarily, you would find one or two. + +Mr. DULLES. That have certain characteristics. You have pointed out on +exhibit--on the left-hand side of Exhibit 672, the circle you have made +on 672, circle A. + +Is there a common characteristic that you have marked on one of the +other hairs? I believe the hair marked with the "A," was taken from +Oswald himself, the hair on which you have marked that particular +characteristic. + +Is there any corresponding characteristic that should be marked or +indicated on a hair that was found on the blanket? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Well, I testified as to all the characteristics I found. + +Mr. DULLES. Yes. + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Now, the difficulty in using a photomicrograph, you are +trying to photograph a round object and as a result of this all of +these characteristics just won't appear in focus. + +Mr. EISENBERG. To be more specific, Mr. Stombaugh, that circle marked +"A" was to show a nobbiness in Oswald's hair. As I recall, you +testified there was very little nobbiness present in that pubic hair, +as opposed to the normal amount of nobbiness of pubic hair? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. That is correct. + +Mr. EISENBERG. On the right-hand side of 672, I suppose we don't see +much or any nobbiness in either the known or---- + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. No; there is none present here. + +Mr. EISENBERG. So that would correspond with the point you made as to +"A," that there was very little nobbiness? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Very little. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And that is why there is no corresponding mark for +nobbiness characteristic on the right-hand side, is that correct? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. That is correct. + +Mr. EISENBERG. The right-hand side of 672? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. That is correct. Oswald's hairs, where the nobbiness did +appear was in the lower third, in other words, the area from the root +out on the shaft approximately one-third. The remaining two-thirds of +the hair shaft all the way out to the tip was relatively straight, no +nobbiness at all present. This was characteristic. Ordinarily a pubic +hair will have this nobbiness two-thirds to three-fourths of the way +up. So this was a characteristic which exists in Oswald's pubic hairs +which is different from the ordinary or average. + +Mr. DULLES. And you found that both on the hairs taken from Oswald +himself and on the hairs found in the blanket? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes; I did. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Stombaugh, on this general point, when you make your +comparison examination, do you come to your conclusions on the basis of +what you see under the microscope, or on the basis of the photographs +you take? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. On the basis of what I see under the microscope. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Do you usually take photographs? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. No, sir. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And you took them--can you explain why you took them +here? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. I took these at your request as an exhibit just to show +what the hairs looked like. In a photograph it is very hard to try to +point out the characteristics of hairs because they aren't clear. Under +a microscope you can see each of these points by focusing up and down. +If I am looking at the pigment on the hair, I can focus the comparison +microscope up and down and see exactly the same characteristics, the +pigment is exactly the same size, dispersed about the same, and there +is approximately the same amount of pigment in a given area. + +Also, the cuticle is of the same thickness. I can line the hairs up +longitudinally and see that the tips of the scales match equally as far +as protrusion and distance goes. + +This you couldn't show in the photographs. In order to show each and +every characteristic in photographs, I would have to take 500 or 600 +different photographs. + +Mr. EISENBERG. So these photographs are just as a general illustration +of the kind of thing you see, rather than being given to the Commission +as photographs from which the Commission is to make an identification? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. That is correct. If I were to look at these photographs +myself, I couldn't make an identification on them because I wouldn't be +able to see enough and I would say this looks like this and this looks +like this, but so what? + +What about the size of the pigments, what about the size of the +scales, what about the thickness of the cuticle? I see a medulla here, +I don't see a medulla over here. So you just couldn't see all the +characteristics in a photograph. + +Mr. EISENBERG. But these characteristics you do see as you change the +focus on the microscope? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes; these appear by looking through different areas of +the hair shaft itself. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, getting to the microscope itself, suppose a person +without experience looked through the microscope directly at the +hairs. Would he be able to directly interpret the hairs--a known and a +questioned hair--to see if they are probably identical, or does it take +experience even to interpret what you see through a microscope? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. This takes experience to interpret what you see. + +We get quite a few people through the lab on tours and every now and +then I will set up some hairs. I had one man making a match with a dog +hair and a human hair, and he said they came from the same person, +because he couldn't interpret what he saw. He just thought he saw +something which he didn't. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Stombaugh, could you tell from these hairs that you +found in the blanket, and let me add parenthetically we sometimes have +been calling this blanket a rug but we have been talking about the +object---- + +Mr. DULLES. You call it a blanket, technically. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Technically a blanket, and it is Exhibit 140. This +Exhibit 140, Mr. Stombaugh, could you tell whether these hairs had been +pulled out or had fallen out? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. These hairs had fallen out naturally. They have died and +fallen from the body. This is a very normal occurrence. When one combs +one's hair, ordinarily you will find one or two strands of hair on the +comb, because hair is constantly being replaced in most people. + +Mr. EISENBERG. How can you tell it had fallen out? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. From the shape of the root. + +Mr. EISENBERG. What is the difference of the shape of the root where a +hair falls out and the shape of the hair of a root where it has been +taken out artificially or unnaturally? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. In Exhibit 667, I have a photomicrograph of a root of +a human hair. Now, this hair has died and has fallen out naturally, +you can tell by the shape of it here. The follicle has just come right +along with it. It is starting to shrivel. If this hair was a healthy +hair and had been forcibly removed, this root would have been collapsed +and twisted. It is very characteristic, it is easy to tell whether a +hair has been forcibly removed or whether it fell out naturally. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Suppose it is cut, suppose the hair was cut, can you +tell that? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes, we can tell from looking at the tip of a hair +whether it has been cut, burned, crushed, and whether it has been cut +with a sharp instrument, such as a razor, or whether it has been cut +with a dull instrument. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Were these hairs cut, the hairs in 140, that you found +in Exhibit 140? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Some of the tips of the head hairs had been cut, but the +limb hairs and the pubic hairs had not. + +Mr. EISENBERG. But they all had roots on them? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. They all had roots on them. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Getting back to the blanket for a moment, as to the +composition, you testified that there were woolen, viscose, and cotton +fibers. I don't recall whether you said that there were green and brown +fibers of each type of textile? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes, each type had green and brown fibers. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, also getting back to the shape of the blanket when +you received it, the shape of 140 and its folds, we had discussed a +crease which you marked "C," which you said was caused by an object 10 +inches long, and we discussed whether the object was 10 inches long or +could have been longer. + +How long was the crease "C"? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. The crease "C," the hump in the blanket itself, was +approximately 10 inches long. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And did that run--as the blanket is folded, and looking +from "A" to the general area of "D"--and putting "A" at the left-hand +side--can you tell us how that crease ran, did it run from left to +right or from top to bottom? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. It ran from left to right. + +Mr. EISENBERG. It ran from left to right, and about 10 inches long? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Approximately 10 inches long. + +Mr. EISENBERG. As I recall, you testified it was caused by a distortion +in the fibers, that is to say, the fact the crease was still present +even though there was no object in the blanket was caused by a +distortion of the fibers? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes, sir; the fibers had been stretched in this +area--not the fibers, the yarns. + +Mr. DULLES. Can one see that on the blanket itself? + +Mr. EISENBERG. Let's take a look at 140, Mr. Stombaugh, and see if it +is still present? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. If I can find where it was here. I doubt if it will +still be present because the creases on the edges of the blanket are +gone. I can't tell. It has been folded so much. No. I can't see it. + +When I received the blanket in the laboratory, I noticed, when I put +the blanket down flat, it had an area that was humped just like this. + +Mr. EISENBERG. You have put a pencil underneath? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And you have picked it up an inch or two, you have made +a hump of about an inch or an inch and a half up from the rest of the +blanket, is that correct? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes. But it was very slight and you could hardly notice +it, but I happened to look at the blanket from a distance and saw the +hump and went over to measure it. But we tried to photograph it and we +just couldn't get it. We tried various ways of lighting. + +So I made a notation in my notes regarding that slight hump. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, just to make the record clear, the hump was 10 +inches long, and therefore you felt that the object immediately causing +the hump must have been approximately 10 inches long, is that correct? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes. The object causing the hump itself. + +Mr. EISENBERG. But could it have been attached to an object which was +longer than 10 inches, or could it have been attached to an object, +running underneath the object causing the protrusion, which was longer +than 10 inches? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes, sir. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Okay. That is what I think was the source of the +confusion earlier. + +Now, you placed this mark "C" on this paper illustration, Exhibit 663. +Does that--does the placement of the mark approximate the general area +where you found the hump? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes, approximately, according to my notes. It could be +to the left a little or to the right a little. This isn't to scale. + +Mr. EISENBERG. One last question on the blanket, Mr. Stombaugh. Could +you form any opinion as to the quality of the blanket? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Well, the composition of the blanket being mostly +viscose, a very cheap synthetic, indicated to me that it was an +inferior blanket, relatively inexpensive. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Could you determine whether it was a domestic or a +foreign product? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. No, I couldn't. + +Mr. EISENBERG. It might have been either? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Could have been either, yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, Mr. Stombaugh, I hand you a photograph which is +labeled on the bottom "C 11, Commission Exhibit 150." It is a color +photograph of a brownish textured shirt, long-sleeved, with a hole in +the right elbow, and I ask you whether you recognize the shirt that is +pictured in that photograph? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes, I do. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Can you see your mark anywhere on that? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes, my mark is in red, initials "PMS" are in the collar +of the shirt. + +Mr. EISENBERG. "PMS" being your initials, Paul M. Stombaugh? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes, sir. + +Mr. EISENBERG. May I have this photograph admitted? + +Mr. DULLES. It will be admitted, 673. + +(The photograph referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 673, and +was received in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. Let me state for the record we are introducing the +photograph at this point rather than the shirt itself because +depositions are being taken in Dallas simultaneously with the testimony +being elicited today, and the shirt is being used by those members of +the staff who are in Dallas. + +Mr. DULLES. I understand. + +Mr. EISENBERG. When did you receive this shirt that is pictured in +Exhibit 673, said shirt being Commission Exhibit 150? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. I received this shirt the same day I received the +blanket, which was November 23, 1963, approximately 7:30 a.m. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, did you conduct an examination to determine the +composition of this shirt? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes, I did. + +Mr. EISENBERG. When did you do that? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. I did this later on that morning. + +Mr. EISENBERG. What were your conclusions as to the composition, Mr. +Stombaugh? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. The shirt is composed of gray-black cotton, dark blue +cotton, and orange-yellow cotton fibers. The dark yarn in the shirt is +composed of a mixture of dark blue and gray-black cotton fibers twisted +together, and the light yellowish orange looking colors here, the yarns +in this part of the shirt were composed of orange-yellow cotton fibers. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did you examine the shirt to determine--pardon me, Mr. +Dulles, were you going to put a question on the composition? + +Mr. DULLES. No. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did you examine the shirt to determine the presence of +hairs or other debris? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. No, I didn't. + +Mr. EISENBERG. You did not? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. No, sir. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Neither then or at any subsequent time? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. No, sir. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Could you take a look at your notes on that, Mr. +Stombaugh, to make sure about that? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. No, sir; I did not remove the debris from the shirt. I +noted in my notes the two buttons from the top were forcibly removed, +the right elbow area was worn through, the bottom front inside of the +shirt was ripped forcibly, and that I had made a known sample of this +shirt. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Stombaugh, I had been under the impression you found +some wax on that shirt. + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes; down the face of the shirt I did find some +wax adhering to it, and this wax I removed and delivered to the +spectrographic unit for a spectrographic examination. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Does that show in your notes? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes; I was looking for debris and hairs. I knew I had +not scraped the shirt. + +Mr. EISENBERG. I am using the wrong term, I guess. + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. I recall doing this. This was later in the afternoon +when I removed this wax and took it to the spectrographic unit. This +was after I had conducted other examinations on some other items. + +Mr. EISENBERG. For the record, we had an earlier discussion, and you +had mentioned this to me in an earlier discussion, as I recall---- + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes; that is correct. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Which prompted me to ask you the question. Did you find +any body hairs on this shirt--or any hairs, I should say? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. I didn't look for hairs on this shirt. This type of +examination had not been requested. It seemed unnecessary. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Stombaugh, were you able to determine the quality of +the shirt or did you form any opinion as to the quality of the shirt? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes; it was an inexpensive shirt. I found no labels in +it indicating the manufacturer. + +Mr. DULLES. Any indication that labels had been torn out? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Not that I recall, sir. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Were you able to determine, Mr. Stombaugh, whether this +was a domestic, whether this was of domestic or foreign origin? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. No; there are so many different shirt manufacturers in +this country, that there is little value in trying to trace down a +particular source unless we can find a manufacturer's marking in the +shirt. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Any laundry marks which you attempted to trace down? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. I found no laundry marks. The shirt was well worn and +appeared to have been hand laundered. + +Mr. EISENBERG. If there are no further questions on the shirt, I will +move on to another item. + +Mr. Stombaugh, I now hand you a homemade paper bag, Commission Exhibit +142, which parenthetically has also received another Exhibit No. 626, +and ask you whether you are familiar with this item? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes; I am. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Does that have your mark on it? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. At the time I examined this, it was to be treated for +latent fingerprints subsequent to my examination, and in a case like +this I will not put a mark on the item itself because my mark might +cover a latent fingerprint which is later brought up, and therefore +obscure it. + +In this particular instance, I made a drawing of this bag on my notes +with the various sizes and description of it to refresh my memory at a +later date. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And it is--looking at those notes and as you remember +now--this is the bag? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. This is the bag. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, this bag has an area of very light-brown color, and +the greater portion of the area is a quite dark-brownish color. What +was the color when you originally received it? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. When I originally received this it was a light-brown +color. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Which is at one end of the bag? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. One end of the bag. + +Mr. EISENBERG. The tape is also two colors, one a lightish brown and +the other a darkish brown. What color was the tape when you received it? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. The tape also was light brown. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Could you turn the bag over? Was it the color that shows +as a lighter yellowish-type of brown? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes; a yellow-brown shade. + +Mr. EISENBERG. When did you receive it, by the way, Mr. Stombaugh? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. This was received on November 23, 7:30 a.m., 1963. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did you form any opinions as you examined it, concerning +the construction of the bag? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. When I looked at the bag and examined it, it struck me +as being a homemade bag such as I could make. Occasionally I will have +a need for something like this at home. Therefore, I will take some +brown paper and a strip of tape home with me. Then when I get home I +will fold the tape--fold the paper rather--in the shape I need--and to +seal it up I will tear strips of the sealing tape from the little piece +I have. + +Here we find that this tape has been torn at several places, such +as one would do in an instance like that. Due to these torn edges, +I was under the impression, from looking at the bag, that it was a +homemade bag which someone had made at home and they did not have a +tape dispenser which machine-cuts tape. Therefore, they had to tear it, +which they did--or cut it, of course--with a knife. And this is the +case where pieces of tape were torn. + +Mr. EISENBERG. You were pointing to various torn edges as you +testified, is that correct? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes; that is correct. + +Mr. EISENBERG. How many, if any, square-cut edges did you notice? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. I found--according to my drawing--two machine-cut edges. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Would that indicate--well, do you form any opinion as +to, on the basis of that, as to the origin, possible origin, of the +tape? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. The origin of the tape as far as the manufacturer---- + +Mr. EISENBERG. What I am referring to is this: on the basis of that +would you draw an inference that the person had taken--whoever made +this bag--had taken two lengths of tape from a dispensing machine and +had subsequently torn it up into smaller strips, or do you think he had +one length of tape from a dispensing machine which he subsequently tore +up into smaller strips? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. From the ends that I could see, now I don't know whether +there were any ends underneath which I did not have a chance to look +at, I don't have anything in my notes, but from what I can see it would +appear he took a strip of tape, machine-cut from a dispenser, and used +that entire strip, thus using up both ends of the tape because we have +two machine-cut ends. + +Mr. EISENBERG. In other words, it would be a machine-cut strip at the +beginning of the tape which the person pulled out, left over from the +last cut? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. That is right. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And a machine-cut at the end, where the person himself +ripped the tape from the machine? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. That is correct. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And you infer that he then divided it into smaller +strips on the occasion when he made the bag? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes, sir; he pulled one strip, of course, he could have +pulled two or three strips, I don't know, but it would appear he took +one strip of tape and tore it into smaller pieces to be used on the bag. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did you notice any bulges or creases or folds apart from +the fold used in making of the bag? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. No; I didn't. I noticed that one end of the bag had been +torn. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, would you say that the absence of bulges would be +inconsistent with the carrying of a heavy object or an irregularly +shaped object in the bag? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Well, I don't believe I am qualified to answer that +question, because I actually am not an expert in paper. + +Mr. EISENBERG. All right. We will leave that to the questioned document +examiner and we will take it up with him. + +Did you notice anything else about the bag relating to its gross +physical characteristics and its shape, apart from any debris which you +may have found inside or outside the bag? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. No, sir; just an oblong homemade bag was the impression +I received from looking at it. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Do you think it was, if it was in fact a homemade bag, +do you think it was a well-made bag, Mr. Stombaugh? Did you form any +opinion as to that? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. In my opinion, just a personal opinion, the person was +aware as to how to make a bag, to seal the ends by folding both corners +in and then folding them flat. + +Mr. EISENBERG. You just demonstrated that both corners originally were +folded by the crease lines, and you folded it over again to show how it +was made? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes; this makes a neat and also a secure corner or end +to the bag, to prevent losing any of the contents. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Stombaugh, did you examine the outside of this paper +bag---- + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes; I did. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Exhibit 142 and also 626, to see if there were any +foreign items on the surface? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes; I did. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And what did you find? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. I found that the bag had previously been dusted for +latent fingerprints because I found traces of what appeared to be +fingerprint powder on it. + +I was using white gloves at the time I examined this and the gloves +became quite soiled from the fingerprint powder. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did you find anything else? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. No; nothing on the outside of the bag. + +Mr. EISENBERG. How did you conduct that examination, by the way? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. With a low-power microscope. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did you find any cotton fibers on the outside of the bag +at all, Mr. Stombaugh, white or colored? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. There were white cotton fibers on the outside but I +was using a pair of white cotton gloves, so these would be of no +value. White cotton is the most common thing we have in the way of +textiles, and therefore it just doesn't have sufficient individual +characteristics to be of value for comparison and identification +purposes. It is for this reason that we use gloves of this material. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And those fibers may have come from your white cotton +gloves? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes; they could very easily have come from my gloves +from handling the object with a pair of gloves on. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did you proceed to examine the inside of the paper bag +to see if there were any foreign objects? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes; I did. + +Mr. EISENBERG. What were your conclusions? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. I removed the debris from the inside of the bag by +opening the bag as best I could, and tapping it and knocking the +debris on to a small piece of white paper, and I found a very small +number of fibers. Upon examining these fibers, I found a single brown, +delustered, viscose fiber and several light-green cotton fibers from +the inside of the bag. I also found a minute particle of wood and a +single particle of a waxy substance. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did you attach any significance to the particle of wood, +Mr. Stombaugh? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. No; it was too minute for identification purposes. It +could have come from any surface, including the bag itself. Sometimes +all of the wood used in the manufacture of paper doesn't go into a +pulp, and this might be a very tiny such fragment. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did you examine the wood fragment? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. I looked at it microscopically. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did you attempt to compare it with the wood of the +Exhibit 139, which is a rifle? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes; the wood particle from the bag was too minute for +comparison purposes. There wasn't much you could do with it, it was +very small. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did you attach any significance to the body wax--or to +the wax, I should say? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. The wax particle I noticed, and I recalled having seen +wax on the shirt, Exhibit No. 673, so therefore I put that aside for a +spectrographic examination and comparison of the wax particle from the +inside of the bag with the wax from the shirt. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And what were the results? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. They were entirely different. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Was there any analysis made of the wax in the bag as to +its origin, do you know? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. It was examined by the spectrographic examiner and he +found it was just common wax. + +Mr. EISENBERG. When you say common wax, do you mean the kind you wax a +floor with? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. No; more like that which could have come from a candle, +candle wax. + +Mr. EISENBERG. What about the wax on the shirt as to origin? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. It was paraffin. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now you also said there were several fibers, Mr. +Stombaugh? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes, sir; I did. There was a single brown delustered +viscose fiber and several light-green cotton fibers. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did this single brown viscose fiber match the fibers +from the blanket, Exhibit 140? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes; it did. + +Mr. EISENBERG. In what characteristics were they matched? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. The fibers in the blanket had a large number of brown +viscose fibers, delustered and one fiber I found in the bag was also a +viscose fiber of the same type and color as seen under a low-powered +microscope. The delustering spots seen on the fiber were the same size, +and both fibers were approximately the same diameter. + +Mr. EISENBERG. How common is viscose, Mr. Stombaugh, as a fiber? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Viscose is fairly common. It is used in many types of +garments; it depends on the quality of the garment. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And this was delustered viscose, did you say? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. How common is delustered viscose? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. It is most common, I would say. It is more common than +lustrous. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Generally speaking, how many variations of diameter +would a delustered viscose come in? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. This is entirely up to the manufacturer. He can +make viscose any diameter he wants, and there could be hundreds of +variations in the diameter of viscose fibers. + +Mr. EISENBERG. But the fiber you found in the paper bag, 142, matched +the fibers you found in the Exhibit 140? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes, sir; but the viscose fibers in the blanket varied +in size also. + +Mr. EISENBERG. To what extent? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. There were 10 to 15 different diameters of viscose in +this blanket. It appeared to me as if the blanket was made of scrap +viscose, scrap fibers. + +Mr. EISENBERG. So that the diameters would be random? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. They were random; yes, sir. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, what about the color, was the color a match +between the fiber found in 140--in 142--and the fiber which is in the +composition of 140, the blanket? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes; the color matched some of the viscose fibers, the +brown viscose fibers in the blanket. Of course, these colors also +varied slightly but not to any great extent, not like the diameter. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Were there any other common characteristics between the +viscose fibers found in the blanket and the viscose fibers found in the +paper bag? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. The viscose fiber I found in the bag matched in all +observable microscopic characteristics some of the viscose fibers found +in the composition of this blanket. This would be the diameter, the +diameter of that same fiber would have the same size of delustering +markings, same shape, same form, and also same color. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, what about the green cotton fiber that you found +in the paper bag, Mr. Stombaugh, how did that compare with the green +cotton fiber--was it a green cotton fiber that your testimony mentioned? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes; there were several light green cotton fibers. + +Mr. EISENBERG. How did they compare with the green cotton fibers which +are contained in the composition of the blanket? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. These matched in all observable microscopic +characteristics. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And those were what? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. The color and the amount of twist of the cotton fibers +were the same as the color and twist found in these. Mainly the color +is what we go by on cotton. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Were they mercerized or unmercerized? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. They were not mercerized. + +Mr. EISENBERG. How common is cotton as a fiber, Mr. Stombaugh? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Cotton is the most common fiber used. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And what about nonmercerized cotton, as to commonness? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. You would find more unmercerized cotton in use than +mercerized, because to mercerize cotton is an added production factor +used in cotton. + +Mr. EISENBERG. How great a variation do you get in degree of twist? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. You are referring to between mercerized and un---- + +Mr. EISENBERG. No; within unmercerized cotton. + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. This would depend on the quality of the cotton and the +length of the cotton also. + +Mr. EISENBERG. But I mean as samples come across your desk in your +office, or as you read about them in books, is there a great variation +in twist or a small variation? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. It depends--there is a small variation but this would +depend on the type of cotton. There are different types of cotton, and +each is determined from the length of the individual cotton fiber. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Could you tell what kind of cotton you were dealing with +in the blanket? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. No; because here we are not dealing with a full-length +cotton fiber. We are dealing with a fragment of a single fiber. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, could you determine whether there was a variation +in the twist of the cotton fibers within the blanket itself as there +was, you say, in the diameter of the viscose fibers? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. The twist seemed to coincide with the twist found in the +cotton from the blanket. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Yes. But looking just to the blanket now for a second, +you said the brown viscose or the viscose generally in the blanket +itself varied as to diameter. Did the cotton in the blanket vary within +itself as to twist or was the cotton of a fairly uniform twist? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. No; it was fairly uniform twist. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And you said the fibers you found, the green cotton +fibers you found, in the bag were the same twist as the twist of the +cottons which composed the blanket? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. That is correct. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And just to tie this into the questions I was asking a +few seconds ago, would this degree of twist be significant, that is +can you determine under the microscope 4 different kinds of degrees +of twist or 20--how many different degrees of twist can you determine +under a microscope, just approximately? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Are you referring to the same type of cotton---- + +Mr. EISENBERG. Well, when you get a piece of cotton? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Or cotton as a whole? + +Mr. EISENBERG. When you get a piece of cotton under the microscope and +you don't know what type it is? I am referring to cotton as a whole. + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. I see. The degree of twist could be--now if we are +dealing with fresh cotton, cotton running right from the plant, then +the degree of twist, this varies, and this could be used in the +identification of the type of cotton. But in the manufacturing process +quite frequently when the cotton is spun into yarns then this twist is +affected. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Well, at this point I am not interested in determining +the type of cotton. What I am interested in is determining how +significant the degree of twist is as an identifying factor. + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. I would say no significance at all as far as the sole +identifying characteristic goes, whether or not this cotton of this +cotton has the same twist. The twist we use is for identification +purposes only, supplementing other identifying characteristics. + +Mr . EISENBERG. That is the only purpose I am interested in. + +Mr . STOMBAUGH. Yes; that is the only purpose. + +Mr . EISENBERG. But in getting to that, how valuable is it for +identification purposes? I am curious as to how many--how much a +twist can vary. As you pick up a random fiber, and put it under your +microscope, I am interested in how much the twist can vary. For +example, if there are only two possibilities, then it isn't too helpful +that you get a match in twist, but if there are great variations in +twist in cotton fibers as they come under your microscope, it would be +helpful in making your identification. + +Mr . STOMBAUGH. I see what you are getting at. There are great +variations. Sometimes in a cotton fiber, the twist will be rather far +apart. Other times it will be rather close together. This piece---- + +Mr. EISENBERG. So that the fibers, the cotton fibers, to begin with, +matched in twist, that is, the cotton fibers you found in the paper bag +matched the twist of the ones that are contained in the blanket, and +you said they also matched in color? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes, sir. + +Mr. EISENBERG. I would like to ask you the same question as to color +that I asked you as to twist. How many different shades do you think +you can distinguish under the microscope in a green cotton? Would +the range be just 2 or 3 different shades, or do you think you could +distinguish between 20 or 30 different types of green cotton if you +laid them next to each other under the microscope? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. No; the range in green cotton fibers, for that matter in +any color, is tremendous. This could go to 50 sometimes 100 different +shades which you can distinguish under a microscope. To the naked +eye, it would look as if it is just green. But you could take, say +five different fabrics of the same type that have been dyed exactly +the same color or rather you think they are the same shade, and put +the individual fibers under the microscope and there will be a big +difference noted in shades. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now were the green cotton fibers in the blanket uniform +as to shade between themselves? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. No; these varied. + +Mr. EISENBERG. To what extent? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. They go from a green to a very pale green. + +Mr. EISENBERG. So that the---- + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Might be seven or eight different shades. + +Mr. EISENBERG. So when you say there is a match, you mean the green +cotton fibers you found in the paper bag were within the spectrum +of shades that are laid out in the green cotton fibers from the +blanket--is that correct? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. No. I forget how many different shades of green I found +in this blanket. Under the circumstances, I considered the exact +number of no particular significance. But we will say it might be +possibly eight different separate shades, and the fibers I found from +the blanket matched some of these shades. Not all of them; but there +might be a medium-green fiber that I found in the bag, which I matched +with a medium-green fiber from this blanket. It might have been one +that had a yellowish-green tinge to it, which I also matched with the +yellowish-green tinged cotton fibers from the blanket. + +So unless the colors match absolutely, there is no match. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Do you recall how many green cotton fibers you found in +the paper bag? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. I have here in my notes "several"-- + +Mr. EISENBERG. Yes? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. I have here in my notes "several light green cotton +fibers," which would be approximately two or three. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Do you recall whether they represented two or three +different shades? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes; they were all different from each other but each +matched the cotton fibers in the blanket. + +Mr. EISENBERG. So you had two or three cotton fibers of two or three +shades of green in the bag, and they matched against these two or three +of the seven or eight shades of green cotton which were in the blanket, +is that a correct recapitulation? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And you say there are 50 to 100--approximately--green +shades of cotton that can be distinguished under the microscope? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes; I would say that is true. This would vary from dark +green, of course, all the way up to light-pale green. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did you find anything else within the bag, Mr. Stombaugh? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. No, sir; that is all I found inside the bag. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, what do you think the degree of probability is, if +you can form an opinion, that the fibers from the bag, fibers in the +bag, ultimately came from the blanket? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. When you get into mathematical probabilities, it is +something I stay away from, since in general there are too many unknown +factors. All I would say here is that it is possible that these fibers +could have come from this blanket, because this blanket is composed +of brown and green woolen fibers, brown and green delustered viscose +fibers, and brown and green cotton fibers. + +Now these 3 different types of fibers have 6 different general colors, +and if we would multiply that, say by a minimum of 5 different shades +of each so you would have 30 different shades you are looking for, and +3 different types of fibers. Here we have only found 1 brown viscose +fiber, and 2 or 3 light green cotton fibers. We found no brown cotton +fibers, no green viscose fibers, and no woolen fibers. + +So if I had found all of these then I would have been able to say these +fibers probably had come from this blanket. But since I found so few, +then I would say the possibility exists, these fibers could have come +from this blanket. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, let me ask you a hypothetical question, Mr. +Stombaugh. First, I hand you Commission Exhibit 139, which consists of +a rifle found on the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository +Building, and I ask you, if the rifle had lain in the blanket, which +is 140, and were then put inside the bag, 142, could it have picked up +fibers from the blanket and transferred them to the bag? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Are there any further questions as to the blanket? + +Mr. DULLES. Do you have any, Mr. Murray? + +Mr. MURRAY. I have none, Mr. Dulles. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Do you recognize Exhibit 139? Are you familiar with that? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes; I am. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did you examine that in the laboratory? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes; I did. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Do you know when you made that examination? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. On the morning of November 23, 1963. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Is your mark on it? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes, sir; here is my mark. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Which consists of your initials? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. My initials, and the date 11-23-63. Do you mind if I +check to see if this is unloaded? + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did you examine the rifle to determine whether it +contained on its surface or crevices any hair or other debris? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes; I did. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Can you tell us how you made that examination? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes, sir. The gun was to be treated for latent +fingerprints also, so I wore a pair of white cotton gloves to protect +any latents that might be present on the gun. I placed the gun under +a low-powered microscope and examined the gun from the end of the +barrel to the end of the stock, removing what fibers I could find from +crevices adhering to the gun. + +I noticed immediately upon receiving the gun that this gun had been +dusted for latent fingerprints prior to my receiving it. Latent +fingerprint powder was all over the gun; it was pretty well dusted +off, and at the time I noted to myself that I doubted very much if +there would be any fibers adhering to the outside of this gun--I +possibly might find some in a crevice some place--because when the +latent fingerprint man dusted this gun, apparently in Dallas, they use +a little brush to dust with they would have dusted any fibers off the +gun at the same time; so this I noted before I ever started to really +examine the gun. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Were you unhappy at all about that? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. I was; however, it is not uncommon for fingerprint +processing to be given priority consideration. They wanted to know +whether or not the gun contained any fibers to show that it had been +stored in this blanket, and with all the obstructions and the crevices +on the metal parts of this gun, ordinarily a fiber would adhere pretty +well, unless you take a brush and brush it off, and then you brush it +on the floor and it is lost. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Who was "they," you said "they" wanted to know? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Well, this is our Dallas office. They sent the gun in +wanting to know this fact. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Proceed. + +Mr. DULLES. It was dusted by the Dallas police, was it, first? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. I don't know who dusted it. + +Mr. EISENBERG. For the record, I believe that will be shown later that +it was dusted by Dallas police. + +As far as you know, did it come into your office, into your laboratory +before it went to the identification division, latent fingerprint +section? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes; I received this gun from Special Agent Vincent +Drain of the Dallas FBI office. It was crated very well. I opened the +crate myself and put my initials on the gun and at that time I noted it +had been dusted for latent prints. + +So I proceeded to pick off what fibers were left from the small +crevices and small grease deposits which were left on the gun. + +At this point of the butt plate, the end of the stock---- + +Mr. EISENBERG. Let's get that a little more specific if we can. Can you +point to that again? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. In this area, the butt plate of the stock, this is a +metal butt plate, you can see the jagged edge on it. + +Mr. EISENBERG. That is on the left side of the butt plate? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. It is on the left side; yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. In approximately in the middle there is a jagged edge, +jagged inside edge, where the butt plate comes into contact with the +wood, is that what you are referring to? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes; there is a jagged edge there. This area right here, +according to my notes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Yes. + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. I found a tiny tuft of fibers which had caught on that +jagged edge, and then when the individual who dusted this dusted them, +he just folded them down very neatly into the little crevice there, +and they stayed. These I removed and put on a glass microscope slide, +and marked this particular slide "No. 2," because this little group of +fibers--little tuft of fibers, appeared to be fresh. + +The fibers on the rest of the gun were either adhering to a greasy, +oily deposit or jammed into a crevice and were very dirty and +apparently very old. + +You can look at a fiber and tell whether it has been beaten around or +exposed much. These appeared to be fairly fresh. + +Mr. EISENBERG. "These" being the ones that you found in the butt plate +crevice? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes; adhering to this small jagged edge. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Before we get to those, were there any other fibers of +value on the rest of the Exhibit 139? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. No; the other fibers I cleaned up, removed the grease +and examined them but they were of no value. They were pretty well +fragmented. + +Mr. EISENBERG. You could not make a determination as to their nature? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. I could tell what type they were. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Meaning textile type? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes; such as wool, cotton, what-have-you, but the grease +and the dirt had changed the colors which ruined the characteristics +for comparison purposes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Could you tell whether they were old or new? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. They all appeared old. + +Mr. EISENBERG. What about---- + +Mr. DULLES. What do you mean by old, 2 or 3 months old, 2 or 3 weeks +old? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Well, a length of time, I would say that in excess of a +month or 2 months. + +Mr. DULLES. In that area? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. In that area or longer. They weren't recently put in +there. Let's say that. + +Mr. EISENBERG. What about the grease, did you attempt to examine the +grease? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. No. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Why was that? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. I could see no need of it at that time. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Let's return then to the fibers which you referred to as +being fresh, which you said you found in the crevice of the butt plate, +and I will ask Mr. Dulles' question in reverse: What do you mean by +fresh, why do you call these fresh? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. In the first place, this was just a small tuft. They +were adhering to the gun on a small jagged edge. In other words, the +gun had caught on a piece of fabric and pulled these fibers loose. They +were clean, they had good color to them, there was no grease on them +and they were not fragmented. They looked as if they had just been +picked up. They were folded very neatly down in the crevice. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Were these fibers in a position where they could have +easily been knocked off by rough use? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. No; they were adhering to the edge rather tightly. + +Mr. EISENBERG. In the crevice? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Well, it had the jagged edge sticking up and the fibers +were folded around it and resting in the crevice. + +Mr. DULLES. I think you testified, though, that might have been done in +part by the dusting? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes, sir; I believe when the fingerprintman dusted it he +probably ran his brush along the metal portion here. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Of the butt plate? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Of the butt plate, and at the time the brush folded +these down into the crevice. + +Mr. EISENBERG. What led you to the particular conclusion that they had +been folded into the crevice by the dusting? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Because of the presence of fingerprint powder being down +in and through the crevice here. It looked as if it had been dusted +with a brush. You could make out the bristlemarks of the brush itself. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now assuming your conclusion is accurate that they were +dusted into the crevice, and had not been in the crevice originally but +had merely adhered to the jagged edge, how much--how rough a handling +would it have taken to have gotten them loose from that jagged edge? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Well, I would imagine if one took a brush and started +brushing pretty hard these would have worked loose and come out. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Would the use of the weapon itself have jarred them +loose? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. I doubt it. I doubt it. + +Mr. EISENBERG. I am talking now about the jagged edge position, and not +the crevice position. + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. You mean breaking them loose? They were adhering to the +jagged edge. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Yes. + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. It might, of course--there are a lot of factors here you +don't know, but they were adhering pretty tightly to the gun. I believe +through ordinary handling of the gun eventually they would have worked +loose and fallen off. + +Mr. EISENBERG. What I can't understand is, when you are talking about +the handling of the gun are you talking about the position in which you +found them, or are you talking about the position which you deduced +they were in before you found them brushed into the crevice? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Well, both. The position I found them in. I had to take +a pair of tweezers and work them out. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Yes? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. And after I had the fibers lifted up which could have +been the original position they were in, then I had to pull them off. +They were wrapped around rather snugly to the sharp edge. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, returning once more to this question of freshness. +Would you say they had been placed there within 1 hour, or 1 day, or 1 +week of the time when you received the rifle or longer? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. I couldn't say in that regard to any period of time. +I refer, by saying they appeared fresh, to the fact that the other +fibers I removed from this gun were greasy, mashed, and broken, where +these were fairly good long fibers. They were not dirty, with the +exception of a little bit of fingerprint powder on them which I cleaned +off, and the color was good. They were in good shape, not fragmented. +They could conceivably have been put on 10 years ago and then the gun +put aside and remain the same. Dust would have settled on them, would +have changed their color a little bit, but as far as when they got on +the gun, I wouldn't be able to say. This would just be speculation on +my part. + +Mr. EISENBERG. In other words, you concluded they were fresh--well, +you said you thought they were fresh, Mr. Stombaugh, and I don't quite +understand now whether you seem to be backing off a little from that? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. No; I am not trying to do that. I am trying to avoid a +specific time element, since there are other factors which may enter. I +couldn't--this is something that I won't even attempt to do, just say +this was on here for 1 hour or 10 minutes, something like that. + +But I would say these fibers were put on there in the recent past for +this reason. If they had been put on there say 3, 4, 5 weeks or so ago, +and the gun used every day, these fibers would have come off. + +Am I making myself a little more clear? + +Mr. EISENBERG. Yes; you are making yourself clear; yes. + +Now, looking at Exhibit 139, the weapon, and Exhibit 140, the blanket, +do you think it is possible that the bulge you described before, which +you marked "C," might have been caused by some component part of 139, +the rifle? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes. At the time I found the hump in the blanket which I +believed you have marked point C. + +Mr. EISENBERG. That is point C on the replica piece of paper you have +folded up, marked Exhibit 663? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. I checked the telescopic sight on Exhibit 139, and noted +that the approximate length and general shape of the scope---- + +Mr. DULLES. Exhibit 139 being the blanket? + +Mr. EISENBERG. Being the rifle. + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Were approximately the same so far as length and shape +went, and at the time I thought to myself it is quite possible the hump +in the blanket could have been made by that telescopic sight. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did you attempt to match up the rifle into the blanket +to see if that could be true? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. No; I didn't want to handle the rifle any more than +possible. I took a ruler and measured the scope and then compared the +measurement with the hump in the blanket and it was approximately the +same. + +Mr. EISENBERG. What about the relationship, the spatial relationship +of the scope to the end of the gun, as compared with the spatial +relationship of the hump in the blanket to the end of the blanket? Were +those matching? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. From the way the blanket was folded at the time, and +from measuring this, and not using the gun itself and putting it in +contact with the blanket, just from measurements, I determined it is +possible that the scope could have made the hump. In other words, the +gun could have fitted in there. But I couldn't be absolutely certain on +any of this. This is just from measurements. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And visual comparison? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. And visual comparison; yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Is there any further information you would like to +give us concerning your examinations of the paper bag, the rifle, the +blanket, or the shirt which we have discussed this morning? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Just the fibers I removed. + +Mr. DULLES. Are you going to go into the relationship of the fibers +that were found in the jagged edge? + +Mr. EISENBERG. Yes. Mr. Stombaugh, did you attempt to determine the +origin of the fibers which were caught in the butt plate of the rifle? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes, sir; I did. I tried to match these fibers with the +fibers in the blanket, and found that they had not originated from the +blanket, because the cotton fibers were of entirely different colors. +So I happened to think of the shirt and I made a known sample of the +shirt fibers. + +Mr. EISENBERG. What does that mean? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. I removed fibers from the shirt to determine the +composition of it and also the colors. I found that the shirt was +composed of dark-blue, grayish-black, and orangish-yellow cotton +fibers, and that these were the same shades of fibers I had found on +the butt plate of the gun. + +Mr. DULLES. Did you find all three shades? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. All three shades; yes, sir. + +Mr. EISENBERG. All three shades were found on the fragments that were +found in the butt of the gun? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Have you made photographs showing these, color +photographs showing these? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes, sir. Color photographs are very difficult to make +microscopically because the color isn't always identical to what you +see in the microscope. So these colors are slightly off. + +Mr. EISENBERG. You have shown a chart captioned "Microphotograph +Showing Match Between Orange-Yellow Cotton Fibers From Butt Plate of +Assassination Rifle and Orange-Yellow Cotton Fibers From Oswald's +Shirt." Did you take this photograph? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. No; it was taken under my supervision. + +Mr. EISENBERG. It was taken under your supervision. + +Mr. Chairman, may I submit this as 674. + +Mr. DULLES. It will be admitted, 674. + +(The item referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 674, and was +received in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. What is the magnification? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. I believe this was 400 also. I am not certain of this, +because the shot itself has also been enlarged. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now you were discussing the reproduction of the color in +the photomicrograph? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes, sir. These are the orangish-yellow fibers. +The color is not exactly the same as what one would see under the +microscope. + +However, you can see that the fibers on both sides, namely, the fiber +from the rifle here, and this---- + +Mr. DULLES. On the right-hand side---- + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. On the right-hand side. + +Mr. DULLES. Of Exhibit 674? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. And the fibers from the shirt, which are on the +left-hand side of Exhibit 674, do match. The colors are the same and +also, we find the same twist in the fiber. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, was the orange-yellow cotton fiber--were the +orange-yellow cotton fibers in the shirt of a uniform shade? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes; they were all of a uniform shade. It was what we +would call a uniform dye job. + +Mr. EISENBERG. What about the twist? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. The twist was about normal. These, you can see here. + +Mr. EISENBERG. You are pointing to the right-hand side and left-hand +side of 674? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. You can see the twist to these fibers. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did they have a uniform twist? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Uniform. + +Mr. EISENBERG. So that the match was identical as to twist and shade, +and the fibers in the shirt were uniform in themselves as to these two +characteristics, is that correct? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes; that is correct. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did you take a photograph of the gray-black cotton +fibers? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. These are the gray-black cotton fibers and the color +didn't come out well on these in this instance because of time and +color process limitations. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Just a second. You have a chart here--a +photomicrograph--captioned "Microphotograph Showing Match Between +Gray-Black Cotton Fibers From Butt Plate of Assassination Rifle, etc. +and Gray-Black Cotton Fibers From Oswald's Shirt." + +Did you take these photographs or were they taken under your +supervision? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Under my supervision. + +Mr. EISENBERG. May I have this admitted as 675? + +Mr. DULLES. 675, it will be admitted. + +(The item referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 675, and +received in evidence.) + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. The same would apply to Exhibit 675 as to 674, with the +exception of the color. The color on these is much darker and we tried +up to last night to duplicate the exact color and this is the best I +could come up with under the time and color process limitations. It +took us about 4 hours to make a photograph such as this. + +Mr. EISENBERG. There is an apparent match of colors in the +photograph---- + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. But there is one---- + +Mr. EISENBERG. I say, there is an apparent match in photographs, in +color, or is that just my eyes deceiving me? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. This one appears to be slightly lighter than this shade. + +Mr. EISENBERG. I see. + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. But actually they are both a gray black, almost black in +color. + +Mr. EISENBERG. But under the microscope they were identical, and a +different shade than what we see in Exhibit 675? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. That is correct. + +Mr. EISENBERG. In all these cases did you make your determination of +color and match under the microscope, or by use of the photographs? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Under the microscope. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And these are illustrative and prepared for the +Commission's use? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes, sir. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, you have a chart of photomicrograph captioned +"Match Between Dark Blue Cotton Fibers From Butt Plate of Assassination +Rifle, etc." Did you prepare these photographs or were they prepared +under your supervision? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Under my supervision. + +Mr. EISENBERG. May I have these received as Exhibit 676? + +Mr. DULLES. 676. + +(The item referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 676, and was +received in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. What is the magnification of 675 and 676, by the way? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. All of these were made at approximately 400 diameters. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did you find a color match here? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes; the color match of the dark blue cotton fibers +shows rather well in this photograph, Exhibit 676. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now there is also a violet-colored fiber running through +the right-hand side of 676. + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes, sir; I asked the photographer about this when he +developed this and I said, "Why did we get this, this is not in the +slide at all," and he said that is one of the orange fibers. They use +different techniques in bringing out the blue and the yellow-orange in +a photomicrograph. + +Mr. DULLES. The shades are the fiber of the blanket? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. No; this shade in the photograph is different from what +that fiber actually is. It is in the development process. I am not too +familiar with color photography. There is an art to it. However, I do +know that there are times and technical limitations on the accuracy of +color reproductions. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Stombaugh, were the shades in--were the shades of +the dark blue cotton fibers uniform throughout the shirt which is +pictured in Commission Exhibit 673? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. No sir; the dark blue fibers had some lighter shades and +some slightly darker shades. + +Mr. EISENBERG. About how many different shades? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. There were only about three in this. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Do you recall how many dark blue fibers you got from the +butt plate? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. I believe a total of six or seven fibers from the butt +plate and three of them are blue fibers and all matched. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Do you recall whether they were one or more shades? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Two shades. + +Mr. EISENBERG. So that two of the fibers were two different shades of +blue? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And they matched two different shades of blue in the +shirt out of a total of three different shades of blue? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. That is correct. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And you testified before there were about 50 to 100 +ranges of shade of green cotton. What about the ranges in shades of +blue cotton? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. The same would apply to blue cotton. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And the ranges in shades of orange yellow cotton? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. The orange-yellow cotton I have here---- + +Mr. EISENBERG. 674. + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. This is a shade of a yellow cotton fiber, it appears +orange yellow under a microscope. Sometimes you get greenish yellow. +These will vary, the orange-yellow shade itself might be only two +variations in orange yellow, but in a greenish yellow it might be 50 to +100. + +Mr. EISENBERG. There was a gray-black cotton fiber in the shirt. Were +they uniform between themselves as to color? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes; these were uniform. + +Mr. EISENBERG. How many shades of gray, in the gray-black area, can you +distinguish? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. The gray-black in itself would be similar to the +orange-yellow and would be possibly two or three. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And in the black taken as a broader---- + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Black taken in itself would go from, all the way from, +very grayish-light gray all the way down to dense black. + +Mr. EISENBERG. How many different shades can you distinguish? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Black is different. There are only about 25 or 30 +shades, I would say, in black. + +Mr. EISENBERG. So you identified the fibers you found on the butt plate +as matching the fibers you found in the shirt, not only as to color but +as to shades within those colors, out of a range going from 25 in the +gray-black or black area to 50 to 100 in the yellow and blue areas? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. That is correct. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And degrees of twist were all the same? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. They were the same. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Any other characteristics? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Just type of fibers, they were all cotton fibers. + +Mr. EISENBERG. On the basis of these examinations, did you draw a +conclusion as to the probability of the cotton fibers found in the butt +plate having come from the shirt pictured in Exhibit 673? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes, sir; it was my opinion that these fibers could +easily have come from the shirt. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Could you go into that in a little more detail, Mr. +Stombaugh? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes. Mainly because the fibers or the shirt is composed +of point one, cotton, and point two, three basic colors. I found all +three colors together on the gun. + +Now if the shirt had been composed of 10 or 15 different colors and +types of fibers and I only had found 3 of them, then I would feel that +I had not found enough, but I found fibers on the gun which I could +match with the fibers composing this shirt, so I feel the fibers could +easily have come from the shirt. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Stombaugh, I asked you a hypothetical question +before concerning whether the rifle could have been a mechanism for +transferring fibers from the blanket into the paper bag, and as I +recall you said it could have. + +Now, is it inconsistent with that answer that no fibers were found on +the gun which matched the fibers in the blanket? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. No; because the gun was dusted for fingerprints and any +fibers that were loosely adhering to it could have been dusted off. + +The only reason, I feel, that these fibers remained on the butt plate +is because they were pulled from the fabric by the jagged edge and +adhered to the gun and then the fingerprint examiner with his brush, I +feel, when brushing and dusting this butt plate, stroked them down into +that crevice where they couldn't be knocked off. + +In time these fibers would have undoubtedly become dislodged and fallen +off the gun. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Stombaugh, is there anything you would like to add +to your testimony? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. No, sir; I can think of nothing else. + +Mr. DULLES. And you found no other pieces of fabric or other foreign +material on the gun? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Nothing that I could associate with either the blanket +or the shirt. I found---- + +Mr. DULLES. Or the paper bag? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Or the paper bag; no, sir. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Just one further question. You said something like, "It +was possible the fibers could have come from the shirt." Could you +estimate the degree of probability that the fibers came from the shirt, +the fibers in the butt plate? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. Well, this is difficult because we don't know how many +different shirts were made out of this same type of fabric, or for that +matter how many identical shirts are in existence. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Stombaugh, I gather that, and correct me if I am +wrong, that in your area as opposed to the fingerprint area, you prefer +to present the facts rather than draw conclusions as to probabilities, +is that correct? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. That is correct. I have been asked this question many +times. There are some experts who will say well, the chances are 1 in +1,000, this, that, and the other, and everyone who had said that and +been brought to our attention we have been able to prove them wrong, +insofar as application to our fiber problems is concerned. + +Mr. EISENBERG. You mean prove them wrong in terms of their mathematics? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. There is just no way at this time to be able to +positively state that a particular small group of fibers came from +a particular source, because there just aren't enough microscopic +characteristics present in these fibers. + +We cannot say, "Yes, these fibers came from this shirt to the exclusion +of all other shirts." + +Mr. EISENBERG. We appreciate your conservatism, but the Commission, +of course, has to make an estimate, and what I am trying to find out +is whether your conservatism, whether your conclusions, reflect the +inability to draw mathematical determinations or conclusions, or +reflect your own doubts? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. No. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Can you tell us which that is? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. There is no doubt in my mind that these fibers could +have come from this shirt. There is no way, however, to eliminate the +possibility of the fibers having come from another identical shirt. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, in your mind what do you feel about the origin of +the fibers you found in the bag? + +Mr. STOMBAUGH. I didn't find enough fibers in the bag to form an +opinion on those. + +Now if I would have found, say 15 or 20 fibers and all 15 or 20 matched +the fibers from the blanket, then I could say, "Yes, I feel that these +very easily could have come from the blanket." But I didn't. I only +found two of the many types. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Okay. I have no further questions. + +Mr. DULLES. Do you have any further questions? + +Mr. MURRAY. No; I have no further questions. + +Mr. DULLES. I have no further questions. + +Thank you, Mr. Stombaugh, we appreciate your coming. + + +TESTIMONY OF JAMES C. CADIGAN + +Mr. DULLES. Would you mind standing and raising your right hand? + +Do you swear the testimony you give before the Commission is the truth, +the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. DULLES. Thank you. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cadigan, can you state your full name and position? + +Mr. CADIGAN. James C. Cadigan, special agent of the FBI, assigned as an +examiner of questioned documents in the laboratory here in Washington. + +Mr. EISENBERG. What is your education, Mr. Cadigan? + +Mr. CADIGAN. I have a Master of Science degree from Boston College in +Newton, Mass. Upon being appointed in the FBI, I was given on-the-job +training, which consisted of working with various examiners, conducting +experiments, reading books, attending lectures, and so forth. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cadigan, how long have you been in the questioned +document field? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Twenty-three and a half years. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And during that time have you examined papers to +determine their possible origin? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Can you estimate the number of such examinations you +have conducted? + +Mr. CADIGAN. No; not with any degree of accuracy, except many, many +specimens, many, many comparisons. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Have you testified on that subject in court? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Many times? + +Mr. CADIGAN. I won't say many, no; because most of the testimony I have +given in court relates to other phases of the work. Strictly on paper, +I would say not more than two or three times. + +Mr. EISENBERG. But you have made more than two or three examinations of +paper? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Oh, yes; far more. + +Mr. DULLES. Running into the hundreds and thousands? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, may I have this witness admitted as an +expert witness? + +Mr. DULLES. He shall be admitted as an expert on this subject. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cadigan, I hand you an object made of paper, +Commission Exhibit 142, also known as Commission Exhibit 626, and ask +you if you are familiar with this object? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Yes; I am. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And did you examine this object, this paper bag, to +determine its origin, possible origin? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Can you tell us how you conducted that examination? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Yes. + +I first saw this paper bag on November 23, 1963, in the FBI laboratory, +along with the sample of paper and tape from the Texas School Book +Depository obtained November 22, 1963, which is FBI Exhibit D-1. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Is that the sample that you are referring to, that you +are holding in your hand? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And that is marked, as you said, "Paper sample from +first floor Texas School Book Depository" and has certain other +markings including the words "shipping department"? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. May I have this admitted, Mr. Chairman? + +Mr. DULLES. That may be admitted. + +Mr. EISENBERG. That will be No. 677. + +Mr. DULLES. 677 may be admitted. + +(Commission Exhibit No. 677 was marked, and received in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did you find out from precisely what portion of the +Texas School Book Depository Building this was obtained, Mr. Cadigan? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Yes; this comes from the first floor, main floor of the +Texas School Book Depository, referred to as the shipping room, the +whole floor. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, did you--who supplied you with this sample, this +Exhibit 677? + +Mr. CADIGAN. This exhibit was brought to the laboratory by Special +Agent Drain of our Dallas office, who brought all of this evidence in +for examination. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did you attempt to determine whether Exhibit 142 had the +same origin as the paper in Exhibit 677, or might have had the same +origin? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Yes; I examined the two papers--do you wish me to state my +opinion? + +Mr. EISENBERG. Yes; please. + +Mr. CADIGAN. Well, initially, I was requested to compare the two papers +to see if they could have originated from the same source. I first +measured the paper and the tape samples. Then I looked at them visually +by natural light, then incident light and transmitted light. + +Mr. EISENBERG. What do you mean by transmitted light? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Well, light coming right on through the paper. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Then---- + +Mr. DULLES. Natural light? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Yes; natural light. + +Mr. DULLES. As distinct from electric light? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Both. In the room I am in you can go over to the window +for natural light and use ceiling light for artificial light which has +a little different property than the outside light. + +Mr. DULLES. Yes. + +Mr. CADIGAN. I looked at the papers under various lighting +conditions---- + +Mr. EISENBERG. Excuse me a minute, Mr. Cadigan, by "transmitted light" +you mean the light transmitted when you hold the object between the +light source and your own eyes? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Yes; then I put it under the microscope, and again looked +at it from the standpoint of the surface, paper structure, the color, +any imperfections. I further noted that on both of the tapes---- + +Mr. EISENBERG. 142 is the paper bag. + +Mr. CADIGAN. On 142 and on the tape on 677 there were a series of marks +right down about the center of the tape. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Can you see those visually with the unaided eye, or only +under a microscope? + +Mr. CADIGAN. I can see them visually. The microscope makes it look +clearer. + +Mr. DULLES. What are you pointing to now? + +Mr. EISENBERG. This line here. + +Mr. DULLES. Where is this? + +Mr. CADIGAN. These are a series of lines running right here about a +half-inch high, they are very closely spaced. + +Mr. DULLES. Oh, yes; these are perpendicular lines. + +Mr. CADIGAN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. DULLES. Would you like to see these, Mr. Murray? + +Mr. MURRAY. Yes; thank you. + +Mr. DULLES. They are quite clear, about a tenth of an inch apart or +less than that. + +Mr. CADIGAN. Well, actually they are 24-1/2 spaces per inch, which +would be about 25 lines per inch. + +Mr. MURRAY. Pockmarks? + +Mr. CADIGAN. A series of little short marks right close together. + +Mr. MURRAY. Oh, yes. + +Mr. DULLES. And they run along about how far on this particular exhibit? + +Mr. CADIGAN. They run the whole length of the tape. + +Mr. MURRAY. A comb design. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Comb in the sense that it is a series of---- + +Mr. MURRAY. Comb or rake. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Could you circle that on 677, and mark the portion "A"? +Can you still make out the lines on Exhibit 640? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Oh, yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Could you circle a portion of the lines on 640 and mark +it--I am sorry, that is 142. + +Mr. CADIGAN. I have marked it. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Dulles, would you care to look at it? + +Mr. DULLES. And--oh, yes--and they go over a good deal further than +your circle? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. DULLES. They run right across. + +Mr. CADIGAN. I might explain that these are made by a wheel in the +paper-tape dispenser. [Referring to an object in the room.] It is +not quite this size, but it is similar to this and it has horizontal +markings running all around the wheel. + +As you pull the operating handle that pulls the paper tape from the +roll through the machine and over the wetting brush, the wheel, in the +process leaves these markings on the tape. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Excuse me, Mr. Cadigan, would this be in the type +of tape dispenser which is operated not merely by a handle--by a +handpull--to the tape from the dispenser, but is operated--that is +operated by a lever? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Yes; a lever, a handle. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And a given quantity of tape is dispensed, which you can +cut off or not as you choose--if you want to, you can pull some more +tape and cut it off, is that correct? + +Mr. CADIGAN. That is correct. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And this wheel, as I understand it, when you pull the +lever this wheel forces the paper out? + +Mr. CADIGAN. It turns, and it is really pulling the paper from the roll +and pushing it out from the slot. + +Mr. EISENBERG. That has a slight knurl which grasps the paper? + +Mr. CADIGAN. It has a slight ridge all around it which is the cause of +these marks on the paper tape. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Okay. + +Mr. DULLES. Is that a defect in the mark or a peculiar---- + +Mr. CADIGAN. Oh, no; it is designed that way. Those little, you might +say, in effect, teeth, go into the paper and pull it through smoothly. + +Mr. EISENBERG. If I went into Woolworths and bought a roll of gummed +tape, would it have those marks on it? + +Mr. CADIGAN. No. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Because it only gets the marks when you put it in the +dispensing machine that you have in commercial establishments? + +Mr. CADIGAN. That is correct. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Would it be common to have this type of dispensing +machine in a home, by the way? + +Mr. CADIGAN. I doubt very much that you would find it in a home. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, within a commercial establishment, are there more +than one type of dispensing machines? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Oh, yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Are there types that won't produce these lines at all? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Yes. I might point out, too, that the number of lines +per inch will vary depending on the diameter of that wheel. In this +particular instance I found that there were 24-1/2 spaces, which would +be 25 lines per inch, on both. + +Mr. EISENBERG. I believe that is 142, the bag you are handling, and +677, the sample? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Yes; the markings on the manila tape in both 142 and 677 +were the same. Now, at that time I also had---- + +Mr. DULLES. Could we get just before you continue there, would you +identify what 142 is and 677 is? + +Mr. EISENBERG. 142 is an apparently homemade paper bag which was found +in the southeast corner of the sixth floor of the TSBD following the +assassination, and which, for the record, is a bag which may have +been used to carry this rifle, 139, which was used to commit the +assassination. 677 is a sample of paper and tape--and parenthetically, +tape was used in the construction of 142--677 is a sample of paper and +tape obtained from the Texas School Book Depository on November 22, +1963, that is, the very day of the assassination. + +Mr. DULLES. Obtained by whom, by the FBI? + +Mr. CADIGAN. This was obtained by the Dallas police. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And forwarded to you by the Dallas---- + +Mr. CADIGAN. By the Dallas police through our Dallas office. + +Mr. DULLES. It was obtained after the assassination on that date? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Yes, sir; the night of November 22. + +At the same time, on November 23, we had an agent come in from Chicago +with samples of paper from Klein's, with the possibility, it was +thought, that the paper sack---- + +Mr. DULLES. Identify Klein's just for the record. + +Mr. CADIGAN. Klein's Sporting Goods Store in Chicago, from which the +Italian rifle was bought. + +Mr. EISENBERG. That is Exhibit 139? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Exhibit 139. The agent brought in these paper samples from +Klein's for comparison purposes, and the paper tape, this manila gummed +tape, had these knurl markings measuring 30 per inch. + +Mr. EISENBERG. That is the gummed tape you obtained from Klein's? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Yes. It was not identical with this, but merely, you might +say, illustrate that the markings will differ depending on the wheel, +and if your wheel has 30 lines per inch and your other sample is 24 +or 25 lines per inch, you know they didn't come from the same tape +dispenser. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cadigan, do these wheels differ as to their diameter +across the bearing surface, the length across the rolling knurled +surface? + +Mr. CADIGAN. I imagine there would be a difference. + +I have made no precise measurement but I imagine they vary within +tolerances of a quarter- or half-inch in width. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Would the length of the lines produced on 142 be the +same--the paper bag--the same as the length of the lines produced on +677? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Yes. + +Mr. DULLES. At what period in connection with the manufacture of the +paper are those lines put on or---- + +Mr. CADIGAN. These are put on after the paper is complete. + +Mr. DULLES. After paper is completely manufactured? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Yes, sir; that is right. + +Mr. DULLES. And put on by the dispensing machine? + +Mr. CADIGAN. No; the individual buys gummed tape in rolls. + +Mr. DULLES. Yes. + +Mr. CADIGAN. Three-inch rolls or inch-and-a-half rolls. He then puts it +on a tape-dispensing machine. + +Mr. DULLES. In his particular organization? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Yes; or his factory or shipping department or wrapping +room. + +Mr. DULLES. I understand. + +Mr. CADIGAN. Once it is in that machine then that wheel will mark the +tape going through the dispenser just before it wets it and you paste +it down. + +Mr. DULLES. Just before, generally just before it is used, then these +markings are put on by the dispensing machine. + +Mr. CADIGAN. Yes, sir. + +After examining the papers, comparing them visually and under the +microscope, I examined them under ultraviolet light. This is merely one +additional step. + +Here again I found that both of them fluoresced the same way. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Could you explain the meaning of that? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Yes. Paper, along with many substances, has the property +of absorbing or reflecting ultraviolet light rays differently. You can +take two samples of paper and put them under an ultraviolet light, and +they may appear to be the same or they may be markedly different. + +Mr. EISENBERG. You mean even if they look the same under visual light? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Visually they may look the same and yet under ultraviolet +light there may be very dramatic differences. + +Mr. EISENBERG. What causes those differences? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Well, the chemicals that are in the paper itself; I think +probably a very common example are the markings on shirts, so-called +invisible dyes which, visually, you do not see, but you put them under +ultraviolet light and the chemical is such that it glows brilliantly. + +So, it is basically a chemical or chemicals in there, in this case, in +the paper being examined under the ultraviolet, which gives a certain +visual appearance, which you can say, it is the same or it is different. + +In all of the observations and physical tests, that I made, I found +that for Exhibit 142, the bag, and the paper sample, Commission Exhibit +677, the results were the same. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Can you just review those? That was the ultraviolet +light---- + +Mr. CADIGAN. Well, briefly, it would be the thickness of both the paper +and the tape, the color under various lighting conditions of both the +paper and the tape, the width of the tape, the knurled markings on the +surface of the tape, the texture of the fiber, the felting pattern. I +hadn't mentioned this before, but if you hold a piece of paper up to +the light, you see light and dark areas caused by the way the fibers +felt right at the beginning stages of paper manufacture. + +There are light and dark areas, and these are called the felting +pattern. This is something that will vary depending on how the paper +is made, the thickness of the paper, the way that the fibers moved on +the papermaking machine, and here again I found that they were the same +for both the known sample, Commission Exhibit 677, and the paper bag, +Commission Exhibit 142. + +Mr. EISENBERG. In all these cases, did you make the examination both of +the tape and the paper in each of the bag and the sample? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Oh, yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And they were all identical? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. You mentioned before the thickness. How did you measure +the thickness of the tape and paper? + +Mr. CADIGAN. With a micrometer. + +Mr. EISENBERG. How sensitive is it? + +Mr. CADIGAN. It reads to four places. + +Mr. EISENBERG. How sensitive? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Four decimal places. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Is that one-hundredths? + +Mr. CADIGAN. That would be one ten-thousandths. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And they were identical in that measurement? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Yes; I measured both the paper sack, Exhibit 142, and the +known paper sample, Exhibit 677, at 0.0057 inch, that is fifty-seven +ten-thousandths. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Go ahead, Mr. Cadigan. + +Mr. CADIGAN. Do you want me to discuss this replica sack yet? + +Mr. EISENBERG. You mentioned a replica bag? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Could you explain what that is? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Yes; this is Commission Exhibit 364. It is a paper sack +similar to Commission Exhibit 142. It was made at the Texas School Book +Depository on December 1, 1963, by special agents of the FBI in Dallas +to show to prospective witnesses, because Commission's Exhibit 142 was +dark and stained from the latent fingerprint treatment and they thought +that this would--it wouldn't be fair to the witness to ask "Did you see +a bag like that?" So they went to the Texas School Book Depository and +constructed from paper and tape a similar bag. + +Mr. EISENBERG. This was made December 1? + +Mr. CADIGAN. December 1, of 1963. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Or some 9 or 10 days after the assassination? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Was the paper obtained from the same source? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Yes; from the same room. + +Mr. EISENBERG. The same room. + +Did you examine this paper to see how it compared--that is, the paper +in the replica bag, which has already been admitted as Commission +Exhibit 364--to see how it compared with the paper in the bag found on +the sixth floor of the TSBD, which is Commission's Exhibit 142? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. What was your conclusion? + +Mr. CADIGAN. That they were different in color, visual color, +felting--that is, the pattern that you see through transmitted light, +and they were different under ultraviolet light. + +Mr. EISENBERG. So that these two papers, which were obtained within 9 +or 10 days from the same source, could be distinguished by you? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Have you brought an ultraviolet light source with you? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Could you show the Commission the difference between the +three papers? + +(Discussion off the record.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, we have been unable to find a plug for this +ultraviolet machine, so we will temporarily or perhaps permanently +bypass this examination. But did you find that two of the papers look +the same under the ultraviolet and a third looked different when you +examined it under ultraviolet? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Yes; that is correct. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Which two were the identical and which was the different +one? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Well--Commission Exhibit 142 and Commission Exhibit 677--I +observed them to have the same appearance under ultraviolet light, and +that appearance was different from Commission Exhibit 364. + +Mr. DULLES. Can you identify these three exhibits, because otherwise I +think it will be very difficult to get into the record. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Yes, sir; 142 being the bag found on the sixth floor of +the TSBD, 677 being the sample obtained that day from the shipping room +in the Texas School Depository, and 364 being a replica made some ten +days later out of paper obtained some 10 days later. + +Did that complete your examination of the gross or physical +characteristics, as opposed to the microscopic characteristics? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Yes; that in essence was the extent of the examination I +made at that time. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did you go on to examine for microscopic characteristics? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Yes; I believe I mentioned that at the time I had examined +these papers under the microscope. + +Mr. EISENBERG. You mentioned that at the time? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Yes; earlier this morning. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Yes. + +Could you tell us what the results were of your examination under the +microscope? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Again, I found that the paper sack found on the sixth +floor, Commission Exhibit 142, and the sample secured 11-22, Commission +Exhibit 677, had the same observable characteristics both under the +microscope and all the visual tests that I could conduct. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Could you go into detail as to what you did see under +the microscope? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Well, I think perhaps this photograph, I have an enlarged +photograph, one side being the---- + +Mr. DULLES. Which side is that? + +Mr. EISENBERG. One side marked K-2, and the other Q-10? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Yes; K-2 corresponds to the known paper sample 677. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Obtained from the TSBD? + +Mr. DULLES. What date? + +Mr. CADIGAN. November 22. + +Mr. DULLES. On the day of the assassination? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Yes. And the Q-10 marking is the same as the paper bag +found on the sixth floor, Commission Exhibit 142. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did you take this photograph or was it taken under your +supervision? + +Mr. CADIGAN. I had it made. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, may I have it in evidence? + +Mr. DULLES. Admitted. + +Mr. CADIGAN. I would like to point out this is only one phase of +the examination and this is a black-and-white photograph. In your +examination under the microscope you are looking at the surface and +memorizing everything about that surface your mind can retain by +putting the two pieces of paper together and studying them back and +forth. I don't wish to imply that that photograph represents all I can +see in a microscope, because it doesn't. + +Mr. EISENBERG. We understand that. May I have this, Mr. Reporter, +marked as 678. + +(Commission Exhibit No. 678 was marked, and received in evidence.) + +Mr. DULLES. That has already been admitted. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Yes. Now, what is the magnification in this Exhibit 678? + +Mr. CADIGAN. It is about 50 times enlarged. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And had you treated the paper chemically before you made +this photograph? + +Mr. CADIGAN. No. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Can you tell us a little bit about that photograph and +what it shows? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Well, actually all this shows is an enlarged area, a very +small area, I might point out. It merely shows the surface structure, +shows some of the fibers, and shows an imperfection. The dark line down +the center of the photograph is actually a fold in both papers, merely +to bring them close together so that they can be seen together. + +But it gives you some idea of the surface texture, how the fibers lie +in there. In this instance you have two little imperfections in these +fiber bundles here, you can't see the brown-colored fibers that are +actually present. + +Mr. DULLES. That imperfection, however, would not be repeated, would it? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Oh, no; it is purely accidental. + +Mr. DULLES. They are accidental. + +Mr. CADIGAN. They are bundles of fibers in the paper itself. + +Mr. EISENBERG. In your opinion were the two samples identical in the +characteristics shown in this photomicrograph? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Yes; they have the same appearance. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did you also break down the papers to test them, to +determine the morphology of the fiber? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Yes. Subsequently, I ran a fiber analysis of the paper, +the known paper sample from the Texas School Book Depository, +Commission Exhibit 677, and the paper bag, Commission Exhibit 142, and +on the same day I had our spectrographic section run a spectrographic +test on these same papers. + +Mr. DULLES. Do I understand correctly, though, you have testified that +a sample taken 10 days later was different--or approximately 10 days +later? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Approximately 10 days. + +Mr. CADIGAN. Yes; this was a sample taken December 1. I could tell +that it was different from this sample, 677, taken on the day of the +assassination, and different from the bag, Exhibit 142. + +Mr. DULLES. Do you happen to know whether another roll was put in the +machine between the 22d and the 1st of December? + +Mr. CADIGAN. May we go off the record? + +(Discussion off the record.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. On the record. + +Do you know whether the Dallas office of the FBI has attempted to make +a determination as to whether the replica paper bag, the paper in the +replica paper bag, prepared on December 1, Commission No. 364, was, or +may have been, or wasn't taken from the same roll as the replica piece +of paper or the sample piece of paper, Exhibit 677, which was obtained +from the Depository November 22? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And can you tell us what you understand the results of +their investigation to have been? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Yes; they were unable to determine whether the paper from +the replica sack, Exhibit 364, came from the same roll or a different +roll as the known sample obtained November 22. Commission Exhibit 677. + +I understand that in the fall, the Depository is busy, and could very +well have changed rolls, but no records are kept along that line. + +Mr. DULLES. Changed rolls in that time, 10-day period? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Yes, sir. Actually there were 4 working days in that +period. + +Mr. DULLES. Yes. But am I not correct that there probably or maybe +certainly, I would like to have your view on that, was no change in +the roll between the day before the assassination and the night of the +assassination, that is between paper bag, Exhibit No. 142, and the +specimen that was taken on the night of the day of the assassination? + +Mr. CADIGAN. I can't tell you that, sir. I have no way of knowing, +because these papers are similar in all observable physical +characteristics, and they are different from a sample obtained on +December 1. I would suspect that this were true. But I can't---- + +Mr. DULLES. I realize that. + +Mr. CADIGAN. I cannot make a positive statement on that. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Have you any information as to whether the paper during +the period between November 22 and December 1 used in the TSBD--whether +it was the same or different rolls--would have come from the same +ultimate manufacturer? + +Mr. CADIGAN. It is my understanding that they received a shipment of +58 rolls of paper that were shipped March 19, 1963, from the St. Regis +Paper Mill in Jacksonville. Fla., and which lasted them until January +of 1964. This would mean on an average, in a 9-month period, a little +more than six rolls a month. + +Mr. EISENBERG. The inference would therefore be that if the--although +the papers in the replica bag obtained on December 1 and the paper in +the sample obtained on November 22 are distinguishable by you, they +came from the same manufacturer, and--is that correct? + +Mr. CADIGAN. That is correct. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And, therefore, that the state of your science is +such that you can distinguish even rolls of paper made by the same +manufacturer and assumedly made within a reasonably close time, is that +correct also? + +Mr. CADIGAN. I don't know what period of time is involved here. But +I can distinguish at least in this case between paper from the same +shipment from the same mill. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Could you proceed now to discuss the morphology of the +fiber as you examined it under a microscope? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Well, I might state briefly what a fiber analysis is. We +put samples of paper back into their, you might say, original state, in +the form of fiber suspension. + +You cook samples of paper for a couple of minutes in weak sodium +hydroxide solution. Then you wash it, add water and shake it +vigorously, and you get a suspension of fibers in the water. Samples +of those fibers are put on glass slides and are stained by various +reagents. + +Then you examine them under a high-power comparison microscope or a +binocular microscope under approximately 120 times magnification. In +this particular case I used two different stains. + +First a malachite green stain. This merely determines if there are +any unbleached fibers, or if they are all bleached. I found that on +both Commission Exhibit 677, the paper sample obtained on November 22, +and the paper sack, Commission Exhibit 142, that they are almost 100 +percent unbleached fibers. + +Then I stained other samples, with a stain known as Herzberg stain. It +is an iodine-iodide stain, which will distinguish between rag fibers, +chemical wood fibers, and ground wood fibers by different coloring. The +chemical wood is stained blue, rag fibers are stained red, ground wood +stained yellow. + +I made and studied specimens or slides of fibers from Commission +Exhibit 677, the known sample, and from Commission Exhibit 142, the +paper sack, to see if the fiber composition is similar. What that means +is, is this chemical wood, is it coniferous or deciduous, are there any +rag fibers in there or are there any ground wood fibers in there, and +I found here the fiber composition was similar and essentially it is a +coniferous woodlike pine. There were a few stray rag fibers, which I +think were probably accidental, and a few stray ground wood fragments +in there. + +Mr. DULLES. Let me get clearly what is similar, that is the paper bag, +Exhibit---- + +Mr. CADIGAN. 142; the paper comprising that sack and the paper +comprising the known sample obtained November 22, Exhibit 677. + +Mr. DULLES. Right. + +Mr. CADIGAN. The papers I also found were similar in fiber composition, +therefore, in addition to the visual characteristics, microscopic and +UV characteristics. + +Mr. EISENBERG. "UV" being ultraviolet? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Yes, sir. Then I had a spectrographic examination made of +the paper from the sack, 142, and the known sample secured November 22, +Commission Exhibit 677. + +Spectrographic tests involve, of course, burning the substance and +capturing the light on a photographic plate to determine what metallic +ions are present. This was done by our spectrographic section, and +again the paper of Commission Exhibit 677, the paper sample, secured +November 22, was found to be similar spectrographically to the paper of +the sack, Commission Exhibit 142. + +Now, these were additional tests, the original examinations, under +visual and ultraviolet light were made by me on November 23, 1963. +Fiber analysis and the spectrographic examination were conducted on +March 25, 1964. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Have you now reviewed all the points in which you +compared the paper sack obtained from the TSBD, Exhibit 142, and the +known sample obtained on November 22, Exhibit 677? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did you find any points of nonidentity? + +Mr. CADIGAN. No; I found none. + +Mr. EISENBERG. They were identical on every point on which you measured +them? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cadigan, did you notice when you looked at the bag +whether there were--that is the bag found on the sixth floor, Exhibit +142--whether it had any bulges or unusual creases? + +Mr. CADIGAN. I was also requested at that time to examine the bag +to determine if there were any significant markings or scratches or +abrasions or anything by which it could be associated with the rifle, +Commission Exhibit 139, that is, could I find any markings that I could +tie to that rifle. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Yes? + +Mr. CADIGAN. And I couldn't find any such markings. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, was there an absence of markings which would be +inconsistent with the rifle having been carried in the bag? + +Mr. CADIGAN. No; I don't see--actually, I don't know the condition of +the rifle. If it were in fact contained in this bag, it could have +been wrapped in cloth or just the metal parts wrapped in a thick layer +of cloth, or if the gun was in the bag, perhaps it wasn't moved too +much. I did observe some scratch marks and abrasions but was unable +to associate them with this gun. The scratch marks in the paper could +come from any place. They could have come from many places. There were +no marks on this bag that I could say were caused by that rifle or any +other rifle or any other given instrument. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Was there any absence of markings or absence of bulges +or absence of creases which would cause you to say that the rifle was +not carried in the paper bag? + +Mr. CADIGAN. No. + +Mr. EISENBERG. That is whether it had been wrapped or not wrapped? + +Mr. CADIGAN. That is something I can't say. + +Mr. DULLES. Would the scratches indicate there was a hard object inside +the bag, as distinct from a soft object that would make no abrasions or +scratches? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Well, if you were to characterize it that way, yes. I mean +there were a few scratches here. What caused them, I can't say. A hard +object; yes. Whether that hard object was part of a gun---- + +Mr. DULLES. I understand. + +Mr. CADIGAN. And so forth---- + +Mr. EISENBERG. I am not sure you understood a question I asked one or +two questions ago. + +I just want to make clear here if the gun was not wrapped in a +cloth--let's assume hypothetically that the gun was not wrapped in +a cloth and was, also hypothetically, inserted into this paper bag. +Is there any absence of marks which would lead you to believe that +this hypothesis I just made couldn't be--that is, that it couldn't be +inserted, without a covering, into the paper bag without leaving more +markings than were present? + +Mr. CADIGAN. No. The absence of markings to me wouldn't mean much. I +was looking for markings I could associate. The absence of marks, the +significance of them, I don't know. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, getting back to the paper bag, 142, and the tape +thereon, just for a second, and the tape found on the, obtained from +the, TSBD on November 22, Exhibit 677, were the widths of the tapes the +same? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Similar. They were not exactly the same; no. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Can you explain that? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Yes; the width of the tape on the paper sack, Exhibit 142, +I measured at 3 inches, and the width of the manila tape on Exhibit +677 obtained the night of November 22, I measured as 2.975. There is +twenty-five one-thousandths of an inch difference. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Would that lead you to believe that they couldn't have +come from the same roll? + +Mr. CADIGAN. No; certainly not. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Not enough of a variation to lead to that conclusion? + +Mr. CADIGAN. That is correct. + +Mr. EISENBERG. How wide do these rolls come in your experience, in what +widths do they come? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Normally they are supplied in, I believe, 1-, 1-1/2-, 2-, +2-1/2-, and 3-inch widths. + +Mr. EISENBERG. So this was basically of a 3-inch width variety out of +several possible alternatives? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Is there any other information you would like to give us +or any other testimony you would like to give us on the subject of the +origin of the paper in the 142 bag? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Well, possibly the comparisons made of paper samples from +Jaggars Chiles-Stovall and from the William B. Riley Co. + +Mr. EISENBERG. These are, you have mentioned two companies at which +Oswald was employed at one time? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. You obtained paper from these companies, did you? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And you matched them to see if they matched--you tested +them to see if they matched the paper in the bag 142, is that correct? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Yes; that is correct. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And your conclusion was what? + +Mr. CADIGAN. That they were different. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Yes. Anything else? + +Mr. CADIGAN. That is about it. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman---- + +Mr. DULLES. Mr. Murray, do you have any questions? + +Mr. MURRAY. I don't believe I have, Mr. Commissioner, but I would like +to mention this off the record, if I may. + +(Discussion off the record.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. We have now the ultraviolet machine set up. + +Could you just show us the difference in fluorescence? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Can you explain what you have set up here, Mr. Cadigan? + +Mr. CADIGAN. This is a portable ultraviolet viewer I used to examine +the papers and I think probably what is most noticeable is in the +manila tapes. The tape on the right is the sample secured November 22. +The tape at the top is from the bag 142, and then the one in the, you +might say, lower left, toward the bottom, is the tape that was secured +December 1. + +Mr. EISENBERG. You are referring to positions in the bottom of the +ultraviolet machine? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Yes; relative position. + +Mr. DULLES. The one at the left is the one taken from the paper sack, +isn't it? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Top left; yes; that would be from 142. + +Mr. DULLES. 142, and the other is---- + +Mr. CADIGAN. The one on the right is 677. + +Mr. DULLES. What am I supposed to see? + +Mr. CADIGAN. A difference in the appearance, difference in color. + +Mr. DULLES. What do you mean? I see the violet and I see the white. + +Mr. CADIGAN. Well, if you look at the two tape samples---- + +Mr. DULLES. This tape sample on upper left hand is covered up by this +one. I wonder whether you shouldn't take out the later one? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Yes; I think probably that would be better. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Why don't you show Mr. Dulles the paper bag, 142, and +the sample obtained November 22? + +Mr. DULLES. Yes; those are the two we are most interested in. + +Mr. CADIGAN. The observation I would make there is that the color of +the tape on Exhibit 142, the sack, and the color of the paper of the +sack 142, under UV, is the same as the color of the tape on 677 and the +color of the paper. + +Mr. DULLES. I agree on that. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Let the record show that Mr. Dulles makes the statement +as he is looking in the machine. Mr. Cadigan, why don't you compare +it---- + +Mr. CADIGAN. By comparison---- + +Mr. DULLES. This is only as to color, that is all I saw. I saw some +markings on it. + +Mr. CADIGAN. That is right. This is only for color appearance under the +ultraviolet light. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Why don't you compare the sack found at the TSBD and the +replica sack obtained 10 days later? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Here again all that should be observed is the color under +UV of both the paper and tape of the sample and the paper and tape of +Exhibit 364. + +Mr. DULLES. 364 is the paper bag, isn't it? + +Mr. CADIGAN. 364 is the replica sack obtained on December 1. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Ten days later. + +Mr. DULLES. That is on the left? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Yes. + +Mr. DULLES. And the other is the sack? + +Mr. CADIGAN. No; the other on your right is the sample of paper +obtained on November 22. + +Mr. DULLES. November 22, just after the assassination? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Yes. + +Mr. DULLES. There is a clear distinction here. The sample to the right, +that is, as I understand it, paper obtained on the evening of November +22, has a more, a deeper violet shade, and on the other hand, the tape +is much lighter than the tape on the sample obtained 10 days later. +That is to say that the sample 10 days later is darker as to the tape +but lighter as to the paper. + +Would you like the opportunity, Mr. Murray? + +Mr. MURRAY. No, thank you. + +Mr. EISENBERG. We are putting in the sack and 364, the 10-day later +sample. + +Mr. DULLES. Sack and 10-day later sample. Which is on which side? + +Mr. CADIGAN. The sack is on the left and the replica bag obtained on +December 1 is on the right. + +Mr. DULLES. Yes. I find there that the sample obtained 10 days later, +and the sack which is on the left, that the sample obtained 10 days +later shows a lighter shade of purple than the sack, and that the tape +shows a darker shade of, I would call it, almost gray as against almost +white for the tape which is on the sack. + +Mr. EISENBERG. I have no further questions, Mr. Dulles. + +Mr. DULLES. Have you anything that you feel you should add, anything in +this general field that would help the Commission? + +Mr. CADIGAN. No, sir; not as it relates to this paper and these paper +bags. + +Mr. EISENBERG. You will be called later for testimony on handwriting--I +suppose you will be the person to testify? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Whenever you want me I will be available. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did you examine the tape for microscopic--to determine +the morphology of the fibers in the paper? + +Mr. CADIGAN. No. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Can you tell us why? + +Mr. CADIGAN. I didn't feel it was necessary. + +Mr. EISENBERG. I wonder whether you could do that, Mr. Cadigan, and +send us a letter as to the results? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Certainly. + +(The letter referred to was later supplied and is set forth at the end +of this testimony.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. And also, did you notice how the glue had been applied +to the tapes? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Yes; you might say glue was applied all the way across the +tapes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. There are no discernible differences in them? + +Mr. CADIGAN. The glue on the tapes would be applied with a brush at the +time of manufacture. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Is there more than one way of applying glue? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Oh, yes. On some tapes, if you look at them either +before or after they are used you will see a continuous line running +right down the tape where they have used a wheel applicator, merely a +difference in manufacturing methods. + +Mr. EISENBERG. But you found a brush applicator? + +Mr. CADIGAN. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Will the same manufacturer use two different methods? + +Mr. CADIGAN. He might or might not. + +Mr. EISENBERG. In your experience, is it likely that he would use two +different methods? + +Mr. CADIGAN. I really couldn't say. + +Mr. DULLES. Mr. Cadigan, I thank you very much for your most +interesting and helpful testimony. + +(Whereupon, at 1:50 p.m., the President's Commission recessed.) + +(Following is the text of a letter relating to the fiber composition of +the gummed tapes in Exhibits 142 and 677.) + + + UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, + FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, + _Washington, D.C., April 8, 1964_. + [By Courier Service]. + +Hon. J. LEE RANKIN, + +_General Counsel, the President's Commission, 200 Maryland Avenue NE., +Washington, D.C._ + +DEAR MR. RANKIN: During the testimony of Special Agent James C. Cadigan +on April 3, 1964, before the President's Commission, Mr. Melvin +Eisenberg of your staff orally requested Special Agent Cadigan to make +a fiber analysis of the gummed tape on the paper sack found on the +sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository Building, Commission +Exhibit 142, and of the sample of gummed tape in Commission Exhibit +677 Obtained November 22, 1963, at the Texas School Book Depository +Building. + +Fiber analysis of the two gummed tapes in Commission Exhibits 142 and +677 revealed that they were similar in fiber composition. + + Sincerely yours, + J. EDGAR HOOVER. + + + + +_Tuesday, April 21, 1964_ + +TESTIMONY OF DR. ROBERT ROEDER SHAW, DR. CHARLES FRANCIS GREGORY, GOV. +JOHN BOWDEN CONNALLY, JR., AND MRS. JOHN BOWDEN CONNALLY, JR. + +The President's Commission met at 1:30 p.m., on April 21, 1964, at 200 +Maryland Avenue NE., Washington, D.C. + +Present were Chief Justice Earl Warren, Chairman; Senator Richard B. +Russell, Senator John Sherman Cooper, Representative Hale Boggs, John +J. McCloy, and Allen W. Dulles, members. + +Also present present were J. Lee Rankin, general counsel; Francis +W. H. Adams, assistant counsel; Joseph A. Ball, assistant counsel; +David W. Belin, assistant counsel; Norman Redlich, assistant counsel; +Arlen Specter, assistant counsel; Charles Murray and Charles Rhyne, +observers; and Waggoner Carr, attorney general of Texas. + + +TESTIMONY OF DR. ROBERT ROEDER SHAW + +Senator COOPER. The Commission will come to order. + +Dr. Shaw, you understand that the purpose of this inquiry is taken +under the order of the President appointing the Commission on the +assassination of President Kennedy to investigate all the facts +relating to his assassination. + +Dr. SHAW. I do. + +Senator COOPER. And report to the public. + +Do you solemnly swear the testimony you are about to give before this +Commission will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the +truth, so help you God? + +Dr. SHAW. I do. + +Senator COOPER. Do you desire an attorney to be with you? + +Dr. SHAW. No. + +Mr. SPECTER. Will you state your full name for the record, please? + +Dr. SHAW. Robert Roeder Shaw. + +Mr. SPECTER. What is your profession, please? + +Dr. SHAW. Physician and surgeon. + +Mr. SPECTER. Will you outline briefly your educational background? + +Dr. SHAW. I received my B.A. degree from the University of Michigan in +1927, and my M.D. degree from the same institution in 1933. + +Following that I served 2 years at the Roosevelt Hospital in New York +City from July 1934, to July 1936, in training in general surgery. I +had then 2 years of training in thoracic surgery at the University +Hospital, Ann Arbor, Mich., from July 1936 to July 1938. + +On August 1, 1938, I entered private practice limiting my practice to +thoracic surgery in Dallas, Tex. + +Mr. DULLES. What kind of surgery? + +Dr. SHAW. Thoracic surgery or surgery of the chest. I have practiced +there continuously except for a period from June 1942, until December +1945, when I was a member of the Medical Corps of the Army of the +United States serving principally in the European theater of operations. + +I was away again from December 1961, until June of 1963, when I was +head of the MEDICO team and performed surgery at Avicenna Hospital in +Kabul, Pakistan. + +Mr. DULLES. Will you tell us a little bit about MEDICO. Is that the +ship? + +Dr. SHAW. No; that is HOPE. MEDICO was formed by the late Dr. Tom +Dooley. + +Mr. DULLES. Yes; I know him very well. He was the man in Laos. + +Dr. SHAW. Yes, sir; this was one of their projects. + +Mr. DULLES. I see. + +Dr. SHAW. I returned to---- + +Mr. DULLES. An interesting project. + +Dr. SHAW. I returned to Dallas and on September 1, 1963, started +working full time with the University of Texas Southwestern Medical +School as professor of thoracic surgery and chairman of the division of +thoracic surgery. + +In this position I also am chief of thoracic surgery at Parkland +Memorial Hospital in Dallas which is the chief hospital from the +standpoint of the medical facilities of the school. + +Mr. SPECTER. Are you licensed to practice medicine in the State of +Texas? + +Dr. SHAW. I am. + +Mr. SPECTER. Are you certified? + +Dr. SHAW. By the board of thoracic surgery you mean? + +Mr. SPECTER. Yes; by the board of thoracic surgery. + +Dr. SHAW. Yes; as of 1948. + +Mr. SPECTER. What experience, if any, have you had, Dr. Shaw, with +bullet wounds? + +Dr. SHAW. I have had civilian experience, both in the work at Parkland +Hospital, where we see a great amount of trauma, and much of this +involves bullet wounds from homicidal attempts and accidents. + +The chief experience I had, however, was during the Second World War +when I was serving as chief of the thoracic surgery center in Paris, +France. And during this particular experience we admitted over 900 +patients with chest wounds of various sort, many of them, of course, +being shell fragments rather than bullet wounds. + +Mr. SPECTER. What is your best estimate as to the total number of +bullet wounds you have had experience with? + +Dr. SHAW. It would be approximately 1,000, considering the large number +of admissions we had in Paris. + +Mr. SPECTER. What were your duties in a general way on November 22, +1963. + +Dr. SHAW. On that particular date I had been at a conference at +Woodlawn Hospital, which is our hospital for medical chest diseases +connected with the medical school system. I had just gone to the +Children's Hospital to see a small patient that I had done a +bronchoscopy on a few days before and was returning to Parkland +Hospital, and the medical school. + +Woodlawn and the Children's Hospital are approximately a mile away from +Parkland Hospital. + +Mr. SPECTER. Were you called upon to render any aid to President +Kennedy on November 22? + +Dr. SHAW. No. + +Mr. SPECTER. Were you called upon to render medical aid to Gov. John B. +Connally on that day? + +Dr. SHAW. Yes. + +Mr. SPECTER. Will you describe briefly the circumstances surrounding +your being called into the case. + +Dr. SHAW. As I was driving toward the medical school I came to an +intersection of Harry Hines Boulevard and Industrial Boulevard. + +There is also a railroad crossing at this particular point. I saw an +open limousine pass this point at high speed with a police escort. +We were held up in traffic because of this escort. Finally, when we +were allowed to proceed, I went on to the medical school expecting to +eat lunch. I had the radio on because it was the day that I knew the +President was in Dallas and would be eating lunch at the Trade Mart +which was not far away, and over the radio I heard the report that the +President had been shot at while riding in the motorcade. I went on to +the medical school and as I entered the medical school a student came +in and joined three other students, and said the President has just +been brought into the emergency room at Parkland, dead on arrival. + +The students said, "You are kidding, aren't you?" and he said, "No, +I am not. I saw him, and Governor Connally has been shot through the +chest." + +Hearing that I turned and walked over to the emergency room, which +is approximately 150 yards from the medical school, and entered the +emergency room. + +Mr. SPECTER. At approximately what time did you arrive at the emergency +room where Governor Connally was situated? + +Dr. SHAW. As near as I could tell it was about 12:45. + +Mr. SPECTER. Who was with Governor Connally, if anyone, at that time, +Dr. Shaw? + +Dr. SHAW. I immediately recognized two of the men who worked with me in +thoracic surgery, Dr. James Duke and Dr. James Boland, Dr. Giesecke, +who is an anesthesiologist, was also there along with a Dr. David +Mebane who is an instructor in general surgery. + +Mr. SPECTER. What was Governor Connally's condition at that time, based +on your observations? + +Dr. SHAW. The Governor was complaining bitterly of difficulty in +breathing, and of pain in his right chest. Prior to my arriving there, +the men had very properly placed a tight occlusive dressing over what +on later examination proved to be a large sucking wound in the front of +his right chest, and they had inserted a rubber tube between the second +and third ribs in the front of the right chest, carrying this tube to +what we call a water seal bottle. + +Mr. SPECTER. What was the purpose? + +Dr. SHAW. Yes; this is done to reexpand the right lung which had +collapsed due to the opening through the chest wall. + +Mr. SPECTER. What wounds, if any, did you observe on the Governor at +that time? + +Dr. SHAW. I observed no wounds on the Governor at this time. It wasn't +until he was taken to the operating room that I properly examined him +from the standpoint of the wound. + +Mr. SPECTER. How long after your initial viewing of him was he taken to +the operating room? + +Dr. SHAW. Within about 5 minutes. I stepped outside to talk to Mrs. +Connally because I had been given information by Dr. Duke that +blood had been drawn from the Governor, sent to the laboratory for +cross-matching for blood that we knew would be necessary, that the +operating room had already been alerted, and that they were ready and +they were merely awaiting my arrival. + +Mr. SPECTER. How was Governor Connally transported from the emergency +room to the operating room? + +Dr. SHAW. On a stretcher. + +Mr. SPECTER. And was he transported up an elevator as well? + +Dr. SHAW. Yes. It is two floors above the emergency rooms. + +Mr. SPECTER. Will you describe what happened next in connection with +Governor Connally's---- + +Mr. DULLES. Could I ask a question, putting in this tube is prior to +making an incision? + +Mr. SHAW. Yes; a stab wound. + +Mr. DULLES. Just a stab wound? + +Dr. SHAW. Yes. + +Mr. SPECTER. What treatment next followed for Governor Connally, Doctor? + +Dr. SHAW. He was taken to the operating room and there Dr. Giesecke +started the anesthesia. This entails giving an intravenous injection of +sodium pentothal and then after the Governor was asleep a gas was used, +that will be on the anesthetic record there. + +Mr. SPECTER. Do you know at approximately what time this procedure was +started? + +Dr. SHAW. I will have to refresh my memory again from the record. We +had at the time I testified before, we had the---- + +Mr. SPECTER. Permit me to make available to you a copy of the Parkland +Memorial Hospital operative record and let me ask you, first of all, +if you can identify these two pages on an exhibit heretofore marked +as Commission Exhibit 392 as to whether or not this constitutes your +report? + +Dr. SHAW. Yes; this is a transcription of my dictated report of the +operation. + +Mr. SPECTER. Are the facts set forth therein true and correct? + +Dr. SHAW. Yes. On this it states that the operation itself was begun at +1300 hours or 1 o'clock, 1 p.m., and that the actual surgery started at +1335 or 1:35 p.m. + +The operation was concluded by me at 3--1520 which would be 3:20 p.m. + +Mr. SPECTER. You have described, in a general way, the chest wound. +What other wounds, if any, was Governor Connally suffering from at the +time you saw him? + +Dr. SHAW. I will describe then the wound of the wrist which was +obvious. He had a wound of the lower right forearm that I did not +accurately examine because I had already talked to Dr. Gregory while +I was scrubbing for the operation, told him that this wound would +need his attention as soon as we were able to get the chest in a +satisfactory condition. There was also, I was told, I didn't see the +wound, on the thigh, I was told that there was a small wound on the +thigh which I saw later. + +Mr. SPECTER. When did you first have an opportunity then to examine +Governor Connally's wound on the posterior aspect of his chest? + +Dr. SHAW. After the Governor had been anesthetized. As soon as he was +asleep so we could manipulate him--before that time it was necessary +for an endotracheal tube to be in place so his respirations could be +controlled before we felt we could roll him over and accurately examine +the wound entrance. + +We knew this was the wound exit. + +Mr. SPECTER. This [indicating an area below the right nipple on the +body]? + +Dr. SHAW. Yes. + +Mr. DULLES. How did you know it was a wound exit. + +Dr. SHAW. By the fact of its size, the ragged edges of the wound. This +wound was covered by a dressing which could not be removed until the +Governor was anesthetized. + +Mr. SPECTER. Indicating this wound, the wound on the Governor's chest? + +Dr. SHAW. Yes; the front part. + +Mr. SPECTER. Will you describe in as much detail as you can the wound +on the posterior side of the Governor's chest? + +Dr. SHAW. This was a small wound approximately a centimeter and a +half in its greatest diameter. It was roughly elliptical. It was just +medial to the axillary fold or the crease of the armpit, but we could +tell that this wound, the depth of the wound, had not penetrated the +shoulder blade. + +Mr. SPECTER. What were the characteristics, if any, which indicated to +you that it was a wound of entrance then? + +Dr. SHAW. Its small size, and the rather clean cut edges of the wound +as compared to the usual more ragged wound of exit. + +Mr. SPECTER. Now I hand you a diagram which is a body diagram on +Commission Exhibit No. 679, and ask you if, on the back portion of +the figure, that accurately depicts the point of entry into Governor +Connally's back? + +Dr. SHAW. Yes. The depiction of the point of entry, I feel is quite +accurate. + +Mr. SPECTER. Now, with respect to the front side of the body, is the +point of exit accurately shown on the diagram? + +Dr. SHAW. The point is---- + +Mr. SPECTER. We have heretofore, may the record show the deposition +covered much the same ground with Dr. Shaw, but the diagrams used now +are new diagrams which will have to be remarked in accordance with your +recollection. + +Dr. SHAW. Yes. Because I would have to place--they are showing here the +angle. + +Mr. DULLES. Is this all on the record? + +Mr. SPECTER. It should be. + +Dr. SHAW. We are showing on this angle, the cartilage angle which it +makes at the end of the sternum. + +Mr. SPECTER. That is an inverted =V= which appears in front of the body? + +Dr. SHAW. Now the wound was above that. They have shown it below that +point so the wound would have to be placed here as far as the point is +concerned. + +Mr. SPECTER. Would you draw on that diagram a more accurate depiction +of where the wound of exit occurred? + +Dr. SHAW. Do you want me to initial this? + +Mr. SPECTER. Yes; if you please, Dr. Shaw. + +I hand you another body diagram marked Commission Exhibit 680 and I +will ask you if that accurately depicts the angle of decline as the +bullet passed through Governor Connally? + +Dr. SHAW. I think the declination of this line is a little too sharply +downward. I would place it about 5° off that line. + +Mr. SPECTER. Will you redraw the line then, Dr. Shaw, and initial it, +indicating the more accurate angle? + +Dr. SHAW. The reason I state this is that as they have shown this, it +would place the wound of exit a little too far below the nipple. Also +it would, since the bullet followed the line of declination of the +fifth rib, it would make the ribs placed in a too slanting position. + +Mr. SPECTER. What operative procedures did you employ in caring for the +wound of the chest, Dr. Shaw. + +Dr. SHAW. The first measure was to excise the edges of the wound of +exit in an elliptical fashion, and then this incision was carried in a +curved incision along the lateral portion of the right chest up toward +the right axilla in order to place the skin incision lower than the +actual path of the bullet through the chest wall. + +After this incision had been carried down to the level of the muscles +attached to the rib cage, all of the damaged muscle which was chiefly +the serratus anterior muscle which digitates along the fifth rib at +this position, was cleaned away, cut away with sharp dissection. + +As soon as--of course, this incision had been made, the opening through +the parietal pleura, which is the lining of the inside of the chest was +very obvious. It was necessary to trim away several small fragments +of the rib which were still hanging to tags of periosteum, the lining +of the rib, and the ragged ends of the rib were smoothed off with a +rongeur. + +Mr. SPECTER. What damage had been inflicted upon a rib, if any, Dr. +Shaw? + +Dr. SHAW. About 10 centimeters of the fifth rib starting at the, about +the mid-axillary line and going to the anterior axillary line, as we +describe it, or that would be the midline at the armpit going to the +anterior lateral portion of the chest had been stripped away by the +missile. + +Mr. SPECTER. What is the texture of the rib at the point where the +missile struck? + +Dr. SHAW. The texture of the rib here is not of great density. The +cortex of the rib in the lateral portions of our ribs, is thin with the +so-called cancellus portion of the rib being very spongy, offering very +little resistance to pressure or to fracturing. + +Mr. SPECTER. What effect, if any, would the striking of that rib have +had to the trajectory of the bullet? + +Dr. SHAW. It could have had a slight, caused a slight deflection of the +rib, but probably not a great deflection of the rib, because of the +angle at which it struck and also because of the texture of the rib at +this time. + +Mr. SPECTER. You say deflection of the rib or deflection of the bullet? + +Dr. SHAW. Deflection of the bullet, I am sorry. + +Mr. SPECTER. Was any metallic substance from the bullet left in the +thoracic cage as a result of the passage of the bullet through the +Governor's body? + +Dr. SHAW. No. We saw no evidence of any metallic material in the X-ray +that we had of the chest, and we found none during the operation. + +Mr. SPECTER. Have you brought the X-rays with you, Dr. Shaw, from +Parkland Hospital? + +Dr. SHAW. Yes; we have them here. + +Mr. SPECTER. May the record show we have available a viewer for the +X-rays. + +Dr. Shaw, would you, by use of the viewer, exhibit the X-rays of +the Governor's chest to show more graphically that which you have +heretofore described? + +Dr. SHAW. This is the first X-ray that was taken, which was taken in +the operating room with the Governor on the operating table, and at +this time anesthetized. The safety pin that you see here is used, was +used, to secure the tube which had been put between the second and +third rib in expanding the Governor's lung. + +We can dimly see also the latex rubber tube up in the chest coming to +the apex of the chest. + +The variations that we see from normal here are the fact that first, +there is a great amount of swelling in the chest wall which we know was +due to bleeding and bruising of the tissues of the chest wall, and we +also see that there is air in the tissues of the chest wall here and +here. It is rather obvious. + +Mr. SPECTER. When you say here and here, you are referring to the outer +portions, showing on the X-ray moving up toward the shoulder area? + +Dr. SHAW. Yes; going from the lower chest up to the region near the +angle of the shoulder blade. + +The boney framework of the chest, it is obvious that the fifth rib, +we count ribs from above downward, this is the first rib, second rib, +third rib, fourth rib, fifth rib, that a portion of this rib has been +shattered, and we can see a few fragments that have been left behind. + +Also the rib has because of being broken and losing some of its +substance, has taken a rather inward position in relation to the fourth +and the sixth ribs on either side. + +Mr. SPECTER. What effect was there, if any, on the upper portion of +that rib? + +Dr. SHAW. This was not noticed at the time of this examination, Mr. +Specter. However, in subsequent examinations we can tell that there was +a fracture across the rib at this point due to the rib being struck and +bent. + +Mr. SPECTER. When you say this point, will you describe where that +point exists on the X-ray? + +Dr. SHAW. This is a point approximately 4 centimeters from its +connection with the transverse process of the spine. + +Mr. SPECTER. And is the fracture, which is located there, caused by a +striking there or by the striking at the end of the rib? + +Dr. SHAW. It is caused by the striking at the end of the rib. + +Mr. SPECTER. Fine. What else then is discernible from the viewing of +the X-ray, Dr. Shaw? + +Dr. SHAW. There is a great amount of, we would say, obscuration of +the lower part of the right lung field which we know from subsequent +examination was due to blood in the pleural cavity and also due to a +hematoma in the lower part of the right lower lobe and also a severe +laceration of the middle lobe with it having lost its ability to +ventilate at that time. So, we have both an airless lung, and blood in +the lung to account for these shadows. + +Mr. SPECTER. Is there anything else visible from the X-ray which is +helpful in our understanding of the Governor's condition? + +Dr. SHAW. No; I don't think so. + +Mr. SPECTER. Would it be useful--As to that X-ray, Dr. Shaw, will +you tell us what identifying data, if any, it has in the records of +Parkland Hospital, for the record? + +Dr. SHAW. On this X-ray it has in pencil John G. Connally. + +Mr. SPECTER. Is that G or C? + +Dr. SHAW. They have a "G" November 22, 1963, and it has number 218-922. + +Mr. SPECTER. Were those X-rays taken under your supervision? + +Dr. SHAW. Yes, by a technician. + +Mr. SPECTER. And that is, in fact, the X-ray then which was taken of +Governor Connally at the time these procedures were being performed? + +Dr. SHAW. It is. + +Mr. SPECTER. Dr. Shaw, would any of the other X-rays be helpful in our +understanding of the Governor's condition? + +Dr. SHAW. I believe the only--perhaps showing one additional X-ray +would show the fracture previously described which was not easily +discernible on the first film. This is quite often true but not +important to the--here is the fracture that can be easily seen. + +Mr. SPECTER. You are now referring to a separate and second X-ray. + +Dr. SHAW. Yes. + +Mr. SPECTER. Will you start out by telling us on what date this X-ray +was performed. + +Dr. SHAW. This X-ray was made on the 29th of November 1963, 7 days +following the incident. + +Mr. SPECTER. What does it show of significance? + +Dr. SHAW. It shows that there has been considerable clearing in the +lower portion of the lung, and also that there is a fracture of the +fifth rib as previously described approximately 4 centimeters from the +transverse process posteriorly. + +Mr. SPECTER. Is there anything else depicted by that X-ray of material +assistance in evaluating the Governor's wound? + +Dr. SHAW. No. + +Mr. McCLOY. Were there any photographs taken as distinguished from +X-rays of the body? + +Dr. SHAW. There were no photographs. + +Mr. SPECTER. Dr. Shaw, we shall then, subject to the approval of the +Commission, for the record, have the X-rays reproduced at Parkland +Memorial Hospital, and, if possible, also have a photograph of the +X-ray made for the permanent records of the Commission to show the +actual X-ray, which Dr. Shaw has described during his testimony here +this afternoon. + +Senator COOPER. It is directed that it be made a part of the record of +these hearings. + +Mr. SPECTER. Dr. Shaw, what additional operative procedures did you +perform on Governor Connally's chest? + +Dr. SHAW. I will continue with my description of the operative +procedure. The opening that had been made through the rib after the +removal of the fragments was adequate for further exploration of the +pleural cavity. A self-retaining retractor was put into place to +maintain exposure. Inside the pleural cavity there were approximately +200 cc. of clotted blood. + +It was found that the middle lobe had been lacerated with the +laceration dividing the lobe into roughly two equal parts. The +laceration ran from the lower tip of the middle lobe up into its root +or hilum. + +However, the lobe was not otherwise damaged, so that it could be +repaired using a running suture of triple zero chromic catgut. + +The anterior basal segments of the right lower lobe had a large +hematoma, and blood was oozing out of one small laceration that was +a little less than a centimeter in length, where a rib fragment had +undoubtedly been driven into the lobe. To control hemorrhage a single +suture of triple zero chromic gut was placed in this laceration. There +were several small matchstick size fragments of rib within the pleural +cavity. Examination, however, of the pericardium of the diaphragm and +the upper lobe revealed no injury to these parts of the chest. + +A drain was placed in the eighth space in the posterior axillary line +similar to the drain which had been placed in the second interspace in +the front of the chest. + +The drain in the front of the chest was thought to be a little too long +so about 3 centimeters of it were cut away. + +Attention was then turned on the laceration of the latissimus dorsi +muscle where the missile had passed through it. Several sutures of +chromic gut where used to repair this muscle. + +The incision was then closed with interrupted No. zero chromic gut in +the muscles of the chest wall--first, I am sorry, in the intercostale +muscle, and muscles of the chest wall, and the same suture material was +used to close the serratus anterior muscle in the subcutaneous tissue, +and interrupted vertical sutures of black silk were used to close the +skin. + +Attention was then turned to the wound of entrance which, as previously +described, was about a centimeter and a half in its greatest diameter, +roughly elliptical in shape. The skin edges of this wound were +incised--excised, I beg your pardon--I have to go back just a little +bit. + +Prior to examination of this wound, a stab wound was made at the +angle of the scapula to place a drain in the subscapular space. In +the examination of the wound of entrance, the examining finger could +determine that this drain was immediately under the wound of entrance, +so that it was adequately draining the space. + +Two sutures were placed in the facia of the muscle, and the skin was +closed with interrupted vertical matching sutures of black silk. + +That concluded the operation. Both tubes were connected to a water seal +bottle, and the dressing was applied. + +Mr. SPECTER. Who was in charge then of the subsequent care on the +Governor's wrist? + +Dr. SHAW. Dr. Charles Gregory who had been previously alerted and then +came in to take care of the wrist. + +Mr. SPECTER. Now, with respect to the wound on the wrist, did you have +any opportunity to examine it by way of determining points of entry and +exit? + +Dr. SHAW. My examination of the wrist was a very cursory one. I could +tell that there was a compound comminuted fracture because there was +motion present, and there was a ragged wound just over the radius above +the wrist joint. But that was the extent of my examination of the wrist. + +Mr. SPECTER. Dr. Shaw, did I take your deposition at Parkland Memorial +Hospital on March 23 of 1964? + +Dr. SHAW. Yes; you did. + +Mr. SPECTER. Has that deposition been made available to you? + +Dr. SHAW. Yes. + +Mr. SPECTER. To you here this afternoon? + +Dr. SHAW. Yes. + +Mr. SPECTER. Have you subsequent to the giving of that deposition on +March 23, 1964, had an opportunity to examine Governor Connally's +clothing which we have available in the Commission room here today? + +Dr. SHAW. Yes. + +Mr. SPECTER. Now, based on all facts now within your knowledge, is +there any modification which you would care to make in terms of the +views which you expressed about entrance and exit wounds back on March +23, based on the information which was available to you at that time? + +Dr. SHAW. From an examination of the clothing, it is very obvious that +the wound of entrance was through the coat sleeve. + +Mr. SPECTER. While you are testifying in that manner, perhaps it would +be helpful if we would make available to you the actual jacket, if it +pleases the Commission. + +We shall reserve Exhibits Nos. 681 for the X-ray of November 22; 682 +for the X-ray of November 29; and we shall now mark a photograph of the +coat for our permanent records as "Commission Exhibit No. 683". + +Dr. Shaw, I hand you at this time what purports to be the coat worn +by Governor Connally, which we introduce subject to later proof when +Governor Connally appears later this afternoon; and, for the record, +I ask you first of all if this photograph, designated as Commission +Exhibit No. 683, is a picture of this suit coat? + +Dr. SHAW. It is. + +Mr. SPECTER. I had interrupted you when you started to refer to the +hole in the sleeve of the coat. Will you proceed with what you were +testifying about there? + +Dr. SHAW. The hole in the sleeve of the coat is within half a +centimeter of the very edge of the sleeve, and lies---- + +Mr. DULLES. This is the right sleeve, is it not? + +Dr. SHAW. I am sorry, yes. Thank you. Of the right sleeve, and places +it, if the coat sleeve was in the same position, assuming it is in the +same position that my coat sleeve is in, places it directly over the +lateral portion of the wrist, really not directly on the volar or the +dorsum of the surface of the wrist, but on the lateral position or the +upper position, as the wrist is held in a neutral position. + +Mr. SPECTER. With the additional information provided by the coat, +would that enable you to give an opinion as to which was the wound of +entrance and which the wound of exit on the Governor's wrist? + +Dr. SHAW. There is only one tear in the Governor's garment as far as +the appearance of the tear is concerned, I don't think I could render +an opinion as to whether this is a wound of entrance or exit. + +Mr. SPECTER. Then, do you have sufficient information at your disposal +in total, based on your observations and what you know now to give any +meaningful opinion as to which was the wound of entrance and which the +wound of exit on the Governor's wrist? + +Dr. SHAW. I would prefer to have Dr. Gregory testify about that, +because he has examined it more carefully than I have. + +Mr. SPECTER. Fine. + +Mr. DULLES. Could you tell at all how the arm was held from that mark +or that hole in the sleeve? + +Dr. SHAW. Mr. Dulles, I thought I knew just how the Governor was +wounded until I saw the pictures today, and it becomes a little bit +harder to explain. + +I felt that the wound had been caused by the same bullet that came out +through the chest with the Governor's arm held in approximately this +position. + +Mr. SPECTER. Indicating the right hand held close to the body? + +Dr. SHAW. Yes, and this is still a possibility. But I don't feel that +it is the only possibility. + +Senator COOPER. Why do you say you don't think it is the only +possibility? What causes you now to say that it is the location---- + +Dr. SHAW. This is again the testimony that I believe Dr. Gregory will +be giving, too. It is a matter of whether the wrist wound could be +caused by the same bullet, and we felt that it could but we had not +seen the bullets until today, and we still do not know which bullet +actually inflicted the wound on Governor Connally. + +Mr. DULLES. Or whether it was one or two wounds? + +Dr. SHAW. Yes. + +Mr. DULLES. Or two bullets? + +Dr. SHAW. Yes; or three. + +Mr. DULLES. Why do you say three? + +Dr. SHAW. He has three separate wounds. He has a wound in the chest, a +wound of the wrist, a wound of the thigh. + +Mr. DULLES. Oh, yes; we haven't come to the wound of the thigh yet, +have we? + +Mr. McCLOY. You have no firm opinion that all these three wounds were +caused by one bullet? + +Dr. SHAW. I have no firm opinion. + +Mr. McCLOY. That is right. + +Dr. SHAW. Asking me this now if it was true. If you had asked me a +month ago I would have. + +Mr. DULLES. Could they have been caused by one bullet, in your opinion? + +Dr. SHAW. They could. + +Mr. McCLOY. I gather that what the witness is saying is that it is +possible that they might have been caused by one bullet. But that he +has no firm opinion now that they were. + +Mr. DULLES. As I understand it too. Is our understanding correct? + +Dr. SHAW. That is correct. + +Senator COOPER. When you say all three are you referring to the wounds +you have just described to the chest, the wound in the wrist, and also +the wound in the thigh? + +Dr. SHAW. Yes. + +Senator COOPER. It was possible? + +Dr. SHAW. Our original assumption, Senator Cooper, was that the +Governor was approximately in this attitude at the time he was---- + +Senator COOPER. What attitude is that now? + +Dr. SHAW. This is an attitude sitting in a jump seat as we know he +was, upright, with his right forearm held across the lower portion of +the chest. In this position, the trajectory of the bullet could have +caused the wound of entrance, the wound of exit, struck his wrist and +proceeded on into the left thigh. But although this is a possibility, +I can't give a firm opinion that this is the actual way in which it +occurred. + +Mr. SPECTER. If it pleases the Commission, we propose to go through +that in this testimony; and we have already started to mark other +exhibits in sequence on the clothing. So that it will be more +systematic, we plan to proceed with the identification of clothing and +then go on to the composite diagram which explains the first hypothesis +of Dr. Shaw and the other doctors of Parkland. And then proceed from +that, as I intend to do, with an examination of the bullet, which will +explore the thinking of the doctor on that subject. + +Dr. Shaw, for our record, I will hand you Commission Exhibit No. 684 +and ask you if that is a picture of the reverse side of the coat, which +we will later prove to have been worn by Governor Connally, the coat +which is before you? + +Dr. SHAW. It is. + +Mr. SPECTER. What, if anything, appears on the back of that coat and +also on the picture in line with the wound which you have described on +the Governor's posterior chest? + +Dr. SHAW. The picture--the coat and the picture of the coat, show a +rent in the back of the coat approximately 2-centimeters medial to +the point where the sleeve has been joined to the main portion of the +garment. + +The lighter-colored material of the lining of the coat can be seen +through this rent in the coat. + +Mr. SPECTER. Dr. Shaw, I show you a shirt, subject to later proof that +it was the shirt worn by Governor Connally, together with a photograph +marked "Commission Exhibit No. 685," and ask you if that is a picture +of that shirt, the back side of the shirt? + +Dr. SHAW. Yes; it is a picture of the back side of the shirt. However, +in this particular picture I am not able to make out the hole in the +shirt very well. + +Now I see it, I believe; yes. + +Mr. SPECTER. Will you describe the hole as you see it to exist in the +shirt? Aside from what you see on the picture, what hole do you observe +on the back of the shirt itself? + +Dr. SHAW. On the back of the shirt itself there is a hole, a punched +out area of the shirt which is a little more than a centimeter in its +greater diameter. The whole shirt is soiled by brown stains which could +have been due to blood. + +Mr. SPECTER. How does the hole in the back of the shirt correspond with +the wound on the Governor's back? + +Dr. SHAW. It does correspond exactly. + +Mr. SPECTER. Now turning the same shirt over to the front side, I +ask you if the photograph, marked "Commission Exhibit No. 386," is a +picture of the front side of this shirt? + +Dr. SHAW. It is. + +Mr. SPECTER. What does the picture of the shirt show with respect to a +hole, if any, on the right side of the front of the shirt? + +Dr. SHAW. The picture and the shirt show on the right side a much +larger rent in the garment with the rent being approximately 4 +centimeters in its largest diameter. + +Mr. SPECTER. What wound, if any, did the Governor sustain on his thigh, +Dr. Shaw? + +Mr. DULLES. Just one moment, are you leaving this? + +Mr. SPECTER. Yes. + +Mr. DULLES. I wonder whether or not it would not be desirable for +the doctor to put on this photograph where these holes are, because +they are not at all clear for the future if we want to study those +photographs. + +Dr. SHAW. This one is not so hard. + +Mr. DULLES. That one appears but the other one doesn't appear and I +think it would be very helpful. + +Dr. SHAW. How would you like to have me outline this? + +Mr. SPECTER. Draw a red circle of what you conceive to be the hole +there, Doctor. + +Mr. DULLES. The actual hole is not nearly as big as your circle, it is +the darkened area inside that circle, is it not? + +Dr. SHAW. Yes; the darkened area is enclosed by the circle. + +Mr. SPECTER. Are you able to note on the photograph of the back of the +shirt, 685? + +Will you draw a red circle around the area of the hole on the +photograph then, Dr. Shaw? + +Mr. DULLES. Would you just initial those two circles, if you can. + +Mr. SPECTER. Dr. Shaw, what wounds, if any, did the Governor sustain on +his left thigh? + +Dr. SHAW. He sustained a small puncture-type wound on the medial aspect +of the left thigh. + +Mr. SPECTER. Did you have an opportunity to examine that closely? + +Dr. SHAW. No. + +Mr. SPECTER. Did you have an opportunity to examine it sufficiently to +ascertain its location on the left thigh? + +Dr. SHAW. No; I didn't examine it that closely, except for its general +location. + +Mr. SPECTER. Where was it with respect to a general location then on +the Governor's thigh? + +Dr. SHAW. It is on the medial anterior aspect of the thigh. + +Mr. DULLES. Nontechnically, what does it mean? + +Dr. SHAW. Well, above, slightly above, between, in other words, the +medial aspect would be the aspect toward the middle of the body, but as +far as being how many centimeters or inches it is from the knee and the +groin, I am not absolutely sure. + +Mr. SPECTER. I now show you a pair of trousers which we shall later +identify as being those worn by the Governor. I will, first of all, ask +you if a photograph bearing Commission Exhibit No. 687 is a picture of +those trousers? + +Dr. SHAW. It is. + +Mr. SPECTER. And what hole, if any did you observe on the trousers and +on the picture of the trousers? + +Dr. SHAW. There is a hole in the garment that has been made by some +instrument which has carried away a part of the Governor's garment. In +other words, it is not a tear but is a punched out hole, and this is +approximately 4 centimeters on the inner aspect from the crease of the +trousers. + +Mr. DULLES. Can you tell where the knee is there and how far above the +knee approximately? + +Dr. SHAW. I can't tell exactly. + +Mr. DULLES. I guess you can't tell. + +Dr. SHAW. From the crotch I would say it would be slightly, it is a +little hard to tell, slightly more toward the knee than the groin. + +Mr. SPECTER. Does that hole in the left leg of the trousers match up to +the wound on the left thigh of the Governor? + +Dr. SHAW. To the best of my recollection it does. + +Mr. DULLES. Are there any other perforations in these trousers at all, +any other holes? + +Dr. SHAW. No. + +Mr. DULLES. So that means that whatever made the hole on the front side +did not come through and make a hole anywhere else in the trousers? + +Dr. SHAW. That is correct. It had to be a penetrating wound and not a +perforating wound, it didn't go on through. + +Mr. SPECTER. Will you turn those trousers over, Dr. Shaw? + +Dr. SHAW. I believe we had already looked at it. + +Mr. SPECTER. On the reverse side, and state whether or not this picture +bearing Commission Exhibit No. 688 accurately depicts the reverse side +of the trousers? + +Dr. SHAW. Yes; it does. + +Mr. SPECTER. Is there any hole shown either on the picture or on the +trousers themselves? + +Dr. SHAW. No. + +Mr. SPECTER. Dr. Shaw, I now show you a body diagram which is marked +"Commission Exhibit No. 689." + +Senator COOPER. May I ask a question before you ask that question? + +When you first saw Governor Connally in the emergency room was he +dressed or undressed? + +Dr. SHAW. His trousers were still on. He had his shorts on, I should +say, Senator Cooper, but his coat, shirt, and trousers had been removed. + +Mr. SPECTER. Were his clothes anywhere in the vicinity where you could +have seen them? + +Dr. SHAW. No; I never saw them. This is the first time that I saw them. + +Mr. SPECTER. That is earlier today when you examined them in this room? + +Dr. SHAW. That is correct. + +Mr. SPECTER. Looking at Commission Exhibit No. 689, is that a drawing +which was prepared, after consultation with you, representing the +earlier theory of all of the Governor's wounds having been inflicted by +a single missile? + +Dr. SHAW. That is correct. + +Mr. SPECTER. With reference to that diagram, would you explain the +position that you had earlier thought the Governor to have been in when +he was wounded here? + +Dr. SHAW. We felt that the Governor was in an upright sitting position, +and at the time of wounding was turning slightly to the right. This +would bring the three wounds, as we know them, the wound in the chest, +the wound in the wrist, and the wound in the thigh into a line assuming +that the right forearm was held against the lower right chest in front. + +The line of inclination of this particular diagram is a little more +sharply downward than is probably correct in view of the inclination of +the ribs of the chest. + +Mr. SPECTER. Will you redraw that line, Dr. Shaw, to conform with what +you believe to be---- + +Dr. SHAW. The fact that the muscle bundles on either side of the +fifth rib were not damaged meant that the missile to strip away 10 +centimeters of the rib had to follow this rib pretty much along its +line of inclination. + +Mr. DULLES. I wonder if you could use that red pencil to make it a +little clearer for us? + +Dr. SHAW. I think these would probably work well on this paper. Perhaps +this isn't a tremendous point but it slopes just a little too much. + +Mr. SPECTER. You have initialed that to show your incline? + +Dr. SHAW. Yes. + +Mr. SPECTER. With respect to the wound you described on the thigh, Dr. +Shaw, was there any point of exit as to that wound? + +Dr. SHAW. No. + +Mr. SPECTER. I now show you---- + +Mr. DULLES. Could I ask one more question there, how deep was the wound +of entry, could you tell at all? + +Dr. SHAW. Mr. Dulles, I didn't examine the wound of the thigh so I +can't testify as to that. Dr. Gregory, I think, was there at the time +that the debris was carried out and he may have more knowledge than I +have. + +Mr. DULLES. We will hear Dr. Gregory later? + +Mr. SPECTER. Yes; he is scheduled to testify as soon as Dr. Shaw +concludes. + +Dr. Shaw, I now show you Commission Exhibit 399 which has heretofore +been identified as being a virtually whole bullet weighing 158 grains. + +May I say for the record, that in the depositions which have been taken +in Parkland Hospital, that we have ascertained, and those depositions +are part of the overall record, that is the bullet which came from the +stretcher of Governor Connally. + +First, Dr. Shaw, have you had a chance to examine that bullet earlier +today? + +Dr. SHAW. Yes; I examined it this morning. + +Mr. SPECTER. Is it possible that the bullet which went through the +Governor's chest could have emerged being as fully intact as that +bullet is? + +Dr. SHAW. Yes; I believe it is possible because of the fact that the +bullet struck the fifth rib at a very acute angle and struck a portion +of the rib which would not offer a great amount of resistance. + +Mr. SPECTER. Does that bullet appear to you to have any of its metal +flaked off? + +Dr. SHAW. I have been told that the one point on the nose of this +bullet that is deformed was cut off for purposes of examination. +With that information, I would have to say that this bullet has lost +literally none of its substance. + +Mr. SPECTER. Now, as to the wound on the thigh, could that bullet have +gone into the Governor's thigh without causing any more damage than +appears on the face of that bullet? + +Dr. SHAW. If it was a spent bullet; yes. As far as the bullet is +concerned it could have caused the Governor's thigh wound as a spent +missile. + +Mr. SPECTER. Why do you say it is a spent missile, would you elaborate +on what your thinking is on that issue? + +Dr. SHAW. Only from what I have been told by Dr. Shires and Dr. +Gregory, that the depth of the wound was only into the subcutaneous +tissue, not actually into the muscle of the leg, so it meant that +missile had penetrated for a very short period. Am I quoting you +correctly, Dr. Gregory? + +Mr. SPECTER. May the record show Dr. Gregory is present during this +testimony and---- + +Dr. GREGORY. I will say yes. + +Mr. SPECTER. And indicates in the affirmative. Do you have sufficient +knowledge of the wound of the wrist to render an opinion as to whether +that bullet could have gone through Governor Connally's wrist and +emerged being as much intact as it is? + +Dr. SHAW. I do not. + +Mr. SPECTER. Dr. Shaw, assume if you will certain facts to be true +in hypothetical form, that is, that the President was struck in the +upper portion of the back or lower portion of the neck with a 6.5-mm. +missile passing between the strap muscles of the President's neck, +proceeding through a facia channel striking no bones, not violating +the pleural cavity, and emerging through the anterior third of the +neck, with the missile having been fired from a weapon having a muzzle +velocity of approximately 2,000 feet per second, with the muzzle being +approximately 100 to 250 feet from the President's body; that the +missile was a copper jacketed bullet. Would it be possible for that +bullet to have then proceeded approximately 4 or 5 feet and then would +it be possible for it to have struck Governor Connally in the back and +have inflicted the wound which you have described on the posterior +aspect of his chest, and also on the anterior aspect of his chest? + +Dr. SHAW. Yes. + +Mr. SPECTER. And what would your reason be for giving an affirmative +answer to that question, Dr. Shaw? + +Dr. SHAW. Because I would feel that a missile with this velocity and +weight striking no more than the soft tissues of the neck would have +adequate velocity and mass to inflict the wound that we found on the +Governor's chest. + +Mr. SPECTER. Now, without respect to whether or not the bullet +identified as Commission Exhibit 399 is or is not the one which +inflicted the wound on the Governor, is it possible that a missile +similar to the one which I have just described in the hypothetical +question could have inflicted all of the Governor's wounds in +accordance with the theory which you have outlined on Commission +Exhibit No. 689? + +Dr. SHAW. Assuming that it also had passed through the President's neck +you mean? + +Mr. SPECTER. No; I had not added that factor in. I will in the next +question. + +Dr. SHAW. All right. As far as the wounds of the chest are concerned, +I feel that this bullet could have inflicted those wounds. But the +examination of the wrist both by X-ray and at the time of surgery +showed some fragments of metal that make it difficult to believe that +the same missile could have caused these two wounds. There seems to be +more than three grains of metal missing as far as the--I mean in the +wrist. + +Mr. SPECTER. Your answer there, though, depends upon the assumption +that the bullet which we have identified as Exhibit 399 is the bullet +which did the damage to the Governor. Aside from whether or not that +is the bullet which inflicted the Governor's wounds. + +Dr. SHAW. I see. + +Mr. SPECTER. Could a bullet traveling in the path which I have +described in the prior hypothetical question, have inflicted all of the +wounds on the Governor? + +Dr. SHAW. Yes. + +Mr. SPECTER. And so far as the velocity and the dimension of the bullet +are concerned, is it possible that the same bullet could have gone +through the President in the way that I have described and proceed +through the Governor causing all of his wounds without regard to +whether or not it was bullet 399? + +Dr. SHAW. Yes. + +Mr. SPECTER. When you started to comment about it not being possible, +was that in reference to the existing mass and shape of bullet 399? + +Dr. SHAW. I thought you were referring directly to the bullet shown as +Exhibit 399. + +Mr. SPECTER. What is your opinion as to whether bullet 399 could have +inflicted all of the wounds on the Governor, then, without respect at +this point to the wound of the President's neck? + +Dr. SHAW. I feel that there would be some difficulty in explaining all +of the wounds as being inflicted by bullet Exhibit 399 without causing +more in the way of loss of substance to the bullet or deformation of +the bullet. + +(Discussion off the record.) + +Mr. SPECTER. Dr. Shaw, have you had an opportunity today here in the +Commission building to view the movies which we referred to as the +Zapruder movies and the slides taken from these movies? + +Dr. SHAW. Yes. + +Mr. SPECTER. And what, if any, light did those movies shed on your +evaluation and opinions on this matter with respect to the wounds of +the Governor? + +Dr. SHAW. Well, my main interest was to try to place the time that the +Governor was struck by the bullet which inflicted the wound on his +chest in reference to the sequence of the three shots, as has been +described to us. + +(At this point the Chief Justice entered the hearing room.) + +This meant trying to carefully examine the position of the Governor's +body in the car so that it would fall in line with what we knew the +trajectory must be for this bullet coming from the point where it has +been indicated it did come from. And in trying to place this actual +frame that these frames are numbered when the Governor was hit, my +opinion was that it was frame number, let's see, I think it was No. 36. + +Mr. SPECTER. 236? + +Dr. SHAW. 236, give or take 1 or 2 frames. It was right in 35, 36, 37, +perhaps. + +Mr. SPECTER. I have heretofore asked you questions about what +possibly could have happened in terms of the various combinations of +possibilities on missiles striking the Governor in relationship to +striking the President as well. Do you have any opinion as to what, in +fact, did happen? + +Dr. SHAW. Yes. From the pictures, from the conversation with Governor +Connally and Mrs. Connally, it seems that the first bullet hit the +President in the shoulder and perforated the neck, but this was not the +bullet that Governor Connally feels hit him; and in the sequence of +films I think it is hard to say that the first bullet hit both of these +men almost simultaneously. + +Mr. SPECTER. Is that view based on the information which Governor +Connally provided to you? + +Dr. SHAW. Largely. + +Mr. SPECTER. As opposed to any objectively determinable facts from the +bullets, the situs of the wounds or your viewing of the pictures? + +Dr. SHAW. Yes. I was influenced a great deal by what Governor Connally +knew about his movements in the car at this particular time. + +Mr. DULLES. You have indicated a certain angle of declination on this +chart here which the Chief Justice has. + +Dr. SHAW. Yes. + +Mr. SPECTER. Do you know enough about the angle of declination of the +bullet that hit the President to judge at all whether these two angles +of declination are consistent? + +Dr. SHAW. We know that the angle of declination was a downward one from +back to front so that I think this is consistent with the angle of +declination of the wound that the Governor sustained. + +Senator COOPER. Are you speaking of the angle of declination in the +President's body? + +Dr. SHAW. Of the first wound? + +Mr. SPECTER. Yes. + +Dr. SHAW. First wound. + +Mr. SPECTER. What you have actually seen from pictures to show the +angle of declination? + +Dr. SHAW. That is right. + +Mr. SPECTER. In the wounds in the President's body? + +Dr. SHAW. Yes; that is right. I did not examine the President. + +Mr. DULLES. And that angle taking into account say the 4 feet +difference between where the President was sitting and where the +Governor was sitting, would be consistent with the point of entry of +the Governor's body as you have shown it? + +Dr. SHAW. The jump seat in the car, as we could see, placed the +Governor sitting at a lower level than the President, and I think +conceivably these two wounds could have been caused by the same bullet. + +Mr. SPECTER. Do you have anything else to add, Dr. Shaw, which you +think would be helpful to the Commission in any way? + +Dr. SHAW. I don't believe so Mr. Specter. + +Mr. SPECTER. May it please the Commission then I would like to move +into evidence Commission Exhibits Nos. 679 and 680, and then reserve +Nos. 681 and 682 until we get the photographs of the X-rays and I now +move for admission into evidence Commission Exhibits Nos. 683 through +689. + +Senator COOPER. They have all been identified, have they? + +Mr. SPECTER. Yes, sir; during the course of Dr. Shaw's testimony. + +Senator COOPER. It is ordered then that these exhibits be received in +the record. + +(The documents referred to, previously identified as Commission +Exhibits Nos. 679, 680, and 683-689 for identification were received in +evidence.) + +Mr. McCLOY. Just one or two questions. It is perfectly clear, Doctor, +that the wound, the lethal wound on the President did not--the bullet +that caused the lethal wound on the President, did not cause any wounds +on Governor Connally, in your opinion? + +Dr. SHAW. Mr. McCloy, I couldn't say that from my knowledge. + +Mr. McCLOY. We are talking about the, following up what Mr. Dulles +said about the angle of declination, the wound that came through the +President's collar, you said was consistent between the same bullet. I +just wondered whether under all the circumstances that you know about +the President's head wound on the top that would also be consistent +with a wound in Governor Connally's body? + +Dr. SHAW. On the chest, yes; I am not so sure about the wrist. I can't +quite place where his wrist was at the time his chest was struck. + +Mr. McCLOY. Now perhaps this is Dr. Gregory's testimony, that is the +full description of the wrist wound, that would be his rather than your +testimony? + +Dr. SHAW. I think he could throw just as much light on it as I could. +And more in certain aspects. + +Mr. McCLOY. It did hit bone? + +Dr. SHAW. Obviously. + +Mr. McCLOY. And there must have been a considerable diminution in the +velocity of the bullet after penetrating through the wrist? + +Dr. SHAW. Yes. + +Mr. DULLES. The wound inflicted on it, the chest wound on Governor +Connally, if you move that an inch or two, 1 inch or the other, could +that have been lethal, go through an area that could easily have been +lethal? + +Dr. SHAW. Yes; of course, if it had been moved more medially it could +have struck the heart and the great vessels. + +Mr. McCLOY. Let me ask you this, Doctor, in your experience with +gunshot wounds, is it possible for a man to be hit sometime before he +realizes it? + +Dr. SHAW. Yes. There can be a delay in the sensory reaction. + +Mr. McCLOY. Yes; so that a man can think as of a given instant he was +not hit, and when actually he could have been hit. + +Dr. SHAW. There can be an extending sensation and then just a gradual +building up of a feeling of severe injury. + +Mr. McCLOY. But there could be a delay in any appreciable reaction +between the time of the impact of the bullet and the occurrence? + +Dr. SHAW. Yes; but in the case of a wound which strikes a bony +substance such as a rib, usually the reaction is quite prompt. + +Mr. McCLOY. Yes. + +Dr. SHAW. Yes. + +Mr. McCLOY. Now, you have indicated, I think, that this bullet traveled +along, hit and traveled along the path of the rib, is that right? + +Dr. SHAW. Yes. + +Mr. McCLOY. Is it possible that it could have not, the actual bullet +could not have hit the rib at all but it might have been the expanding +flesh that would cause the wound or the proper contusion, I guess you +would call it on the rib itself? + +Dr. SHAW. I think we would have to postulate that the bullet hit the +rib itself by the neat way in which it stripped the rib out without +doing much damage to the muscles that lay on either side of it. + +Mr. McCLOY. Was--up until you gave him the anesthetic--the Governor was +fully conscious, was he? + +Dr. SHAW. I would not say fully, but he was responsive. He would answer +questions. + +Mr. McCLOY. I think that is all I have. + +The CHAIRMAN. I have no questions of the doctor. + +Mr. DULLES. There were no questions put to him that were significant as +far as our testimony is concerned? + +Dr. SHAW. No; we really don't have to question him much. Our problem +was pretty clearcut, and he told us it hurt and that was about his only +response as far as---- + +Senator COOPER. Could I ask you a question, doctor? + +I think you said from the time you came into the emergency room and the +time you went to the operating room was about 5 minutes? + +Dr. SHAW. Yes; it was just the time that it took to ask a few simple +questions, what has been done so far, and has the operating room been +alerted, and then I went out and talked to Mrs. Connally, just very +briefly, I told her what the problem was in respect to the Governor and +what we were going to have to do about it and she said to go ahead with +anything that was necessary. So this couldn't have taken more than 5 +minutes or so. + +Mr. DULLES. Did he say anything or did anyone say anything there about +the circumstances of the shooting? + +Dr. SHAW. Not at that time. + +Mr. DULLES. Either of Governor Connally or the President? + +Dr. SHAW. Not at that time. All of our conversation was later. + +Mr. DULLES. Was the President in the same room? + +Dr. SHAW. No. + +Mr. DULLES. Did you see him? + +Dr. SHAW. I only saw his shoes and his feet. He was in the room +immediately opposite. As I came into the hallway, I could recognize +that the President was on it, in the room to my right. I knew that my +problem was concerned with Governor Connally, and I turned and went +into the room where I saw that he was. + +Mr. DULLES. Did you hear at that time or have any knowledge, of a +bullet which had been found on the stretcher? + +Dr. SHAW. No; this was later knowledge. + +Mr. DULLES. When did you first hear that? + +(At this point Senator Russell entered the hearing room.) + +Dr. SHAW. This information was first given to me by a man from the +Secret Service who interviewed me in my office several weeks later. It +is the first time I knew about any bullet being recovered. + +Senator COOPER. I think, of course, it is evident from your testimony +you have had wide experience in chest wounds and bullet wounds in the +chest. + +What experience have you had in, say, the field of ballistics? Would +this experience--you have been dealing in chest wounds caused by +bullets--have provided you knowledge also about the characteristics of +missiles, particularly bullets of this type? + +Dr. SHAW. No; Senator. I believe that my information about ballistics +is just that of an average layman, no more. Perhaps a little more since +I have seen deformed bullets from wounds, but I haven't gone into that +aspect of wounds. + +Senator COOPER. In the answers to the hypothetical questions that were +addressed to you, based upon the only actual knowledge which you could +base that answer, was the fact that you had performed the operation on +the wound caused in the chest, on the wound in the chest? + +Dr. SHAW. That is true. I have seen many bullets that have passed +through bodies or have penetrated bodies and have struck bone and I +know manners from which they are deformed but I know very little about +the caliber of bullets, the velocity of bullets, many things that other +people have much more knowledge of than I have. + +Senator COOPER. That is all. + +The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Dr. Shaw. + + +TESTIMONY OF DR. CHARLES FRANCIS GREGORY + +Senator COOPER. Do you solemnly swear the testimony you are going to +give to this Commission will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing +but the truth, so help you God? + +Dr. GREGORY. I do. + +Mr. SPECTER. Would you state your full name for the record, please? + +Dr. GREGORY. Doctor Charles Francis Gregory. + +Mr. SPECTER. What is your profession, sir? + +Dr. GREGORY. I am a physician and surgeon. + +Mr. SPECTER. Would you outline your educational background briefly, +please? + +Dr. GREGORY. I received a bachelor of science degree from the +University of Indiana in 1941, and an M.D. degree in medicine from the +Indiana University School of Medicine in 1944. + +Following 1-year internship and a tour of duty in the U.S. Navy, I +undertook 5 years of postgraduate training in orthopedic surgery at +Indiana University Medical Center. + +Upon completing that training I became a member of the faculty at +Indiana University Medical School, and remained so until November of +1952, when I reentered the U.S. Navy for another 20 months. + +In 1956 I was appointed professor and then chairman of the Division +of Orthopedic Surgery at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical +School, where I presently am. + +Mr. SPECTER. Are you certificated by the American Board of Orthopedic +Surgery? + +Dr. GREGORY. I am, in 1953. + +Mr. SPECTER. What experience, if any, have you had with bullet wounds, +Doctor? + +Dr. GREGORY. Beyond the rather indigenous nature of such wounds in the +main teaching hospital at Southwestern Medical School, my experience +has covered a tour of duty in the Navy during World War II, and a +considerably more active period of time in the Korean war in support of +the 1st Marine Corps Division. + +Mr. SPECTER. What is your best estimate as to the total number of +bullet wounds you have had an opportunity to observe and treat? + +Dr. GREGORY. I would estimate that I have dealt directly with +approximately 500 such wounds. + +Mr. SPECTER. Are you a licensed doctor in the State of Texas at the +present time? + +Dr. GREGORY. I am. + +Mr. SPECTER. What were your duties in a general way back on November +22, 1963, with Parkland Hospital? + +Dr. GREGORY. On that date, November 22, 1963, I was seeing patients in +the health service of the adjacent medical school building when about +noon I was advised that the President of the United States had been +admitted to Parkland Hospital due to gunshot injuries. + +I went immediately to the emergency room area of the Parkland Hospital, +and upon gaining admission to the emergency room, I encountered the +hospital superintendent. + +I inquired of him then as to whether or not the President had injuries +which might require my attention and he indicated that they were not of +that nature. + +I, therefore, took a number of unnecessary onlookers like myself from +the emergency area in order to reduce the confusion, and I went to the +fifth floor of the hospital, which is the orthopedic ward. + +And after attending a number of patients there, I prepared to leave the +hospital, but stopped by the surgical suite on my way out, to check and +see if any need for my services might have come up, and encountered +there Dr. Shaw who indicated to me that Governor Connally had also been +injured, and that these included injuries to his extremities for which +I would be retained. + +Mr. SPECTER. Did Dr. Shaw then call upon you to perform operative aid +for Governor Connally? + +Dr. GREGORY. He did. + +Mr. SPECTER. And when did you first see Governor Connally then? + +Dr. GREGORY. I first saw Governor Connally after Dr. Shaw had prepared +him and draped him for the surgical procedures which he carried out on +the Governor's chest. + +Mr. SPECTER. Now, did you have any opportunity to observe the wound on +the Governor's chest? + +Dr. GREGORY. I could see the wounds on the Governor's chest, but I +could see them only through the apertures available in the surgical +drapes, and therefore I had difficulty orienting the exact positions of +the wounds, except for the wound identified as the wound of exit which +could be related to the nipple in the right chest which was exposed. + +Mr. SPECTER. Now what did you observe with respect to the wound on the +Governor's wrist? + +Dr. GREGORY. I did not have an opportunity to examine the wound on the +Governor's wrist until Dr. Shaw had completed his surgical treatment of +the Governor's chest wound. + +At that time he was turned to his back and it was possible to examine +both the right upper extremity and the left lower extremity for wounds +of the wrist and left thigh respectively. + +The right wrist was the site of a perforating wound, which by +assumption began on a dorsal lateral surface. In lay terms this is +the back of the hand on the thumb side at a point approximately 5 +centimeters above the wrist joint. + +There is a second wound presumed to be the wound of exit which lay in +the midline of the wrist on its palmar surface about 2 centimeters, +something less than 1 inch above the wrist crease, the most distal +wrist crease. + +Mr. SPECTER. You say that the wound on the dorsal or back side of the +wrist you assume to be the wound of entrance. What factors, if any, led +you to that assumption? + +Dr. GREGORY. I assumed it to be a wound of entrance because of the +general ragged appearance of the wound, but for other reasons which I +can delineate in a lighter description which came to light during the +operative procedure and which are also hallmarked to a certain extent +by the X-rays. + +Mr. SPECTER. Would you proceed to tell us, even though it is out of +sequence, what those factors, later determined to be, were which led +you to assume that it was the wound of entrance? + +Dr. GREGORY. Yes. Assuming that the wrist wound, which included a +shattering fracture of the wrist bone, of the radial bone just above +the wrist, was produced by a missile there were found in the vicinity +of the wound two things which led me to believe that it passed from +the dorsal or back side to the volar. The first of these---- + +Mr. SPECTER. When you say volar what do you mean by that? + +Dr. GREGORY. The palm side. + +Mr. SPECTER. Proceed. + +Dr. GREGORY. The first of these was evidence of clothing, bits of +thread and cloth, apparently from a dark suit or something of that sort +which had been carried into the wound, from the skin into the region of +the bone. + +The second of these were two or three small fragments of metal which +presumably were shed by the missile after their encounter with the firm +substance which is bone. + +Mr. SPECTER. As to the bits of cloth which you describe, have you had +an opportunity earlier today to examine a coat, heretofore identified +and marked by a picture bearing Commission Exhibit No. 683, which we +will have later testimony on as being Governor Connally's coat? + +Dr. GREGORY. I have. + +Mr. SPECTER. And what, if anything, did your examination disclose with +respect to the wound of the right wrist? + +Dr. GREGORY. Well, the right sleeve of the coat has a tear in it close +to the margin at a point which is, I think, commensurate with the +location of the dorsal surface, the back side of the wrist, forearm +where the two may have been superimposed and both damaged by the same +penetrating body. + +Mr. SPECTER. Is the nature of the material of the suit coat the same as +that which you found in the wound of the wrist? + +Dr. GREGORY. It is. As a matter of fact, at the time that the wound was +treated, and the cloth was found, the speculation was made as to the +kind of--the color of the suit the Governor was wearing and moreover +the thread was almost identifiable as mohair or raw silk or something +of that nature and entirely consistent with this fabric. + +Mr. SPECTER. Was the color, which you speculated about, the same as +which you see in this jacket? + +Dr. GREGORY. Yes; it was my impression it was black or either dark blue. + +Mr. SPECTER. You say there was something in the X-ray work which led +you to further conclude that that was the wound of entrance? + +Dr. GREGORY. Yes. + +Mr. SPECTER. Will you proceed now to show the Commission those X-rays, +please? + +Dr. GREGORY. This is an X-ray made in the lateral view of the +Governor's wrist at the time he was brought to the hospital prior to +any surgical intervention. + +Mr. SPECTER. As to the first X-ray, Dr. Gregory, would you identify the +date when it was taken? + +Dr. GREGORY. Yes; this film was made on November 22, 1963, as indicated +by a pencil marking on that film, and it further bears the assigned +X-ray number of 219-992, which was that of the patient, Governor John +Connally. + +Mr. SPECTER. May it please the Commission we shall reserve number 690 +and 691 for later identification of those photographs and X-rays. + +Senator COOPER. So ordered. + +Dr. GREGORY. If you will notice in addition to the apparent fracture of +this, the radial bone here. + +Mr. SPECTER. Are you now describing a second X-ray? + +Dr. GREGORY. No; these are two taken at right angle of the Governor's +wrist prior to attention. These are diagnostic film, one made with the +hand palm down and one with the hand turned 90°. + +Mr. SPECTER. Do they bear identical numbers then? + +Dr. GREGORY. They do. + +Mr. SPECTER. Is there any mark on them at the present time which +distinguishes them by way of marking or number? + +Dr. GREGORY. Other than the pencil markings on each of these two films +and my own which I attached last evening for convenience. + +Mr. SPECTER. Can you mark one of them as "A" and one as "B," so that +when you describe them here we will know which you are referring to? + +Dr. GREGORY. Very well. Let the record show that "A" stands for the +anteroposterior view, Exhibit No. 691, and "B" stands for the lateral +view, Exhibit No. 690, of the right wrist and forearm. "A" then +demonstrates a comminuted fracture of the wrist with three fragments. + +Mr. SPECTER. What do you mean by comminuted? + +Dr. GREGORY. Comminuted refers to shattering, to break into more than +two pieces, specifically many pieces, and if I may, I can point out +there is a fragment here, a fragment here, a fragment here, a fragment +here, and there are several smaller fragments lying in the center of +these three larger ones. + +Mr. SPECTER. How many fragments are there in total, sir, in your +opinion? + +Dr. GREGORY. I would judge from this view that counting each isolated +fragment there are fully seven or eight, and experience has taught that +when these things are dismantled directly under direct vision that +there very obviously may be more than that. + +Mr. SPECTER. Will you continue to describe what that X-ray shows with +respect to metallic fragments, if any? + +Dr. GREGORY. Three shadows are identified as representing metallic +fragments. There are other light shadows in this film which are +identified or interpreted as being artifacts. + +Mr. SPECTER. What is the basis of distinction between that which is an +artifact and that which is a real shadow of the metallic substance? + +Dr. GREGORY. A real shadow of metallic substance persist and be seen in +other views, other X-ray copies, whereas artifacts which are produced +by irregularities either in the film or film carrier will vary from one +X-ray to another. + +Mr. SPECTER. Is it your view that these other X-ray films led you to +believe that those are, in fact, metallic substances? + +Dr. GREGORY. As a matter of fact, it is the mate to this very film, +the lateral view marked "B", which shows the same three fragments in +essentially the same relationship to the various levels of the forearm +that leads me to believe that these do, in fact, represent metallic +fragments. + +Mr. SPECTER. Will you describe as specifically as you can what those +metallic fragments are by way of size and shape, sir? + +Dr. GREGORY. I would identify these fragments as varying from +five-tenths of a millimeter in diameter to approximately 2 millimeters +in diameter, and each fragment is no more than a half millimeter in +thickness. They would represent in lay terms flakes, flakes of metal. + +Mr. SPECTER. What would your estimate be as to their weight in total? + +Dr. GREGORY. I would estimate that they would be weighed in micrograms +which is very small amount of weight. I don't know how to reduce it to +ordinary equivalents for you. + +It is the kind of weighing that requires a microadjustable scale, which +means that it is something less than the weight of a postage stamp. + +Mr. SPECTER. Have you now described all the metallic substances which +you observed either visually or through the X-rays in the Governor's +wrist? + +Dr. GREGORY. These are the three metallic substance items which I saw. + +Now if I may use these to indicate why I view the path as being from +dorsal to volar, from the back of the wrist to the palm side, these +have been shed on the volar side suggesting that contact with this bone +resulted in there being flaked off, as the remainder of the missile +emerged from the volar side leaving the small flakes behind. + +Mr. SPECTER. Are the X-rays helpful in any other way in ascertaining +the point of entry and the point of exit? + +Dr. GREGORY. There is a suggestion to be seen in Exhibit B, the lateral +view, a suggestion of the pathway as seen by distortion of soft +tissues. This has become a bit irregular on the dorsal side. There is +evidence of air in the tissues on this side suggesting that the pathway +was something like this. + +Mr. SPECTER. And when you say indications of air on which side did you +mean by "this side," Doctor? + +Dr. GREGORY. Air distally on the volar side. There is some evidence +of air in the tissue on the volar side too but they are at different +levels and this suggests that they gained access to the tissue plans in +this fashion. + +Mr. SPECTER. Would you elaborate on just what do you mean by "this +fashion," indicating the distinctions on the level of the air which +suggest that conclusion to you? + +Dr. GREGORY. Recall that I suggested that the wound of entrance, +certainly the dorsal wound lay some distance, 5 cm. above the wrist +joint, approximately here, that the second wound considered to be the +wound of exit was only 2 cm. above this point, making the pathway an +oblique one. + +Mr. DULLES. Would you show that on your own wrist? + +Dr. GREGORY. Yes. + +Mr. DULLES. We have to explain this a little for the record but I think +it would be very useful. + +Dr. GREGORY. I think you will have an opportunity to see the real thing +a little later if the Governor makes his appearance here. + +But the wound of entry I considered to be, although on his right hand, +of course, to be approximately at this point on the wrist, and the +wound of exit here, which is about the right level for my coat sleeve +held at a casual position. + +Mr. SPECTER. Let the record show you made two red marks on your wrist, +which are in the same position as that which you have described +heretofore in technical language. + +Dr. GREGORY. Yes. + +Mr. SPECTER. Had you finished the complete explanation on the indicator +from the air levels which you had mentioned before? + +Dr. GREGORY. Yes. The air is a little bit more visible to the dorsal +surface, closer to the skin here, not so close down at the lower +portion, not so much tissue destruction had occurred at the point of +the emergence. + +Mr. SPECTER. Before proceeding to the other factors indicating point +of entry and point of exit, Dr. Gregory, I call your attention to +Commission Exhibit No. 399, which is a bullet and ask you first if you +have had an opportunity to examine that earlier today? + +Dr. GREGORY. I have. + +Mr. SPECTER. What opinion, if any, do you have as to whether that +bullet could have produced the wound on the Governor's right wrist and +remained as intact as it is at the present time? + +Dr. GREGORY. In examining this bullet, I find a small flake has been +either knocked off or removed from the rounded end of the missile. + +(At this point Representative Boggs entered the room.) + +I was told that this was removed for the purpose of analysis. The only +other deformity which I find is at the base of the missile at the +point where it joined the cartridge carrying the powder, I presume, +and this is somewhat flattened and deflected, distorted. There is some +irregularity of the darker metal within which I presume to represent +lead. + +The only way that this missile could have produced this wound in +my view, was to have entered the wrist backward. Now, this is not +inconsistent with one of the characteristics known for missiles which +is to tumble. All missiles in flight have two motions normally, a +linear motion from the muzzle of the gun to the target, a second motion +which is a spinning motion having to do with maintaining the integrity +of the initial linear direction, but if they strike an object they +may be caused to turn in their path and tumble end over, and if they +do, they tend to produce a greater amount of destruction within the +strike time or the target, and they could possibly, if tumbling in air +upon emergence, tumble into another target backward. That is the only +possible explanation I could offer to correlate this missile with this +particular wound. + +Mr. SPECTER. Is there sufficient metallic substance missing from the +back or rear end of that bullet to account for the metallic substance +which you have described in the Governor's wrist? + +Dr. GREGORY. It is possible but I don't know enough about the structure +of bullets or this one in particular, to know what is a normal +complement of lead or for this particular missile. It is irregular, but +how much it may have lost, I have no idea. + +Mr. DULLES. Would the nature of the entry wound give you any indication +as to whether it entered backward or whether it entered forward? + +Dr. GREGORY. My initial impression was that whatever produced the wound +of the wrist was an irregular object, certainly not smooth nosed as +the business end of this particular bullet is because of two things. +The size of the wound of entrance, and the fact that it is irregular +surfaced permitted it to pick up organic debris, materials, threads, +and carry them into the wound with it. + +Now, you will note that Dr. Shaw earlier in his testimony and in all of +my conversations with him, never did indicate that there was any such +loss of material into the wrist, nor does the back of this coat which +I have examined show that it lost significant amounts of cloth but I +think the tear in this coat sleeve does imply that there were bits of +fabric lost, and I think those were resident in the wrist. I think we +recovered them. + +Mr. SPECTER. Is the back of that bullet characteristic of an irregular +missile so as to cause the wound in the wrist? + +Dr. GREGORY. I would say that the back of this being flat and having +sharp edges is irregular, and would possibly tend to tear tissues more +than does an inclined plane such as this. + +Mr. SPECTER. Would the back of the missile be sufficiently irregular to +have caused the wound of the right wrist, in your opinion? + +Dr. GREGORY. I think it could have; yes. It is possible. + +Mr. SPECTER. Would it be consistent with your observations of the wrist +for that missile to have penetrated and gone through the right wrist? + +Dr. GREGORY. It is possible; yes. It appears to me since the wound of +exit was a small laceration, that much of the energy of the missile +that struck the Governor's wrist was expended in breaking the bone +reducing its velocity sufficient so that while it could make an +emergence through the underlying soft tissues on his wrist, it did not +do great damage to them. + +Mr. SPECTER. Is there any indication from the extent of the damage +to the wrist whether the bullet was pristine, that is: was the wrist +struck first in flight or whether there had been some reduction in the +velocity of the missile prior to striking the wrist? + +Dr. GREGORY. I would offer this opinion about a high velocity rifle +bullet striking a forearm. + +Mr. SPECTER. Permit me to inject factors which we have not put on the +record although it has been brought to your attention previously: +Assume this is a 6.5-millimeter missile which was shot from a rifle +having a muzzle velocity of approximately 2,000 feet per second, with +a distance of approximately 160 to 200 feet between the weapon and the +victim; and answer the prior question, if you would, Dr. Gregory, with +those factors in mind? + +Dr. GREGORY. I would fully expect the first object struck by that +missile to be very badly damaged, and especially if it were a rigid +bone such as the wrist bone is, to literally blow it apart. I have had +some experience with rifle wound injuries of the forearm produced by +this type of missile, and the last two which I attended myself have +culminated in amputation of the limb because of the extensive damage +produced by the missile as it passed through the arm. + +Considerably more than was evidenced in the Governor's case either by +examination of the limb itself or an examination of these X-rays. + +Mr. SPECTER. Now, as to the experience you had which you experienced +which resulted in amputations, what was the range between the weapon +and the victim's limb, if you know? + +Dr. GREGORY. The range in those two instances, I concede was +considerably shorter but I cannot give you the specific range. By short +I mean perhaps no more than 15 or 20 yards at the most. + +Mr. SPECTER. Would the difference between the 15 or 20 yards and the +160 to 250 feet make any difference in your opinion, though, as to the +damage which would be inflicted on the wrist had that bullet struck it +as the first point of impact? + +Dr. GREGORY. No, sir; I don't think it would have made that much +difference. + +Mr. SPECTER. Do you know what the color was of the fragments in the +wrist of the Governor, Dr. Gregory? + +Dr. GREGORY. As I recall them they were lead colored, silvery, of that +color. I did not recall them as being either brass or copper. + +Mr. SPECTER. Are there any other X-rays of the Governor's wrist which +would aid the Commission in its understanding of the injuries to the +wrist? + +Dr. GREGORY. Only to indicate that there were two fragments of metal +retrieved in the course of dealing with this wound surgically. + +For the subsequent X-rays of the same area, after the initial surgery +indicate that those fragments are no longer there. + +And as I stated, I thought I had retrieved two of them. The major one +or ones now being missing. The small one related to the bone or most +closely related to the bone, and I will put back up here---- + +Mr. SPECTER. On the new X-rays which you put up, would you identify +them first by indicating the date the X-ray was taken? + +Dr. GREGORY. Yes; the date of the X-ray is the same, November 22, +1963, and they may be identified as Exhibit "C" anteroposterior view +postoperative, which is this one. + +Mr. SPECTER. Did they bear the same numbers, Dr. Gregory? + +Dr. GREGORY. They will bear the same numbers; yes. + +Mr. DULLES. I think you had better get them marked. + +We haven't got them marked yet "A," "B," and "C." + +Representative BOGGS. Postoperative, these are after the operation? + +Dr. GREGORY. These two. This one was made before the wound was dealt +with. + +Mr. SPECTER. Which one? + +Dr. GREGORY. "A" is the one made before the wound was dealt with +surgically. + +Senator COOPER. Could you mark it 4 "A," "B," "C," and "D," Doctor? + +Mr. McCLOY. Is that "B," we have had another "B" here, you know? + +Dr. GREGORY. This is "C." "A" and "C" are comparable X-rays, one made +before and one made after the operation was carried out. + +Before the operation, you will note a large fragment of metal +visible here, not visible in this one. You will also note a small +satellite fragment not visible here. A second piece of metal visible +preoperatively is still present postoperatively. + +No effort incidentally is made to dissect for these fragments. They +are small, they are proverbial needles in hay stacks, and we know from +experience that small flakes of metal of this kind do not ordinarily +produce difficulty in the future, but that the extensive dissection +required to find them may produce such consequences and so we choose +to leave them inside unless we chance upon them, and on this occasion, +those bits of metal recovered were simply found by chance in the course +of removing necrotized material. + +Other than that the X-rays have nothing more to offer so far as the +wrist is concerned. + +Mr. SPECTER. May we then reserve 692 for "C" and 693 for "D"? + +Dr. GREGORY. I will put the other marks on these. + +Senator COOPER. So ordered. + +Dr. GREGORY. For your convenience. + +Mr. DULLES. Was the wound of exit in the wrist also jagged like the +wound of entry or was there, what differences were there between the +wound of entry and the wound of exit? + +Dr. GREGORY. The wound of exit was disposed transversely across the +wrist exactly as I have it marked here. It was in the nature of a small +laceration, perhaps a centimeter and a half in length, about a half an +inch long, and it lay in the skin creases so that as you examined the +wrist casually it was a very innocent looking thing indeed, and it was +not until it was probed that its true nature in connection with the +remainder of the wound was evident. + +Senator RUSSELL. When did you first see this bullet, Doctor, the one +you have just described in your testimony? + +Dr. GREGORY. This bullet? + +Senator RUSSELL. Yes. + +Dr. GREGORY. This morning, sir. + +Senator RUSSELL. You had never seen it until this morning? + +Dr. GREGORY. I had never seen it before this time. + +Mr. SPECTER. Dr. Gregory, what was then the relative size of the wounds +on the back and front side of the wrist itself? + +Dr. GREGORY. As I recall them, the wound dimensions would be so far +as the wound on the back of the wrist is concerned about a half a +centimeter by two and a half centimeters in length. It was rather +linear in nature. The upper end of it having apparently lost some +tissue was gapping more than the lower portion of it. + +Mr. SPECTER. How about on the volar or front side of the wrist? + +Dr. GREGORY. The volar surface or palmar surface had a wound disclosed +transversely about a half centimeter in length and about 2 centimeters +above the flexion crease to the wrist. + +Mr. SPECTER. Then the wound on the dorsal or back side of the wrist was +a little larger than the wound on the volar or palm side of the wrist? + +Dr. GREGORY. Yes; it was. + +Mr. SPECTER. And is that characteristic in terms of entry and exit +wounds? + +Dr. GREGORY. It is not at all characteristic of the entry wound of a +pristine missile which tends to make a small wound of entrance and +larger wound of exit. + +Mr. SPECTER. Is it, however, characteristic of a missile which has had +its velocity substantially decreased? + +Dr. GREGORY. I don't think that the exchange in the velocity will alter +the nature of the wound of entrance or exit excepting that if the +velocity is low enough the missile may simply manage to emerge or may +not emerge at all on the far side of the limb which has been struck. + +Mr. DULLES. Would this be consistent with a tumbling bullet or a bullet +that had already tumbled and therefore entered back side too? + +Dr. GREGORY. The wound of entrance is characteristic in my view of an +irregular missile in this case, an irregular missile which has tipped +itself off as being irregular by the nature of itself. + +Mr. DULLES. What do you mean by irregular? + +Dr. GREGORY. I mean one that has been distorted. It is in some way +angular, it has edges or sharp edges or something of this sort. It +is not rounded or pointed in the fashion of an ordinary missile. The +irregularity of it also, I submit, tends to pick up organic material +and carry it into the limb, and this is a very significant takeoff, in +my opinion. + +Mr. SPECTER. Have you now described all of the characteristics on the +Governor's wrist which indicate either the point of entry or the point +of exit? + +Dr. GREGORY. There is one additional piece of information that is of +pertinence but I don't know how effectively it can be applied to the +nature of the missile. That is the fact that dorsal branch of the +radial nerve, a sensory nerve in this immediate vicinity was partially +transected together with one tendon leading to the thumb, which was +totally transected. + +This could have been produced by a missile entering in the ordinary +fashion, undisturbed, undistorted. But again it is more in keeping with +an irregular surface which would tend to catch and tear a structure +rather than push it aside. + +Mr. SPECTER. Would that then also indicate the wound of entrance where +that striking took place? + +Dr. GREGORY. I believe it is more in keeping with it, yes. + +Mr. SPECTER. As to the thigh wound, what, if anything, did you observe +as to a wound on the thigh, Dr. Gregory? + +Dr. GREGORY. I was apprised that the Governor had a wound of the thigh, +and I did examine it immediately the limb was available for it after +Dr. Shaw had completed the surgery. + +The wound was located on the inner aspect of the thigh, a little to +the front surface about a third of the way up from the knee. The wound +appeared to me to be rounded, almost a puncture type of wound in +dimension about equal to a pencil eraser, about 6 mm. + +I suspected that there might be a missile buried here and so an X-ray +was obtained of that limb, and---- + +Mr. SPECTER. Have you brought the X-ray with you? + +Dr. GREGORY. Yes; I have. + +Mr. SPECTER. On what date was that X-ray taken? + +Dr. GREGORY. This X-ray is marked as having been taken on November 22, +1963. It indicates that it was made of the left thigh, and it belongs +to John Connally, John G. Connally. + +Mr. SPECTER. That says "G" instead of "C"? + +Dr. GREGORY. Yes. It appears to me to be a "G." The number again is +219-922. + +Mr. SPECTER. Is that the same number as the other X-rays bear? + +Dr. GREGORY. I believe it is, yes. + +Mr. SPECTER. May we reserve then Commission Exhibit No. 694 for that +X-ray? + +Senator COOPER. It may be so done. + +Dr. GREGORY. There are a series of these films. Would you like them +marked subsequently "E", "F," and "G"? + +Mr. SPECTER. Insofar as you feel they are helpful in characterizing the +wounds, do mark them in that way. + +Dr. GREGORY. All right. + +This I understand is Exhibit E, then and it is a single X-ray made on +the anterior posterial view of Mr. Connally's thigh. The only thing +found is a very small fleck of metal marked with an arrow here. It is +that small, and almost likely to be overlooked. This was not consonant +with the kind of wound on the medial aspect of his thigh. + +Our next natural assumption was that that missile having escaped from +the thigh had escaped the confines of this X-ray and lay somewhere +else. So that additional X-rays were made of the same date and I +submit two additional X-rays identified again as belonging to John G. +Connally, the left lower extremity, November 22, 1963, and these two +are numbered 218-922, and they are an anterial posterior view which I +will mark "F," and a lateral view which I will mark "G." + +Mr. SPECTER. May we reserve 695 for "F," and 696 for "G"? + +Senator COOPER. So ordered. + +Dr. GREGORY. Careful examination of this set of X-rays illustrated +or demonstrates, I should say, a number of artificial lines, this is +one and there is one. These lines I think represent rather hurried +development of these films for they were taken under emergency +conditions. They were intended simply to let us know if there was +another missile in the Governor's limb where it might be located. + +The only missile turned up is the same one seen in the original film +which lies directly opposite the area indicated as the site of the +missile wound or the wound in the thigh, but a fragment of metal, +again microscopic measuring about five-tenths of a millimeter by 2 +millimeters, lies just beneath the skin, about a half inch on the +medial aspect of the thigh. + +Mr. SPECTER. What is your best estimate of the weight of that metallic +fragment? + +Dr. GREGORY. This again would be in micrograms, postage stamp weight +thereabouts, not much more than that. + +Mr. SPECTER. Could that fragment, in your opinion, have caused the +wound which you observed in the Governor's left thigh? + +Dr. GREGORY. I do not believe it could have. The nature of the wound in +the left thigh was such that so small a fragment as this would not have +produced it and still have gone no further into the soft tissues than +it did. + +Mr. SPECTER. Would the wound that you observed in the soft tissue of +the left thigh be consistent with having been made by a bullet such as +that identified as Commission Exhibit 399? + +Dr. GREGORY. I think again that bullet, Exhibit 399, could very well +have struck the thigh in a reverse fashion and have shed a bit of its +lead core into the fascia immediately beneath the skin, yet never have +penetrated the thigh sufficiently so that it eventually was dislodged +and was found in the clothing. + +I would like to add to that we were disconcerted by not finding a +missile at all. Here was our patient with three discernible wounds, +and no missile within him of sufficient magnitude to account for them, +and we suggested that someone ought to search his belongings and other +areas where he had been to see if it could be identified or found, +rather. + +Mr. SPECTER. Had the missile gone through his wrist in reverse, would +it likely have continued in that same course until it reached his +thigh, in your opinion? + +Dr. GREGORY. The missile that struck his wrist had sufficient energy +left after it passed through the radius to emerge from the soft tissues +on the under surface of the skin. It could have had enough to partially +enter his thigh, but not completely. + +Mr. SPECTER. In the way which his thigh was wounded? + +Dr. GREGORY. I believe so; yes. + +Mr. SPECTER. What did you do, Dr. Gregory, with the missile fragments +which you removed from his wrists? + +Dr. GREGORY. Those were turned over to the operating room nurse in +attendance with instructions that they should be presented to the +appropriate authorities present, probably a member of the Texas +Rangers, but that is as far as I went with it myself. + +Mr. SPECTER. I now show you a part of a document heretofore identified +as Commission Exhibit 392, a two-page report which bears your name on +the second page, and I ask you if this is the report you made of the +operation on Governor Connally? + +Dr. GREGORY. It appears to be the same; yes. + +Mr. SPECTER. Are the facts set forth therein true and correct? + +Dr. GREGORY. In essence they are true and correct; yes. + +Mr. SPECTER. Dr. Gregory, does that report show the name of the nurse +to whom you turned over the metallic fragments? + +Dr. GREGORY. There are two nurses who are identified on this page. One +is the scrub nurse, Miss Rutherford, and the second is the circulating +nurse, Mrs. Schrader. + +Mr. SPECTER. And is one or the other the nurse to whom you turned over +the metallic fragments? + +Dr. GREGORY. I do not remember precisely to whom I handed them. I do +not know. + +Mr. SPECTER. I now hand you a document marked Commission Exhibit No. +679, which Dr. Shaw used to identify the wounds on the Governor's back, +and I ask you to note whether these documents accurately depict the +place and the identity of the entry and exit wounds. + +Dr. GREGORY. They do not in that, though the location of the wounds +on the forearm is correct, and the dimensions, it is my opinion that +entrance and exit terms have been reversed. + +Mr. SPECTER. Would you delete the inaccurate statement and insert the +accurate statement with your initials by the side of the changes, +please? + +Will you now describe the operative procedures---- + +Mr. DULLES. Could I ask one question that relates, I think, to your +question. Assuming that the wrist wound and the thigh wound were caused +by the same bullet, would you agree that the approximate trajectory is +as indicated in this chart where Dr. Shaw has drawn a trajectory that +he assumed taking into account three bullets instead of two? I am only +asking you about the two wounds, namely the wrist and the thigh. + +Dr. GREGORY. It would strike me, sir, that the trajectory to the wrist +and the subsequent wound of the thigh could be lined up easily in a +sitting position. + +Now, those two could probably be lined up with a trajectory of the +wound in the chest as well, but this would require a more precise +positioning of the individual. + +Mr. DULLES. But do you agree in general, taking the two wounds with +which you are particularly familiar, that that would have been the +trajectory as between the wrist and the thigh as drawn on that chart? + +Dr. GREGORY. Yes, essentially so; yes, sir. + +Mr. SPECTER. For the record, how was that chart identified. Doctor? + +Dr. GREGORY. This is identified as Commission Exhibit 689. + +Mr. SPECTER. Would you outline briefly the operative procedures which +you performed on the Governor, please? + +Dr. GREGORY. Yes. The wound on the dorsum of the Governor's wrist +was treated by debridement, which means to remove by sharp surgical +excision all contaminated tissues and those which are presumed to +have been rendered nonviable by force. This meant removing a certain +amount of skin, subcutaneous tissue, fat, and all of the particles of +clothing, threads of cloth, which we could identify; and, incidentally, +a bit of metal or two. + +That wound was subsequently left open; in other words, we did not +suture it or sew it together. This is done in deference to potential +infection which we know often to be associated with retained organic +material such as cloth. + +The wound on the volar surface or the palmar side of his wrist was +enlarged. The purpose in enlarging it was an uncertainty as to the +condition of the major nerves in the volar side of the wrist, and so +these nerves were identified and explored and found to be intact, as +were adjacent tendons. So that that wound was then sutured, closed. + +After this, the fracture was manipulated into a hopefully respectable +position of the fragments, and a cast was applied, and some traction, +using rubber bands, was applied to the finger and the thumb in order +to better hold the fracture fragments in their reduced or repositioned +state. + +Mr. SPECTER. Dr. Gregory, could all of the rounds which were inflicted +on the Governor, that is, those described by Dr. Shaw, and those which +you have described during your testimony, have been inflicted from +one missile if that missile were a 6.5 millimeter bullet fired from +a weapon having a muzzle velocity of approximately 2,000 feet per +second at a distance of approximately 160 to 250 feet, if you assumed a +trajectory with an angle of decline approximately 45 degrees? + +Dr. GREGORY. I believe that the three wounds could have occurred from a +single missile under these specifications. + +Mr. SPECTER. Assume, if you will, another set of hypothetical +circumstances: That the 6.5 millimeter bullet traveling at the same +muzzle velocity, to wit, 2,000 feet per second, at approximately 165 +feet between the weapon and the victim, struck the President in the +back of the neck passing through the large strap muscles, going through +a fascia channel, missing the pleural cavity, striking no bones and +emerging from the lower anterior third of the neck, after striking the +trachea. Could such a projectile have then passed into the Governor's +back and inflicted all three or all of the wounds which have been +described here today? + +Dr. GREGORY. I believe one would have to concede the possibility, but I +believe firmly that the probability is much diminished. + +Mr. SPECTER. Why do you say that, sir? + +Dr. GREGORY. I think that to pass through the soft tissues of the +President would certainly have decelerated the missile to some extent. +Having then struck the Governor and shattered a rib, it is further +decelerated, yet it has presumably retained sufficient energy to smash +a radius. + +Moreover, it escaped the forearm to penetrate at least the skin and +fascia of the thigh, and I am not persuaded that this is very probable. +I would have to yield to possibility. I am sure that those who deal +with ballistics can do better for you than I can in this regard. + +Mr. SPECTER. What would your assessment of the likelihood be for a +bullet under those hypothetical circumstances to have passed through +the neck of the President and to have passed through only the chest of +the Governor without having gone through either the wrist or into the +thigh? + +Dr. GREGORY. I think that is a much more plausible possibility or +probability. + +Mr. SPECTER. How about the likelihood of passing through the President +and through the Governor's chest, but missing his wrist and passing +into his thigh? + +Dr. GREGORY. That, too, is plausible, I believe. + +Mr. SPECTER. Are there any other circumstances of this event which have +been related to you, including the striking of the President's head by +a third bullet, which would account in any way, under any possibility, +in your view, for the fracture of the right wrist which was apparently +caused by a missile? + +Dr. GREGORY. May I refer to this morning's discussions? + +Mr. SPECTER. Yes, please do. + +Dr. GREGORY. This morning I was shown two additional missiles or +portions of missiles which are rather grossly distorted. + +Mr. SPECTER. Let me make those a part of the record here, and ask +if those are the missiles which have heretofore been identified as +Commission Exhibit 568 and Commission Exhibit 570. + +Dr. GREGORY. These items represent distorted bits of a missile, a +jacket in one case, and part of a jacket and a lead core in the other. + +These are missiles having the characteristics which I mentioned +earlier, which tend to carry organic debris into wounds and tend to +create irregular wounds of entry. One of these, it seems to me, could +conceivably have produced the injury which the Governor incurred in his +wrist. + +Mr. DULLES. In his wrist? + +Dr. GREGORY. Yes. + +Mr. DULLES. And in his thigh? + +Dr. GREGORY. I don't know about that, sir. It is possible. But the +rather remarkably round nature of the wound in the thigh leads me to +believe that it was produced by something like the butt end of an +intact missile. + +Mr. SPECTER. I now hand you an exhibit heretofore identified as +Commission Exhibit 388, which depicts the artist's drawing of the +passage of a bullet through the President's head, and I ask you, first +of all, if you have had an opportunity to observe that prior to this +moment? + +Dr. GREGORY. Yes. I saw this illustration this morning. + +Mr. SPECTER. Well, if you assume that the trajectory through the +President's head was represented by the path of a 6.5-mm. bullet which +fragmented upon striking the skull, both the rear and again the top, is +it possible that a fragment coming at the rate of 2,000 feet per second +from the distance of approximately 160 to 230 feet, could have produced +a fragment which then proceeded to strike the Governor's wrist and +inflict the damage which you have heretofore described? + +Dr. GREGORY. I think it is plausible that the bullet, having struck +the President's head, may have broken into more than one fragment. I +think you apprised me of the fact that it did, in fact, disperse into +a number of fragments, and they took tangential directions from the +original path apparently. + +Mr. SPECTER. Assuming the fact that the autopsy surgeon presented +for the record a statement that the fragments moved forward into the +vicinity of the President's right eye, as the diagram shows, that there +were approximately 40 star-like fragments running on a line through the +head on the trajectory, and that there was substantial fragmentation of +the bullet as it passed through the head, what is your view about that? + +Dr. GREGORY. I think it is possible that a fragment from that +particular missile may have escaped and struck the Governor's right arm. + +Mr. SPECTER. Did you have an opportunity to observe the slides and +films commonly referred to as the Zapruder film this morning? + +Dr. GREGORY. Yes; I saw those this morning. + +Mr. SPECTER. Did they shed any light on the conclusions--as to your +conclusions with respect to the wounds of the Governor and what you +observed in the treatment of the Governor? + +Dr. GREGORY. Yes, to this extent. It seemed to me in frames marked 234, +235, and 236, Governor Connally was in a position such that a single +missile entered his back, could have passed through his chest, through +his right forearm, and struck his thigh. That is a possibility. + +I looked at the film very carefully to see if I could relate the +position of Governor Connally's right arm to the movement when the +missile struck the President's head, presumably the third missile, and +I think that the record will show that those are obscured to a degree +that the Governor's right arm cannot be seen. In the Governor's own +words, he did not realize his right arm had been injured, and he has no +idea when it was struck. This is historical fact to us at the time of +the initial interview with him. + +Mr. DULLES. Could I ask just one question? If a bullet had merely +struck the Governor's arm without previously having struck anything +else, is it conceivable that impediment of the bone that it hit there +would be consistent with merely a flesh wound on the thigh? Do you +follow me? + +Dr. GREGORY. Yes; I follow you. I would doubt it on the basis of the +kind of wound that the Governor has. Now the kind of wound in the +Governor's right forearm is the kind that indicates there was not an +excessive amount of energy expended there, which means either that the +missile producing it had dissipated much of its energy, either that or +there was an impediment to it someplace else along the way. + +It is simply that there was not enough energy loss there, and one would +expect a soft tissue injury beyond that point to be of considerably +greater magnitude. + +Mr. SPECTER. Dr. Gregory, did I take your deposition back on March 23, +1964, at Parkland Hospital? + +Dr. GREGORY. Yes; you did. + +Mr. SPECTER. Have you had an opportunity to review that deposition +prior to today? + +Dr. GREGORY. Yes; I have looked it over. + +Mr. SPECTER. Do you have anything to add, Dr. Gregory, that you think +would be helpful to the Commission in any way? + +Dr. GREGORY. No, sir; I do not. + +Mr. DULLES. Are you in agreement with the deposition as given? + +Dr. GREGORY. Yes. I don't think there are any--there is any need +to change any of the essence of the deposition. There are a few +typographical errors and word changes one might make, but the essence +is essentially as I gave it. + +Mr. SPECTER. I have no further questions, sir. + +Senator COOPER. I would just ask this question. In your long experience +of treating wounds, you said some 500 wounds caused by bullets, have +you acquired, through that, knowledge of ballistics and characteristics +of bullets? + +Dr. GREGORY. Within a very limited sphere. + +Senator COOPER. I know your testimony indicates that. + +Dr. GREGORY. I have been concerned with the behavior of missiles in +contact with tissues, but I am not very knowledgeable about the design +of a missile nor how many grains of powder there are behind it. My +concern was with the dissipation of the energy which it carries and the +havoc that it wreaks when it goes off. + +Senator COOPER. You derived that knowledge from your actual study of +wounds and their treatment? + +Dr. GREGORY. Study of wounds together with what I have read from the +Army proving grounds, various centers, for exploring this kind of +thing. I don't own a gun myself. + +Mr. McCLOY. You are from Texas and you do not own a gun? + +Dr. GREGORY. Well, sir, I went from Indiana to Texas. My father gave me +a .410 shotgun, but he took it away from me shortly after he gave it to +me. + +The CHAIRMAN. Doctor, thank you very much. + +Dr. GREGORY. Thank you very much, sir, Mr. Chief Justice. + +(A short recess was taken.) + +The CHAIRMAN. Governor, the Commission will come to order, please. + + +TESTIMONY OF GOV. JOHN BOWDEN CONNALLY, JR. + +Governor, this Commission has met today for the purpose of taking the +testimony of you and Mrs. Connally concerning the sad affair that you +were part of. If you will raise your right hand, please, and be sworn. +Do you solemnly swear the testimony you are about to give before this +Commission will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the +truth, so help you God? + +Governor CONNALLY. I do. + +The CHAIRMAN. You may be seated, Governor. Mr. Specter will conduct the +examination. + +Mr. SPECTER. Will you state your full name for the record, please? + +Governor CONNALLY. John Bowden Connally. + +Mr. SPECTER. What is your official position with the State of Texas, +sir? + +Governor CONNALLY. I am now Governor of the State of Texas. + +Mr. SPECTER. Did you have occasion to be in the automobile which +carried President John F. Kennedy through Dallas, Tex., back on +November 22, 1963. + +Governor CONNALLY. Yes, sir; I did. + +Mr. SPECTER. Will you outline briefly, please, the circumstances +leading up to the President's planning a trip to Texas in November of +last year? + +Governor CONNALLY. You want to go back to--how far back do you want to +go, a few days immediately prior to the trip or a month before, or all +of the circumstances surrounding it? + +Mr. SPECTER. Well, just a very brief picture leading up to the trip, +Governor, starting with whatever point you think would be most +appropriate to give some outline of the origin of the trip. + +Governor CONNALLY. Well, it had been thought that he should come to +Texas for a period of many months, as a matter of fact. There was some +thought given to it during 1962. The trip kept being delayed. + +Finally in the fall of 1963 it was decided that he definitely should +come, or should come in the fall of last year as opposed to waiting +until this year, when his appearance might have more political +overtones. + +So I came up, I have forgotten the exact date, around the middle of +October and talked to him about it, discussed the details, asked him +what he would like to do. + +He said he would like to do whatever he could do that was agreeable +with me; it was agreeable with me that he more or less trust me to +plan the trip for him, to tell him where he would like to go. About +that time some thought was being given to having four fundraising +dinners. His attitude on that was he wouldn't prefer that. He felt +that the appearances would not be too good, that he would much prefer +to have one if we were going to have any. I told him this was entirely +consistent with my own thoughts. We ought not to have more than one +fundraising dinner. If we did, it ought to be in Austin. If we could do +it, I would like for him to see and get into as many areas of the State +as possible while he was there. + +He, on his own, had made a commitment to go to the dinner for +Congressman Albert Thomas, which was being given the night of the 21st +in Houston, so shortly, really before he got there, and when I say +shortly I would say 2 weeks before he came, the plans were altered a +little bit in that he landed originally in San Antonio in the afternoon +about 1:30 of the afternoon of the 21st. From there we went to Houston, +attended the Thomas dinner that night at about 8 o'clock. + +After that we flew to Fort Worth, spent the night at the Texas Hotel, +had a breakfast there the next morning, and left about 10 o'clock, +10:30, for the flight over to Dallas. + +Mr. SPECTER. In what vehicle did you fly from Fort Worth to Dallas? + +Governor CONNALLY. In Air Force 1. + +Mr. SPECTER. And approximately what time did you arrive at Love Field, +Tex. + +Governor CONNALLY. I would say about 11:50, 12:00, shortly before noon. +I believe the luncheon was planned for 12:30, and we were running on +schedule. I believe it was 11:50. + +Mr. SPECTER. Would you describe for us briefly the ceremonies at Love +Field on the arrival of the President? + +Governor CONNALLY. Well, we, as usual, the President had a receiving +line there. I conducted Mrs. Kennedy through the receiving line and +introduced her to about 15 or 17 people who were there as an official +welcoming committee. + +The President came right behind, was introduced to them, and then he +and Mrs. Kennedy both went over to the railing and spoke to a number +of people who were standing around, who visited for 5 or 10 minutes, +and then we got into the car as we had customarily done at each of the +stops, and Mrs. Connally and I got on the jump seats, and with the +President and Mrs. Kennedy on the back seat, and took off for the long +motorcade downtown. + +Mr. SPECTER. I will now hand you a photograph which I have marked +"Commission Exhibit 697," Governor Connally, and ask you if that +accurately depicts the occupants of the car as you were starting that +motorcade trip through Dallas? + +Governor CONNALLY. Yes; it does. + +Mr. SPECTER. Do you know the identities of the men who are riding in +the front seat of the car? + +Governor CONNALLY. Yes. Roy Kellerman is on the right front. He is a +Secret Service agent, and Bill--I can't remember the other's name---- + +Mr. SPECTER. Greer. + +I hand you another photograph here, Governor, marked as "Commission +Exhibit 698," and ask you if that is a picture of the President's +automobile during its ride through the downtown area of Dallas? + +Governor CONNALLY. Yes; I assume it is. This is certainly the +President's automobile, and this is the precise position that each of +us occupied in the ride through Dallas. It was the same position, and +could be a photograph, of any number of places that we went. But I was +seated in the jump seat immediately in front of him, and Mrs. Connally +was seated immediately in front of Mrs. Kennedy in the jump seat, and +Roy Kellerman was immediately in front of me. + +Mr. SPECTER. Mr. Chief Justice, may I move at this time the admission +into evidence of Exhibits 697 and 698? + +The CHAIRMAN. They may be admitted. + +(The items marked Commission Exhibits Nos. 697 and 698 were received in +evidence.) + +Mr. SPECTER. What was the relative height of the jump seats, Governor, +with respect to the seat of the President and Mrs. Kennedy immediately +to your rear? + +Governor CONNALLY. They were somewhat lower. The back seat of that +particular Lincoln limousine, which is a specially designed and built +automobile, as you know, for the President of the United States, has an +adjustable back seat. It can be lowered or raised. I would say the back +seat was approximately 6 inches higher than the jump seats on which +Mrs. Connally and I sat. + +Mr. SPECTER. Do you know for certain whether or not the movable back +seat was elevated at the time? + +Governor CONNALLY. No; I could not be sure of it, although I know +there were--there was a time or two when he did elevate it, and +I think beyond question on most of the ride in San Antonio, Fort +Worth, Houston, and Dallas, it was elevated. For a while--the reason +I know is--I sat on the back seat with him during part of the ride, +particularly in San Antonio, not in Dallas, but in San Antonio. The +wind was blowing, and we were traveling fairly fast, and Mrs. Kennedy +preferred to sit on the jump seat, and I was sitting on the back seat +part of the time, and the seat was elevated, and I think it was on +substantially all the trip. + +Mr. SPECTER. Was the portion elevated, that where only the President +sat? + +Governor CONNALLY. No; the entire back seat. + +Mr. SPECTER. Describe in a general way the size and reaction of the +crowd on the motorcade route, if you would, please, Governor? + +Governor CONNALLY. When we got into Dallas, there was quite a large +crowd at the airport to greet their President, I would say several +thousand people. + +Part way downtown, in the thinly populated areas of Dallas, where +we traveled, the crowds were not thick and were somewhat restrained +in their reaction. By restrained, I mean they were not wildly +enthusiastic, but they were grown people. There was a mature crowd as +we went through some of the residential areas. They applauded and they +were obviously very friendly in their conduct. + +But as we, of course, approached downtown, the downtown area of Dallas, +going down the main street, the crowds were tremendous. They were +stacked from the curb and even outside the curb, back against the back +walls. It was a huge crowd. I would estimate there were 250,000 people +that had lined the streets that day as we went down. + +The further you went the more enthusiastic the response was, and the +reception. It was a tremendous reception, to the point where just as +we turned on Houston Street off of Main, and turned on Houston, down +by the courthouse, Mrs. Connally remarked to the President, "Well, Mr. +President, you can't say there aren't some people in Dallas who love +you." And the President replied, "That is very obvious," or words to +that effect. + +So I would say the reception that he got in Dallas was equal to, if +not more, enthusiastic than those he had received in Fort Worth, San +Antonio, and Houston. + +Mr. SPECTER. Are there any other conversations which stand out in your +mind on the portion of the motorcade trip through Dallas itself? + +Governor CONNALLY. No; actually we had more or less desultory +conversation as we rode along. The crowds were thick all the way down +on both sides, and all of us were, particularly the President and Mrs. +Kennedy were, acknowledging the crowds. They would turn frequently, +smiling, waving to the people, and the opportunity for conversation +was limited. So there was no particularly significant conversation or +conversations which took place. It was, as I say, pretty desultory +conversation. + +Mr. SPECTER. Did the automobile stop at any point during this +procession? + +Governor CONNALLY. Yes; it did. There were at least two occasions on +which the automobile stopped in Dallas and, perhaps, a third. There was +one little girl, I believe it was, who was carrying a sign saying, "Mr. +President, will you please stop and shake hands with me," or some that +was the import of the sign, and he just told the driver to stop, and +he did stop and shook hands, and, of course, he was immediately mobbed +by a bunch of youngsters, and the Secret Service men from the car +following us had to immediately come up and wedge themselves in between +the crowd and the car to keep them back away from the automobile, and +it was a very short stop. + +At another point along the route, a Sister, a Catholic nun, was there, +obviously from a Catholic school, with a bunch of little children, and +he stopped and spoke to her and to the children; and I think there was +one other stop on the way downtown, but I don't recall the precise +occasion. But I know there were two, but I think there was still +another one. + +Mr. SPECTER. Are there any other events prior to the time of the +shooting itself which stand out in your mind on the motorcade trip +through Dallas? + +Governor CONNALLY. No; not that have any particular significance. + +Mr. SPECTER. As to the comment which Mrs. Connally had made to +President Kennedy which you just described, where on the motor trip was +that comment made, if you recall? + +Governor CONNALLY. This was just before we turned on Elm Street, after +we turned off of Main. + +Mr. SPECTER. Onto Houston? + +Governor CONNALLY. Onto Houston, right by the courthouse before we +turned left onto Elm Street, almost at the end of the motorcade, and +almost, I would say, perhaps a minute before the fatal shooting. + +Mr. SPECTER. What was the condition of the crowd at that juncture of +the motorcade, sir? + +Governor CONNALLY. At that particular juncture, when she made this +remark, the crowd was still very thick and very enthusiastic. It began +to thin immediately after we turned onto Elm Street. We could look +ahead and see that the crowd was beginning to thin along the banks, +just east, I guess of the overpass. + +Mr. SPECTER. Was there any difficulty in hearing such a conversational +comment? + +Governor CONNALLY. No, no; we could talk without any, and hear very +clearly, without any difficulty, without any particular strain. We +didn't do it again because in trying to carry on a conversation it +would be apparent to those who were the spectators on the sidewalk, +and we didn't want to leave the impression we were not interested in +them, and so we just didn't carry on a conversation, but we could do so +without any trouble. + +Mr. SPECTER. As the automobile turned left onto Elm from Houston, what +did occur there, Governor? + +Governor CONNALLY. We had--we had gone, I guess, 150 feet, maybe +200 feet, I don't recall how far it was, heading down to get on the +freeway, the Stemmons Freeway, to go out to the hall where we were +going to have lunch and, as I say, the crowds had begun to thin, and +we could--I was anticipating that we were going to be at the hall in +approximately 5 minutes from the time we turned on Elm Street. + +We had just made the turn, well, when I heard what I thought was a +shot. I heard this noise which I immediately took to be a rifle shot. +I instinctively turned to my right because the sound appeared to come +from over my right shoulder, so I turned to look back over my right +shoulder, and I saw nothing unusual except just people in the crowd, +but I did not catch the President in the corner of my eye, and I was +interested, because once I heard the shot in my own mind I identified +it as a rifle shot, and I immediately--the only thought that crossed my +mind was that this is an assassination attempt. + +So I looked, failing to see him, I was turning to look back over my +left shoulder into the back seat, but I never got that far in my turn. +I got about in the position I am in now facing you, looking a little +bit to the left of center, and then I felt like someone had hit me in +the back. + +Mr. SPECTER. What is the best estimate that you have as to the time +span between the sound of the first shot and the feeling of someone +hitting you in the back which you just described? + +Governor CONNALLY. A very, very brief span of time. Again my trend of +thought just happened to be, I suppose along this line, I immediately +thought that this--that I had been shot. I knew it when I just looked +down and I was covered with blood, and the thought immediately passed +through my mind that there were either two or three people involved or +more in this or someone was shooting with an automatic rifle. These +were just thoughts that went through my mind because of the rapidity +of these two, of the first shot plus the blow that I took, and I knew +I had been hit, and I immediately assumed, because of the amount of +blood, and, in fact, that it had obviously passed through my chest, +that I had probably been fatally hit. + +So I merely doubled up, and then turned to my right again and began +to--I just sat there, and Mrs. Connally pulled me over to her lap. She +was sitting, of course, on the jump seat, so I reclined with my head +in her lap, conscious all the time, and with my eyes open; and then, +of course, the third shot sounded, and I heard the shot very clearly. +I heard it hit him. I heard the shot hit something, and I assumed +again--it never entered my mind that it ever hit anybody but the +President. I heard it hit. It was a very loud noise, just that audible, +very clear. + +Immediately I could see on my clothes, my clothing, I could see on +the interior of the car which, as I recall, was a pale blue, brain +tissue, which I immediately recognized, and I recall very well, on my +trousers there was one chunk of brain tissue as big as almost my thumb, +thumbnail, and again I did not see the President at any time either +after the first, second, or third shots, but I assumed always that it +was he who was hit and no one else. + +I immediately, when I was hit, I said, "Oh, no, no, no." And then I +said, "My God, they are going to kill us all." Nellie, when she pulled +me over into her lap---- + +Mr. SPECTER. Nellie is Mrs. Connally? + +Governor CONNALLY. Mrs. Connally. When she pulled me over into her lap, +she could tell I was still breathing and moving, and she said, "Don't +worry. Be quiet. You are going to be all right." She just kept telling +me I was going to be all right. + +After the third shot, and I heard Roy Kellerman tell the driver, "Bill, +get out of line." And then I saw him move, and I assumed he was moving +a button or something on the panel of the automobile, and he said, "Get +us to a hospital quick." I assumed he was saying this to the patrolman, +the motorcycle police who were leading us. + +At about that time, we began to pull out of the cavalcade, out of the +line, and I lost consciousness and didn't regain consciousness until we +got to the hospital. + +Mr. SPECTER. Governor Connally, I hand you a photograph, marked +Commission Exhibit 699, which is an overhead shot of Dealey Plaza +depicting the intersection of Houston and Elm, and ask you if you would +take a look at that photograph and mark for us, if you would, with +one of the red pencils at your right, the position of the President's +automobile as nearly as you can where it was at the time the shooting +first started. + +Governor CONNALLY. I would say it would be about where this truck is +here. It looks like a truck. I would say about in that neighborhood. + +Mr. SPECTER. Would you place your initials, Governor, by the mark that +you made there? + +Governor, you have described hearing a first shot and a third shot. Did +you hear a second shot? + +Governor CONNALLY. No; I did not. + +Mr. SPECTER. What is your best estimate as to the timespan between +the first shot which you heard and the shot which you heretofore +characterized as the third shot? + +Governor CONNALLY. It was a very brief span of time; oh, I would have +to say a matter of seconds. I don't know. 10, 12 seconds. It was +extremely rapid, so much so that again I thought that whoever was +firing must be firing with an automatic rifle because of the rapidity +of the shots; a very short period of time. + +Mr. SPECTER. What was your impression then as to the source of the shot? + +Governor CONNALLY. From back over my right shoulder which, again, was +where immediately when I heard the first shot I identified the sound as +coming back over my right shoulder. + +Mr. SPECTER. At an elevation? + +Governor CONNALLY. At an elevation. I would have guessed at an +elevation. + +Mr. SPECTER. Excuse me. + +Governor CONNALLY. Well, that is all. + +Mr. SPECTER. Did you have an impression as to the source of the third +shot? + +Governor CONNALLY. The same. I would say the same. + +Mr. SPECTER. How fast was the President's automobile proceeding at that +time? + +Governor CONNALLY. I would guess between 20 and 22 miles an hour, and +it is a guess because I didn't look at the speedometer, but I would say +in that range. + +Mr. SPECTER. Did President Kennedy make any statement during the time +of the shooting or immediately prior thereto? + +Governor CONNALLY. He never uttered a sound at all that I heard. + +Mr. SPECTER. Did Mrs. Kennedy state anything at that time? + +Governor CONNALLY. Yes; I have to--I would say it was after the third +shot when she said, "They have killed my husband." + +Mr. SPECTER. Did she say anything more? + +Governor CONNALLY. Yes; she said, I heard her say one time, "I have got +his brains in my hand." + +Mr. SPECTER. Did that constitute everything that she said at that time? + +Governor CONNALLY. That is all I heard her say. + +Mr. SPECTER. Did Mrs. Connally say anything further at this time? + +Governor CONNALLY. All she said to me was, after I was hit when she +pulled me over in her lap, she said, "Be quiet, you are going to be +all right. Be still, you are going to be all right." She just kept +repeating that. + +Mr. SPECTER. Was anything further stated by Special Agent Roy Kellerman +other than that which you have already testified about? + +Governor CONNALLY. No; those are the only two remarks that I heard him +make. + +Mr. SPECTER. Was any statement made by Special Agent William Greer at +or about the time of the shooting? + +Governor CONNALLY. No; I did not hear Bill say anything. + +Mr. SPECTER. Did you observe any reaction by President Kennedy after +the shooting? + +Governor CONNALLY. No; I did not see him. + +Mr. SPECTER. Did you observe any reaction by Mrs. Kennedy after the +shooting? + +Governor CONNALLY. I did not see her. This almost sounds incredible, I +am sure, since we were in the car with them. But again I will repeat +very briefly when what I believe to be the shot first occurred, I +turned to my right, which was away from both of them, of course, and +looked out and could see neither, and then as I was turning to look +into the back seat where I would have seen both of them, I was hit, so +I never completed the turn at all, and I never saw either one of them +after the firing started, and, of course, as I have testified, then +Mrs. Connally pulled me over into her lap and I was facing forward with +my head slightly turned up to where I could see the driver and Roy +Kellerman on his right, but I could not see into the back seat, so I +didn't see either one of them. + +Mr. SPECTER. When you turned to your right, Governor Connally, +immediately after you heard the first shot, what did you see on that +occasion? + +Governor CONNALLY. Nothing of any significance except just people out +on the grass slope. I didn't see anything that was out of the ordinary, +just saw men, women, and children. + +Mr. SPECTER. Do you have any estimate as to the distance which the +President's automobile traveled during the shooting? + +Governor CONNALLY. No; I hadn't thought about it, but I would suppose +in 10 to 12 seconds, I suppose you travel a couple of hundred feet. + +Mr. SPECTER. Did you observe any bullet or fragments of bullet strike +the windshield? + +Governor CONNALLY. No. + +Mr. SPECTER. Did you observe any bullet or fragments of bullet strike +the metal chrome? + +Governor CONNALLY. No. + +Mr. SPECTER. Did you experience any sensation of being struck any place +other than that which you have described on your chest? + +Governor CONNALLY. No. + +Mr. SPECTER. What other wounds, if any, did you sustain? + +Governor CONNALLY. A fractured wrist and a wound in the thigh, just +above the knee. + +Mr. SPECTER. What thigh? + +Governor CONNALLY. Left thigh; just above the knee. + +Mr. SPECTER. Where on the wrist were you injured, sir? + +Governor CONNALLY. I don't know how you describe it. + +Mr. SPECTER. About how many inches up from the wrist joint? + +Governor CONNALLY. I would say an inch above the wrist bone, but on +the inner bone of the wrist where the bullet went in here and came out +almost in the center of the wrist on the underside. + +Mr. SPECTER. About an inch from the base of the palm? + +Governor CONNALLY. About an inch from the base of the palm, a little +less than an inch, three-quarters of an inch. + +Mr. SPECTER. Were you conscious of receiving that wound on the wrist at +the time you sustained it? + +Governor CONNALLY. No, sir; I was not. + +Mr. SPECTER. When did you first know you were wounded in the right +wrist? + +Governor CONNALLY. When I came to in the hospital on Saturday, the next +morning, and I looked up and my arm was tied up in a hospital bed, and +I said, "What is wrong with my arm?" And they told me then that I had a +shattered wrist, and that is when I also found out I had a wound in the +thigh. + +Mr. SPECTER. Can you describe the nature of the wound in the thigh? + +Governor CONNALLY. Well, just a raw, open wound, looked like a fairly +deep penetration. + +Mr. SPECTER. Indicating about 2 inches? + +Governor CONNALLY. No; I would say about an inch, an inch and a quarter +long is all; fairly wide, I would say a quarter of an inch wide, maybe +more, a third of an inch wide, and about an inch and a quarter, an inch +and a half long. + +Mr. SPECTER. Were you conscious that you had been wounded on the left +thigh at the time it occurred? + +Governor CONNALLY. No. + +Mr. SPECTER. Did you first notice that in the hospital on the following +day also? + +Governor CONNALLY. Yes. + +Mr. SPECTER. In your view, which bullet caused the injury to your +chest, Governor Connally? + +Governor CONNALLY. The second one. + +Mr. SPECTER. And what is your reason for that conclusion, sir? + +Governor CONNALLY. Well, in my judgment, it just couldn't conceivably +have been the first one because I heard the sound of the shot. In +the first place, I don't know anything about the velocity of this +particular bullet, but any rifle has a velocity that exceeds the speed +of sound, and when I heard the sound of that first shot, that bullet +had already reached where I was, or it had reached that far, and after +I heard that shot. I had the time to turn to my right, and start to +turn to my left before I felt anything. + +It is not conceivable to me that I could have been hit by the first +bullet, and then I felt the blow from something which was obviously +a bullet, which I assumed was a bullet, and I never heard the second +shot, didn't hear it. I didn't hear but two shots. I think I heard the +first shot and the third shot. + +Mr. SPECTER. Do you have any idea as to why you did not hear the second +shot? + +Governor CONNALLY. Well, first, again I assume the bullet was traveling +faster than the sound. I was hit by the bullet prior to the time the +sound reached me, and I was in either a state of shock or the impact +was such that the sound didn't even register on me, but I was never +conscious of hearing the second shot at all. + +Obviously, at least the major wound that I took in the shoulder through +the chest couldn't have been anything but the second shot. Obviously, +it couldn't have been the third, because when the third shot was fired +I was in a reclining position, and heard it, saw it and the effects of +it, rather--I didn't see it, I saw the effects of it--so it obviously +could not have been the third, and couldn't have been the first, in my +judgment. + +Mr. SPECTER. What was the nature of the exit wound on the front side of +your chest, Governor? + +Governor CONNALLY. I would say, if the Committee would be interested, I +would just as soon you look at it. Is there any objection to any of you +looking at it? + +The CHAIRMAN. No. + +Governor CONNALLY. You can tell yourself. + +I would say, to describe it for the record, however, that it, the +bullet, went in my back just below the right shoulder blade, at just +about the point that the right arm joins the shoulder, right in that +groove, and exited about 2 inches toward the center of the body from +the right nipple of my chest. I can identify these for you. + +The bullet went in here--see if I properly describe that--about the +juncture of the right arm and the shoulder. + +Mr. SPECTER. Let the record show that the Governor has removed his +shirt and we can view the wound on the back which he is pointing toward. + +Governor CONNALLY. The other two are tubes that were inserted in my +back by the doctors. + +Mr. SPECTER. Dr. Shaw is present and he can, perhaps, describe with +identifiable precision where the wounds are. + +Dr. SHAW. There is the wound of the drain that has been specifically +described. It was not as large as the scar indicated because in +cleaning up the ragged edges of the wound, some of the skin was excised +in order to make a cleaner incision. This scar---- + +Mr. SPECTER. Will you describe the location, Doctor, of that wound on +the Governor's back? + +Dr. SHAW. Yes. It is on the right shoulder, I will feel it, just +lateral to the shoulder blade, the edge of which is about 2 centimeters +from the wound, and just above and slightly medial to the crease formed +by the axilla or the armpit, the arm against the chest wall. + +Mr. SPECTER. What other scars are shown there on the Governor's back? + +Dr. SHAW. The other scars are surgically induced. This is the incision +that was made to drain the depth of the subscapular space. + +Mr. SPECTER. And there you are indicating an incision at what location, +please? + +Dr. SHAW. Just at the angle of the shoulder blade. Here is the angle of +the shoulder blade. + +These incisions were never closed by suture. These incisions were left +open and they healed by what we call secondary intention, because +in this case there was what we call a Penrose drain, which is a +soft-rubber drain going up into the depths of the shoulder to allow +any material to drain. This was to prevent infection. The other small +opening was the one in which the tube was placed through the eighth +interspace. + +Mr. SPECTER. Indicate its location, please, Doctor, on his back. + +Dr. SHAW. This is lower on the right back in what we refer to as the +posterior axillary line, roughly this line. + +Mr. SPECTER. There you are drawing a vertical, virtually vertical line? + +Dr. SHAW. Yes. It is on the right back, but getting close to the +lateral portion of the chest. This also was a stab wound which was +never sutured. There was a rubber drain through this that led to what +we call a water seal bottle to allow for drainage of the inside of the +chest. + +Mr. SPECTER. Indicating again the second medically inflicted wound. + +Dr. SHAW. Yes; that is right. + +Mr. SPECTER. Will you now, Doctor, describe the location of the wound +of exit on the Governor's chest, please? + +Dr. SHAW. Yes. The wound of exit was beneath and medial to the nipple. +Here was this =V= that I was indicating. It is almost opposite that. +At the time of the wound there was a ragged oval hole here at least +5 centimeters in diameter, but the skin edges were excised, and here +again this scar does not look quite as nice as it does during the more +lateral portion of the surgically induced incision, because this skin +was brought together under a little tension, and there is a little +separation there. + +Mr. SPECTER. Will you describe the entire scar there, Doctor, for the +record, please? + +Dr. SHAW. Yes. The entire surgical incision runs from the anterior +portion of the chest just lateral to the, we call it, the condral arch, +the =V= formed by the condral arch, and then extends laterally below +the nipple, running up, curving up, into the posterior axillary portion +or the posterior lateral wall of the chest. + +Mr. SPECTER. What is the total length of the scar, Doctor? + +Dr. SHAW. Twenty centimeters, about. + +Mr. DULLES. Where was the center of the bullet wound itself in that +scar about? + +Dr. SHAW. Here. + +Mr. DULLES. There? + +Dr. SHAW. Yes. All of the rest of this incision was necessary to gain +access to the depths of the wound for the debridement, for removing all +of the destroyed tissue because of the passage of the bullet. + +Mr. DULLES. Would you give us in your hand the area of declination from +the entry to the---- + +Dr. SHAW. This way. + +Mr. DULLES. Yes. + +Mr. SPECTER. Can you estimate that angle for us, Doctor? + +Dr. SHAW. We are talking about the angle now, of course, with the +horizontal, and I would say--you don't have a caliper there, do you? + +Dr. GREGORY. Yes. + +Dr. SHAW. I was going to guess somewhere between 25° and 30°. + +Mr. DULLES. Sorry to ask these questions. + +Governor CONNALLY. That is fine. I think it is an excellent question. + +Dr. SHAW. Well, this puts it right at 25°. + +Mr. SPECTER. That is the angle then of elevation as you are measuring +it? + +Dr. SHAW. Measuring from back to front, it is the elevation of the +posterior wound over the anterior wound. + +The CHAIRMAN. The course being downward back to front? + +Dr. SHAW. Yes. + +Governor CONNALLY. Back to front. + +The CHAIRMAN. Yes. + +Dr. SHAW. At the time of the initial examination, as I described, this +portion of the Governor's chest was mobile, it was moving in and out +because of the softening of the chest, and that was the reason I didn't +want the skin incision to be directly over that, because to get better +healing it is better to have a firm pad of tissue rather than having +the incision directly over the softened area. + +Mr. DULLES. Doctor, would the angle be the same if the Governor were +seated now the way he was in the chair? + +Dr. SHAW. That is a good question. Of course, we don't know exactly +whether he was back or tipped forward. But I don't think there is +going to be much difference. + +Mr. DULLES. Were you seated in about that way, Governor? + +Governor CONNALLY. Mr. Dulles, I would say I was in about this position +when I was hit, with my face approximately looking toward you, 20° off +of center. + +Dr. SHAW. Yes; I got 27°. That didn't make much difference. + +Mr. SPECTER. Is that reading taken then while the Governor is in a +seated position, Doctor? + +Dr. SHAW. Yes, seated; yes. + +Representative BOGGS. May I ask a question? How would his hand have +been under those circumstances, Doctor, for the bullet to hit his wrist? + +Dr. GREGORY. I think it fits very well, really, remembering at the +other end the trajectory is right here, and there would be no problem +to pose his hands in that fashion, and if you will note, you can see +it best from over here really, because you did see that the point +of entry, and you can visualize his thigh, there is no problem to +visualize the trajectory. + +Mr. DULLES. Would you be naturally holding your hand in that position? + +Dr. GREGORY. It could be any place. + +Governor CONNALLY. It could be anywhere on that line, Mr. Dulles. + +Mr. Chief Justice, you see this is the leg. + +Dr. SHAW. Of course, the wound is much smaller than this. + +Mr. SPECTER. Let the record show the Governor has displayed the left +thigh showing the scar caused by the entry of the missile in the left +thigh. + +Dr. Gregory, will you describe the locale of that? + +Dr. GREGORY. Yes. This scar, excisional scar, is a better term, if I +may just interject that---- + +Mr. SPECTER. Please do. + +Dr. GREGORY. The excisional scar to the Governor's thigh is located at +a point approximately 10 or 12 centimeters above the adductor tubercule +of the femur, placing it at the juncture of the middle and distal third +of his thigh. + +Mr. SPECTER. In lay language, Doctor, about how far is that up from the +knee area? + +Dr. GREGORY. Five inches, 6 inches. + +Mr. SPECTER. Governor Connally, can you recreate the position that you +were sitting in in the automobile, as best you can recollect, at the +time you think you were struck? + +Governor CONNALLY. I think, having turned to look over my right +shoulder, then revolving to look over my left shoulder, I threw my +right wrist over on my left leg. + +Mr. SPECTER. And in the position you are seated now, with your right +wrist on your left leg, with your little finger being an inch or two +from your knee? + +Governor CONNALLY. From the knee. + +Mr. SPECTER. And, Dr. Gregory, would that be in approximate alignment +which has been characterized on Commission Exhibit---- + +Dr. GREGORY. I think it fits reasonably well; yes, sir. + +Mr. SPECTER. In a moment here I can get that exhibit. + +Mr. DULLES. May I ask a question in the meantime? + +Governor CONNALLY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. DULLES. You turned to the right, as I recall your testimony, +because you heard the sound coming from the right? + +Governor CONNALLY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. DULLES. How did you happen to turn then to the left, do you +remember why that was? + +Governor CONNALLY. Yes, sir; I know exactly. I turned to the right both +to see, because it was an instinctive movement, because that is where +the sound came from, but even more important, I immediately thought it +was a rifleshot, I immediately thought of an assassination attempt, +and I turned to see if I could see the President, to see if he was all +right. Failing to see him over my right shoulder, I turned to look over +my left shoulder. + +Mr. DULLES. I see. + +Governor CONNALLY. Into the back seat, and I never completed that turn. +I got no more than substantially looking forward, a little bit to the +left of forward, when I got hit. + +Representative BOGGS. May I ask one of the doctors a question? What is +the incidence of recovery from a wound of this type? + +Dr. GREGORY. I will defer the answer to Dr. Shaw. From the wrist, +excellent so far as recovery is concerned. Functionally, recovery is +going to be good, too, and Dr. Shaw can take on the other one. + +Dr. SHAW. We never had any doubt about the Governor's recovery. We knew +what we had to do and we felt he could recover. I think I indicated +that to Mrs. Connally. + +Governor CONNALLY. As soon as you got into the chest and found out what +it was. + +Representative BOGGS. But, there was a very serious wound, was there +not, Doctor? + +Dr. SHAW. Yes. It was both a shocking and painful wound, and the +effects of the wound, the immediate effects of the wound, were very +dangerous as far as Governor Connally was concerned, because he had +what we call a sucking wound of the chest. This would not allow him to +breathe. I think instinctively what happened, while he was riding in +the car on the way to the hospital, he probably had his arm across, and +he may have instinctively closed that sucking area to some extent. But +they had to immediately put an occlusive dressing on it as soon as he +got inside to keep him from sucking air in and out of the right chest. + +Representative BOGGS. Had hospitalization been delayed for about +another half hour or so---- + +Dr. SHAW. That is speculation, but I don't think he could have +maintained breathing, sufficient breathing, for a half hour with that +type of wound. It is a little speculation. It would depend on how +well he could protect himself. We have had instances where by putting +their jackets around them like this, they could occlude this, and go +for a considerable period of time. Airmen during the war instinctively +protected themselves in this way. + +Representative BOGGS. You have no doubt about his physical ability to +serve as Governor? + +Dr. SHAW. None whatever. [Laughter.] + +Senator COOPER. I am just trying to remember whether we asked you, +Doctor, if you probed the wound in the thigh to see how deep it was. + +Dr. GREGORY. I did not, Senator. Dr. Tom Shires at our institution +attended that wound, and I have his description to go on, what he +found, what he had written, and his description is that it did not +penetrate the thigh very deeply, just to the muscle, but not beyond +that. + +Representative BOGGS. Just one other question of the Doctor. Having +looked at the wound, there is no doubt in either of your minds that +that bullet came from the rear, is there? + +Dr. GREGORY. There has never been any doubt in my mind about the origin +of the missile; no. + +Representative BOGGS. And in yours? + +Dr. SHAW. No. + +Mr. SPECTER. Governor Connally, this is the exhibit which I was +referring to, being 689. Was that your approximate position +except--that is the alinement with your right hand being on your left +leg as you have just described? + +Governor CONNALLY. No; it looks like my right hand is up on my chest. +But I don't know. I can't say with any degree of certainty where my +right hand was, frankly. + +Mr. SPECTER. Governor Connally---- + +Governor CONNALLY. It could have been up on my chest, it could have +been suspended in the air, it could have been down on my leg, it could +have been anywhere. I just don't remember. + +I obviously, I suppose, like anyone else, wound up the next day +realizing I was hit in three places, and I was not conscious of having +been hit but by one bullet, so I tried to reconstruct how I could have +been hit in three places by the same bullet, and I merely, I know it +penetrated from the back through the chest first. + +I assumed that I had turned as I described a moment ago, placing my +right hand on my left leg, that it hit my wrist, went out the center of +the wrist, the underside, and then into my leg, but it might not have +happened that way at all. + +Mr. SPECTER. Were your knees higher on the jump seat than they would be +on a normal chair such as you are sitting on? + +Governor CONNALLY. I would say it was not unlike this, with the +exception the knees might be slightly higher, perhaps a half an inch to +an inch higher. + +Mr. DULLES. In this photograph you happen to have your right arm on +the side of the car. I don't know whether you recall that. That is +Commission Exhibit 698. That just happened to be one pose at one +particular time? + +Governor CONNALLY. Yes; I don't think there is any question, Mr. +Dulles, at various times we were turned in every direction. We had arms +extended out of the car, on the side. + +Mr. DULLES. That was taken earlier, I believe. Was that on Main Street? +Where was that taken? + +Representative BOGGS. I wonder if I might ask a question? + +The CHAIRMAN. Go right ahead. + +Representative BOGGS. This is a little bit off the subject, but it +is pretty well established that the Governor was shot and he has +recovered. Do you have any reason to believe there was any conspiracy +afoot for somebody to assassinate you? + +Governor CONNALLY. None whatever. + +Representative BOGGS. Had you ever received any threat from Lee Harvey +Oswald of any kind? + +Governor CONNALLY. No. + +Representative BOGGS. Did you know him? + +Governor CONNALLY. No. + +Representative BOGGS. Had you ever seen him? + +Governor CONNALLY. No. + +Representative BOGGS. Have you ever had any belief of, subsequent to +the assassination of President Kennedy and your own injury, that there +was a conspiracy here of any kind? + +Governor CONNALLY. None whatever. + +Representative BOGGS. What is your theory about what happened? + +Governor CONNALLY. Well, it is pure theory based on nothing more +than what information is available to everyone, and probably less is +available to me, certainly less than is available to you here on this +Commission. + +But I think you had an individual here with a completely warped, +demented mind who, for whatever reason, wanted to do two things: First, +to vent his anger, his hate, against many people and many things in +a dramatic fashion that would carve for him, in however infamous a +fashion, a niche in the history books of this country. And I think he +deliberately set out to do just what he did, and that is the only thing +that I can think of. + +You ask me my theory, and that is my theory, and certainly not +substantiated by any facts. + +Representative BOGGS. Going on again, Governor, and again using the +word "theory," do you have any reason to believe that there was any +connection between Oswald and Ruby? + +Governor CONNALLY. I have no reason to believe that there was; no, +Congressman. By the same token, if you ask me do I have any reason not +to believe it, I would have to answer the same, I don't know. + +Representative BOGGS. Yes. + +Governor CONNALLY. I just don't have any knowledge or any information +about the background of either, and I am just not in a position to +say. + +Mr. DULLES. You recall your correspondence with Oswald in connection +with Marine matters, when he thought you were still Secretary of the +Navy? + +Governor CONNALLY. After this was all over, I do, Mr. Dulles. As I +recall, he wrote me a letter asking that his dishonorable discharge be +corrected. But at the time he wrote the letter, if he had any reason +about it at all, or shortly thereafter, he would have recognized that I +had resigned as Secretary of the Navy a month before I got the letter, +so it would really take a peculiar mind, it seems to me, to harbor any +grudge as a result of that when I had resigned as Secretary prior to +the receipt of the letter. + +Mr. DULLES. I think I can say without violating any confidence, that +there is nothing in the record to indicate that there was--in fact, +Marina, the wife, testified, in fact, to the contrary. There was no +animus against you on the part of Oswald, as you---- + +Governor CONNALLY. I have wondered, of course, in my own mind as +to whether or not there could have conceivably been anything, and +the only--I suppose like any person at that particular moment, I +represented authority to him. Perhaps he was in a rebellious spirit +enough to where I was as much a target as anyone else. But that is the +only conceivable basis on which I can assume that he was deliberately +trying to hit me. + +Representative BOGGS. You have no doubt about the fact that he was +deliberately trying to hit you? + +Governor CONNALLY. Yes, I do; I do have doubt, Congressman. I am not +at all sure he was shooting at me. I think I could with some logic +argue either way. The logic in favor of him, of the position that he +was shooting at me, is simply borne out by the fact that the man fired +three shots, and he hit each of the three times he fired. He obviously +was a pretty good marksman, so you have to assume to some extent at +least that he was hitting what he was shooting at. + +On the other hand, I think I could argue with equal logic that +obviously his prime target, and I think really his sole target, was +President Kennedy. His first shot, at least to him, he could not have +but known the effect that it might have on the President. His second +shot showed that he had clearly missed the President, and his result to +him, as the result of the first shot, the President slumped and changed +his position in the back seat just enough to expose my back. I haven't +seen all of the various positions, but again I think from where he was +shooting I was in the direct line of fire immediately in front of the +President, so any movement on the part of the President would expose me. + +The CHAIRMAN. Have you seen the moving pictures, Governor? + +Governor CONNALLY. Yes, sir; I have, Mr. Chief Justice. + +Mr. SPECTER. Was there any point of exit on your thigh wound? + +Governor CONNALLY. No. + +Mr. SPECTER. (to Dr. Gregory.) Would you give the precise condition of +the right wrist, and cover the thigh, too? + +Dr. GREGORY. The present state of the wound on his wrist indicates that +the linear scar made in the course of the excision is well healed; that +its upper limb is about---- + +Governor CONNALLY. I thinks he wants you to describe the position of it. + +Mr. SPECTER. Yes; the position. + +Dr. GREGORY. I was about to do that. The upper limb of it is about 5 +centimeters above the wrist joint, and curves around toward the thumb +distally to about a centimeter above the wrist joint. + +Mr. SPECTER. What is the total length of that? + +Dr. GREGORY. The length of that excisional scar is about 4 centimeters, +an inch and a half. + +Mr. SPECTER. What is the wound appearing to be on the palmer side? + +Dr. GREGORY. The wound on the palmer side of the wrist is now converted +to a well-healed linear scar approximately one-half inch in length, and +located about three-quarters of an inch above the distal flexion crease. + +Representative BOGGS. What is the prognosis for complete return of +function there? + +Dr. GREGORY. Very good, Congressman; very good. + +Mr. SPECTER. Governor Connally, I now show you the black jacket and ask +you if you can identify what that jacket is, whose it is? + +Governor CONNALLY. Yes, sir; that is mine. + +Mr. SPECTER. When did you last wear that jacket? + +Governor CONNALLY. On November 22 I was wearing this, the day of the +shooting. + +Mr. SPECTER. I show you Commission Exhibit 683 and ask you if that is a +photograph of the front side of the jacket, as it appears at the moment? + +Governor CONNALLY. Yes; it is. + +Mr. SPECTER. I show you Exhibit 684, and ask if that is a photograph of +the rear side of the jacket? + +Governor CONNALLY. Yes, sir; it is. + +Mr. SPECTER. I now show you a shirt and ask you if you can identify +this as having been the shirt you wore on the day of the assassination? + +Governor CONNALLY. Yes, sir; that is the shirt I had on. + +Mr. SPECTER. I show you Exhibit 685 and ask if that is a picture of the +rear side of the shirt? + +Governor CONNALLY. Yes; it is. + +Mr. SPECTER. Exhibit 686 is shown to you, and I ask you if that is a +photograph of the front side of the shirt? + +Governor CONNALLY. Yes, sir; it is. + +Mr. SPECTER. I show you a pair of black trousers and ask you if you can +identify them? + +Governor CONNALLY. Yes, sir; these are the trousers to the coat we +looked at a moment ago. They were the trousers I was wearing on the day +of the shooting. + +Mr. SPECTER. I show you a photograph and ask you, which is Exhibit 687, +if that is a photograph of the front of the trousers? + +Governor CONNALLY. Yes, sir; it is. + +Mr. SPECTER. I show you Exhibit 688 and ask you if that depicts the +rear of the trousers? + +Governor CONNALLY. Yes, sir; it does. + +Mr. SPECTER. I show you a tie, and ask you if you can identify that? + +Governor CONNALLY. Yes, sir; that is the tie I was wearing on the day +of the shooting. + +Mr. SPECTER. I now show you a photograph marked Commission Exhibit 700 +and ask if that is a picture of the tie? + +Governor CONNALLY. Yes, sir; it is. + +Mr. SPECTER. What is the permanent home of these clothes at the present +time when they are not on Commission business? + +Governor CONNALLY. They, the Archives of the State of Texas, asked for +the clothing, and I have given the clothing to them. That is where they +were sent from, I believe, here, to this Commission. + +Mr. SPECTER. At this juncture, Mr. Chief Justice, I move for the +admission in evidence of Commission Exhibits 699 and 700. + +The CHAIRMAN. They may be admitted. + +(The items marked Commission Exhibits 699 and 700 for identification +were received in evidence.) + +Mr. SPECTER. Governor Connally, in 1963 we were informed that Lee +Harvey Oswald paid a visit to Austin. Tex., and is supposed to also +have visited your office. Do you have any knowledge of such a visit? + +Governor CONNALLY. No, sir. + +Mr. DULLES. What date did you give? + +Mr. SPECTER. 1963. + +Representative BOGGS. What date in 1963? + +Mr. SPECTER. We do not have the exact date on that. + +Representative BOGGS. Excuse me just a minute. Would your office +records indicate such a visit? + +Governor CONNALLY. It might or might not, Congressman. We have---- + +Representative BOGGS. That is what I would think. + +Governor CONNALLY. We have there a reception room that is open from +about 9:30 to 12 and from 2 to 4 every day, and depending on the time +of the year there are literally hundreds of people who come in there. +There would be as high as 80 at a time that come in groups, and a +tour--this is a very large reception room which, frankly, we can't +use for any other purpose because it is so useful for tourists, and +they literally come in by the hundreds, and some days we will have a +thousand people in that room on any given day. So for me to say he +never was in there, I couldn't do that; and he might well have been +there, and no record of it in the office. + +We make no attempt to keep a record of all the people who come in. If +they come in small groups or if they have appointments with me, or one +of my assistants, yes, we do. We keep records of people who come in and +want to leave a card or leave word that they dropped by. But I have no +knowledge that he ever came by. + +Mr. SPECTER. Governor Connally, on your recitation of the events on the +day of the assassination, you had come to the point where the shooting +was concluded and the automobile had started to accelerate toward the +hospital. What recollection do you have, if any, of the events on the +way to the hospital from the assassination scene? + +Governor CONNALLY. None really. I think at that point I had lost +consciousness because I don't have any recollection, Mr. Specter, of +anything that occurred on the way to the hospital. It was a very short +period of time, but I don't remember it. + +Mr. SPECTER. Do you have any recollection of your arrival at the +hospital itself, at the Parkland Hospital? + +Governor CONNALLY. Yes. I think when the car stopped the driver was +obviously driving at a very rapid rate of speed, and apparently, as he +threw on the brakes of the car, it brought me back to consciousness. + +Again, a strange thing--strange things run through your mind and, +perhaps, not so strange under the circumstances, but I immediately--the +only thought that occurred to me was that I was in the jump seat next +to the door, that everyone concerned, was going to be concerned with +the President; that I had to get out of the way so they could get to +the President. So although I was reclining, and again Mrs. Connally +holding me, I suddenly lurched out of her arms and tried to stand +upright to get myself out of the car. + +I got--I don't really know how far I got. They tell me I got almost +upright, and then just collapsed again, and someone then picked me up +and put me on a stretcher. I again was very conscious because this was +the first time that I had any real sensation of pain, and at this point +the pain in the chest was excruciating, and I kept repeating just over +and over, "My God, it hurts, it hurts," and it was hurting, it was +excruciating at that point. + +I was conscious then off and on during the time I was in the emergency +room. I don't recall that I remember everything, but I remember quite a +bit. I remember being wheeled down the passageway, I remember doctors +and various people talking in the emergency room. I remember them +asking me a number of questions, too, which I answered, but that was +about it. + +Mr. SPECTER. Do you know whether there was any bullet, or bullet +fragments, that remained in your body or in your clothing as you were +placed on the emergency stretcher at Parkland Hospital? + +Governor CONNALLY. No. + +Mr. SPECTER. Governor Connally, other than that which you have already +testified to, do you know of any events or occurrences either before +the trip or with the President in Texas during his trip, or after his +trip, which could shed any light on the assassination itself? + +Governor CONNALLY. None whatever. + +Mr. SPECTER. Do you know of any conversations involving anyone at all, +either before the trip, during the trip, or after the trip, other than +those which you have already related, which would shed any light on the +facts surrounding the assassination? + +Governor CONNALLY. None whatever. + +Mr. SPECTER. Do you have anything to add which you think would be +helpful to the Commission in any way? + +Governor CONNALLY. No, sir; Mr. Specter, I don't. + +I want to express my gratitude to the Commission for hearing me so +patiently, but I only wish I could have added something more that would +be helpful to the Commission on arriving at the many answers to so many +of these difficult problems, but I don't. + +I can only say that it has taken some little time to describe the +events and what happened. It is rather amazing in retrospect when you +think really what a short period of time it took for it to occur, in a +matter of seconds, and if my memory is somewhat vague about precisely +which way I was looking or where my hand or arm was, I can only say I +hope it is understandable in the light of the fact that this was a very +sudden thing. It was a very shocking thing. + +I have often wondered myself why I never had the presence of mind +enough--I obviously did say something; I said, "Oh, no, no, no," and +then I said, "My God, they are going to kill us all." + +I don't know why I didn't say. "Get down in the car," but I didn't. You +just never know why you react the way you do and why you don't do some +things you ought to do. + +But I am again grateful to this Commission as a participant in this +tragedy and as a citizen of this country, and I want to express, I +think in behalf of millions of people, our gratitude for the time and +energy and the dedication that this Commission has devoted to trying +to supply the answers that people, I am sure, will be discussing for +generations to come. I know it has been a difficult, long, laborious +task for you, but I know that generations of the future Americans will +be grateful for your efforts. + +Representative BOGGS. Governor, I would like to say that we have had +fine cooperation from all of your Texas officials, from the attorney +general of the State, and from his people and others who have worked +with the Commission. + +Governor CONNALLY. Well, we are delighted, and I am very happy that the +attorney general is here with us today. + +Senator COOPER. May I ask one question? + +The CHAIRMAN. Yes, Senator Cooper. + +Senator COOPER. Governor, at the time you all passed the Texas School +Book Depository, did you know that such a building was located there? +Were you familiar with the building at all? + +Governor CONNALLY. Just vaguely, Senator. + +Senator COOPER. But now when you heard the shot, you turned to your +right because you thought, as you said, that the shot came from that +direction. As you turned, was that in the direction of the Texas School +Book Depository? + +Governor CONNALLY. Yes, sir; it was. + +Senator COOPER. Do you remember an overpass in front of you---- + +Governor CONNALLY. Yes, sir. + +Senator COOPER. As you moved down? + +Governor CONNALLY. Yes, sir. + +Senator COOPER. Were you aware at all of any sounds of rifleshots from +the direction of the overpass, from the embankment? + +Governor CONNOLLY. No, sir; I don't believe there were such. + +Senator COOPER. Well, you know, there have been stories. + +Governor CONNALLY. Yes, sir; but I don't believe that. + +Senator COOPER. I wanted to ask you if you were very conscious of the +fact--you were conscious of a shot behind you, you were not aware of +any shot from the embankment or overpass. The answer is what? + +Governor CONNALLY. I am not aware of any shots from the overpass, +Senator. Senator, I might repeat my testimony with emphasis to this +extent, that I have all my life been familiar with the sound of a +rifleshot, and the sound I heard I thought was a rifleshot, at the time +I heard it I didn't think it was a firecracker, or blowout or anything +else. I thought it was a rifleshot. I have hunted enough to think that +my perception with respect to directions is very, very good, and this +shot I heard came from back over my right shoulder, which was in the +direction of the School Book Depository, no question about it. I heard +no other. The first and third shots came from there. I heard no other +sounds that would indicate to me there was any commotion or disturbance +of shots or anything else on the overpass. + +Senator COOPER. Would you describe again the nature of the shock that +you had when you felt that you had been hit by a bullet? + +Governor CONNALLY. Senator, the best way I can describe it is to say +that I would say it is as if someone doubled his fist and came up +behind you and just with about a 12-inch blow hit you right in the back +right below the shoulder blade. + +Senator COOPER. That is when you heard the first rifleshot? + +Governor CONNALLY. This was after I heard the first rifleshot. There +was no pain connected with it. There was no particular burning +sensation. There was nothing more than that. I think you would feel +almost the identical sensation I felt if someone came up behind you and +just, with a short jab, hit you with a doubled-up fist just below the +shoulder blade. + +Senator COOPER. That is all. + +Mr. SPECTER. I have just one other question, Governor. With respect to +the films and the slides which you have viewed this morning, had you +ever seen those pictures before this morning? + +Governor CONNALLY. I had seen what purported to be a copy of the film +when I was in the hospital in Dallas. I had not seen the slides. + +Mr. SPECTER. And when do you think you were hit on those slides, +Governor, or in what range of slides? + +Governor CONNALLY. We took--you are talking about the number of the +slides? + +Mr. SPECTER. Yes. + +Governor CONNALLY. As we looked at them this morning, and as you +related the numbers to me, it appeared to me that I was hit in the +range between 130 or 131, I don't remember precisely, up to 134, in +that bracket. + +Mr. SPECTER. May I suggest to you that it was 231? + +Governor CONNALLY. Well, 231 and 234, then. + +Mr. SPECTER. The series under our numbering system starts with a higher +number when the car comes around the turn, so when you come out of the +sign, which was---- + +Governor CONNALLY. It was just after we came out of the sign, for +whatever that sequence of numbers was, and if it was 200, I correct my +testimony. It was 231 to about 234. It was within that range. + +Mr. SPECTER. That is all. + +The CHAIRMAN. Are there any other questions? + +Mr. DULLES. I have one or two. Governor, were you consulted at all +about the security arrangements in connection with the Dallas visit? + +Governor CONNALLY. No, sir; not really; no, sir; and let me add we +normally are not. + +Mr. DULLES. I realize that. + +Governor CONNALLY. Mr. Dulles, the Secret Service, as you know, comes +in, they work with both our department of public safety and the various +city police, and the various localities in which we are going. So far +as I know, there was complete cooperation on the part of everyone +concerned, but I was not consulted. + +Mr. DULLES. I think you mentioned that there was a slight change in +plans before the arrival in San Antonio. I don't know whether it +affects our investigation at all. Do you recall that? + +Governor CONNALLY. Yes, sir; I don't know whether it--I don't think it +affects the testimony at all. I was merely trying to relate some of +the problems that had gone into planning a Presidential trip into four +cities. + +Mr. DULLES. Yes. + +Governor CONNALLY. And trying to arrange this all initially within +about a 12-hour period which had been expanded into a little more than +that because the President finally agreed to come the day before, and +come into San Antonio on the afternoon before the Thomas dinner on +Thursday night. + +Mr. DULLES. That was the change you had in mind? + +Governor CONNALLY. This was the change. This gave us much more latitude +because it permitted us to go into San Antonio, which is one of the +major stops, which was the major stop, really, because he dedicated +the Aerospace Medical Center on Thursday, which meant we did not have +to crowd Thursday. But there was a change, but not significant to this +investigation. + +Mr. DULLES. Do you happen to recall in general when the decision was +reached that the visit would include a trip to Dallas, or was that +always a part? + +Governor CONNALLY. I think it was always a part. + +Mr. DULLES. Of the planning? + +Governor CONNALLY. Yes; I think it was always a part. There was +consideration given, if you had to leave out some place, let us leave +out Dallas or let us leave out this one or that one, but there was +no question, I don't think, in anyone's mind if we made more than one +stop in the big cities that we were going to try to make them all, San +Antonio, Houston, Dallas, and Fort Worth. + +Mr. DULLES. You do not recall seeing anyone approach the car outside +of those who were in the procession just prior to the shooting, anyone +from the sidewalk or along the street there, in the park, which was on +one side? + +Governor CONNALLY. No, sir; I sure don't. + +Mr. DULLES. You and one other happen to be the only witnesses who have +indicated that they recognized it as being a rifleshot. The other +witness, like you, was a huntsman. Most of the witnesses have indicated +they thought it was a backfire; the first shot was a backfire or a +firecracker. + +Can you distinguish, what is there that distinguishes a rifleshot from +a backfire or a firecracker? Can you tell or is it just instinct? + +Governor CONNALLY. I am not sure I could accurately describe it. I +don't know that I have ever attempted to. I would say a firecracker +or a blowout has more of a hollow, bursting kind of sound, as if you +popped a balloon, or something of this sort. A rifleshot, on the other +hand, to me has more of a ring, kind of an echo to it, more of a +metallic sound to it. It is a more penetrating sound than a firecracker +or a blowout. It carries---- + +Mr. DULLES. That gives me what I had in mind. I realize that. That is +all I have, Mr. Chief Justice. + +The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much. We are very appreciative of the help +you have given us. + +Senator COOPER. May I ask just one question? + +The CHAIRMAN. We hate to have you review all of this sordid thing again. + +Senator COOPER. May I ask a rather general question? I would like to +ask, in view of all the discussion which has been had, was there any +official discussion of any kind before this trip of which you were +aware that there might be some act of violence against the President? + +Governor CONNALLY. No, sir. + +Senator COOPER. Thank you. + +Governor CONNALLY. No; let me say that there have been several news +stories---- + +Senator COOPER. Yes, I know. + +Governor CONNALLY. That purportedly quoted me about not wanting the +President to ride in a motorcade or caravan in Dallas. That is very +true. But the implication was that I had some fear of his life, which +is not true. + +The reason I didn't want him to do it at the time it came up was simply +we were running out of time, and that, I thought, we were working him +much too hard. This again was before the change, moving San Antonio to +Thursday instead of having it all on one day, and I was opposed to a +motorcade because they do drain energy, and it takes time to do it, and +I didn't think we had the time. + +But once we got San Antonio moved from Friday to Thursday afternoon, +where that was his initial stop in Texas, then we had the time, and I +withdrew my objections to a motorcade. + +The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Governor. + +Governor CONNALLY. Thank you, sir. + + +TESTIMONY OF MRS. JOHN BOWDEN CONNALLY, JR. + +The CHAIRMAN. Mrs. Connally, would you mind telling us the story of +this affair as you heard it, and we will be brief, and we will start +right with the shooting itself, and Mr. Specter will also examine you. + +Would you raise your right hand and be sworn, please? Do you solemnly +swear the testimony you are about to give before this Commission will +be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you +God? + +Mrs. CONNALLY. I do. + +The CHAIRMAN. Will you sit, please? + +Mr. SPECTER. Are you the wife of Governor John C. Connally? + +Mrs. CONNALLY. No, I am the wife of Governor John B. Connally. + +Mr. SPECTER. Mrs. Connally, tell us what happened at the time of the +assassination. + +Mrs. CONNALLY. We had just finished the motorcade through the downtown +Dallas area, and it had been a wonderful motorcade. The people had been +very responsive to the President and Mrs. Kennedy, and we were very +pleased, I was very pleased. + +As we got off Main Street--is that the main thoroughfare? + +Mr. SPECTER. That is the street on which you were proceeding through +the town, yes. + +Mrs. CONNALLY. In fact the receptions had been so good every place that +I had showed much restraint by not mentioning something about it before. + +I could resist no longer. When we got past this area I did turn to the +President and said, "Mr. President, you can't say Dallas doesn't love +you." + +Then I don't know how soon, it seems to me it was very soon, that I +heard a noise, and not being an expert rifleman, I was not aware that +it was a rifle. It was just a frightening noise, and it came from the +right. + +I turned over my right shoulder and looked back, and saw the President +as he had both hands at his neck. + +Mr. SPECTER. And you are indicating with your own hands, two hands +crossing over gripping your own neck? + +Mrs. CONNALLY. Yes; and it seemed to me there was--he made no +utterance, no cry. I saw no blood, no anything. It was just sort of +nothing, the expression on his face, and he just sort of slumped down. + +Then very soon there was the second shot that hit John. As the first +shot was hit, and I turned to look at the same time, I recall John +saying, "Oh, no, no, no." Then there was a second shot, and it hit +John, and as he recoiled to the right, just crumpled like a wounded +animal to the right, he said, "My God, they are going to kill us all." + +I never again---- + +Mr. DULLES. To the right was into your arms more or less? + +Mrs. CONNALLY. No, he turned away from me. I was pretending that I was +him. I never again looked in the back seat of the car after my husband +was shot. My concern was for him, and I remember that he turned to the +right and then just slumped down into the seat, so that I reached over +to pull him toward me. I was trying to get him down and me down. The +jump seats were not very roomy, so that there were reports that he slid +into the seat of the car, which he did not; that he fell over into my +lap, which he did not. + +I just pulled him over into my arms because it would have been +impossible to get us really both down with me sitting and me holding +him. So that I looked out, I mean as he was in my arms, I put my head +down over his head so that his head and my head were right together, +and all I could see, too, were the people flashing by. I didn't look +back any more. + +The third shot that I heard I felt, it felt like spent buckshot falling +all over us, and then, of course, I too could see that it was the +matter, brain tissue, or whatever, just human matter, all over the car +and both of us. + +I thought John had been killed, and then there was some imperceptible +movement, just some little something that let me know that there was +still some life, and that is when I started saying to him, "It's all +right. Be still." + +Now, I did hear the Secret Service man say, "Pull out of the motorcade. +Take us to the nearest hospital," and then we took out very rapidly to +the hospital. + +Just before we got to Parkland, we made a right-hand turn, he must have +been going very fast, because as he turned the weight of my husband's +body almost toppled us both. + +Mr. SPECTER. How fast do you think he was going? + +Mrs. CONNALLY. I don't know; very rapidly. The people I could see going +by were just rushing. We were just rushing by very fast. + +We arrived at the hospital and sat there what seemed to me like an +interminable time, and from what I know was just a few minutes, but +the thoughts that went through my mind were how long must I sit here +with this dying man in my arms while everybody is swarming over the +President whom I felt very sure was dead, and just when I thought I +could sit and wait no longer, John just sort of heaved himself up. He +did not rise up in the car, he just sort of heaved himself up, and then +collapsed down into the seat. + +Mr. SPECTER. At that time you and Governor Connally were still on the +jump seats of the car? + +Mrs. CONNALLY. Yes, and they had not--the President was still--and Mrs. +Kennedy were still in the back. I still had not ever looked back at +the back seat after the second shot. I could hear, you know, hear them +talking about how sad, and lamenting the fact that the President was +in such poor shape and, of course, they didn't know whether he was--I +guess they didn't know whether he was alive or dead. + +Mr. SPECTER. Did President Kennedy say anything at all after the +shooting? + +Mrs. CONNALLY. He did not say anything. Mrs. Kennedy said, the first +thing I recall her saying was, after the first shot, and I heard her +say, "Jack, they have killed my husband," and then there was the second +shot, and then after the third shot she said, "They have killed my +husband. I have his brains in my hand," and she repeated that several +times, and that was all the conversation. + +Mr. SPECTER. From that point forward you say you had your eyes to the +front so you did not have a chance---- + +Mrs. CONNALLY. Yes, because I had him, and I really didn't think about +looking back anyway, but I could just see the car rushing along, and +people and things rushing past us. I remember thinking what a terrible +sight this must be to those people, to see these two shot-up men, and +it was a terribly horrifying thing, and I think that is about as I +remember it. + +Mr. SPECTER. What happened then after you got to the hospital? + +Mrs. CONNALLY. We got to the hospital and, like I said, John heaved +himself over. They still could not seem to get Mrs. Kennedy or the +President out of the back of the car, but someone scooped him up in +their arms and put him on a stretcher. There were two stretchers there, +and then they took him off immediately to the emergency room, and they +ran down the hall with the stretcher, and I just ran along with them. + +They took him into the emergency room, and right behind us came the +President on a stretcher, and they took him and put him in a room to +the right. There was much commotion and confusion. There were lots of +what I assumed were Secret Service men rushing in with machine guns, +I guess, or tommyguns. I am not real sure, they were big arms of some +sort. There was no one--there were lots of people across the hall. +There was no one with me and, of course, my thoughts then were, I guess +like any other woman, I wondered if all the doctors were in the room on +the left, and they were not taking too good care of my husband on the +right. I shouldn't have worried about that, should I? + +I knew no one in the hospital and I was alone. Twice I got up and +opened the door into the emergency room, and I could hear John and I +could see him moving, and I knew then that he was still alive. + +I guess that time was short, too. It seemed endless. Somebody rushed +out, I thought it was a nurse, and handed me one cuff link. I later +read that it was a lady doctor. + +They took him out of there very soon up to surgery, and I just left +with him and waited in an office. Do you know whose office I was in? It +was where you came to me. + +Dr. GREGORY. Dr. Jenkins' office. + +Dr. SHAW. Yes. You were either in the anesthesia office or in the room +that is part of the recovery room. Was it the same place where you +later stayed, Mrs. Connally? + +Mrs. CONNALLY. No. + +Dr. GREGORY. I think it was back in Dr. Jenkins' office. That is where +I believe I first saw you. + +Mrs. CONNALLY. I believe that is right. + +As soon as Dr. Shaw found that he had some encouraging news, that the +wounds were not as extensive as he had thought they could be or might +be, he sent that word to me from the operating room, and that was good +news. + +I then asked if I couldn't go see Mrs. Kennedy, and they told me that +she had left the hospital. + +Mr. SPECTER. Were you visited at the hospital by Mrs. Johnson? + +Mrs. CONNALLY. Yes, I was. But I assume that was before, since they +left together, not much of a visit. She came by and we didn't have to +say much, and then they left. + +Mr. SPECTER. Mrs. Connally, what was your impression, if any, as to the +source of the shots? + +Mrs. CONNALLY. Well, I had no thought of whether they were high or low +or where. They just came from the right; sounded like they were to my +right. + +Mr. SPECTER. How many did you hear in all? + +Mrs. CONNALLY. I heard three. + +Mr. SPECTER. What is your best estimate on the time that passed from +the first to the last shot? + +Mrs. CONNALLY. Very short. It seemed to me that there was less time +between the first and the second than between the second and the third. + +Mr. SPECTER. About how fast do you think the car was going then? + +Mrs. CONNALLY. I don't really know. Not too fast. It was sort of a +letdown time for us. We could relax for, we thought we could, for just +a minute. + +Mr. SPECTER. And you mean by that since the major part of the crowd had +been passed? + +Mrs. CONNALLY. We had gone by them. The underpass was in sight, and I +knew that as soon as we passed through the underpass that then we would +be going straight to the Trade Mart for the luncheon, and I felt like +we would then be moving fast and not have people on all sides of us. + +Mr. SPECTER. Did you see the films this morning here in the Commission +office? + +Mrs. CONNALLY. Yes, I did. + +Mr. SPECTER. Did you have an opinion as to which frame it was that +Governor Connally was shot? + +Mrs. CONNALLY. Yes. I was in agreement with the Governor. I am not sure +I remember the numbers so correct me, but I thought at the time that it +was that 229--it could have been then through the next three or four +frames. + +Mr. SPECTER. Do you have anything---- + +Mrs. CONNALLY. They were blurred. + +Mr. SPECTER. With respect to the source, you say you thought it was to +the right--did you have any reaction as to whether they were from the +front, rear or side? + +Mrs. CONNALLY. I thought it was from back of us. + +Mr. SPECTER. To the rear? + +Mrs. CONNALLY. To the right; that is right. + +Mr. SPECTER. Did you have any reaction as to the question of elevation +or level? + +Mrs. CONNALLY. No, I didn't. + +Mr. SPECTER. Do you have anything else to add which you think would be +helpful to the Commission in any way? + +Mrs. CONNALLY. I don't think so. + +The CHAIRMAN. Are there any other questions? Senator, do you have any? +Do you have any, Mr. Dulles? + +Mr. DULLES. I just have one question. Mrs. Connally, on one point your +testimony differs from a good many others as to the timing of the +shots. I think you said that there seemed to be more time between the +second and third than between the first and the second; is that your +recollection? + +Mrs. CONNALLY. Yes. + +Mr. DULLES. That is, the space between the first and the second was +less than between the second and the third? You realize I just wanted +to get whether I had heard you correctly on that. + +Mrs. CONNALLY. You did. + +Mr. DULLES. Thank you very much. + +Mrs. CONNALLY. Thank you. + +The CHAIRMAN. Mrs. Connally, thank you very much. We hate to have you +review all this in your mind's eye again, but it was necessary to have +your testimony, and you were very kind to come. + +Mrs. CONNALLY. Thank you. + +The CHAIRMAN. We appreciate it very much, indeed. + +(Whereupon, at 5:45 p.m., the President's Commission adjourned.) + + + + +_Wednesday, April 22, 1964_ + +TESTIMONY OF JESSE EDWARD CURRY, J. W. FRITZ, T. L. BAKER, AND J. C. DAY + +The President's Commission met at 9:10 a.m. on April 22, 1964, at 200 +Maryland Avenue NE., Washington, D.C. + +Present were Chief Justice Earl Warren, Chairman; Senator John Sherman +Cooper, Representative Gerald R. Ford, John J. McCloy, and Allen W. +Dulles, members. + +Also present were J. Lee Rankin, general counsel; Joseph A. Ball, +assistant counsel; David W. Belin, assistant counsel; Melvin Aron +Eisenberg, assistant counsel; Leon D. Hubert, Jr., assistant counsel; +Norman Redlich, assistant counsel; Charles Murray, observer; Waggoner +Carr, attorney general of Texas; and Dean Robert G. Storey, special +counsel to the attorney general of Texas. + + +TESTIMONY OF JESSE EDWARD CURRY + +The CHAIRMAN. The Commission will come to order. + +Chief, we have asked you to come here this morning, you and some of +your officers, for the purpose of taking their testimony concerning the +matters surrounding the arrest and the death of Lee Oswald at the time +of the assassination of the President. + +I think we will take the testimony of you, Captain Fritz, Lieutenant +Day, and Lieutenant Baker. I want to say to you, Chief, before I leave, +I will have to leave after an hour or so in order to sit on some cases +we are hearing in the Supreme Court but I want to say to you beforehand +that our staff was very much pleased with the cooperation that it +received from your people when they were down in Dallas, and from the +help that you personally gave to them, and made it very helpful, they +were very helpful, and we did need to have speed at that particular +time, because, as you know, we were obliged to wait until the Ruby +trial was over before we could come down there at all. + +So, we appreciate the assistance that your people gave us throughout +that proceeding. + +Now, would you please rise, Chief, and raise your right hand to be +sworn. + +Do you solemnly swear the testimony you are about to give before this +Commission will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the +truth, so help you God? + +Mr. CURRY. I do. + +The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Rankin, our Chief Counsel, will interrogate you, +Chief. Mr. Rankin, will you proceed? + +Mr. RANKIN. Yes; Mr. Chief Justice. Chief Curry, you gave a deposition +for the Commission recently, did you not? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes; I did, sir. + +Mr. RANKIN. That was about April 15, 1964? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. RANKIN. And that was down in Dallas that you gave it? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes, sir; it was. + +Mr. RANKIN. And Mr. Hubert examined you? + +Mr. CURRY. That is true. + +Mr. RANKIN. That was taken down by a court reporter? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you have anything to add to what you said at that time +or wish to correct it in any way? + +Mr. CURRY. I can't recall of anything that I should correct or add to. + +Mr. RANKIN. I ask you those questions in a general way, we will go back +to certain parts of that but I would like to proceed at this time in +view of the fact that the Chief Justice and possibly other members of +the Commission who will come may not be able to be here all the time +that you are being examined and I would like to get to certain crucial +matters if I may. + +When did you learn of the arrest of Lee Harvey Oswald? + +Mr. CURRY. While I was out at Parkland Hospital. + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you know about what time that was, the day? + +Mr. CURRY. It was on the 22d and the best I recall it was around 1 +o'clock or maybe a little after 1 o'clock. + +Mr. RANKIN. How did that come to your attention? + +Mr. CURRY. Some of my officers came to me and said they had arrested a +suspect in the shooting of our Officer Tippit. + +Mr. RANKIN. What else did they say? + +Mr. CURRY. They also told me a little later, I believe, that he was a +suspect also in the assassination of the President. + +Mr. RANKIN. What did you do then? + +Mr. CURRY. I didn't do anything at the time. I was at the hospital, and +I remained at the hospital until some of the Secret Service asked me +to prepare two cars that we were informed that President Kennedy had +expired and we were requested to furnish two cars for President Johnson +and some of his staff to return to Love Field. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you do that? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes; I did. + +Mr. RANKIN. What else--what did you do after that? + +Mr. CURRY. After the planes departed from Love Field, I was there for +the inauguration of the President, and then we left the plane, and +Judge Sarah Hughes and myself, and I remained at Love for some, I guess +perhaps an hour. + +Mr. RANKIN. By inauguration, you mean the swearing in of the President? + +Mr. CURRY. That is right, sir. + +Mr. RANKIN. On the plane? + +Mr. CURRY. On the plane; yes. + +Mr. RANKIN. And then you left Love Field? + +Mr. CURRY. I talked to Mayor Cabell and his wife for a little while and +after the plane left Love Field then I left Love Field. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you go with Judge Hughes or she go with you? + +Mr. CURRY. No; she was in her own car. + +Mr. RANKIN. I see. + +Mr. CURRY. And I returned to the city hall. + +Mr. DULLES. Did I understand correctly, how long were you at Love Field +after the plane of the President left? + +Mr. CURRY. As I recall it was approximately an hour. + +Mr. DULLES. That is what I thought. + +Mr. CURRY. We waited there until the casket bearing the President, and +then the cars bearing Mrs. Kennedy arrived, and it was, I would judge +an hour perhaps. + +Mr. RANKIN. Then what did you do? + +Mr. CURRY. I returned to my office at city hall. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you do anything about Lee Harvey Oswald at that time? + +Mr. CURRY. No. As I went into the city hall it was overrun with the +news media. + +Mr. RANKIN. What did you do about that? + +Mr. CURRY. I didn't do anything. They were jammed into the north hall +of the third floor, which are the offices of the criminal investigation +division. The television trucks, there were several of them around the +city hall. I went into my administrative offices, I saw cables coming +through the administrative assistant office and through the deputy +chief of traffic through his office, and running through the hall +they had a live TV set up on the third floor, and it was a bedlam of +confusion. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did anyone of the police department give them permission to +do this? + +Mr. CURRY. I noticed--well, I don't know who gave them permission +because I wasn't there. When I returned they were up there. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you inquire about whether permission had been given? + +Mr. CURRY. No; I didn't. We had in the past had always permitted free +movement of the press around the city hall but we had never been faced +with anything like this before where we had national and international +news media descending upon us in this manner. + +Mr. RANKIN. Could you describe to the Commission the difference this +time as compared with the ordinary case that you have handled? + +Mr. CURRY. Well, the ordinary case, perhaps we have two or three or +maybe a half dozen reporters, we have a room for them on the third +floor where they normally on assignment at city hall they stay in this +room. + +As prisoners are brought to and from the interrogation offices, it is +necessary to bring them down the main corridor, and they usually are +waiting there where they take pictures of them as they enter and as +they leave and they sometimes try to ask them questions. + +Mr. RANKIN. Now, how was this different? + +Mr. CURRY. That there was such total confusion here. We had to post men +on the door to keep them actually from going into the office where they +were interrogating. We had some men, police reserves and a sergeant, I +noticed on the third floor when I come off the elevator. + +They were stationed there, and they were screening people to see +whether or not they had business on the third floor because we did have +to carry on our other normal business, the burglary and theft and the +juvenile bureau and the auto theft bureau, the forgery bureau all of +these are on the third floor in this wing. + +The CHAIRMAN. Chief, is this building just a police building or a +municipal building, general purposes? + +Mr. CURRY. It is a section of the municipal building. + +The CHAIRMAN. A section of it. Is it isolated from the rest of it? + +Mr. CURRY. No; it is connected. + +The CHAIRMAN. Connected? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes. And on the first floor we have the courts and the +traffic violations bureau. + +In the basement it is principally police offices. On the second floor +we have the city planning commission, and we have part of our traffic +division and special service bureau on the second floor. + +Then on the third floor we have the criminal investigation division. +We have the police dispatcher's office, and we have the administrative +offices and we have the personnel offices. + +The CHAIRMAN. I see. + +Mr. CURRY. But all these are connected with the municipal building, +each floor is. + +The CHAIRMAN. Yes. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you have anything to do with the interrogation of Lee +Harvey Oswald? + +Mr. CURRY. No, sir; I did not. I was in the office once or twice while +he was being interrogated but I never asked him any question myself. + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you know who did? + +Mr. CURRY. Captain Fritz principally interrogated him, I believe. + +Mr. RANKIN. Was that his responsibility? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes; it was. There were several people in the office. It +seems to me we were violating every principle of interrogation, the +method by which we had to interrogate. + +Mr. RANKIN. Will you explain to the Commission what you mean by that? + +Mr. CURRY. Ordinarily an interrogator in interrogating a suspect will +have him in a quiet room alone or perhaps with one person there. + +Mr. RANKIN. Is that your regular practice? + +Mr. CURRY. That is the regular practice. + +Mr. RANKIN. Tell us how this was done? + +Mr. CURRY. This we had representatives from the Secret Service, we had +representatives from the FBI, we had representatives from the Ranger +Force, and they were--and then one or two detectives from the homicide +bureau. This was, well, it was just against all principles of good +interrogation practice. + +Mr. RANKIN. By representatives can you tell us how many were from each +of these agencies that you describe? + +Mr. CURRY. I can't be sure. I recall I believe two from the FBI, one +or two, Inspector Kelley was there from Secret Service, and I believe +another one of his men was there. There was one, I recall seeing one +man from the Rangers. I don't recall who he was. I just remember now +that there was one. + +Captain Fritz, and one or two of his detectives--this was in a small +office. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you do anything about this when you found out there +were so many, did you give any instructions about it? + +Mr. CURRY. No; I didn't. This was an unusual case. In fact, I had +received a call from the FBI requesting that they have a representative +from there in the hearing room. And we were trying to cooperate with +all agencies concerned in this, and I called Captain Fritz and asked +him to permit a representative of the FBI to come in. + +Mr. DULLES. Who was directing the interrogation, Captain Fritz? + +Mr. CURRY. Captain Fritz. + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you know how Lee Harvey Oswald was treated by the police +department? + +Mr. CURRY. So far as I know he was treated as any other prisoner is +treated. He was not handled in any manner any different from any other +prisoner. He had a scratch or two on his face which he received when he +was wrestling with the police over in this theater in Oak Cliff. Other +than that he had no marks on him. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did he ever complain that you know of about his treatment +while he was there? + +Mr. CURRY. No, sir; he did not. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you give any instructions about the security or how he +should be protected during this time? + +Mr. CURRY. No; I personally didn't. Deputy Chief Lumpkin, who has +charge of the service division which is the jail security, he told me +that he had ordered that two guards be placed on him right outside his +cell and kept there 24 hours a day as long as we had him. + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you know what was done about that? + +Mr CURRY. It was carried out. He told me that this was carried out. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you have any further difficulty with the media, the +various press and radio and television representatives during this time? + +Mr. CURRY. Well, every time we would walk out of the office they would +besiege you with questions and wanting statements and asking what we +had found out, and did we think this was the right man, and they almost +ran over you. + +Mr. RANKIN. What did you do about that? + +Mr. CURRY. I tried to maintain some order. I didn't order them out of +the building, which if I had it to do over I would. In the past like I +say, we had always maintained very good relations with our press, and +they had always respected us, and this was something, the first time we +experienced anything like this, to this degree. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you have any tape recordings of the interviews with Mr. +Oswald? + +Mr. CURRY. I do not have. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did anyone? + +Mr. CURRY. Not to my knowledge. Unless someone from the FBI or the +Secret Service, if they recorded it, I don't know. + +Mr. RANKIN. How many times was he interrogated, do you know? + +Mr. CURRY. No; I do not know that. + +Mr. RANKIN. You never examined him yourself at any time? + +Mr. CURRY. No, sir; I didn't. + +Mr. RANKIN. Will you describe the place where he was kept while he was +there in the jail? + +Mr. CURRY. Well, it is in one of our maximum security cells, much +the same as any other jail. But he was isolated away from the other +prisoners, and there was two jail guards set immediately outside his +cell. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you isolate him or was that in accordance with your +instructions? + +Mr. CURRY. No; this is customary with a prisoner of this type and Chief +Lumpkin in charge of the service division had issued these orders. + +Mr. RANKIN. What do you mean by maximum security in your prison? + +Mr. CURRY. Well, we have some cells where they have cells that are +locked and then you come out of the cell into a corridor and that is +locked, and these are maintained from a master control box. That is a +maximum security cell. Some of the others they just have a lock on the +door and it opens out into the hallway. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you do anything about furnishing him clothing? + +Mr. CURRY. We removed his clothing except for his underwear in order +that he couldn't harm himself. When he was removed from the cell, of +course, his clothes were given to him. + +Mr. RANKIN. Was he allowed to shower and clean up. + +Mr. CURRY. I don't think he ever asked for a shower while he was there. +Had he asked for one he would have been permitted to shower and he +would have been permitted to shave. + +Mr. RANKIN. Was he treated any differently in any way that you know of +than other prisoners? + +Mr. CURRY. Except perhaps a little more security placed on him, a +constant security. Ordinarily we wouldn't, except in unusual cases +would we have a constant surveillance on a prisoner, and this is +usually, if we felt like he might try to harm himself we would have +someone there to immediately prevent it. + +Mr. DULLES. Could I ask a question? + +What was Oswald's attitude toward the police? Have you any comment on +that? + +Mr. CURRY. The only things I heard him say, he was very arrogant. He +was very--he had a dislike for authority, it seemed, of anyone. He +denied anything you asked him. I heard them ask once or twice if this +was his picture or something, he said, "I don't know what you are +talking about. No; it is not my picture," and this was a picture of him +holding a rifle or something. I remember one time they showed him and +he denied that being him. + +I remember he denied anything knowing anything about a man named Hidell +that he had this identification in his pocket or in his notebook, and +I believe a postal inspector was in this room at the time, too, and +someone asked him about the fact that he had a post office box in the +name of Hidell and he didn't know anything about that. He just didn't +know anything about anything. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did it ever come to your attention that he ever asked for +or inquired about counsel? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes; I heard him say something. I asked if he had had an +opportunity to use the phone and Captain Fritz told me they were giving +him an opportunity to use the phone. + +Mr. RANKIN. What did he say about counsel? + +Mr. CURRY. As I recall he said he wanted to try to get in touch with +John Abt. + +Mr. RANKIN. A-b-t? + +Mr. CURRY. A-b-t, I believe an attorney in New York, to handle his case +and then if he couldn't get him he said he wanted to get someone from +Civil Liberties Union. + +Mr. RANKIN. What did you do about that? + +Mr. CURRY. I told them to let him talk to them in an attempt to get his +attorney and in an attempt to get some of his relatives so they could +arrange for it. + +Mr. RANKIN. Will you describe how it was handled for him to be able to +talk on the telephone? + +Mr. CURRY. We take them from their cells and we have two telephones +that they are taken to, and they are put on these telephones and they +are locked in, and a guard stands by while they make their calls. + +Mr. RANKIN. Is that call secret or is there any listening in on it? + +Mr. CURRY. No, sir; it is not supposed to be secret. I mean it is +supposed to be secret. It is privileged communication as far as we are +concerned, we don't have a tap on the phone or anything. + +Mr. DULLES. Did he use this? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes; he did. + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you know whether an attorney from Dallas was offered to +him and came to the jail? + +Mr. CURRY. There were some members of the Civil Liberties Union came +to see us that night, and they said they were concerned with whether +or not he was being permitted legal counsel. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did they talk to you? + +Mr. CURRY. No; they didn't talk to me. They talked to Professor Webster. + +Mr. RANKIN. How did this come to your attention? + +Mr. CURRY. He told me. + +Mr. RANKIN. I see. Now, tell us what he said. + +Mr. CURRY. He said that they had come down to see whether or not he +was being permitted legal counsel, and Professor Webster is in the law +school out at Southern Methodist University and he told them he thought +he was being given an opportunity to get in touch with legal counsel, +and they seemed satisfied then about it. We also got Mr. Nichols. + +Mr. RANKIN. Who is he? + +Mr. CURRY. He was president of the Dallas Bar Association or criminal +bar. I don't know which, Louis Nichols, and---- + +Mr. RANKIN. What did he do? + +Mr. CURRY. He came down, he said he had heard that he was not being +allowed the right to counsel, and they wanted to see and so I took him +myself up to Lee Harvey Oswald's cell and let him go in the cell and +talk to Lee Harvey Oswald. + +The CHAIRMAN. Who was Mr. Nichols, did you say? + +Mr. CURRY. Louis Nichols. He was president either of the Dallas---- + +Dean STOREY. Pardon me, it is Dallas Bar Association. + +Mr. CURRY. Dallas Bar Association. + +The CHAIRMAN. Yes. + +Mr. CURRY. He went in to talk to him and to see whether or not he was +getting an opportunity to receive counsel and he seemed pleased, I mean +he had no complaints. He told him if he didn't get John Abt then he +wanted someone from the Civil Liberties Union to come up and talk to +him. Then Mr. Nichols then went out in front of the television cameras, +I believe and made a statement to the effect that he had talked to him +and he was satisfied that he was being given the opportunity for legal +counsel. + +The CHAIRMAN. On what day was this? + +Mr. CURRY. That was on the same day we arrested him? + +The CHAIRMAN. That was Friday? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes. + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you know whether Mr. Oswald ever did obtain counsel? + +Mr. CURRY. I don't believe he did. But I do know he made some telephone +contacts. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did the police department so far as you know interfere in +any way with his obtaining counsel? + +Mr. CURRY. No, sir. + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you know when Lee Harvey Oswald was arraigned? + +Mr. CURRY. It was about 1:30 in the morning. That would be on the +morning of the 23d, I believe. + +Mr. RANKIN. How long did he--how long had he been in your custody then? + +Mr. CURRY. About 11 hours. That was on the Tippit; yes, sir. + +Mr. RANKIN. When you say that he was arraigned the following day +early in the morning, did you mean for the Tippit murder or for the +assassination? + +Mr. CURRY. No; that was for the assassination of the President. + +Mr. RANKIN. All right, will you tell us when he was arraigned for the +Tippit murder? + +Mr. CURRY. I was not present but I believe it was about 7:30. + +Mr. RANKIN. That same evening? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes; that would be about 5 hours afterwards. + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you recall whether he was arrested first for the +assassination or for the Tippit murder? + +Mr. CURRY. For the Tippit murder. There were some witnesses to this +murder and they had observed him as he left the scene, and this was +what he was arrested for. + +The CHAIRMAN. May I interrupt just to ask the chief a question? + +Chief, on your arraignments does the magistrate advise the petitioner +as to his right to counsel? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes, sir; he does. + +The CHAIRMAN. Does he ask him if he has counsel? + +Mr. CURRY. I don't recall him doing that. I am not customarily present +when a person is arraigned. + +The CHAIRMAN. You were not present at the arraignment? + +Mr. CURRY. I was present when he was arraigned for the assassination of +the President. I was not present when he was arraigned for the murder +of Tippit. + +The CHAIRMAN. I suppose they make a stenographic record of that, do +they not? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes, sir; I am sure they do. + +The CHAIRMAN. That is all I have. + +Mr. RANKIN. Chief, our people made an inquiry whether there was a +stenographic record. They don't believe there was any. + +Mr. CURRY. I am not sure of that. I know at the time he was arraigned +for the assassination of the President I was present there at the time. +It was decided that we should, district attorney was there at the city +hall. He was there during most of the evening. + +Mr. RANKIN. Will you just describe for the Commission what happened +during the arraignment for the assassination, who was present, what you +saw. + +Mr. CURRY. As I recall, I know the Justice of the Peace David John +Stone was there. It seemed like Sergeant Warren, but I couldn't be +positive but some of the jail personnel brought him out into the +identification bureau. + +Mr. RANKIN. How was he taken out? Were there several people around him, +what was the security arrangements? + +Mr. CURRY. At that time there was only, we were inside the offices of +the criminal identification section. He was brought out through a door +that opens from the jail into the criminal identification section. +There was only about a half dozen of us altogether there, I don't +recall who all was there. + +Mr. RANKIN. What do you mean by the criminal identification section. +Could you describe what that is? + +Mr. CURRY. That is the identification bureau. + +Mr. RANKIN. Does that have a room that this meeting occurred in? + +Mr. CURRY. It is not a room such as this. It was in the little foyer or +lobby, and it is separated from the jail lobby. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did the justice of the peace sit or stand or what? + +Mr. CURRY. He stood. He stood on one side of the counter and Oswald on +the other side of the counter. + +Mr. RANKIN. What floor is this on? + +Mr. CURRY. The fourth floor. + +Mr. RANKIN. That is nearest the place where there are some filing +cabinets? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes; it is. + +Mr. RANKIN. And besides the people that you have described, I assume +that you yourself were there as you have said? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes; I was. + +Mr. RANKIN. Was there anyone else that you recall? + +Mr. CURRY. Not that I recall, other than the justice of the peace. + +Mr. RANKIN. Will you describe what happened? + +Mr. CURRY. Lee Harvey Oswald was brought in and the complaint was read +to him, and here again he was very arrogant and he said, "I don't know +what you are talking about. That is the deal, is it," and such remarks +as this, and the justice of the peace very patiently and courteously +explained to him what the procedure was and why it was. + +Mr. RANKIN. What did he say about that? + +Mr. CURRY. I don't recall his exact words. + +Mr. RANKIN. Just tell us in substance. + +Mr. CURRY. He didn't--as I recall, he didn't think much of it. He just +said, "I don't know what you are talking about." + +Mr. RANKIN. What did the justice of the peace say about the procedure +and any rights and so forth? + +Mr. CURRY. As I recall it, he read to him the fact that he was being +charged with the assassination of the President of the United States, +John Kennedy on such and such day at such and such time. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did he say anything about his right to plead? + +Mr. CURRY. I don't recall, sir. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did he say anything about counsel? + +Mr. CURRY. I don't recall whether he did or not. + +Mr. RANKIN. What else happened at that time that you recall? + +Mr. CURRY. That is about all. After it was read to him, he was taken +back to his cell. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you go back with him to the cell? + +Mr. CURRY. No, sir; I didn't. + +Mr. RANKIN. Who took him back to the cell? + +Mr. CURRY. The jailer and assistant jailer or jail guard. + +Mr. RANKIN. What came to your attention after that about Lee Harvey +Oswald, that you can recall, what was the next thing that happened that +you know of? + +Mr. CURRY. The next thing that I know of, was the next morning. + +Mr. RANKIN. What happened then? + +Mr. CURRY. The interrogation of Lee Harvey continued on and off through +the day. No; I had asked the captain during the afternoon if he was +being given rest periods and if he was being fed properly so that he +wouldn't have reason to complain that we were mistreating him in any +way. + +Mr. RANKIN. What captain did you ask that? + +Mr. CURRY. Fritz. + +Mr. RANKIN. What did he say? + +Mr. CURRY. He said he was. He said he was not interrogating him on long +drawn-out extended periods, he was letting him rest and he was being +fed. + +Mr. DULLES. Did the interrogation continue into the night or did it +stop, do you know? + +Mr. CURRY. I don't know what--well, it did continue into that first +night, I know. But I don't know what time they discontinued the +interrogation. + +Mr. RANKIN. They stopped? + +Mr. CURRY. I was not in the offices all the time. I was there two or +three times. + +Mr. RANKIN. Captain Fritz tell you anything about the interrogation, +how it was going, what was said? + +Mr. CURRY. He told me about, oh, late in the afternoon or early in the +evening that he felt that he had enough evidence to file on him for the +murder of the officer, and he told me, he said, "I strongly suspect +that he was the assassin of the President." + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you know what time of day it was? + +Mr. CURRY. It seemed to me like it was 6 or 7 o'clock on the day of the +22d. + +Mr. RANKIN. Can you describe the situation in the police headquarters +with regard to the media. Were they continuing to be there? + +Mr. CURRY. They remained there. You could hardly get down the hall, +and it was necessary, when we would take the prisoner back to the jail +to bring him out of the office, and down this hallway and put him on a +special elevator just for prisoners. + +Mr. RANKIN. What office do you mean when you say that? + +Mr. CURRY. From the homicide office. + +Mr. RANKIN. Yes. You took him down what hallway? + +Mr. CURRY. The third floor hallway. The offices run like this in the +building. The homicide office is right along here, perhaps 25 feet. The +elevator is right here, this is a special elevator that runs to the +jail. + +Mr. RANKIN. Will you mark that homicide office with an "H" on to +indicate it? + +Mr. CURRY. This extends up here a little more perhaps. + +Mr. RANKIN. Will you mark the elevator with "EL." + +The CHAIRMAN. There is a lot of other writing on this paper a lot of +doodling that someone else has done and I think the chief had better +have a new piece of paper. + +Gentlemen, before you get into a discussion of this diagram with the +chief, Mr. Rankin, I must leave now for a session of the Court, and Mr. +Dulles, will you preside in my absence? + +Mr. DULLES. Yes, Mr. Chairman. + +The CHAIRMAN. I will be back immediately at the conclusion of our +session today. + +(At this point, the Chief Justice left the hearing room.) + +Mr. RANKIN. Chief, have you marked on a yellow sheet of paper a diagram +of the third floor of the police headquarters? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes; I have, principally the north end of it. + +Mr. RANKIN. We will call that Exhibit 701. Will you describe briefly +for the Commission just what you have marked on there now? + +Mr. CURRY. I have a rough layout of the north end of the third floor of +the police and courts building in Dallas, Tex. + +Now, this shows the public elevators, the lobby way in front of the +elevators, and then a hall that extends the length of the third floor +from north to south. + +In the extreme north end there is a small press room where ordinarily +the news media stay from early morning until late at night to cover +police events. + +I have also marked off the other bureaus that are located on this +floor, the burglary and theft bureau would be on the west side, and in +the northwest corner is the juvenile bureau. + +The northeast corner is the auto theft bureau, the next going south +would be the forgery bureau, and then would be the homicide office +or homicide bureau, which is adjacent to a hallway, the north-south +hallway, and also the rear office is adjacent to the hall going over +to the municipal building which is immediately east of the police and +courts building. + +The entrance to the homicide office is approximately 20 or 25 feet to +the entrance to this jail elevator, and it is necessary to bring a +prisoner down this hall in order to get him into this jail elevator. +Each time we--that I observed them move Oswald, they were almost +overrun by news media. + +Mr. RANKIN. By overrun, what do you mean? + +Could you describe with a little more definiteness, are you talking +about 4 or 5 or 10? + +Mr. CURRY. I will say probably a hundred, at least a hundred that were +jammed into this hallway. + +(At this point, Mr. McCloy entered the hearing room.) + +Mr. RANKIN. Were some of them--I will withdraw that question. + +Were some of these people from the news media from the press and others +from the radio and others from the television? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes, sir; that is true, sir. + +(At this point, Representative Ford entered the hearing room.) + +Mr. RANKIN. Chief Curry, you said that Mr. Nichols came that afternoon. +I call to your attention that we have information that he came there on +the Saturday afternoon. + +Mr. CURRY. Perhaps it was, not the Friday. That perhaps was on Saturday. + +Mr. RANKIN. Yes. + +Mr. DULLES. I wonder if you could just summarize briefly where we are. + +(Discussion off the record.) + +Mr. RANKIN. Back on the record. + +In regard to Mr. Nichols, did you know whether or not he offered to +represent or provide counsel? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes; he did. + +Mr. RANKIN. What did he say about that? + +Mr. CURRY. He said he didn't care to at this time. + +Mr. RANKIN. What did Mr. Nichols say about providing counsel? + +Mr. CURRY. He said the Dallas Bar would provide counsel if he desired +counsel. + +Mr. RANKIN. That is to Mr. Oswald? + +Mr. CURRY. Oswald. + +Mr. RANKIN. What did Mr. Oswald say? + +Mr. CURRY. He said, "I don't at this time," he said, "If I can't get +Mr. Abt to represent me or someone from Civil Liberties Union I will +call on you later." + +Representative FORD. Did Nichols and Oswald talk one to another? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes; he was taken to see Oswald and he talked to him. + +Mr. RANKIN. And this all occurred at the meeting you have already +described? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. RANKIN. Between Mr. Nichols and Mr. Oswald? + +Mr. CURRY. That is correct. + +Mr. RANKIN. When you had so many people of the news media in all of +your corridors and throughout your police headquarters, did you discuss +that with the mayor or any of the other authorities? + +Mr. CURRY. I don't recall that I specifically discussed this condition. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you ask for any instructions or advice? + +Mr. CURRY. No, sir; I didn't. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you do anything about it that you have not already +described? + +Mr. CURRY. No, sir; I didn't. + +Mr. DULLES. Did it worry you? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes, sir; it did. I was concerned about it. + +Mr. McCLOY. Did you have a definite system of checking credentials of +these people as they came in? + +Mr. CURRY. On a particular incident that had occurred previous to this, +such as the school integration, we had a plane to fall there one time +and we have a regular set up for disaster, whereby the press identify +themselves in order to get into a certain area, and their credentials +were being checked. + +Now, I have heard it said, not to my knowledge can I tell you this, +that Jack Ruby at one time or sometime during these preceding days, had +been seen there and apparently had some press credentials but I was +never able to establish that. + +Mr. RANKIN. You have checked into it? + +Mr. CURRY. I have inquired into it or had it inquired into. + +Mr. RANKIN. What did you find out in that regard? + +Mr. CURRY. I couldn't find out where he had received press credentials +from anybody. + +Representative FORD. Were any press credentials found in his effects? + +Mr. CURRY. No; not to my knowledge. + +Mr. RANKIN. When you were having the difficulty with the media that you +have described, did you do anything about adding additional guards or +anything about additional security? + +Mr. CURRY. No; we had two men, two uniformed officers right at the +homicide door to keep anyone from going in there. + +As I recall, there was a sergeant, and a couple of reserve officers +at the public elevators here, and there were a couple of reservists +at this end of the hall to keep them from overrunning into the +administrative offices. + +Mr. RANKIN. I offer in evidence Exhibit 701, Mr. Chairman. + +Mr. DULLES. Is that the chart? + +Mr. RANKIN. Yes. + +Mr. DULLES. It will be admitted. This is a chart of the third floor. + +Mr. CURRY. Of the police and courts building. + +Mr. DULLES. What is the other word? + +Mr. CURRY. Police and courts building. + +Mr. DULLES. It will be accepted. + +(The chart referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 701 for +identification and received in evidence.) + +Mr. RANKIN. Have you done anything to change your procedures in +regard to security or how you would handle prisoners in light of this +difficulty you had with the media? + +Mr. CURRY. The city manager and I have discussed the possibility that +we are going to in the near future build a new police building. + +Mr. RANKIN. Who is the city manager? + +Mr. CURRY. Elgin Crull. He made this statement that when and if we +build another building, it will be so designed that the prisoners will +not have to be brought through where the general public are permitted +or where the press would be permitted. That there will be two sets of +halls or hallways where they will be brought down in the rear hallways +and admitted into the offices for interrogation. + +Mr. RANKIN. What did you say about that? + +Mr. CURRY. I heartily agreed with him. + +Mr. RANKIN. Have you made any other plans for change of security? + +Mr. CURRY. I have talked to my staff and said if we were ever faced +with a thing of such magnitude again that we would not permit the +press to come into the building. We would designate a place outside +for them and we would just have to take the heat that was given to us +by the press for not permitting them in there, but in view of what had +happened that we would never permit this to occur again. + +That we would permit them to have representatives but they would +be required to choose their representatives to be present, say, in +these hallways or inside the buildings, and the rest of them would be +excluded. + +And regardless of how they treated us in the press for this decision, +that is the way it would be in the future. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you do anything about appearing on television during +this time? + +Mr. CURRY. They had these cameras set up in the hallway, if I can have +the exhibit I will show it to you. + +Mr. RANKIN. Yes. That is Exhibit 701. + +Mr. CURRY. Yes, sir. They had cameras set up right here, two or three +cameras. + +Mr. RANKIN. Have you marked that with the word "cameras"? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes. And on an occasion or two as I was walking from the +homicide office back to my office they would stop me here and try to +interrogate me or interview me and they would have the cameras turned +on me. + +Mr. RANKIN. What would you do? + +Mr. CURRY. They would besiege me with questions about how the +investigation was proceeding, and I would on occasion or two I told +them I thought it was proceeding very well, that we were obtaining good +evidence to substantiate our suspicions, that this was the man that was +guilty of the assassination. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you tell them what evidence you had? + +Mr. CURRY. I told them on one occasion we had a rifle that had been +partially identified by his, as belonging to him. + +Mr. RANKIN. When did you do that? + +Mr. CURRY. I believe that was on Saturday, I think. + +Mr. RANKIN. About what time of the day? + +Mr. CURRY. I don't recall exactly. I think it was in the afternoon. It +might have been Friday night. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you tell them about any other evidence that you had? + +Mr. CURRY. I don't recall, sir, whether I did or not. There was so much +confusion that I can't recall exactly the times and exactly what was +said. I think this is documented, perhaps. + +Mr. RANKIN. Where? + +Mr. CURRY. On the TV film. + +Mr. RANKIN. I see. Did you give out any interviews to the newspapers? + +Mr. CURRY. I don't recall giving any interviews to newspapers. + +Mr. RANKIN. Any news releases? + +Mr. CURRY. Not that I recall. + +Mr. DULLES. Do you recall having told them that you had sent a radio +order out to surround the book depository? + +Mr. CURRY. I didn't do that, sir. That was one of my inspectors, I +believe that gave that order. I was riding in the Presidential parade +and approximately a hundred feet, I guess, ahead of the President's +car, and when we heard this first report, I couldn't tell exactly where +it was coming from. + +Representative FORD. What report are you talking about now? + +Mr. CURRY. A sharp report as a firecracker or as it was it was the +report of this rifle. + +We were just approaching an underpass, and there were some people +around on each side of the underpass, up in the railroad yards, and +I thought at first that perhaps this was a railroad torpedo, it was a +sharp crack. + +Inspector--no, it wasn't Inspector, it was Lawson of the Secret Service +and Mr. Sorrels of the Dallas office of the Secret Service, and Sheriff +Bill Decker and myself were in this car. + +Mr. DULLES. I may be anticipating. + +Mr. RANKIN. That is all right, go right ahead. + +Mr. CURRY. I said what was that, was that a firecracker, or someone +said this. I don't recall whether it was me or someone else, and from +the report I couldn't tell whether it was coming from the railroad yard +or whether it was coming from behind but I said over the radio, I said, +"Get someone up in the railroad yard and check." + +And then about this time. I believe it was motorcycle Officer Chaney +rode up beside of me and looking back in the rear view mirror I could +see some commotion in the President's car and after this there had been +two more reports, but these other two reports I could tell were coming +behind instead of from the railroad yards. + +Mr. RANKIN. What do you mean by reports? + +Mr. CURRY. Sharp reports as a rifle or a firecracker, and looking in +the rear view mirror then I could see some commotion in President +Kennedy's car. + +Mr. RANKIN. You could distinctly hear and tell that the two later +reports were from behind? + +Mr. CURRY. Behind. + +Mr. RANKIN. Rather than front? + +Mr. CURRY. That is right. + +Mr. RANKIN. You weren't sure whether the first one was from behind or +in front? + +Mr. CURRY. I couldn't tell because perhaps of the echo or the---- + +Representative FORD. Where were you sitting in the car, sir? + +Mr. CURRY. I was driving. + +Representative FORD. You were driving? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes, sir. + +Representative FORD. When you heard the first report, did you grab a +communications set and give this order? + +Mr. CURRY. Almost immediately. + +Representative FORD. What was the order that you gave? + +Mr. CURRY. As I recall it, "Get someone up in the railroad yard to +check those people." There was already an officer up there. + +Mr. RANKIN. How do you know that? + +Mr. CURRY. They assigned officers to every overpass. + +We went with the Secret Service, Batchelor and Chief Lunday had went +over this route with Secret Service agents Lawson and Sorrels and they +had run the route 2 or 3 days prior to this and pointed out every place +where they wanted security officers, and we placed them there where +they asked for them. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you see an officer there when you looked up? + +Mr. CURRY. I couldn't recognize him, but I could see an officer whoever +it was. + +Representative FORD. Did you get this order over the PA system before +the second and third shots? + +Mr. CURRY. I don't believe so, I am not sure. I am not positive. +Because they were in pretty rapid succession. But after I noticed some +commotion in the President's car and a motorcycle officer ran up aside +of me and I asked him what had happened and he said shots had been +fired, and I said, "Has the President been hit or has the President's +party been hit? + +And he said, "I am sure they have." + +I said, "Take us to the hospital immediately," and I got on the +radio and I told them to notify Parkland Hospital to stand by for an +emergency, and this is approximately, I would say, perhaps a couple of +miles or so to Parkland Hospital from this, and we went to Parkland and +I notified them to have them to be standing by for an emergency, and we +went out there under siren escort and went into the emergency entrance. + +As I recall, I got out of the car and rushed to the emergency entrance +and told them to bring the stretchers out, and they loaded the +President, President Kennedy and Governor Connally onto stretchers and +took them into the hospital. + +Mrs. Kennedy, I went into the hospital, and I know she was outside +the door of where they were working with the President, and someone +suggested to her that she sit down and she was very calm, and she said, +"I am all right. Some of your people need to sit down more than I do." + +But everyone was very concerned. I remained around the hospital. I was +contacted by some of the special sergeants who asked me to stand by in +my car and get another car and take the President, then Vice President +Johnson to Love Field. + +Mr. RANKIN. You have told us about that, haven't you? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes; I have told you about that. + +Mr. RANKIN. And you told us you attended the swearing in of President +Johnson? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes; I did. + +Mr. RANKIN. And that you waited until the plane left and then you came +back? + +Mr. CURRY. To my offices. + +Mr. RANKIN. And Judge Hughes left at the same time? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes. + +Mr. RANKIN. Now, did you do anything about the assassination after this +or at some time? + +Mr. CURRY. No. I left this to be handled by Captain Fritz who is in +charge of all homicide investigations. + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you know whether anything was done, did you make inquiry? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes; he told me they were interrogating him, Oswald about +the assassination and trying to check on the movements of Oswald, and +they obtained, I understand, some search warrants to go out and search, +they found out where he had been staying. + +Mr. RANKIN. What about the building immediately after the occasion? + +Mr. CURRY. It was sealed off, Inspector Sawyer who is a uniformed +police inspector, I think was the first ranking officer to the School +Depository Building. He would have had to come perhaps 10 blocks. I +believe he told me that he was about at Akard and Maine when this came +on the air that we had had some trouble down there. + +Mr. RANKIN. You say you imagine. Is this something that they reported +to you? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes. He told me later that he did immediately go to the +scene of the Texas--of where the shots were fired from. + +Mr. RANKIN. What did he tell you he did then? + +Mr. CURRY. He took charge of the investigation. + +Mr. RANKIN. What did he do about the building? + +Mr. CURRY. He had it sealed off. This perhaps would have been perhaps, +5, 8, 10 minutes after the original---- + +Mr. RANKIN. About what time? + +Mr. CURRY. I would say perhaps 12:40. + +Mr. RANKIN. And was that before or after a description of Lee Oswald +was put on the radio? + +Mr. CURRY.I couldn't say whether it was before or after. + +Mr. RANKIN. What else happened? + +Mr. CURRY. I think he perhaps was the one who gave that description, I +am not sure. + +A deputy chief of services who was in the pilot car ahead of us, was at +Love Field, and he had some more Secret Service men with him, I believe. + +Mr. RANKIN. Who is that? + +Mr. CURRY. George Lumpkin. George L. Lumpkin. He asked me at the +hospital if I didn't want him to go back to the Texas School Book +Depository and assist in the search of the building and I told him yes, +and he did go back, and took over on the search of the building then. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did he report to you later what he did about that? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes, he did. He told me that he had sealed it off and he +appointed two search teams to search the building from top to bottom, +starting at the bottom and going to the top and starting at the top and +going to the bottom. + +Mr. McCLOY. Who was this man? + +Mr. CURRY. George L. Lumpkin. + +Mr. McCLOY. Secret Service? + +Mr. CURRY. No. + +Mr. McCLOY. On your staff? + +Mr. CURRY. No; he is a police officer. + +Mr. RANKIN. Was he an assistant chief? + +Mr. CURRY. He is not an assistant chief. Each of the divisions have a +deputy chief in charge of them. I have one assistant chief and four +deputy chiefs. + +Mr. RANKIN. And this was a deputy chief? + +Mr. CURRY. A deputy chief; yes. + +Mr. RANKIN. Under your system the highest civil service status is +inspector, is it? + +Mr. CURRY. That is correct. + +Mr. RANKIN. And the other officers are appointed? + +Mr. CURRY. Appointed, yes. + +Mr. RANKIN. By you? + +Mr. CURRY. By me, yes. + +Mr. RANKIN. Now, these two teams that you referred to that the deputy +chief appointed to search the building, do you know how many officers +were in those teams? + +Mr. CURRY. No, sir; I don't. + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you know whether the search was made? + +Mr. CURRY. They reported to me that it was made, yes. + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you know what else happened in regard to the building or +the search for the assassin? + +Mr. CURRY. After it was searched I understand it was sealed off and +they were asked not to let anybody come or go from the building until +further orders. + +Mr. RANKIN. Then what happened after that? + +Mr. DULLES. Could I inquire there. I thought it was sealed off previous +to the search according to your previous testimony. + +Mr. CURRY. It was. But after they searched it and all of the +investigators left there, they asked Mr. Truly, I believe, the building +manager, not to let anybody come and go. + +Mr. DULLES. Was that supplemented, though, by the police? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes; I believe we had officers there. + +Mr. DULLES. Then there were in a way two sealings off. One that you +gave the order was given 8 or 10 minutes---- + +Mr. CURRY. Almost immediately, yes. + +Mr. DULLES. After the assassination, and then the other one was after +this search had been made. + +Mr. CURRY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. McCLOY. There is one element I am not clear on, I may be +anticipating, Mr. Rankin. But I believe we have had some testimony +heretofore, that Mr.--an officer went in with Mr. Truly into the +building. + +Mr. CURRY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. McCLOY. And started to go upstairs, and they ran into Oswald on the +second floor. Was that before the inspector got there? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes, sir; I am sure it was, because this officer was there +at the scene. + +Mr. McCLOY. Do you remember that officer's name? + +Mr. CURRY. No, sir; I don't. It is in the record. + +Mr. BELIN. It is officer M. L. Baker. He was in the motorcade. + +Mr. McCLOY. Did M. L. Baker purport to seal off the building? + +Mr. CURRY. No, sir; he didn't. The first officers in there were rushing +up to the upper floors. + +Mr. McCLOY. The first man who sealed the building was---- + +Mr. CURRY. I believe will be Inspector Sawyer. + +Mr. McCLOY. Inspector Sawyer? + +Mr. CURRY. I believe he would be the first to issue orders. I could be +mistaken on that but as I recall he was the first officer. + +Mr. DULLES. You did not give those orders yourself? + +Mr. CURRY. No, sir; not myself. + +Representative FORD. How many men participated in the search of the +building? + +Mr. CURRY. I would just have to guess but I would suggest probably 20 +people. + +Representative FORD. Did you check with those who went through this +process? + +Mr. CURRY. No; I didn't check with each individual officer. + +Representative FORD. Did you get a report? + +Mr. CURRY. I got a report from Inspector Sawyer, and also from Chief +Lumpkin as to the manner in which it was searched. + +Representative FORD. How long did it take them, do you have any idea? + +Mr. CURRY. I believe they were, perhaps, maybe a couple of hours +altogether, searching that building. + +Representative FORD. Did they give you an oral or written report on +what they found or didn't find? + +Mr. CURRY. I believe there were some written reports made. I don't +recall now. + +Representative FORD. If there are written reports could we have them? + +Mr. CURRY. I think---- + +Mr. RANKIN. Off the record. + +(Discussion off the record.) + +Representative FORD. Back on the record. + +Are you familiar with any written report, Chief, on what transpired +during the search of the building? + +Mr. CURRY. Only what Deputy Chief Lumpkin in his report here in a +chronological report that we made, and you have this, as best we could, +after this occurred, the deputy chiefs and myself all sat down together +went over this from the time we received notice that the President +would visit Dallas until the shooting of Oswald, and step by step we +tried to go through this as to what we did, and this is what we call a +chronological report. + +Representative FORD. If there is a report in anybody's files in the +Dallas Police department on what transpired during this investigation +of the building, there would be no reason why that report couldn't be +made available? + +Mr. CURRY. No, sir; if we have one it certainly would be made available. + +Representative FORD. Will you check the files of the department and +if there is a report available will you submit it to the Commission, +please? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes, sir; I was trying to. + +Mr. RANKIN. Chief Curry, I think that your chronological report does +not purport to go into the detail of how the search was made and so +forth. + +Mr. CURRY. No, sir; it just states in here how Chief Lumpkin, how he +formed the search and it tells something about while he was there. + +Mr. McCLOY. The chronological report part of our record yet? + +Mr. BELIN. We have a chronological report, yes. + +Mr. McCLOY. Is this the same one as the Chief is looking at? + +Mr. RANKIN. We will check that. + +Mr. DULLES. It is not yet an exhibit, is it? + +Mr. RANKIN. No; we have, and we were discussing yesterday, a number of +items in the form of affidavits and other evidence that we will have +to introduce into the record of the Commission before we get through +which has been examined by the staff and in some cases called to the +Commission's attention but is not formally a matter of record and we +will have to complete that before we can complete our report. + +Mr. McCLOY. Is that the same chronological report that the Chief has? + +Mr. CURRY. If it isn't I can leave you these copies but they were +submitted to Attorney General Carr, two copies. This is what is in +this report. "Upon arrival,"--this is Chief Lumpkin--"Upon arrival +at the Texas School Book Depository we found Inspector Sawyer was in +front of the building and with the assistance of other officers was +in the process of detaining anyone or everyone who had any knowledge +whatsoever of the shooting. This was discussed with Sawyer. We decided +that we would get all persons in that category away from the crowd by +sending them to Sheriff Decker's office"--which is about a half block +from here--"at Main and Houston to be held for further interrogation. +Homicide Detective Turner was sent to the sheriff's office to represent +the homicide bureau of our department and interrogating these +witnesses." + +Mr. DULLES. That is where the sheriff's office was? + +Mr. CURRY. Main and Houston, it runs. + +"Detective Senkel was released back to Captain Fritz to assist in +the investigation. He had come down. Sawyer had placed guards on the +building to prevent anyone from going or coming. Sawyer organized +a detail to check all persons and automobiles on the parking lot +surrounding the Texas School Book Depository Building, taking their +names, telephone numbers, addresses, places of employment, and later on +in the afternoon those vehicles that were not taken out were checked by +license number. Several of the U.S. Alcohol Tax units assisted in the +search. + +"At that time Lumpkin entered the building and instructed that it be +completely sealed off and that no one be allowed to leave or enter." + +This probably was some, I would say, some 30 or 40 minutes after the +original shots were fired. He had gone on to Parkland Hospital to me +and I told him there to return to assist in the handling of this matter. + +Mr. McCLOY. In your judgment is that the first sealing off of the +building that took place? + +Mr. CURRY. No; I think Inspector Sawyer, when he arrived he took some +steps to seal off the building. + +Mr. RANKIN. You have already testified about Inspector Sawyer and you +said you thought he was about 10 or 12 blocks away. + +Mr. CURRY. I believe so. I believe he was about at Main and Akard +Streets which would be about 10 blocks away when he heard of this +incident occurring and he immediately went down there. + +Mr. DULLES. And the first order to seal off was given some 10 minutes, +I think you testified, in that neighborhood? + +Mr. CURRY. To the best of my knowledge. + +Mr. DULLES. After the assassination? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes. + +Mr. RANKIN. You don't know just what he did about sealing the building, +did you? + +Mr. CURRY. No, sir; I don't. I imagine he placed men on the front and +back doors and asked them not to let anyone come or go without finding +out who they were. + +Mr. DULLES. Who would know that fact as to when that order was given, +that would be Sawyer? + +Mr. RANKIN. Officer Sawyer would be the one who would really know that +fact? + +Mr. CURRY. I believe so. + +Mr. RANKIN. And whatever he would say about it you think would be +correct? + +Mr. CURRY. I do. Because we already have a deposition from him +that tells about the sealing of the building, and it was not done +immediately when he came. + +Representative FORD. Would it be appropriate at this time to put that +deposition in the record at this point? + +Mr. RANKIN. I wonder if it would be satisfactory to the Commission, in +view of the inquiry by Commissioner Ford, if we would, the staff would, +tender at this point the portion of the deposition that relates to how +the building was sealed, and then have a reference to this point in the +place where it is offered in evidence in regular course. + +Representative FORD. That would be satisfactory to me as far as the +particular point we are discussing at the moment. + +Mr. RANKIN. We will do that then. + +Now, Chief, would you tell us the next thing that you know of that +happened about the search for the assassin, after the search of the +depository building that you described? + +Mr. CURRY. The next thing I can tell you about, I remained out, as I +say, at Love Field until the planes departed. I went back to the office. + +Mr. DULLES. At about what time would you place that? + +Mr. CURRY. I believe it was about 4 o'clock I believe when I returned +to the office. + +Mr. DULLES. It was 4 o'clock when you returned to the office from Love +Field? + +Mr. CURRY. I believe so, I am not positive. + +When I arrived they were in the process of, Captain Fritz and his men, +were in the process of investigating this murder of Tippit and also the +assassination of the President. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you make an inquiry in regard to the progress? + +Mr. CURRY. I think I did. I asked him how he was coming along and he +said they were making good progress. + +Mr. RANKIN. Then what happened after that? + +Mr. CURRY. They had had a couple of showups with Oswald so witnesses +could attempt to identify him. + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you know whether they had gone out to Beckley Street to +the place where he had stayed? + +Mr. CURRY. I understood they had and I understood they went back the +next day. + +Mr. RANKIN. What do you mean by a showup? + +Mr. CURRY. Well, it is customary when you have suspects in a crime +where you have witnesses, that they be taken into a room and allowed, +the witnesses, to observe them in the presence of other people. + +Mr. RANKIN. You have a room for this purpose? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes, sir; we do. + +Mr. RANKIN. Will you describe briefly what that room is like? + +Mr. CURRY. It is a police assemblyroom where we hold our regular +rollcalls. They have a stage whereby prisoners are brought up on this +stage. + +Mr. RANKIN. How large is the room? + +Mr. CURRY. The room, I would say, is perhaps 50 feet long and 20 feet +wide. + +Mr. RANKIN. Who was allowed in the room at the time of this showup? + +Mr. CURRY. Presumably only the news media and police officers. I have +been told that Jack Ruby was seen in this showuproom also. + +Mr. RANKIN. About what time of the day was that? + +Mr. CURRY. As I recall, this was fairly late Friday night, I believe. + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you know who was there to try to identify Lee Oswald? + +Mr. CURRY. No, I don't. The news media, a number of them, had continued +to say, "Let us see him. What are you doing to him? How does he look?" + +I think one broadcaster that I had heard or someone had told me about, +said that Lee Harvey Oswald is in custody of the police department, and +that something about he looked all right when he went in there, they +wouldn't guarantee how he would look after he had been in custody of +the Dallas police for a couple of hours, which intimated to me that +when I heard this that they thought we were mistreating the prisoner. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you do anything about that? + +Mr. CURRY. I offered then at that time--they wanted to see him and they +wanted to know why they couldn't see him and I said we had no objection +to anybody seeing him. + +And when he was being moved down the hall to go back up in the jail +they would crowd on him and we just had to surround him by officers to +get to take him to the jail elevator to take him back upstairs, to let +him rest from the interrogation. + +Mr. RANKIN. And this showup, how many people attended? + +Mr. CURRY. I would think perhaps 75 people. I am just making an +estimate. I told them if they would not try to overrun the prisoner and +not try to interrogate him we would bring him to the showup room. There +was--this, thinking also that these newspaper people had been all over +Love Field, and had been down at the assassination scene, and we didn't +know but what some of them might recognize him as being present, they +might have seen him around some of these places. + +Now, Mr. Wade, the district attorney, was present, at this time and his +assistant was present, and as I recall, I asked Mr. Wade, I said, "Do +you think this will be all right?" And he said, "I don't see anything +wrong with it." + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you find out where Jack Ruby was during this showup? + +Mr. CURRY. I didn't know Jack Ruby. Actually the first time I saw Jack +Ruby to know Jack Ruby was in a bond hearing or I believe it was a bond +hearing, and I recognized him sitting at counsel's table. + +The impression has been given that a great many of the Dallas Police +Department knew Jack Ruby. + +Mr. RANKIN. What is the fact in that regard? + +Mr. CURRY. The fact of that as far as I know there are a very small +percentage of the Dallas Police Department that knows Jack Ruby. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you make an inquiry to find out? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes; I did, yes, sir. And so far as I know most of the men +who knew Jack Ruby are men who were assigned to the vice squad of the +police department or who had worked the radio patrol district where he +had places and in the course---- + +Mr. RANKIN. How many men would that be? + +Mr. CURRY. I am guessing, perhaps 25 men. This is merely a guess on my +part. + +Mr. RANKIN. How large is your police force? + +Mr. CURRY. Approximately 1,200. I would say 1,175 people. I would say +less, I believe less than 50 people knew him. From what I have found +out since then that he is the type that if he saw a policeman, or he +came to his place of business he would probably run up and make himself +acquainted with him. + +I also have learned since this time he tried to ingratiate himself with +any of the news media or any of the reporters who had anything to do, +he was always constantly trying to get publicity for his clubs or for +himself. + +Mr. RANKIN. Now, at this showup, is there some screen between the +person in custody? + +Mr. CURRY. There is a time--there wasn't at this time. + +Mr. RANKIN. Why not? + +Mr. CURRY. No particular reason. They just, a lot of the news media say +they didn't think they could see him up there or couldn't get pictures +of him up there and we brought him in there in front of the screen +and kept him there as I recall only about 4 or 5 minutes and shoving +up close to him and taking shots of him and took him upstairs and I +believe the district attorney and his assistant stayed down and perhaps +talked to the news media for several minutes. + +But we took Harvey Oswald back upstairs and I think I went back to my +office. + +Mr. DULLES. This was the evening of Friday, was it not? + +Mr. CURRY. I believe so, sir. + +Mr. DULLES. Did you say Ruby was present that evening? + +Mr. CURRY. I have understood he was. But to my own knowledge, I +wouldn't have known him because I didn't know him. + +Mr. McCLOY. You said you first saw Ruby when? + +Mr. CURRY. In a trial. I believe it was for a bond hearing where they +were attempting to get bond for him. And I saw him sitting at a counsel +table and recognized him from pictures I had seen of him in the paper. + +Mr. DULLES. This is some time before the assassination? + +Mr. McCLOY. This is the trial incident to the trial of Ruby, as I +understand it? + +Mr. DULLES. You had not seen him before? + +Mr. CURRY. No, sir. + +Mr. McCLOY. It was a bond hearing incident to the trial? + +Mr. CURRY. If I had seen him I wouldn't have known him. + +Mr. McCLOY. I don't want to again interrupt but I don't know whether +we have passed by all of the questions you wanted to ask the chief in +regard to the motorcade and the time of the assassination. + +I thought maybe we might ask him whether or what was his estimate of +the speed of the motorcade, for example. + +Mr. RANKIN. We haven't covered that period because of the way we +started, and I think we could go back, Chief, if you will, to, say, at +the point the motorcade left Main Street and started down Houston, and +then down Elm up to the time of the shots. + +Will you describe that, where you and what the motorcade consisted of? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes, sir; I was--there was a pilot car ahead of us with +Deputy Chief Lumpkin that was perhaps two or three blocks ahead of us +and had been preceding us all the way from Love Field to see that the +route was open and reporting back by radio to us, and this was for the +purpose, if we had any wrecks or congestion to where it looked like +the motorcade could be stopped that we could change our routes and get +around them and also to let us know how the crowd was. + +He had been preceding us all this way. There has been some question as +to why this motorcade would not proceed on down Main Street. + +Mr. RANKIN. Will you explain that to the Commission? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes, sir; I can. I will make another diagram here, if you +wish me to. + +Mr. RANKIN. Mr. McCloy asked about whether the chronological report +that Chief Curry was examining during part of his testimony was +available to the Commission. We have now searched the Commission files +and we find that a copy of that exact report has been available to the +Commission and we have it here. It is a Commission document---- + +Mr. REDLICH. It is in Commission Document 81.1. + +Representative FORD. Will this report be made a part of the record? + +Mr. RANKIN. We haven't decided that question but we will examine it and +report to the Commission later if it is not made a part of the record, +why we recommend that it not be. It may very well be amongst the +documents that would be made part of the record in regular course when +we examine all of the material for that purpose. Is that a satisfactory +handling of it? + +Representative FORD. I think it is. I haven't had an opportunity to +examine it. But if it is a part of the record, I suspect it ought to +be made a part at this point since it has been referred to by the +testimony of the chief. But it is something that could be discussed +later, and if it should be, it could be put into the record at this +point. + +Mr. RANKIN. I would like to ask leave of the Chairman then to examine +it with greater care after the testimony of the chief is taken and be +able to make it a part of the record at this point unless I report back +to the Commission that for some reason it would not be desirable. + +Mr. DULLES. That would be we would proceed in regard to this +chronological report we would proceed in the same way as we have +suggested we would with regard to the other depositions that were taken +in Dallas. + +Mr. RANKIN. Except my offer before, Mr. Chairman, was that the portion +of the deposition that would relate to the matters described, that is +the sealing of the building, would, in fact, be incorporated into this +record at that point. And that the balance of it would be offered at +some later date as a part of the record of the Commission. + +Here I wanted to reserve the question as to whether it should be a part +of the record because of my desire first to examine it in detail and +see if there is any reason why it should not and then report back to +the Commission. + +Mr. DULLES. You will report back to the Commission. It will not be +excluded unless you so report to the Commission. + +Mr. RANKIN. That is right. + +Mr. DULLES. And the reason therefor? + +Mr. CURRY. This sketch. + +Mr. RANKIN. Will you mark that sketch you have just made Exhibit 702 +please, and 703? + +(Commission Exhibits Nos. 702 and 703 were marked for identification.) + +Mr. CURRY. In the diagram, 702, Exhibit 702, the motorcade was going +west on Main Street, there is a triple underpass there. There are three +streets and they converge into one wide street down through a triple +underpass, what we call a triple underpass. + +Mr. RANKIN. Where you are talking about the underpass is that underpass +on Main Street? + +Mr. CURRY. It is just west of Houston Street and runs parallel +with Houston Street. And Main Street--now Houston Street runs in a +north-south direction, Main Street, Elm Street, and Commerce Street +the three principal streets that empty into this triple underpass are +east-west, Elm Street is a one-way street west, Commerce is one-way +east, Main Street is a two-way street going east and west. We had---- + +Mr. RANKIN. You were going to explain why you couldn't continue right +down Main. + +Mr. CURRY. We would--we left the parade route up to the host committee. +They chose the route, asking that we go down Main Street, and then +we would go on to what is known as the triple, through the triple +underpass onto Stemmons Expressway. It was necessary to get on this +expressway to get to the Trade Mart, the building where the dinner or +luncheon would be held. + +But had we proceeded on down Main Street, we could not have gotten +onto Stemmons Expressway unless we had had public works to come in and +remove some curbing and build some barricades over it. + +So, in talking with the Secret Service people they suggested we come +to Main Street to Elm Street, turn one block north and turn back west +and go through the triple underpass on the Elm Street side and at this +place Elm Street is two-way. + +So that was the reason that it was necessary to take this motorcade one +block north, and then turn west again in order that we could get on +the triple, through the triple underpass onto the Stemmons Expressway +without coming down and removing some curbing or building over the +curbing and disturbing the regular flow of traffic. + +Mr. RANKIN. Was there any consideration given prior to establishing the +parade route to removing this curbing and going---- + +Mr. CURRY. No, sir; nothing was said about it at all. In fact, when +they were choosing the routes for this parade, we left it entirely up +to the host committee and to the Secret Service. + +They asked us what we thought about certain routes. We told them what +we thought would be the most direct routes, and they chose to come +through the downtown area, I think for the purpose they wanted the +President to see as much of the people as possible and wanted the +people to have an opportunity to see him. + +Mr. RANKIN. Going to the Trade Mart building would be assumed that you +would go by the Texas Depository Building? + +Mr. CURRY. If we went on Stemmons Expressway and that is the way +they wanted to go. The only other way we could have gone. We could +have continued down Main Street passed through the underpass about a +block past there to Industrial Boulevard and then we would have gone +Industrial Boulevard and made an entrance from the Trade Mart, from the +north side of the Trade Mart there. But it was decided with the Secret +Service people that we would go Main to Houston, Houston to Elm, Elm +through to triple underpass onto the expressway and the expressway to +the Trade Mart where they would come off and had parking facilities +reserved and had a security setup. + +Mr. RANKIN. Will you describe the cars of the---- + +Mr. McCLOY. Just before that, how far before November 22 was that route +decided on? + +Mr. CURRY. Approximately 2 days or so, I believe. That is in this +chronological record. + +Mr. DULLES. When was this route published? + +Mr. McCLOY. That route was published. + +Mr. CURRY. It was published perhaps 2 days before, a day or two before. + +Mr. RANKIN. Is the Elm Street route a shorter route than to go by +Industrial Boulevard? + +Mr. CURRY. It's a more scenic route. The Stemmons Expressway was and +it was easier to travel, traffic is easier to control on it, it is +a 10-lane highway, and the Industrial Highway is heavily traveled +by commercial vehicles and goes through a commercial section of the +industrial area. And there was a more scenic route and traffic was +more--a freer flow of traffic anyway. + +Mr. RANKIN. Were you involved in the discussion about the choice of +route? + +Mr. CURRY. Not particularly. Chief Batchelor, my assistant chief, and +Chief Lunday. I discussed this some with the Secret Service Agent +Sorrels, and Lawson in a staff meeting at city hall. + +Mr. RANKIN. What was that discussion? + +Mr. CURRY. Well, we, when I say we, I mean my staff and I, we told them +what we thought would be the most direct route. + +Mr. RANKIN. What did you say that would have been? + +Mr. CURRY. It would have been to come into Lemmon Avenue, to Central +Expressway if they were coming through town and over that route. + +Now, if they were going directly to the Trade Mart it would have been +to come in Lemmon to Inwood Road and down Inwood to Hines, and Hines +to Industrial and Industrial into--but this would not have taken them +through the downtown area. + +Mr. RANKIN. Then if they were going to go through the downtown area +what did you say about the route that should be taken for that? + +Mr. CURRY. This was probably the most direct route that they chose +except they could have come in what we term the Central Expressway to +Main Street, and then west on Main Street right down the route that was +taken. + +They chose rather to come in on Lemmon Avenue to Turtle Creek, and +here again this is a more scenic route and more people would have +an opportunity to see the motorcade. And followed Turtle Creek into +Cedar Springs, to Harwood and south on Harwood to Main Street, west on +Main to Houston, north on Houston to Elm and west on Elm to Stemmons +Expressway. + +Mr. RANKIN. Have you described the cars in the motorcade? Their +positions? + +Mr. CURRY. I have them listed here, I couldn't tell you other than the +front part of the motorcade but they are in this report. + +Mr. RANKIN. Yes. Tell us the front part that you recall. + +Mr. CURRY. I had Deputy Chief Lumpkin, and he had two Secret Service +men with him, I believe, out of Washington, and a Colonel Wiedemeyer +who is the East Texas Section Commander of the Army Reserve in the +area, he was with him. They were out about, they were supposed to stay +about a quarter of a mile ahead of us and I was in the lead car. + +Mr. RANKIN. Who was with you? + +Mr. CURRY. Inspector, not inspector, but Sheriff Bill Decker, Sorrels +of the Secret Service, and Mr. Lawson, I believe he was out of the +Washington office of the Secret Service. And immediately behind us then +was the President's car. + +Mr. RANKIN. You were driving your car? + +Mr. CURRY. I was driving my car. + +Mr. RANKIN. You had radio communication in that? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes; I had radio communication with my motorcycle officers, +with my downtown office, and Secret Service had a portable radio that +they had radio contact with their people. + +Mr. RANKIN. Yes. Now, what was in the next car. + +Mr. CURRY. The President's party was in that car. Then following him +was the Secret Service vehicle and then I understand was the Vice +President's car, and then behind him was a Secret Service car. And then +they had cars lined up as listed in this report here, how they were +lined up after that. + +Mr. RANKIN. Now, after you turned the corner off of Main going onto +Houston, will you describe what happened as you recall it? + +Mr. CURRY. Nothing unusual occurred. We were, I would say traveling +perhaps 10 miles an hour, would be the ordinary speed to make a turn, +and probably was making that speed after we made a turn from north, +going north on Houston to west on Elm Street, and---- + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you slow down for the turn onto Elm? + +Mr. CURRY. Perhaps just a little. I would say we were probably going +8 to 10 miles an hour. And as we were moving downward the triple +underpass which is about an ordinary block we were beginning to pick up +a little speed. + +Mr. RANKIN. How much of a descent is there between where the Depository +Building is and the place in the underpass? + +Mr. CURRY. It is a pretty good little drop. Within the space of a block +it drops down enough to go under an underpass. + +Mr. RANKIN. It would be more than the height of a car? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes; two heights. + +Mr. RANKIN. Two heights. + +Mr. CURRY. I think it is a 13- or 14-foot clearance. + +Mr. RANKIN. Trucks could get under that? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes. + +Mr. RANKIN. Then what happened? + +Mr. CURRY. Then we heard this report. + +Mr. RANKIN. Now, how far along from the corner of Elm and Houston were +you at the time of that? + +Mr. CURRY. I think we were perhaps a couple of hundred feet or so. + +Mr. RANKIN. How fast were you going then? + +Mr. CURRY. I think we were going between 10 or 12 miles an hour, maybe +up to 15 miles an hour. + +Mr. RANKIN. Then what happened? + +Mr. CURRY. We heard this report, and then all of the tension that +followed I have told you. + +Mr. RANKIN. Yes. + +Mr. DULLES. What was the distance between your car and the President's +car approximately? + +Mr. CURRY. Mr. Dulles, I believe to the best of my knowledge it would +have been 100, 125 feet. + +Mr. DULLES. Between your car and the President's car? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes, we stayed pretty close to them. In the planning of +this motorcade, we had had more motorcycles lined up to be with the +President's car, but the Secret Service didn't want that many. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did they tell you why? + +Mr. CURRY. We actually had two on each side but we wanted four on each +side and they asked us to drop out some of them and back down the +motorcade, along the motorcade, which we did. + +Mr. RANKIN. How many motorcycles did you have? + +Mr. CURRY. I think we had four on each side of him. + +Mr. RANKIN. How many did you want to have? + +Mr. CURRY. We actually had two on each side side but we wanted four on +each side and they asked us to drop out some of them and back down the +motorcade, along the motorcade, which we did. + +Mr. RANKIN. So that you in fact only had two on each side of his car? + +Mr. CURRY. Two on each side and they asked them to remain at the rear +fender so if the crowd moved in on him they could move in to protect +him from the crowd. + +Mr. RANKIN. Who asked him to stay at the rear fender? + +Mr. CURRY. I believe Mr. Lawson. + +Mr. RANKIN. The Secret Service man? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes, sir. Also we had planned to have Captain Fritz and some +of his homicide detectives immediately following the President's car +which we have in the past, we have always done this. + +Mr. RANKIN. Now, would that be between the President's car and the +Secret Service? + +Mr. CURRY. And the Secret Service. We have in past done this. We have +been immediately behind the President's car. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you propose that to someone? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. RANKIN. Who did you propose it to? + +Mr. CURRY. To Mr. Lawson and Mr. Sellers. + +Mr. RANKIN. What did they say about that? + +Mr. CURRY. They didn't want it. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did they tell you why? + +Mr. CURRY. They said the Secret Service would be there. + +Mr. RANKIN. And then? + +Mr. CURRY. They said we can put this vehicle in between Captain Fritz +and his detectives immediately at the end of the motorcade. They said, +"No, we want a white or marked car there bringing up the rear," so +Fritz and his men were not in the motorcade. + +Mr. DULLES. What do you mean in the past when there have been previous +Presidents visiting Dallas or other dignitaries? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes; that is right; other dignitaries. Yes; our thinking +along this was that in the past there have been this. Captain Fritz, +he is a very experienced homicide man so are his detectives. They know +the city very well. They have been there very, Captain Fritz to my +knowledge, over 40 years. + +It is customary that they in trying to protect a person if they are +in the immediate vicinity, and Captain Fritz told me later, he said, +"I believe that had we been there we might possibly have got that man +before he got out of that building or we would have maybe had the +opportunity of firing at him while he was still firing" because they +were equipped, would have been equipped with high-powered rifles and +machineguns, submachine guns. + +Representative FORD. Where were they instead of being at the motorcade. + +Mr. CURRY. Actually they were not in the motorcade at all. They +followed up the motorcade. + +Representative FORD. Were they in a car following up the motorcade? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes, sir; they were in a car. + +Representative FORD. How far away would they have been? + +Mr. CURRY. I think they would have been at the rear, I believe. + +Representative FORD. Captain Fritz is going to be here later. + +Mr. RANKIN. Yes. + +Representative FORD. And fill in what he did at that time? + +Mr. RANKIN. Yes. + +Mr. CURRY. But we tried to do what the Secret Service asked us to do, +and we didn't try to override them because we didn't feel it was our +responsibility, that it was their responsibility to tell us what they +wanted and we would try to provide it. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you refuse to do anything that they asked you to do? + +Mr. CURRY. No, sir; not to my knowledge we don't--we didn't refuse them +to do anything. + +Mr. DULLES. You considered them to be the boss in this particular +situation? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes, sir; the Secret Service; yes, sir. + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you know or can you tell us approximately where the +President's car was at the time of the first shot that you heard? + +Mr. CURRY. To the best of my knowledge, I would say it was +approximately halfway between Houston Street and the underpass, which +would be, I would say probably 125-150 feet west of Houston Street. + +Mr. RANKIN. Can you give us the approximate location of where it was +when you heard the second shot? + +Mr. CURRY. Well, it would have been just a few feet further because +these shots were in fairly rapid succession. + +Mr. RANKIN. How many feet do you mean? + +Mr. CURRY. I would say perhaps, and this is just an estimate on my +part, perhaps 25 or 30 feet further along. + +Mr. RANKIN. Then at the time of the third shot? + +Mr. CURRY. A few feet further, perhaps 15-20 feet further. + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you have an opinion as to the time that expired between +the first shot and the third shot? + +Mr. CURRY. This is just an opinion on my part but I would think perhaps +5 or 6 seconds. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you hear any more than three shots? + +Mr. CURRY. No, sir; I did not. + +Mr. RANKIN. Are you sure of that? + +Mr. CURRY. I am positive of that. I heard three shots. I will never +forget it. + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you have something, Mr. McCloy? + +Mr. McCLOY. I was going to ask you, chief, as you were approaching the +underpass you were looking toward the underpass presumably? + +Mr. CURRY. That is right. + +Mr. McCLOY. Was the underpass bare of people or were there people on it? + +Mr. CURRY. No; I could see some people on each side but not immediately +over, but there were some people up in the railroad yard. I also could +see an officer up there. I don't know who the officer was. + +Mr. McCLOY. You could recognize an officer on the top of the underpass? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes; their instructions had been to place officers on every +overpass and in every underpass. + +Mr. McCLOY. How close were you then to the underpass when you first +heard that shot? + +Mr. CURRY. Oh, perhaps 150 feet or 100 feet or so. + +Mr. McCLOY. So you are convinced that the shot could not come from the +overpass? + +Mr. CURRY. I don't believe it did; no, sir. + +Mr. McCLOY. Then---- + +Mr. CURRY. Because there didn't seem to be any commotion going on over +there. This seemed to be people that I could see, they didn't seem to +run or anything. They just seemed to be there. + +Mr. McCLOY. You spoke of the railroad yard. Just where is that railroad +yard in relation to the underpass? We will see that. + +Mr. CURRY. It is over---- + +Mr. McCLOY. It is on the other side. + +Mr. CURRY. Yes, sir. You see these tracks. + +Mr. RANKIN. Mark that as Exhibit 703 and you can refer to. + +Mr. CURRY. Yes; here is the School Book Depository. The railroad goes +over. + +Mr. DULLES. This aerial view of the Elm Street there, isn't it of the +underpass, will be admitted as 704. + +(Commission Exhibit No. 704 was marked for identification, and received +in evidence.) + +Mr. McCLOY. Do you call that the railroad yards? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes; that is true. + +Mr. McCLOY. Above the underpass? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes. + +Mr. McCLOY. Did you see a number of people in the railroad yard? + +Mr. CURRY. I would estimate maybe a half dozen. + +Mr. DULLES. They were spectators or were they workmen. They were +spectators? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes, sir; as well as I was able to tell. They might have +been workmen, too, but I presume it was people who were in the area and +as the motorcade approached they got into position where they perhaps +could have seen it. + +Mr. McCLOY. Did you recognize any officer amongst them? + +Mr. CURRY. I seemed to recall seeing a uniformed police officer up +there. + +Mr. McCLOY. In the railroad yard, and there was no commotion amongst +the railroad yard people? + +Mr. CURRY. I don't believe so. + +Representative FORD. Do you know who the officer was? + +Mr. CURRY. No, sir; but I believe by looking at the assignments we +could determine what officer was up there. + +There is an assignment of personnel which has been submitted for the +record. + +(Discussion off the record.) + +Mrs. RANKIN. On the record, we will supply for the purposes of this +record the name of the officer and check it with Chief Curry, who was +on the underpass or really the over part of the pass. + +Mr. CURRY. Really over. + +Mr. RANKIN. At the time of the motorcade. + +Representative FORD. Who determined there should be one, not more +officers at an overpass? + +Mr. CURRY. Deputy Chief Lunday and Assistant Chief Batchelor went over +this route with Sorrels, and I believe Lawson was with them. And they +were the ones who determined how many men would be placed at each +location. + +Mr. RANKIN. The inquiry I think particularly is did the Secret Service +decide it would be one or did you decide it would be one? + +Mr. CURRY. No; it would be the Secret Service because we just let them +tell us how many men they wanted. The only deviation we made from that +was in the security of the Trade Mart. I believe they requested 143 +men, as I recall to secure the Trade Mart, and I believe we supplied +them with 193 or 194 men, somewhat in excess of what they asked for at +this location. + +I called the State police, and they furnished a number of men, about 30 +men, and Sheriff Decker furnished about 15, and I think we furnished +from our department everybody that they asked for really, so we had a +surplus. + +Representative FORD. But the details as to how many men should be +placed where were determined by Lawson and Sorrels of the Secret +Service? + +Mr. CURRY. That is right, sir; yes, sir. + +(At this point Senator Cooper entered the hearing room.) + +Mr. McCLOY. May I ask one question? + +As you were leading this or just ahead of the President's car, as you +came around past the School Depository Building, was there anything +that attracted your attention to the building at all as you went by? + +Mr. CURRY. Not at all. + +Mr. McCLOY. There was no movement or anything? + +Mr. CURRY. Not at all. + +Mr. McCLOY. You weren't conscious of looking up at the windows? + +Mr. CURRY. Not at all. + +Mr. McCLOY. You had Secret Service men in that car with you? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. McCLOY. Were they inspecting the windows as they went by? + +Mr. CURRY. It seemed that Sorrels, he was looking around a whole lot +and so was Lawson. I know comments were being made along the route as +to first one thing and then another. + +Mr. DULLES. If you had had the other Car with police officers in it to +which you referred and which I gathered you recommended what would have +been the function and duties of the officers in that particular car? + +Mr. CURRY. It would have been, of course, to guard the President, but +in the event that anything happened they would have immediately dropped +out of their car with rifles and submachine guns. That was what we had +planned. + +Mr. RANKIN. Now, as a part of the plans for the motorcade, was there +anything said about the inspection of buildings along the route? + +Mr. CURRY. The comment was made that in a city like this how in the +world could you inspect or put somebody in every window of every +building. + +Mr. RANKIN. Who said that? + +Mr. CURRY. This was in a discussion with the Secret Service. I don't +recall exactly who said this. + +Mr. RANKIN. Was it the Secret Service people or your people? + +Mr. CURRY. I don't know whether it was us or Secret Service. But this +was discussed. I think it was Secret Service who told us how they +always dreaded having to go through a downtown area where there were +these skyscraper buildings. + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you know of any effort that was made to search any of +the buildings? + +Mr. CURRY. Not to my knowledge. We did put some extra men from the +special service bureau in the downtown area to work in midblocks to +watch the crowd and they were not specifically told to watch buildings +but they were told to watch everything. + +Mr. RANKIN. Where were they located? + +Mr. CURRY. On the route down Main Street. We didn't have any between +Elm Street and the railroad yard. + +Mr. RANKIN. But you say in midblock? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes, sir; especially midblock along the route through the +downtown area. + +Mr. RANKIN. Where would the downtown area be? + +Mr. CURRY. It would be from Harwood Street down to Houston Street. + +Mr. RANKIN. Chief Curry, do you know whether Officers Foster and White +were on the underpass? + +Mr. CURRY. I would have to look at the assignment sheet to determine +that, sir. + +Mr. McCLOY. May I ask at this point, unless I may be interfering with +your examination, but was it usual for the representatives of the news +media to attend showups in the police headquarters apart from this +incident? + +Mr. CURRY. It was not unusual. This was not setting a precedent. + +Mr. McCLOY. It was not unusual. + +Representative FORD. In such a showup where they are present, are they +shielded from the person brought in for identification? + +Mr. CURRY. Are they shielded from---- + +Representative FORD. From the person who is brought up for +identification? + +Mr. CURRY. Ordinarily the person who is brought up for identification +would be behind the screen, behind this silk screen. This is for the +purpose of protecting the person who is going to try to identify him +more than trying to protect the person who is being shown up because +witnesses ofttimes have a fear of facing someone that they are asked to +identify. + +For this reason this screen was provided where the prisoner could not +see out, but the people can see in. It is much like a one-way glass. + +Representative FORD. That was used in this case? + +Mr. CURRY. No; this was not used. We just brought him in front of it. + +Representative FORD. Any particular reason why he was put in front of +it? + +Mr. CURRY. They asked us if we wouldn't bring him out there, they +didn't think their cameras would show through the screen. And as I +repeated, when this was brought up, I asked Mr. Wade, the district +attorney, if he saw anything wrong with this and he said "No; I don't +see anything wrong with this," so we agreed to do this. + +Representative FORD. Who was in charge of the actual showup operation? + +Mr. CURRY. The jail personnel would have brought him down from +downstairs and brought him into the room and then removed him. + +Representative FORD. Who handled the actual process of identification +or attempted identification by various witnesses? + +Mr. CURRY. Usually Captain Fritz or some of his homicide detectives are +present. I know when they were having a showup for a little lady, I +don't know her name but she was a waitress who observed the shooting of +the officer, I just--I wasn't there during the entire showup but I was +present part of the showup and Captain Fritz was asking her to observe +these people and see if she could pick out the man she saw who shot the +officer and she didn't identify Oswald at that time. + +Representative FORD. Did you say the actual process that was--that took +place in these several showups was similar to or different from the +showups in other cases? + +Mr. CURRY. The only one where we didn't have any particular witnesses +to show him up to, but the number of the news media had asked if they +couldn't see him and it was almost impossible for all of them to see +him up in this hallway and we decided that the best thing to do, if +we were going to let them see him at all would be to take them and +get them into a room, and then there was utter confusion after we did +that because they tried to overrun him after we got him there and we +immediately removed him and took him back upstairs. + +Representative FORD. You mentioned earlier there had been some +allegations to the effect that Oswald had been badly treated. + +Mr. CURRY. There was--I didn't hear this myself but someone told me, I +don't recall who it was, that some of the news media, I understood this +was broadcast over the radio and TV. + +Representative FORD. Did you investigate that rumor? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes, sir. + +Representative FORD. What did you find out? + +Mr. CURRY. I found he had not been mistreated. + +Representative FORD. You checked with all the police personnel who had +anything to do with it? + +Mr. CURRY. Everyone I knew about and the only marks on him was, that +I could see there was a slight mark on his face up here, and this was +received when he was fighting the officers in that theatre, and they +had to subdue him and in the scuffle, this episode in the theatre, he +apparently received a couple of marks on his face. + +But he didn't complain to me about it. I think he--one of the times he +was coming down the hall someone asked him what was the matter with +his eye and he said, "A cop hit me," I believe, or "A policeman hit me." + +Representative FORD. Did you ask Oswald whether he had been mistreated? + +Mr. CURRY. I don't believe I did, sir. + +Representative FORD. But you talked to Oswald on one or more occasions? + +Mr. CURRY. I don't know that I ever asked him any questions at all. +I was present during the interrogation, but he was very sullen and +arrogant and he didn't have much to say to anybody. Fritz, I think did +more talking to him than anybody else. + +Representative FORD. But not in your presence did he object to any +treatment he received from the Dallas police force? + +Mr. CURRY. No, sir; I would like to say for the record that we are very +strict on our officers in the treatment of prisoners, and we have a +personnel section setup that any person who complains that they have +been mistreated by the police officer, a thorough investigation is +made, and if it is determined that he has been mistreated in any way, +disciplinary action is taken, and on occasion we have, not frequently, +but on occasion where we have found that this has been true we have +dismissed personnel for mistreating a prisoner, so our personnel know +positively this is not tolerated regardless of who it is. + +Mr. RANKIN. Chief, you have described a showup, and you have also +described the general practice. You have also described showups in +regard to Oswald and you said there were several of them. + +Mr. CURRY. When I said several, to the best of my knowledge there were +perhaps three altogether. + +Mr. RANKIN. Yes, one you were describing when the screen was not used +was not for the purpose of identification, is that right? + +Mr. CURRY. No, sir; unless some of the news media had come forward and +said, "We saw that man"; you see a lot of that news media, that was +present, were with the Presidential party and there is a possibility +that some of them might have said we saw this man to leave the scene. + +Mr. RANKIN. So the principal reason was to allow the news media? + +Mr. CURRY. The principal reason was at their request that they be +allowed to see the prisoner. + +Mr. RANKIN. And he wasn't placed back of the screen at that time? + +Mr. CURRY. No, sir; he was not. + +Mr. RANKIN. And whatever identification there would be would be under +the hope that they might have seen him? + +Mr. CURRY. They might have seen him because a great number of the news +media were at the scene of the shooting or in the immediate area. + +Mr. RANKIN. And that is the particular showup when you learned later +Jack Ruby was supposed to have been present? + +Mr. CURRY. I was told that he was present. That someone had seen him +back in this room. He easily could have been there as far as I was +concerned because I wouldn't have known him from anyone else. + +Mr. RANKIN. At the other showups, were witnesses there to try to +identify Oswald? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes, there were. + +Mr. RANKIN. How were those handled, do you know? + +Mr. CURRY. Exactly the same manner except that he was brought in +behind the screen, and was handcuffed to some police officers or other +prisoners. + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you know who was there to try to identify him? + +Mr. CURRY. Only on one occasion. This was a little lady that was a +waitress. + +Mr. RANKIN. Mrs. Markham? + +Mr. CURRY. I believe her name was Mrs. Markham. + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you believe whether she was able to identify him? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes, I heard her tell Captain Fritz that was the man she saw +shoot the officer. + +Mr. RANKIN. And that was Officer Tippit? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. RANKIN. What kind of a reputation did Officer Tippit have with the +police force? + +Mr. DULLES. Could I ask one question before that. Were you present +when any members of Oswald's family, his wife, his mother, saw him or +talked with him? + +Mr. CURRY. No, sir; I was not. + +Mr. DULLES. Do you know whether any of your officers were? + +Mr. CURRY. I understood they were brought to the third floor of the +city hall and were placed in a room, and that if any of them were +present it probably would have been Captain Fritz. + +Mr. DULLES. He would know about it? + +Mr. CURRY. I believe he would, yes. + +Mr. DULLES. Thank you. + +Mr. RANKIN. Will you tell us what Officer Tippit's reputation was with +your police force? + +Mr. CURRY. He had a reputation of being a very fine, dedicated officer. + +Mr. RANKIN. How long had he been with you? + +Mr. CURRY. I believe he came to work for us in 1952, after he had had +service in the paratroopers, I believe, and he had made several jumps +into Europe. He was raised in a rural community, and he was very well +thought of by the people in the community where he grew up. He was a +rather quiet, serious minded young man. He seemed to be very devoted to +his family, and he was an active church man. + +Mr. RANKIN. What was his rank? + +Mr. CURRY. Patrolman. He was not a real aggressive type officer. In +fact, he seemed to be just a little bit shy, if you were to meet him, +I believe, shy, retiring type, but certainly not afraid of anything. I +think in his personnel investigation it showed that during, as he was +growing up, sometimes his shyness was mistaken for perhaps fear, but +that it only took a time or two for someone to exploit this to find out +it wasn't fear. It was merely a quiet, shy-type individual. + +Mr. RANKIN. Was there any record in the police department of any +disciplinary action toward him? + +Mr. CURRY. The only disciplinary action ever taken was he was given a +day off one time because he had missed court on two occasions. + +Mr. DULLES. Missed what? + +Mr. CURRY. Missed court. + +Mr. RANKIN. He had been unable to testify or something? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes, sir; in city court they have to appear 1 day a week. +They are notified each week to appear but they are told on one day will +be their court day and if any cases coming up it would be that time. +And on two occasions he failed to appear. I think one time he forgot +it and I think another time he said he was tied up on a radio call or +something and didn't notify him and it is just a departmental policy if +you miss court twice you are given a day off for it. + +Mr. RANKIN. Was that the penalty that was imposed? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes, it was. He took it in very good graces, he didn't feel +like he was being mistreated. + +Mr. RANKIN. That was the only disciplinary action against him? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes, sir; there was one other complaint in his file, where +he had stopped a lady and given her a ticket and also had given her, he +gave her two tickets, one for no operator's license, and after he had +issued the tickets she found her driver's license, and she called to +him across the street, and said something about she found her license +and he told her okay, show it in court, but she thought he was being +rather abrupt and discourteous to her, she felt like he should have +come back over and taken this ticket for driver's license and destroyed +it. + +Under our rules and regulations you cannot destroy a ticket; if it is +destroyed it has to be accounted in our auditor's office and that was +the only complaint in the years on the force. + +Mr. DULLES. A rumor reached me that Officer Tippit had been some way +involved in some narcotic trouble, I don't know what the foundation of +that is. Do you know anything about that at all? + +Mr. CURRY. Nothing whatsoever; no, sir. + +Representative FORD. You mean you know nothing about it or you checked +it out and there is no validity? + +Mr. CURRY. This is the first I ever heard of it that he was involved in +any narcotics. + +Representative FORD. But your records, so far as you know, would not +indicate such? + +Mr. CURRY. No, sir. + +Mr. DULLES. Thank you. + +Mr. McCLOY. Did you, so far as you know, did Tippit know Ruby? + +Mr. CURRY. I don't believe he did. I am sure he didn't. He would not be +the type I think that would even have any occasion to know him because +some of the officers that we found that did know him, either worked in +the area where he had a night club or some of the officers that worked +in the vice squad who had occasion to go in and inspect these cases +or a few officers we found they went out there for social purposes, +outside their regular duty. + +Tippit, for a number of years, had been assigned out in Oak Cliff. I +don't think he had ever been assigned in an area where Jack Ruby--well +Jack Ruby did live in Oak Cliff but I am sure, to the best of my +knowledge, Tippit never had any occasion to be around Jack Ruby. + +Mr. DULLES. Was Tippit at the time he was killed on a regular assigned +assignment or was he just roving in a particular area? + +Mr. CURRY. On this particular day, now he had been assigned to Oak +Cliff for several months farther out than he was, but when this +incident occurred at the Texas School Book Depository, this is +customary policy in the police department if something happens on this +district and tying up several squads that the squads from the other +district automatically move in in a position where they can cover off +or something else might happen here, much the same as fire equipment +does, this is automatic. + +Mr. RANKIN. Will you explain that further? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes, sir; say two squads were to get a call in an area, and +this area here, say they had a big fire or something, they brought two +or three squads in here from adjoining districts, then automatically +these squads out in these other areas would begin to cover off or get +in a position to where if instead of staying out here on the far side +of this district, they would perhaps move into this district right here +where they could answer here, here or over into here. This is just +automatic patrol policy. + +On this particular day, some of the squads in this Oak Cliff area +had been ordered over into the Dallas area, this Texas School Book +Depository, and some of these other outlying squads then, I think we +have this on a radio log, I don't know whether you have this or not, +were 78 or 81. + +Mr. BALL. Why don't you read it in the record, a definite order for +Tippit to come in there. + +Mr. CURRY. Right here. This would have been at approximately 12:45, +I believe. Here is the description came out at about 12:45. The +dispatcher put out a description of attention all squads. + +Mr. DULLES. What do you mean by description? + +Mr. CURRY. Of a suspect. + +Mr. DULLES. I see, description of Oswald? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes. + +Mr. RANKIN. What are you reading from, Chief? + +Mr. CURRY. This is radio log record from the Dallas Police Department, +as recorded on November 22. + +Mr. RANKIN. Is that from Commission Document 728? + +Mr. DULLES. I want to correct my question, it was a man seen leaving? + +Mr. CURRY. It was a description of a suspect. + +Mr. DULLES. You didn't know it was Oswald? + +Mr. RANKIN. Will you tell us what the rest of that notation is? + +Mr. CURRY. Dispatcher put out this description, "attention all squads +Elm and Houston, unknown white male person approximately 30, slender +build, height 5 feet 10, 160 pounds, reported to be armed with what is +believed to be a .30-caliber rifle. Attention all squads, the suspect +is believed to be white male 30, 5 feet 10 inches, slender build, +armed with what is thought to be a .30-30 rifle, no further description +at this time." + +This was at 12:45 p.m. + +Mr. RANKIN. What channel are you talking about? + +Mr. CURRY. Channel 1. + +Mr. RANKIN. You had more than one channel? + +Mr. CURRY. Two channels. + +Mr. RANKIN. Yes. + +Mr. CURRY. Someone came in, they didn't identify themselves and came in +and said what are they wanted for, and they said signal 19 which is a +shooting under our code involving the President. + +Representative FORD. Did Tippit's motorcycle have channel 1? + +Mr. CURRY. He was in a squad car and most of our squad cars have +channel 1 and 2, but they stay on channel 1 unless they are instructed +to switch over to channel 2. + +Mr. DULLES. He did have channel 1? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes. Now within the minute of broadcasting, a little further +on, squads 102 and 233 checked out at Elm and Houston, 81 came in the +district squad, that was an Oak Cliff squad. He said "I will be going +north from Industrial on Corinth." That means he was leaving the Oak +Cliff section coming toward the downtown section of Dallas. + +Representative FORD. By he who do you mean? + +Mr. CURRY. The man assigned to district 81, and I don't have his name +but it would be on our records. + +Then Tippit was working 78 and he along with district 87, which is +further out in Oak Cliff, at about 12:45, between 12:45 and 12:46, the +dispatcher sent out this message to him, "87-78 moving into central Oak +Cliff area." + +Now the central Oak Cliff area would have been the area nearby where +this shooting occurred. + +Representative FORD. Shooting of Tippit? + +Mr. CURRY. Shooting of Tippit occurred. I am sure--a little later on +here, he says "you are in Oak Cliff area, are you not," and he said "at +Lancaster and 8th", that would be just several blocks from where this +shooting then occurred. + +Mr. McCLOY. This is Tippit's reply going in? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes. + +Mr. RANKIN. The next sentence also says something, Chief? + +Mr. CURRY. And the dispatcher told him, "You will be at large for any +emergency that comes in." In other words, he was one of the remaining +squads in Oak Cliff that was in service. + +Mr. DULLES. What does that mean, scout around the area? + +Mr. CURRY. Anywhere in that central area, Oak Cliff. + +Mr. McCLOY. Did he reply to that? + +Mr. CURRY. He said "10-4". + +Mr. RANKIN. What does that mean? + +Mr. CURRY. It means message received. + +Mr. RANKIN. Doesn't that mean approval? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes, sir. + +Representative FORD. These are transcriptions of communications back +and forth? + +Mr. CURRY. That is recorded on our radio there in Dallas. + +Mr. RANKIN. Is there a tape recorder on that? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes; and it is kept for a permanent record. + +Mr. RANKIN. Was there any other shooting in this particular area where +Officer Tippit was that morning, do you know? + +Mr. CURRY. Not to my knowledge. + +Mr. DULLES. Is that 10-4 message the last message you received from +Tippit? + +Mr. CURRY. As far as I know that is the last word we heard from him. + +Mr. McCLOY. Was this description of the suspect the first description +that went out? + +Mr. CURRY. As far as I know, it is. + +Mr. DULLES. That was at 12:45, as I recall. + +Mr. CURRY. Approximately, yes. + +(Discussion off the record.) + +Mr. RANKIN. When did you first learn of Officer Tippit's murder? + +Mr. CURRY. While I was out at Parkland Hospital. That is after we had +taken the President there and the Governor, and we were waiting there. + +Mr. RANKIN. Now, on these showups for Lee Oswald, did you have any +special security arrangements about bringing him in among all this +crowd of news people? + +Mr. CURRY. We had some police officers bringing him down. I was there, +Captain Fritz went, I don't believe he went inside the door. He went to +the door, I believe. There were several officers there, yes. + +Mr. RANKIN. Was this more than usual? + +Mr. CURRY. Perhaps so; yes. Ordinarily there would have been maybe a +jailer and a jail guard with the prisoner. And there would have been +the detective out with the witnesses. + +Mr. RANKIN. Were you disturbed about the security for Lee Oswald with +all this crowd? + +Mr. CURRY. Not at that time. I really didn't suspect any trouble from +the news media. I thought they were there doing a professional job of +reporting the news and I had no reason to be concerned about the news +media. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did it concern you that there were so many additional +people to try to keep track of as well as---- + +Mr. CURRY. Yes, sir; it did. + +Mr. RANKIN. What did you do about it? + +Mr. CURRY. I didn't do anything about it but I was concerned about it. +I was thinking that we were going to have to, in the event we have had +an incident like this occur again, that we would have to make some +different arrangements for the press. We couldn't, when I say the +press, the news media, we couldn't have the city hall overrun like this. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did it occur to you to do anything about stopping it right +then? + +Mr. CURRY. No. I didn't discuss it with any of my staff that we should +clear all these people out of here and get them outside the city hall. + +Mr. RANKIN. You gave no consideration to that kind of approach? + +Mr. CURRY. Not at the time. + +Mr. RANKIN. Now after the interrogation of Oswald, did you make some +decision about moving him? + +Mr. CURRY. Not at that particular time. It is customary after we file +on a person that he be removed from the city hall. + +Mr. RANKIN. What do you mean by file on a person? + +Mr. CURRY. File a case against him and that is necessary to go to the +district attorney's office usually, and in this case the district +attorney was there and we filed it at the city hall because the +district attorney was with us. + +Mr. RANKIN. A criminal complaint? + +Mr. CURRY. A criminal complaint. After we file this complaint it is +customary for the prisoner to be transferred from the city to the +county jail and to remain in custody until he makes bond or is brought +to trial. + +Mr. RANKIN. That is a regular practice? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes, sir. These transfers are usually made by the sheriff's +office, sometime during the morning. + +Mr. RANKIN. By the sheriff's office you mean it is the sheriff's +responsibility? + +Mr. CURRY. Routine transfers are made. It is not a hard and fast +custom. Many times we will take the prisoner to the sheriff. + +Mr. RANKIN. Who decides which way you will do it? + +Mr. CURRY. It is left up to the bureau commander. + +Mr. RANKIN. What do you mean by the bureau commander? + +Mr. CURRY. That is handling the case. + +Mr. RANKIN. Who would that be in this case? + +Mr. CURRY. In this case it would have been Captain Fritz. + +Mr. RANKIN. And he decides then in all cases of this type whether +or not the police will take him across to the sheriff's jail or the +sheriff will come and get him? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes, sir; ordinarily it wouldn't even come to my attention +how it was handled. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did it come to your attention this time? + +Mr. CURRY. It did this time. I had asked, it seemed to me like it was +on Saturday after he had been filed on late or early Friday morning, +the news media many times had asked me when are you going to transfer +him and I said, "I don't know." + +Mr. RANKIN. What do you mean by "early Friday morning?" + +Mr. CURRY. I mean early Saturday morning. Late Friday night or early +Saturday morning. + +Representative FORD. Where do you actually do this filing? + +Mr. CURRY. Ordinarily our detectives would go down to the courthouse +which is right near where the President was assassinated and file it +in the district attorney's office. However, in this case the district +attorney and also his assistant was up at the city hall with us, and we +drew up the complaints there at the city hall. + +Mr. RANKIN. Who do you mean by we? + +Mr. CURRY. When I say we, I mean the Dallas police officers and the +homicide officers working in this case. + +Mr. RANKIN. I see. + +Representative FORD. What evidence did you have at that point? + +Mr. CURRY. I couldn't tell you all the evidence. I think Captain Fritz +can tell you better than I. Captain Fritz just told me on Friday +afternoon he said, "We have sufficient evidence to file a case on +Oswald for the murder of Tippit." Later on that night, somewhere around +midnight, I believe, he told me, he said, "We now have sufficient +evidence to file on Lee Harvey Oswald for the assassination of +President Kennedy." + +He told me he had talked it over with Henry Wade and with the assistant +district attorney and they agreed we had enough evidence to file a +case, and a decision was made then to file the case, which we did. + +Representative FORD. At that time you had the rifle, did you not? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes, sir. + +Representative FORD. Who made the original identification of the rifle, +the kind of rifle that it was? + +Mr. CURRY. I don't know, sir. + +Representative FORD. It was reported that the original identification +was a 7.65 Mauser. Are those reports true or untrue? + +Mr. CURRY. I wouldn't know, sir. + +Representative FORD. You don't know? + +Mr. CURRY. I don't know. + +Representative FORD. Do you know when it was finally determined that it +was not a 7.65 Mauser? + +Mr. CURRY. No, sir; I don't know that. + +Mr. McCLOY. As far as I know there was no police report that it was a +7.65 rifle. + +(Discussion off the record.) + +Mr. RANKIN. Chief Curry, do you know of any police records of your +police department that showed that this weapon that was purportedly +involved in the assassination was a Mauser rifle? + +Mr. CURRY. No, sir; not to my knowledge. + +Representative FORD. All of your records show affirmatively it was the +Italian rifle? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes, sir. That is correct. + +Mr. McCLOY. While we are waiting for Mr. Rankin to continue his +examination, let me ask you this question, Chief. + +Did you, prior to the assassination, know or hear of Oswald? + +Mr. CURRY. Never. + +Mr. McCLOY. Didn't hear that he had been--there was a defector named +Oswald in the city of Dallas? + +Mr. CURRY. No, sir. + +Mr. McCLOY. Never heard of his name? + +Mr. CURRY. We didn't have it in our files. + +Representative FORD. Was there anything in your files that Lee Harvey +Oswald had been involved with the Dallas police force? + +Mr. CURRY. No, sir. + +Representative FORD. No record whatsoever? + +Mr. CURRY. No, sir. + +Mr. DULLES. Was there any record of his having made a trip to the +Soviet Union and returned? + +Mr. CURRY. Not in our files. + +Mr. DULLES. And returned to Texas? + +Mr. CURRY. We didn't have anything in our files regarding Lee Harvey +Oswald. + +Senator COOPER. Could I follow up on that, did you have any record of +any individuals, persons, in Dallas, or the area, who because of any +threats of violence against the President or any Communist background +required you to take any special security measures? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes, sir; when we have notables, celebrities visiting us, +there are some groups in Dallas that are known to be extreme rightwing +and extreme leftwing groups. We try to keep track of these people and +what their plans are. We have been able to infiltrate most of their +organizations. + +Senator COOPER. Now prior to the President's visit, did you take +any--did the Dallas Police force take any special security measures +about any persons that you might suspect of possible violence? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes, sir; we kept some people under surveillance or groups +under surveillance. We had prior to this visit, we had some information +brought to us, I don't know who brought it to us, that there was a +man in Sherman or Denison, who said that he is going to see that the +President was embarrassed when he came to Dallas. + +Senator COOPER. Who was that man, do you know? + +Mr. DULLES. We have a Secret Service report, I believe with regard to +this case. Here is one from the chief of police of Denton, Tex. + +Mr. CURRY. Yes; we had some information that the students at North +Texas were planning some demonstrations. + +Senator COOPER. My question is, did your police force take any special +security measures about anyone that you felt might be capable of +violence against the President? + +Mr. CURRY. Not at this particular time, because we had reports from +the different groups, and we had information from inside these groups +that they were not planning to do anything on the day the President was +there. We knew that General Walker was out of the city, and we knew +that his group that sometimes put on demonstrations. + +Senator COOPER. When you say planning, you are not limiting it to any +violence, but you are talking about any possible demonstrations? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes; demonstrations. + +Senator COOPER. I want to come back to that point later, but I want to +ask this, outside of what you had in your police files, your records, +did you know yourself, or did you know whether anyone in authority in +the police force or anyone in the police force, to your knowledge, had +any knowledge of the presence of Oswald in Dallas? + +Mr. CURRY. No, sir; I have asked my criminal intelligence section, +which would have been the persons who had knowledge of this. + +Senator COOPER. Had anyone informed you that he was working in the +Texas School Book Depository Building? + +Mr. CURRY. No, sir. + +Mr. DULLES. Had he ever tangled with the Dallas Police in any respect +of which there is any record? + +Mr. CURRY. We have no record at all of him. + +Representative FORD. Did the Secret Service people inquire of you as to +your knowledge of these various groups that you had infiltrated? + +Mr. CURRY. I don't remember them specifically asking me what were these +groups planning to do. + +Representative FORD. Did you volunteer any information on it? + +Mr. CURRY. I think perhaps we told them what we had done. They +were aware of the fact that we did know the plans of the various +organizations, and I know we sent Lieutenant Revill and a couple of his +men up to Denison, or Denton, to talk to a man that had purportedly +said they were going to embarrass the President and had made some +remarks about it and after we talked with him he said, "I won't even +be in Dallas. I was just popping off. I will assure you I am not even +going to be down there. I don't want any part of it." + +Then some of the study group in North Texas, we had an informant in +this group, and they had decided they would be in Dallas with some +placards to express opinions about the President or some of his views. +Some of these people were arrested after the shooting because we were +afraid that the people were going to harm them. They were down around +the Trade Mart with some placards. + +Senator COOPER. I have a couple of more questions. + +Do you remember the full page advertisement that was in the Dallas +paper? + +Mr. CURRY. I saw it; yes. + +Senator COOPER. Directed against the President of the United States? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes. + +Senator COOPER. What date did you give that statement in making any +kind of preparations for his visit? + +Mr. CURRY. In the first place, I didn't think it was very appropriate, +it makes us apprehensive, a little more apprehensive of the security of +the President, but we were doing everything that I knew we could do to +protect him. I will never forget that as we turned to go down toward +that underpass the remark was made, "We have almost got it made," and I +was very relieved that we had brought him through this downtown area, +and were fixing to get on this expressway where we could take him out +to the Trade Mart where we had a tremendous amount of security set up +for him. + +Senator COOPER. Since the assassination, have you had any actual +factors or any evidence or information of any kind which would indicate +that any person other than Oswald was involved in the assassination of +President Kennedy? + +Mr. CURRY. No, sir; I have not. + +Mr. DULLES. Was any investigation made of, I believe it was Weissman, +or somebody by that name, who inserted this advertisement to which +Senator Cooper referred, was any particular investigation made? + +Mr. CURRY. Not any investigation by us. + +(At this point, Representative Ford withdrew from the hearing room.) + +Mr. McCLOY. I have one question. + +Did you since the assassination or before have any information or any +credible information which would indicate that there was any connection +between Ruby and Oswald? + +Mr. CURRY. No, sir; we were not able to establish any connection +between them. + +Mr. McCLOY. You made a thorough investigation of that? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes, sir; we made every attempt to prove or disprove an +association between them, and we were not able to connect the two. + +Mr. McCLOY. Do you intend to ask the chief about the General Walker +episode? + +Mr. RANKIN. Yes; and also about the Ruby episode. + +Mr. McCLOY. I think that is all I have at the moment. + +Mr. RANKIN. Chief, I put in front of you there as Exhibit 705, now +marked as "Exhibit 705," your radio log that you have just been looking +at and referred to, is that right? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. RANKIN. Will you turn to the page there where you find the first +broadcast of the description of the suspect of the assassination of the +President? Is that on your page 6 or thereabouts? + +Mr. CURRY. The pages--yes, it is page 6, channel 1. + +Mr. RANKIN. Will you tell what time of the day that is recorded as +having been made? + +Mr. CURRY. This shows at the end the broadcast to be 12:45 p.m. It +would be on November 22d. + +Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Chairman, I would like to offer Exhibit 705 being +this radio log which covers a great many matters, but in light of the +importance of the time and the description and all, I think the entire +log should go in and then we can refer to different items in it. + +Mr. DULLES. It will be admitted as Commission's Exhibit No. 705. + +(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 705, and +received in evidence.) + +Mr. RANKIN. Now, will you read to the Commission a description that was +given at that time of the suspect of the assassination? + +Mr. CURRY. The broadcast reads as follows: "Attention all squads. +Attention all squads. At Elm and Houston, reported to be an unknown +white male, approximately 30, slender build, height 5 feet 10 inches, +165 pounds. Reported to be armed with what is believed to be a +.30-caliber rifle. + +"Attention all squads, the suspect is believed to be white male, 30, 5 +feet 10 inches, slender build, 165 pounds, armed with what is thought +to be a .30-.30 rifle. No further description or information at this +time. KKB there 64 Dallas, and the time given as 12:45 p.m." + +Mr. RANKIN. You have described Officer Tippit's number? + +Mr. CURRY. District 78. + +Mr. RANKIN. And that is recorded along the left-hand side when there is +any message either from him or to him, is that right? + +Mr. CURRY. That is correct. + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you find there a message directed to him about moving to +the central Oak Cliff area? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. RANKIN. And what time is that message recorded? + +Mr. CURRY. Immediately following this dispatch to him to district +squads 87 and 78, EBG 78. + +Mr. RANKIN. What time? + +Mr. CURRY. The time is given as 12:46. + +Mr. RANKIN. What does it say? + +Mr. CURRY. The dispatcher asked him "87 and 78" or instructed him "Move +into the central Oak Cliff area." + +Mr. RANKIN. Did he respond to that? + +Mr. CURRY. A little later he did. + +Mr. RANKIN. When? + +Mr. CURRY. We have--he was asked his location, would be about 1 o'clock. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did he say what it was? + +Mr. CURRY. He didn't come back in at that time. At 1:08 p.m. they +called him again. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did he respond? + +Mr. CURRY. It is at 12:54. The dispatcher said "78" and he responded, +he said, "You are in the Oak Cliff area, are you not?" + +Seventy-eight responded and said, "Lancaster and 8," which would be in +the central section of Oak Cliff. + +The dispatcher said, "You will be at large for any emergency that comes +in." + +And he responded, "10-4," which means message received. And he would +follow those instructions. + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you have an item there of a broadcast of a person who +murdered Tippit? + +Mr. CURRY. We have apparently--a citizen came in on the radio and he +said, "Somebody shot a police officer at 404 10th Street." Someone in +the background said 78, squad 78, car No. 10. And the citizen said, +"You get that?" and the dispatcher said, "78." + +And there was no response and the citizen said, "Hello, police +operator, did you get that?" Some other unknown voice came in and said, +"510 East Jefferson." + +Mr. RANKIN. What time of the day? + +Mr. CURRY. This was about 1:15; 1:19 is the next time that shows up on +the radio log. The dispatcher at 1:19 said, "The subject is running +west on Jefferson from the location." + +Citizen came back in on the radio and said, "From out here on 10th +street, 500 block, the police officer just shot, I think he is dead." +Dispatcher said, "10-4, we have the information." + +The citizen using the radio remained off the radio. + +Dispatcher to 15, he was the sergeant, said, "Did you receive the +information of police officer shot?" + +And he said, "10-4, but didn't that citizen say first he was on +Jefferson and 10th and then Chesapeake?" + +And he said, "Yes." + +And he said, "Do they relate?" + +And he said, "Yes, at Denver, 19 will be there shortly," that is a +sergeant or a lieutenant. + +Ninety-one came on and said, "Have a signal 19 involving a police +officer at 400 block East 10th. The suspect last seen running west on +Jefferson, no description at this time." + +The dispatcher came in and said, "The suspect just passed 401 East +Jefferson." + +Dispatcher then says, "Give us the correct location on it, 85, we have +three different locations." + +Eighty-five says, "I haven't seen anything on Jefferson yet, 10-4, +check, 491 East 10th at Denver." + +Dispatcher repeated, "The subject has just passed 401 East Jefferson." + +At 1:22 we have a broadcast here that says, "We have a description +on the suspect here on Jefferson, last seen on the 300 block on East +Jefferson, a white male, 30, about 5 feet 8, black hair, slender, +wearing a white jacket, white shirt and dark slacks, armed with what he +states unknown. Repeat the description." + +Dispatcher said that to the squad. He says. "Wearing a white jacket +believed to be a white shirt and dark slacks. What is his direction of +travel on Jefferson?" + +He said, "Travel west on Jefferson, last seen in the 401 West +Jefferson, correction, it will be East Jefferson." + +The dispatcher then said, "Pick up for investigation of aggravated +assault on a police officer, a white male approximately 30, 5 feet +8, slender build, has black hair, white jacket, white shirt, dark +trousers. Suspect has been seen running west on Jefferson from the 400 +block of East Jefferson at 1:24." + +Then they asked about the condition of the officer, and there was +something about--the dispatcher did receive some information that there +was a man pulled in there on West Davis driving a white Pontiac, a 1961 +or 1962 station wagon with a prefix PE, saying he had a rifle laying in +the street. + +We have a citizen following in a car address unknown direction. + +The dispatcher said, "Any unit near Gaston 3600 block, this is about a +blood bank." + +Then 279 comes in and says, "We believe the suspect on shooting this +officer out here got his white jacket, believed he dumped it in this +parking lot behind the service station at 400 block West, Jefferson +across from Dudley House. He had a white jacket we believe this is it." + +"You do not have a suspect, is that correct?" + +"No, just the jacket lying on the ground." + +There is some more conversation about blood going to Parkland. + +"What was the description beside the white jacket?" + +"White male, 30, 5-8 black hair, slender build, white shirt, white +jacket, black trousers, going west on Jefferson from the 300 block." + +Squad says, "This is Sergeant Jerry Hill." Says, "I am at 12th and +Beckley now, have a man in the car with me that can identify the +suspect if anybody gets one." + +Mr. RANKIN. Chief Curry, we were furnished a Commission Document No. +290, dated December 5, 1963, that purported to be a radio log for your +department, and it did not have any item in it in regard to instruction +to Officer Tippit to go to the Central Oak Cliff area. + +Do you know why that would be true? + +Mr. CURRY. I don't know why it wasn't in that log except that these +logs, after they are recorded, they are pretty difficult to try to take +everything off of them, channel 1 and channel 2 is in on them and they +spent many hours going over these and copying these. + +This would be available and I listened to our recording. + +Mr. RANKIN. That is Exhibit 705 you are talking about? + +Mr. CURRY. That is right. + +Mr. RANKIN. So if there is a discrepancy between the two, are you +satisfied that Exhibit 705 is correct? + +Mr. CURRY. Is the correct exhibit; yes. + +Mr. RANKIN. Commission Document No. 290 does say at the heading that +most routine transmissions were left out for reasons of brevity. + +Would that be any explanation? + +Mr. CURRY. Perhaps it could be, yes. Because these would have been +routine broadcasts. The fact the squad was moving into this area +because this is more or less normal procedure when we have incidents +occurring of any magnitude, the squads immediately begin moving in to +cover officers of the district. + +Mr. RANKIN. You were going to tell us about how it came to your +attention about the moving of Lee Oswald to the jail from your place on +Saturday? + +Mr. CURRY. To the county jail? + +Mr. RANKIN. Yes. + +Mr. CURRY. Yes, sir. + +I asked Captain Fritz a time or two when he wanted to move Oswald, +because this is left up to him. Whoever will be handling the case, I +mean I don't enter in the transfer of prisoners. I don't ordinarily +even know when they are going to be transferred. + +Mr. RANKIN. Why is that? + +Mr. CURRY. It is just a routine matter. + +Mr. RANKIN. Can you tell us is that involved quite a few times in your +operations? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes, sir. Usually it is a daily transfer of prisoners, +and usually the sheriff's office sends up there and picks them up on +routine prisoners. + +Mr. RANKIN. Are there a number each day? + +Mr. CURRY. I would say perhaps anywhere from maybe none to 15 a day. + +Mr. RANKIN. When did you talk to Officer or Captain Fritz about this? + +Mr. CURRY. I think I talked to him some on Saturday, because the +newspaper people or the news media kept asking me when are going to +transfer him? + +Mr. RANKIN. That would be November 23? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes; and I said this I don't know because that would be left +up to the men doing the interrogation. When they felt like they were +finished with him and wanted to transfer him or when Sheriff Decker +said, "We want the man." + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you have anything to do with his transfer then? + +Mr. CURRY. Other than to, I called Sheriff Decker on Sunday morning and +he said, I told him and I think he had talked to Fritz prior to that +time, too, and he told Fritz, he says, "Don't bring him down here until +I get some security set up for him." + +So, Sunday morning I talked to Sheriff Decker. + +Mr. RANKIN. Why didn't you do it at night? + +Mr. CURRY. This is not customary to transfer prisoners at night. + +Mr. RANKIN. Why? + +Mr. CURRY. Well, in talking with Captain Fritz, and here again the +prisoner was his, and when some of my captains, I believe it was +perhaps Lieutenant Swain, it is in the record somewhere said something +about, "Do you think we ought to move him at night?" + +And Captain Fritz was not in favor of moving him at night because he +said, "If anything does occur you can't see, anybody can immediately +get out of sight, and if anything is going to happen we want to know +where we can see and see what is happening." + +Mr. RANKIN. Were you fearful something might happen? + +Mr. CURRY. I didn't know. I thought it could happen because of a +feeling of a great number of people. But I certainly didn't think +anything to happen in city hall. I thought that if anything did happen +to him it would probably be en route from the city jail to the county +jail. + +Mr. RANKIN. What precautions did you take? + +Mr. CURRY. The precautions that were taken, when I came in on Sunday +morning, now Captain Fritz, I had talked to him on Saturday night or +Saturday evening anyway, and he said, he thought he would be ready +to transfer him by 10 o'clock the next morning, that would be Sunday +morning. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you tell that to the media? + +Mr. CURRY. I told them at some time after that. Several of them asked +me when are you going to transfer him, and I said, I don't know. + +They said, "Are you going to transfer him tonight," and I said, "No, we +are not going to transfer him tonight." I said, "We are tired. We are +going home and get some rest." + +Something was said about well, we are tired, too. When should we come +back, and I think that this is recorded in some of the tape recording, +that I told them if you are back here by 10 o'clock in the morning, I +don't think that you would miss anything you want to see. + +Mr. RANKIN. What did you do then about precautions? + +Mr. CURRY. The next morning when I came in, that would be about 8:30, +8:45, I think, parked in the basement of city hall, I started up to +the elevator and I noticed they had moved some cameras into a hallway +down in the basement and I told Lieutenant Wiggins who is in the jail +office, I said, "These things will have to be moved out of here, and +I also told Chief Batchelor, and Chief Stevenson, Assistant Chief +Batchelor, and Assistant Chief in Charge of Investigations Stevenson +who came down in the basement at the time. + +Mr. RANKIN. Those were TV cameras? + +Mr. CURRY. That was in the lobby or in near the lobby of the jail +office. I told them they were--would have to move those out of there. +This was also in the parking area, there was a ramp come down from Main +Street and goes out on Commerce Street, and then there is a parking +area east of this. + +I told Lieutenant Wiggins who was there, I said, "Now, move these squad +cars," there was a transfer car there and a squad car, "move these cars +out of this area and if the news media wants down here put them over +behind these railings, back over in the basement here." + +Then that is all I did at that time. I saw that they were setting +up some security. A little while later Chief Batchelor and Chief +Stevenson went downstairs and found Captain Talbert who was the platoon +commander, radio platoon commander had some sergeants down there and +they were setting up security and were told clean everything out of the +basement and not let anybody in here, I think the depositions will show +that, not let anybody in except police officers and news media who had +proper credentials. + +Mr. RANKIN. What about the various entrances, was anything done about +that? + +Mr. CURRY. Well, the entrances to the basement, yes, and the entrances +from the basement of city hall out into the basement proper where the +cars come in. + +Mr. RANKIN. What was done about that? + +Mr. CURRY. Every entrance there were guards put on it with instructions +not to let anyone come or go except police officers or news people that +had proper credentials. + +Mr. RANKIN. What entrances are there to the basement? + +Mr. CURRY. This is a Main Street entrance for vehicles, that would be +on the north side of the building. There is a Commerce Street exit +which would be on the south side of the building, on the west side +downstairs there is an entrance from the jail corridor where the public +goes to the jail window into the basement of the parking area. Then +there are some elevators that come from the municipal building, that +come down to the basement level. There are also, there is also an +opening that goes from this basement down into a subbasement where the +maintenance men have their offices. + +(At this point, Senator Cooper left the hearing room.) + +Mr. RANKIN. And each one of those was guarded? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. RANKIN. Throughout the time? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. RANKIN. What other precautions were made? + +Mr. CURRY. There were a great number of police reservists and +detectives and uniformed officers, I think there was a total, I believe +of about 74 men in this area between the jail office and the immediate +area where he would be loaded. + +Mr. RANKIN. How large an area was that? + +Mr. CURRY. Well, where he would be brought out of the jail office to +put him in this car, would be, I would say, 16 or 20 feet, and then +this building, this ramp runs from one street to the other, and the +parking area would cover a block wide and perhaps 150 feet deep. + +Mr. RANKIN. Were there cars in the parking area? + +Mr. CURRY. Some cars were there. They had been searched out, all of +them. All of the vehicles had been searched, and all the, where the +airconditioning ducts were, they had all been searched, every place +where a person could conceal himself had been searched out. + +Mr. RANKIN. Was there a plan for an armored car? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes, sir; there was. + +Mr. RANKIN. What happened about that? + +Mr. CURRY. After they had gotten the armored car down there, in talking +with Captain Fritz, and here again this prisoner was his responsibility +and I don't want to be in a position of just overriding him, and I was +willing to trust his judgment, he had been doing this for, like I say, +nearly 40 years, and he said, "Chief, I would prefer not to use that +armored car, I don't know who the driver is. It is awkward to handle +and if anybody tries to do anything to us, I am afraid we would be +surrounded. I would prefer to put him in a police car with some of my +men following him, and get in and just take him right down Main Street +and slip him into the jail." + +So I said, "It will be all right with me if you want to do it that way +but let's not say anything about this." + +Mr. RANKIN. Now the armored car was not a Dallas police car, was it? + +Mr. CURRY. No; it was not. + +Mr. RANKIN. It was one you were arranging to get from---- + +Mr. CURRY. I believe his name was Mr. Sherrell, who was the manager of +the Armored Motor Service there in Dallas. + +Mr. RANKIN. And they would furnish a driver with it? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes. + +Mr. RANKIN. What else was done, if anything? + +Mr. CURRY. We went ahead with our plans and we instructed the officers +that would be involved in this transfer they would go east on Commerce +Street, north to Elm Street, west on Elm Street to Houston Street, and +then back south on Houston to the rear entrance of the county jail. + +Mr. RANKIN. How many officers would be involved in the transfer? + +Mr. CURRY. In the actual transfer, I would think perhaps 15 or 18 +besides the men that were stationed at the intersections downtown. + +Mr. RANKIN. How far would it be from your police department to the +county jail? + +Mr. CURRY. I would say 12-15 blocks. + +Mr. RANKIN. Were there any other precautions you haven't described? + +Mr. CURRY. No, sir; that is about all I know of, except that Captain +Fritz wanted to transfer the prisoner in his car, with some of his +detectives. This is not unusual. He has transferred many, many +prisoners, especially where there is--it is an unusual case involving +more than the ordinary routine crime, so it is not anything unusual to +transfer him, for him to transfer prisoners. + +But, it was then suggested or arranged that they would put his car in a +position behind the armored car that we would bring the prisoner out, +put him in his car, and he would have two detectives in the back seat +with him, plus one driver and two or three detectives following him +immediately and there was supposed to be another car to pick up and go +with them or get into a car van with these two. + +They would follow the armored motor car and no one would know that +he was not in the armored motor car except the reporters downstairs +when they saw him come out. They would see he was placed in a car +instead of the armored car, and we planned to let the armored car go +over the predetermined route, but that Captain Fritz, when he got to +Main Street, as you go east on Commerce and turned north to go to Elm +Street, that is the second street over, when he got to Main Street they +would make a left turn and go right down Main Street to the county +jail, and they would turn right on Houston Street and the lead car +would pull past the entrance and he would duck in and the gates would +be closed and the prisoner would be transferred. + +Mr. RANKIN. What happened to these TV cameras that you told them to get +out of there? + +Mr. CURRY. They moved them back somewhere. I don't know where they +moved them but it was away from there. + +Mr. RANKIN. Weren't their cameras right there at the time of the +shooting? + +Mr. CURRY. There were some cameras immediately over, TV cameras, I +think over where I had told them to place them earlier that morning. +I understood when Chief Batchelor went downstairs and I think Captain +Jones of the forgery bureau, immediately prior to the transfer, they +found there were some reporters and cameramen in the jail office, and +Captain Jones, I believe, asked Chief Batchelor if these should not +be removed and he was told yes, they should be removed out into the +basement. When they were removed out into the basement instead of them +being placed outside of the railing--now this is a decision made by +Chief Batchelor, I suppose, because he said put them in the driveway +up to the north. Now this is from where Ruby came. So apparently this +afforded him an opportunity, from our investigation it was determined +that he came down this Main Street ramp. + +Mr. RANKIN. How did you determine that? + +Mr. CURRY. We interrograted every man that was assigned in the +basement. Also every witness who was around there that we could find +that knew anything about it. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did anyone see him come in on that ramp? + +Mr. CURRY. There was a former police officer who told us he saw him go +down that ramp, a Negro former police officer. + +Mr. RANKIN. Who was that? + +Mr. CURRY. I believe his name was Daniels. I think perhaps you have a +statement from him, don't you? + +Mr. RANKIN. Is he the only one who saw him come in down there? + +Mr. CURRY. I believe so. + +Mr. RANKIN. Now with these TV cameras down there how would your ruse +work about having the armored car go ahead and Oswald climb into +Captain Fritz' car? Wouldn't that all be shown on TV? + +Mr. CURRY. If it was. We didn't think there would be anybody downtown +to be in a position to watching TV that quickly to do anything about it +if they wanted to. + +Mr. RANKIN. You thought about it though? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes. + +Mr. RANKIN. What happened? Were you down there at the time? + +Mr. CURRY. No, sir; I would have been but I received a call from my +mayor and as I was fixing to go downstairs and I wish that I had been +downstairs because I don't know that I could have done anything but you +always have this feeling if you were there maybe you could have done +something. + +But I was called to the telephone and while I was talking to the mayor, +why I heard some noises from downstairs and I was up on the third +floor, and I heard some shouting, and someone came in and told me that +Oswald had been shot. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you learn how the shooting occurred? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes. + +Mr. RANKIN. Will you tell us? + +Mr. CURRY. I was told that someone sprang from the crowd and pushed a +gun into his stomach and fired a shot. + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you know who that was? + +Mr. CURRY. I was told that the man was named Jack Ruby. + +Mr. RANKIN. What else did you learn about it? + +Mr. CURRY. Further investigation revealed, and some of my officers who +talked to Ruby and talked to his attorney, I believe, were told that he +came down that north ramp, and an investigation revealed that one of +our officers, who was assigned there. Officer Vaughn, who was assigned +to this location just prior to this transfer. + +Mr. RANKIN. That is out on the street? + +Mr. CURRY. Main Street side. + +Mr. RANKIN. At the entrance? + +Mr. CURRY. At the entrance to the basement ramp. He had been assigned +there and had been told not to let anybody come in except newspaper +reporters or news media or police officers. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you find out what he did? + +Mr. CURRY. We discovered or found out subsequently that he, just prior +to this transfer, that when we found out we were going to transfer him +and not use an armored car that Chief Stevenson had told Lieutenant +Pierce "to get a couple of sergeants or a sergeant, get somebody and +go around and get in front of the armored car and when we tell you to +why you lead off and lead this armored car over here and just over the +route we have discussed, and take it to the county jail." + +Well, Lieutenant Pierce went downstairs and got a car and he got +Sergeant Putnam and I don't recall the other sergeant, and because the +ramp that ordinarily we would use for exit ramp to Commerce Street, +it was blocked with this armored car and another vehicle, he went out +in the wrong direction, that is he went north, up to north, he went +north on the ramp to Main Street which ordinarily would not be done, +but since he could not get out, why he did, and as he approached the +ramp, our investigation showed that Officer Vaughn stepped from his +assignment in the entrance to this ramp, and the walk is about 10 or 12 +feet wide there, stepped across and just more or less assisted the car +to get into the Main Street flow of traffic. + +Now he wasn't asked to do this by the lieutenant, but he just did it +and according to what Ruby told some of my officers, I believe, whether +you have it on the record who he told this to, that he came down that +north ramp. + +Mr. RANKIN. At that time? + +Mr. CURRY. At that time. + +Now this would only have been, it couldn't have possibly been over 2 +or 3 minutes prior to the shooting, so apparently he went right down +that ramp and he got in behind some of these newspaper reporters or +news media and detectives, and as Oswald was brought out he sprang from +behind one of my detectives and took about two steps and shoved a gun +in Oswald's side and pulled the trigger. + +This officer, in talking to him, he made a report, he swears that he +didn't see anybody go in there. + +Mr. RANKIN. By this officer, you mean Vaughn? + +Mr. CURRY. Officer Vaughn. He did, I asked him myself or asked the +investigating officers to see if he wouldn't take a polygraph test +concerning this, just to verify his position in it, and he agreed +to take the polygraph test and did take the polygraph test and the +polygraph test revealed that he was not aware that Ruby came in while +he stepped, when he stepped away from the entrance of that door. + +Now I am not here to place the blame on anybody because, as I have +said previously, as head of the department, I have got to accept the +responsibility for what goes on there. + +But if Officer Vaughn had properly carried out his assignment, I don't +believe that Ruby could have gotten into the basement of the city hall. + +Mr. McCLOY. Unless he had credentials, media credentials? + +Mr. CURRY. That is correct. + +Mr. McCLOY. We haven't verified whether or not he did have anything? + +Mr. CURRY. We haven't been able to verify that. There were none found +on his person. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you make any inquiry as to whether or not any of the +police force were involved with Ruby in this shooting? + +Mr. CURRY. We got reports and interrogated every officer who was there. + +Mr. RANKIN. What did you find out? + +Mr. CURRY. We didn't find any officer who knew he was down there or +that had in any way assisted him in getting there. No one. + +Mr. RANKIN. You are satisfied that none of them were involved in trying +to have Oswald shot? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes, sir; I certainly am. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you make inquiry to determine whether there was any +evidence that anyone else was involved with Ruby in trying to shoot +Oswald? + +Mr. CURRY. We made every effort we could in our investigation. We were +not able to determine any tieup between any other individual and Ruby +or Oswald. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you make any inquiry to determine whether or not anyone +else was involved with Oswald in the assassination of the President? + +Mr. CURRY. We attempted to. Every lead we came upon we followed it +out to see whether or not we could make any connection between Ruby, +Oswald, or any other group. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you discover any evidence that would tend to show that +Oswald had any support in the assassination? + +Mr. CURRY. No; we did not. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you discover any evidence that would prove Ruby was +involved with any other person in the killing of Oswald? + +Mr. CURRY. We were not able to determine any connection. + +Mr. DULLES. I will just ask one question, if I may, here. + +It was Officer Vaughn, I understand, who had the direct responsibility +for checking the credentials. + +Mr. CURRY. Of that door, of that particular door. + +Mr. DULLES. That door. Is there any evidence that Officer Vaughn knew +of Ruby? + +Mr. CURRY. I don't believe he did. + +Mr. DULLES. Has that been looked into? + +Mr. CURRY. He was asked that, and if I remember correctly in his +deposition he didn't know him. + +Mr. DULLES. He testified he didn't know him? + +Mr. CURRY. I believe so, I am not confident of that, but they have had +his deposition here, which I am sure would reveal that. + +Mr. DULLES. Do you know---- + +(Discussion off the record.) + +Mr. McCLOY. Do you know, chief, anybody on the staff, on your staff, on +the police staff, that was particularly close to Ruby? + +Mr. CURRY. No, sir; I do not. + +Mr. McCLOY. I would want to go back for a little while on one thing. + +How did it happen the description was broadcast so quickly after the +event? Can you explain the circumstances under which---- + +Mr. CURRY. I am merely giving an opinion here. + +Mr. McCLOY. Yes. + +Mr. CURRY. I think the reason it was when they found out at the Texas +School Book Depository that this employee when they were checking +employees and they found out this employee was missing, that they +presumed he must or could have had some connection between the shooting +of the President and the fact that he was not present at this time. + +Mr. McCLOY. Can you describe the mechanics or the machinery by which +this did get on to, this material on to the broadcast, that is---- + +Mr. BALL. Could I go off the record on it? + +(Discussion off the record.) + +Mr. CURRY. No, sir; other than, I am sure that someone put it over a +police radio to our dispatcher and he put it then, he broadcast it. + +Mr. McCLOY. That is someone on the scene would presumably communicate +with headquarters? + +Mr. CURRY. With the dispatcher. He would rebroadcast it to all units. + +Mr. McCLOY. And he would rebroadcast it to all the units? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes. + +Mr. DULLES. You have given us, I think, an estimate or approximate +estimate of the number of officers you thought that knew Ruby, and I +believe it was about 25 out of the whole force. + +Mr. CURRY. This is just--I mean this is not--I couldn't say this was +a real accurate number, but I am just presuming from just talking to +people in the department. I would say that certainly no more than 50 +men knew anything about him at all. + +Mr. DULLES. Have you made any effort to find out and run down these men +that did know? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. DULLES. You have? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. DULLES. And how many have you actually discovered did know Ruby +from that investigation? + +Mr. CURRY. I don't have the exact number, but I am guessing it probably +would be 25 or 30 men. + +Mr. DULLES. Twenty-five men whom you have interrogated with regard to +their association with Ruby? + +Mr. CURRY. That knew him in some capacity. That knew him in some +capacity. + +Mr. DULLES. Mr. Rankin, do we have depositions on this point? + +Mr. RANKIN. We have inquired of everyone deposed as to what he knew +about Jack Ruby, what acquaintance, any prior connections. + +Mr. DULLES. You mean all the police officers who were---- + +Mr. RANKIN. Who were interrogated, but, of course, we didn't cover any +1,200 men. + +Mr. DULLES. Did you cover all those that were present that morning? + +Mr. CURRY. I believe we asked anyone in the police department who knew +Ruby to let us know about it. And then I think anyone that knew him, +the names were turned over to those people here. We covered all that +such an inquiry would reveal but we didn't purport to cover--well, we +covered something like a hundred out of 1,200. + +We requested by departmental order any police officer who knew Jack +Ruby make it known to us, and then he was interrogated about it. + +Mr. RANKIN. Of those interrogated that would probably include all of +those present the day of the shooting of Oswald, the morning of the +shooting of Oswald at the time of the transfer? + +Mr. CURRY. I believe it would. + +Mr. RANKIN. All that we knew were present at all, and beyond that, too, +have been interrogated. + +Mr. CURRY. Yes. + +Mr. McCLOY. When Officer 78, that is Tippit was directed to the Oak +Cliff area that was simply because the Oak Cliff area was sort of a +center of activity at that point? + +Mr. CURRY. At that time. + +Mr. McCLOY. It wasn't--it wasn't because you were trying to or had any +idea that the suspect might have been there? + +Mr. CURRY. Not from the Presidential shooting, but we were sure that +the suspect in the Officer Tippit shooting was in the central area. + +Mr. McCLOY. But Tippit was still alive on the first direction to him to +go out there? + +Mr. CURRY. That was because some of the squad had been moved out of the +Oak Cliff into the Dallas area. You see, this is across the river. + +Mr. McCLOY. What is the Oak Cliff area? + +Mr. RANKIN. I think that ought to be clarified. Chief Curry, wasn't +your testimony that Tippit was in the Oak Cliff area of Dallas? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes. + +Mr. RANKIN. And then he was directed to move to the central Oak Cliff +area? + +Mr. CURRY. That is correct. + +Mr. RANKIN. Move in closer, and so he was in it, his regular beat, as I +understand it, was in the Oak Cliff area, isn't that right? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes. + +Mr. RANKIN. And is Oak Cliff a suburb or what is it? + +Mr. CURRY. It is not exactly a suburb, but it is physically separated. +It used to be a separate municipality and some years ago---- + +Mr. RANKIN. Where does it lie? + +Mr. CURRY. It lies west of Dallas proper and across the Trinity River +and the only means of going to Oak Cliff, going to and from Oak Cliff +is by means of viaduct so there is a physical separation between Oak +Cliff and Dallas, and some of the squads had been pulled out of the Oak +Cliff area and to come over to the Elm and Houston area to assist in +the investigation of this shooting, and it would be normal procedure as +squads go out of an area for the squads further out to move in in the +event something does happen in this area they would have a squad that +wouldn't be so far removed from it. + +Mr. DULLES. This direction had nothing to do with any suspicion that +you might have had that the assassin might be going into this area? + +Mr. CURRY. No, sir; none at all. + +Mr. DULLES. It was purely a maneuver to cover an area which had been +evacuated or been left uncovered because of the assassination and the +reassignment of squads? + +Mr. CURRY. The reassignment of squads, that is right. + +Mr. McCLOY. Because of the withdrawal of people of the Oak Cliff area +into the Houston Street area? + +Mr. CURRY. That is correct. So we pulled some of the squads further +assigned to the area into the most central area to cover anything that +might happen so they would be in position to go out or come in. + +Mr. McCLOY. That does clear it up. + +Mr. RANKIN. Will you tell us on the record what was normal procedure +that you just spoke about? + +Mr. CURRY. Normal procedure would be when we have a great number of +squads on assignment in an area, in their particular district, as +squads go out of service, say they are checking out, to haul prisoners +into the jails or they are on calls, it just is automatic they are +instructed in school when they go to school if the adjoining squad goes +out of service, doesn't stay, say he adjoins you on the east, don't +go to the far west side of your district, go to the east side of your +district where you could be on the west side of his district, so if +something else occurs in his district you would be in a position to +answer the call. + +Ordinarily it is not necessary for us to, so that squads go to getting +out of service, to go and rearrange squads. + +In this particular instance, when he asked 81 and 78 if they were in +central Oak Cliff they said yes, but they were moving there because +this would be a normal thing to do, to move into an area where other +squads had gone out of service. + +Mr. RANKIN. You told us about your efforts to try to determine whether +subversive groups or groups that might have an interest in making +trouble for a trip of the President were going to try to do anything. +Would you tell us what you did about that in more detail? + +Mr. CURRY. I gave you a copy of this, and I would like to read it for +the record, if you would like me to. + +Mr. RANKIN. We will offer that. + +Mr. CURRY. All right. + +This is a copy of a report submitted to me by Lieutenant Jack Revill, +criminal intelligence section of the special service bureau. + +Mr. RANKIN. I will hand you Exhibit No. 710 and ask you if that isn't a +copy of what you are referring to. + +Mr. CURRY. Yes; it is. + +Mr. RANKIN. You won't have to read that. Chief, if you will just +describe in a general way what was done that you know about and then I +will offer that to show what it proves. + +Mr. CURRY. In essence, this report says prior to the announcement of +the President's visit, there were rumors he would visit Dallas and +because of these rumors the intelligence section increased its efforts +in attempting to get data concerning not only extremists and subversive +groups. + +Mr. RANKIN. How do they do that? + +Mr. CURRY. They usually have an informant inside the organization. +Sometimes it may be one of our own men. + +Mr. RANKIN. I see. + +That was with regard to the persons listed on that Exhibit 710? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes. + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you know of any other efforts besides that? + +Mr. CURRY. No, sir; these are all that I know of except we did in one +instance go to the cities outside of Dallas, towns outside of Dallas +to talk to some people that had rumored that they would do something +to embarrass the President. These organizations are listed as the Ku +Klux Klan, the Indignant White Citizens Council, National States Rights +Party, the John Birch Society, Dallas White Citizens Council, Oak Cliff +White Citizens Council, General Walker group, American Opinion Forum, +Dallas Committee for Full Citizenship, Young Peoples Socialist League, +Dallas Civil Liberties Union, Texas White Citizens Council, and Black +Muslims. + +Mr. RANKIN. I will hand you Exhibit 709 which you have furnished us +this morning, and ask you, can you tell us how you got that exhibit? + +Mr. CURRY. This exhibit was a report that was submitted to me from Jack +Revill, who is a lieutenant, in the criminal intelligence section. + +Mr. RANKIN. That is the same man who is referred to in Exhibit 710? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes, it is; their assignment is to keep track of these +groups that we have talked about, possible subversive or extremist +groups and try to know something about their plans, their movements. + +Mr. RANKIN. How did you get that information described in Exhibit 709? + +Mr. CURRY. It was given to me on November 22d at 2:50 p.m., or shortly +thereafter, but I mean the information came to him at that time, and he +passed it on to me, later that day. + +Mr. RANKIN. Would you tell us how you secured Exhibit 711? + +Mr. CURRY. This is a report from Officer V. J. Brian, B-r-i-a-n, who +is a detective in the criminal intelligence section, and was present +when Lieutenant Revill, when the information submitted was given to +Lieutenant Revill. + +Mr. RANKIN. I would like to offer Exhibits 709, 710, and 711. + +Mr. DULLES. They will be admitted. + +(The documents referred to were marked Commission Exhibit Nos. 709, +710, and 711 for identification and received in evidence.) + +Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Chairman, I think we should have a recess now until 2 +o'clock. + +Mr. McCLOY. One more question. + +Was there any talk that you heard around before the, after the +apprehension of Oswald and his time set for his removal from police +headquarters to the jail, was there any talk that you heard in the +corridors or elsewhere about lynching or possible lynching? + +Mr. CURRY. No, sir. The only information I had was that the FBI, +someone from the FBI passed the information to the city hall during the +night that they had had a call that said, I believe the FBI sent this +call, that there was a group of 100 who would take that prisoner away +from us before he got to the county jail. + +Mr. McCLOY. But this came from outside the jail? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes; outside. + +Mr. McCLOY. You never heard any threats uttered within the jail? + +Mr. CURRY. No. + +Mr. DULLES. Another general question: Have you any comments or anything +you would like to say about the cooperation between the Dallas police, +the Secret Service, and the FBI during this period immediately +following, prior to and immediately following the assassination? + +Mr. CURRY. No, sir. We have always had the best of cooperation between +both of these Federal units, and all other units of the Federal and +State government. I feel sure that they thought this information was +important to us, they probably would have given it to us. But we +certainly have not had any trouble with the FBI or with the Secret +Service in any of our past associations. + +Mr. DULLES. I was going a little further. I mean, was the cooperation +whole-hearted and open and frank as far as you could tell? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes, sir; as far as I could tell, it was. + +Mr. DULLES. Was there any problem created because of the possible--not +conflict of authority, but question as to who had responsibility of +particular areas here as between you as chief of police and the Secret +Service and the FBI? + +Mr. CURRY. Prior to the President's visit, no; there was nothing there. + +Mr. DULLES. Prior to or subsequent to? + +Mr. CURRY. Now, subsequent to that, we felt this, that this was a +murder that had been committed in the county, city and county of +Dallas, and that we had prior, I mean we had jurisdiction over this. +The FBI actually had no jurisdiction over it, the Secret Service +actually had no jurisdiction over it. But in an effort to cooperate +with these agencies we went all out to do whatever they wanted us +to do that we could do to let them observe what was taking place, +but actually we knew that this was a case that happened in Dallas, +Tex., and would have to be tried in Dallas, Tex., and it was our +responsibility to gather the evidence and present the evidence. + +We kept getting calls from the FBI. They wanted this evidence up in +Washington, in the laboratory, and there was some discussion, Fritz +told me, he says, "Well, I need the evidence here, I need to get some +people to try to identify the gun, to try to identify this pistol and +these things, and if it is in Washington how can I do it?" + +But we finally, the night, about midnight of Friday night, we agreed to +let the FBI have all the evidence and they said they would bring it to +their laboratory and they would have an agent stand by and when they +were finished with it to return it to us. + +Mr. DULLES. An agent of the police force, you mean? + +Mr. CURRY. An agent of the FBI. + +Mr. DULLES. FBI? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes. + +Mr. DULLES. There was no agent of the Dallas police that went to +Washington with the evidence? + +Mr. CURRY. Not to my knowledge. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did that work out all right so far? + +Mr. CURRY. Well, not exactly, because they were to give us pictures of +everything that was brought to Washington, and Fritz tells me that some +of these little items that it was very poor reproduction of some of the +items on microfilm. + +Subsequently they photographed these things in Washington and sent us +copies, some 400, I think, 400 copies of different items. So far as I +know, we have never received any of that evidence back. It is still in +Washington, I guess. + +Perhaps the Commission has it. + +Mr. RANKIN. Yes; the Commission is still working with it. + +Mr. CURRY. Yes. + +Mr. RANKIN. But apparently the FBI tried to carry out their agreement +with you, didn't they? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes; they did. + +Mr. RANKIN. And it is a question of whether or not their reproductions +were as good as you would like to have? + +Mr. CURRY. There were made, some of them, in the office down in Dallas, +they were in a tremendous hurry to get all of these items to the +laboratory here in Washington, and our only concern was this, that if +this case is tried in Dallas, we need the evidence to be presented here +in a court in Dallas and we were a little bit apprehensive about it if +it gets to Washington will it be available to us when we need it. If we +need somebody to identify, attempt to identify the gun or other items +will it be here for them to see? + +And that was our only concern. + +We got several calls insisting we send this, and nobody would tell me +exactly who it was that was insisting, "just say I got a call from +Washington, and they wanted this evidence up there," insinuated it was +someone in high authority that was requesting this, and we finally +agreed as a matter of trying to cooperate with them, actually. + +Mr. DULLES. Have you any more questions? + +Mr. McCLOY. Not at this stage. + +Mr. RANKIN. Shall we convene at 2? + +Mr. DULLES. Mr. Murray, do you have any? + +Mr. MURRAY. No, thank you. + +(Whereupon, at 12:45 p.m., the President's Commission recessed.) + + + + +Afternoon Session + +TESTIMONY OF JESSE EDWARD CURRY RESUMED + + +The President's Commission reconvened at 2 p.m. + +Mr. McCLOY. (presiding). We are ready. + +Mr. RANKIN. Chief Curry, I was asking you just as we closed your +examination before lunch about Exhibits 709, 711 particularly, and you +will recall those are the documents concerning the conversation between +Agent Hosty of the FBI and Jack Revill who is your lieutenant of +criminal intelligence section, is that right? + +Mr. CURRY. It was reported to me, I was given a report to that effect. + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you know anything about the matters described in those +letters? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes. + +Mr. RANKIN. Will you tell us what you know about them? Do you want to +see them? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes. One of the documents tells me that Lieutenant Revill +states that about 2:50 p.m. on the 22d---- + +Mr. RANKIN. Of what? + +Mr. CURRY. November 1963, that he met Special Agent Jim Hosty of the +FBI in the basement of the city hall, and at that time Agent Hosty +related to Revill that the subject, Oswald, was a member of the +Communist Party, and that he was residing in Dallas. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you make any further inquiry after you got that +information? + +Mr. CURRY. None other than I had a report from V. J. Brian, a detective +in criminal intelligence, who was present at the time this conversation +took place. + +Mr. RANKIN. That later report was as of April 20? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes. + +Mr. RANKIN. 1964? + +Mr. CURRY. The last report. + +Mr. RANKIN. What was the occasion for that? + +Mr. CURRY. I just asked Revill if anyone was with him at the time, and +he recalled that Detective Brian was at the time. + +Mr. RANKIN. Otherwise, did you know anything more about that matter? + +Mr. CURRY. No, sir; I believe Captain Fritz said that he, he told me he +knew they had been out to talk to Mrs. Paine. + +Mr. RANKIN. By they, who do you mean? + +Mr. CURRY. Some of the FBI agents, and that he did know that Oswald +apparently knew Hosty, because Hosty was present in the interrogation +room. + +Mr. RANKIN. By he there at that point who do you mean? + +Mr. CURRY. Oswald. + +Mr. RANKIN. Yes; but you say he knew. + +Mr. CURRY. That Oswald knew Hosty. + +Mr. RANKIN. Yes. + +Mr. CURRY. Because according to Fritz he said that he was quite bitter, +Oswald was quite bitter toward Hosty because he had made the statement +that "you mistreated my wife." + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you know how Captain Fritz learned that? + +Mr. CURRY. He was in Captain Fritz's office when this statement was +made, according to Captain Fritz. + +Mr. RANKIN. Now, after the assassination, did you give any orders of +your staff, making any reports about anything they knew about either +the assassination or the Tippit killing? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes, sir; we had all of our officers who knew anything at +all about it to submit reports which is a normal procedure in any +unusual incident. + +Mr. RANKIN. How did you direct that that be done? + +Mr. CURRY. Just through my staff. + +Mr. RANKIN. Was that in writing? + +Mr. CURRY. No, sir. + +Mr. RANKIN. You just told them? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. RANKIN. And was that direction promptly given? + +Mr. CURRY. I am sure it was passed on immediately. All orders are. + +Mr. RANKIN. How soon after the assassination? + +Mr. CURRY. I would say probably within the next day after we met and we +decided that an investigation should be conducted into all phases of +this. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you give any directions about furnishing information +immediately about what anyone knew about the killing of Oswald? + +Mr. CURRY. No specific directions. After Oswald was killed, I called +and I talked with Deputy Chief Stevenson of the criminal investigation +division the next morning of the next day, I believe this was Monday, +and we decided we should appoint an investigative group. + +Mr. RANKIN. Who was that? + +Mr. CURRY. That was Inspector Sawyer, headed by Inspector Sawyer. + +Mr. RANKIN. Who else? + +Mr. CURRY. And Captain O. A. Jones, and then I think they had some +lieutenants assigned to it and some detectives. Their assignment was to +find out every person who was present in or around the city hall at the +time that Lee Oswald was killed, and to get a report from them. + +I know Lieutenant Revill was also in on this, and then they would also, +in addition to getting a report, they would personally interrogate each +one of them to see whether or not any information they had knowledge of +might be left out of the reports. + +And you have a copy of all of these reports, both the reports the +officers made, the additional interrogation made by members of this +investigating group. + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you know whether they inquired as to the knowledge of +any of these people about conversations with Ruby immediately after the +shooting of Oswald? + +Mr. CURRY. I believe they have some reports to that effect. + +Mr. RANKIN. Was that a part of their responsibility to get those +reports? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes; anything that they had, that they could get regarding +this. + +Mr. RANKIN. And you would expect the police officers to tell anything +they knew at once? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. RANKIN. So far as you know has all of that information been +supplied to the Commission? + +Mr. CURRY. So far as I know. + +Mr. RANKIN. It has? + +Mr. CURRY. So far as I know it has been supplied. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you learn about the claims of some police officers that +Ruby had said something about the killing to them shortly after killing +Oswald? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes. + +Mr. RANKIN. When did you first learn that? + +Mr. CURRY. I don't recall exactly, the exact date that I learned of +this. But I think the first time it came to my knowledge was that Agent +Sorrels of the Secret Service, sometime after this told me, he said, +"Now Chief, I don't know that, they could--that I could testify to +this," but he said, "immediately after Oswald was shot, I went to his +cell"---- + +Mr. RANKIN. Whose cell? + +Mr. CURRY. To Oswald's--I mean to Ruby's cell, "and I went in and +talked to him, told him who I was, and"---- + +Mr. RANKIN. Was anyone else present? + +Mr. CURRY. There was a patrolman and a guard, I think, and perhaps a +detective. + +Mr. RANKIN. Who were they? + +Mr. CURRY. I believe Dean was present, Sergeant Dean, I don't know who +these officers were but it is revealed in these reports that have been +made. + +Mr. RANKIN. Yes. + +Mr. CURRY. Sorrels told me, he said, "I asked Ruby why he did it and he +said somebody had to kill the son-of-a-bitch and the police department +couldn't do it." + +I believe he also said, "I couldn't think, stand the thought of having +Jacqueline Kennedy having to return to Dallas and go through a trial +for him." I told him this was not for the Secret Service or not for +publication, I just asked him the question but he said, "I did not warn +him against himself, about his constitutional rights, so I don't know +that I would be allowed to testify to this." + +Mr. RANKIN. When did Sorrels first tell you that? + +Mr. CURRY. This was the--it seems to me like several days after this +occurred. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you report that to anyone? + +Mr. CURRY. I believe I told Chief Stevenson about it or whoever was--or +perhaps Captain or Inspector Sawyer or some of them. This information +was relayed on to the investigating group. + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you know whether they recorded it any place? + +Mr. CURRY. No; we called the officers, when I say we, the investigating +team did talk with the officers and they recall hearing this testimony. + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you know when they first gave you any information that +they knew of any such conversation? + +Mr. CURRY. I don't recall that; no, sir. + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you recall that the officers ever said to you or placed +in writing in any memorandum or communication to you that they heard +Ruby say anything beyond what you have described Mr. Sorrels to say? + +Mr. CURRY. No, sir. + +Mr. RANKIN. If your records show that the first time any such +information was communicated to you, was around February 18, 1964, +would you think that was a correct record? + +Mr. CURRY. Perhaps it is. When Sorrels, if that is when he says it is +when it was, perhaps that is when it was. But this was prior to Ruby's +trial that I know that he came forward with this information and he +said, "It is possible they can use this testimony in the trial of +Ruby", but he didn't feel like that he could testify to it because he +had not warned him of his constitutional rights. + +But that these officers were present, and if they overheard it, then he +said, "You ought to at least talk to Henry Wade about it and he might +be able to get that in his testimony on that basis." + +Mr. RANKIN. You think that Dean was one of the officers involved who +overheard it? + +Mr. CURRY. I believe he was. + +Mr. RANKIN. And who else? + +Mr. CURRY. I don't recall now. It is in our reports. + +Mr. RANKIN. Was the officer Archer? + +Mr. CURRY. I believe Officer Archer was there. + +Mr. RANKIN. Was it Officer Newcomb? + +Mr. CURRY. I believe so. + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you believe whether they testified to something like +that at the trial? + +Mr. CURRY. I was not present during the trial but I understand they did +testify. + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you know whether or not those officers made a report +about what they knew about the killing of Oswald prior to February 18? + +Mr. CURRY. I don't believe they did. + +Mr. RANKIN. You don't think they made any report to you or to the FBI +or anybody else? + +Mr. CURRY. Not to my knowledge. + +Mr. RANKIN. So if they did not include such information in any report +or statement prior to February 18, 1964, you don't know it? + +Mr. CURRY. That is correct, I do not know it. + +Mr. McCLOY. May I ask, when was, has there been testimony as to when +Agent Sorrels told the chief that he had heard this? + +Mr. RANKIN. I don't recall the date. + +Mr. CURRY. But it was--I don't recall the date but it was sometime +after the shooting of Oswald. + +Mr. RANKIN. Was it 1 day or 2 days? + +Mr. CURRY. It was several days but it was prior to the trial of Jack +Ruby. + +Mr. RANKIN. Was it a week later? + +Mr. CURRY. I would say perhaps it was more than a week later, it was +several weeks, I would say, but prior to the trial, Sorrels talked to +me and he said that this may be important in a trial of the case. + +"Some of the things that Ruby told me immediately following the +shooting of Oswald," and he said, "I don't think I can testify to +it, but you might talk to Mr. Wade and he might be able to get the +testimony entered because these officers were not talking they just +overheard the conversation." + +Mr. McCLOY. This was a substantial period after the date? + +Mr. CURRY. The assassination. + +Mr. McCLOY. The date of the assassination? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. McCLOY. And the date that Sorrels was alleged to have heard this +from Ruby? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. RANKIN. Was it before or after Christmas? + +Mr. CURRY. I believe it was after Christmas. I just couldn't be sure +because I was not---- + +Mr. RANKIN. Where did the conversation occur? + +Mr. CURRY. On the telephone. + +Mr. RANKIN. Was anybody present? + +Mr. CURRY. No, sir. + +Mr RANKIN. Did you make a written record of the information? + +Mr. CURRY. No, sir; I just told Chief Stevenson, who is in charge of +criminal investigation, to attempt to determine who was present at that +time; that Oswald was--I mean that Ruby was talking to Sorrels, and to +see what they heard at that time, which they did, and the officers then +made a report. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you tell Chief Stevenson at that time what Sorrels had +told you? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you know whether he made any record of it? + +Mr. CURRY. I doubt that he did. + +Mr. RANKIN. You haven't tried to find out? + +Mr. CURRY. No, sir; I haven't. + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you have any practice in the police force about +recording statements by the accused in first-degree murder cases? + +Mr. CURRY. No, sir. + +Mr. RANKIN. Now changing to another subject, do you recall--you said +that you had made some comments upon the evidence in regard to Oswald +and to the media--do you recall what you said about that? + +Mr. CURRY. I believe I told them it had been reported that we had an +FBI report that they had been able to trace that weapon where he had +ordered it from Chicago, and it had been picked up under the name of +Hidell and that the handwriting was the same on the order blank as +Oswald's. + +Mr. RANKIN. Was this told to a news conference or over the TV? + +Mr. CURRY. Well, the TV was there. It was not a news conference. I was +walking down the hall, and they surrounded me. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you tell them anything else about the evidence you had +against Oswald? + +Mr. CURRY. I only told them I believed that we had some other evidence, +but I didn't tell them what it was. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you ever tell them any more about the evidence that you +had against Oswald? + +Mr. CURRY. I don't believe so; I don't recall it. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you ever tell them about the evidence you had against +Oswald concerning the Tippit shooting? + +Mr. CURRY. No, sir; I don't believe I made any comment. + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you know about when this was made, these statements were +made about the evidence? + +Mr. CURRY. I believe this was on Friday, the 22d, during the late +evening. + +Mr. RANKIN. Is it a common practice for you or someone for the police +department to tell about the evidence that you had? + +Mr. CURRY. It wouldn't be an uncommon practice. There is no law against +it. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you often do it then? + +Mr. CURRY. Well, I would say this was not really unusual. It might +be--this was an exceptional case; ordinarily I am not involved in +these investigations or in making statements, but this would not be an +unusual thing to say. + +Mr. RANKIN. Someone from the police department often does it; is that +right? + +Mr. CURRY. Well, frequently, if they are asked about it. + +Mr. RANKIN. Do you know whether it is possible to monitor conversations +between the prisoner and the visitor on the intercom? + +Mr. CURRY. Not by intercom. It would be--they are brought into--when a +prisoner is brought in to visit with an attorney or a relative he is +placed on one side of a wall and the prisoner--I mean the visitor--on +the other side, but we don't have any means of recording this. They +talk through by telephone. There is a glass that separates them. + +Mr. RANKIN. Did you monitor any conversations between Lee Oswald and +his brother Robert, or Lee Oswald and Marina at any time? + +Mr. CURRY. I did not, and I don't know of any. We don't have any way of +doing it. I mean we have no setup for doing this. + +Mr. RANKIN. You don't know of any that was done? + +Mr. CURRY. No, sir; I do not. + +Mr. RANKIN. In regard to arrangements, do you know the Texas law as to +how soon after an arrest an arraignment is required? + +Mr. CURRY. Excuse me now; I am not an attorney. + +Mr. RANKIN. Yes. + +Mr. CURRY. It is my understanding that, so far in Texas, being brought +immediately before a magistrate would be during the normal course of +that court's business. + +Mr. RANKIN. Your law---- + +Mr. CURRY. When they are in session. + +Mr. RANKIN. Your law says he shall be brought immediately. + +Mr. CURRY. Immediately, but it has been---- + +Mr. RANKIN. But in interpretation you ordinarily follow a practice +of---- + +Mr. CURRY. During the normal course of the court's business. This was +actually unusual because this type of arraignment--because usually it +would have been later than this, but we were trying to take whatever +precautions we could to see that he was given his--we were not +violating his civil rights. That is the reason that we did arraign him +in the city hall. Ordinarily we would have taken him before a court. + +Mr. RANKIN. I didn't understand you to say that the justice of the +peace told him he had a right to counsel or said anything about that. + +Mr. CURRY. I don't recall whether he did or whether he did not. He read +all this to him. + +Mr. RANKIN. That is, he read the complaint to him? + +Mr. CURRY. The complaint, and I don't recall what all he said to him. + +Mr. RANKIN. So, according to the practice in Texas at the time that +he was taken for arraignment would have been the usual practice or a +little earlier? + +Mr. CURRY. A little earlier, actually. + +Mr. McCLOY. Were you present at any investigation or interrogation of +Ruby? + +Mr. CURRY. No, sir; I was not. + +Mr. McCLOY. Did you hear any further elaboration of this charge that +Oswald made that Hosty had mistreated his wife; what was the nature of +the mistreatment? + +Mr. CURRY. I was not present when this happened. This was told to me, I +think Captain Fritz told me this, and he seemed to gather that he had +more or less sort of browbeat her in interrogating her is what Fritz, +the impression that Fritz got. + +Mr. McCLOY. When was that? Do you have any reason to know--Captain +Fritz will perhaps tell us about it--as to when that interrogation of +Hosty and Mrs. Oswald took place? + +Mr. CURRY. No, sir. + +Mr. McCLOY. You don't take normally any tape recordings of witnesses' +examinations? + +Mr. CURRY. No, sir. + +Mr. McCLOY. I guess that is all, except the general question I have +of Chief Curry. Do you know anything else with respect to this whole +matter that you think would be of any help to this Commission in +getting at the facts? + +Mr. CURRY. Not that I know of, except to say we were extremely sorry +that, of course, this thing happened in Dallas. We thought we were +taking every normal precaution that we could take to insure the safety +of the President in cooperating with the Secret Service and all other +agencies and we felt like we had done a good job. + +After the assassination and the murder of our officer, that our +officers had done a good job in making a quick apprehension of the +alleged person guilty of this, and that we will have to admit that +although we thought that adequate precautions had been taken for the +transfer of this prisoner, that one of our officers momentarily stepped +away from his post of duty, and that during this moment of negligence +on his part, as far as we could determine Ruby went down the ramp, the +Main Street ramp, and concealed himself behind some news media and +detectives and as Oswald was brought out he stepped forward and shot +him. + +And if we had it to do over again, and I think this, that some policy +should be set up for the news media, whereby if anything of this +magnitude ever occurs again, that we would not be plagued by the +confusion present that was present at that time, and that the news +media should accept some of the responsibility for these things and +agree among themselves to have representatives that can report back to +them. + +Mr. RANKIN. Chief Curry, I am not quite clear about the situation with +regard to your practices in the police force, and the news media. +I understand what happened, as you described it at the time of the +episodes that we have been going into, and I understand that you would, +if there was a matter of this magnitude again--you would expect and +want a very different change? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes. + +Mr. RANKIN. And eliminate the interference by the news media? + +Mr. CURRY. That is right. + +Mr. RANKIN. But what do you do now about the ordinary case? Have you +changed your practices about the media at all? + +Mr. CURRY. Not the ordinary cases; no. + +Mr. RANKIN. And do they use the radio and TV in the police headquarters? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes, sir; they do. + +Mr. RANKIN. And they, the reporters, come in, and it is just the +difference between a great many? + +Mr. CURRY. And a few is what made the difference in this. + +Mr. McCLOY. Do you permit reporters now to come in and interrogate +prisoners as they did in this case by holding a microphone up to their +mouth and saying, "How did you do it?" + +Mr. CURRY. They do the same as they do here; on the way from the +interrogation room to the jail elevator as they pass by they might run +along and ask him questions and try to get him to answer. + +Mr. RANKIN. That could be done today just the same? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes, sir. Because we have no way of keeping them out of the +public halls. + +Mr. RANKIN. Don't you have jurisdiction as chief of police to exclude +them if you thought it was the wise thing to do? + +Mr. CURRY. Yes. Now if I had it to do over again, of course, I would +exclude it. + +Mr. RANKIN. And you could do it today in the ordinary case if you +wanted to? + +Mr. CURRY. I would probably have my hide taken off by the news media, +but I could do it. + +Mr. RANKIN. So, it is really a problem of weighing what the media will +do to you against other considerations? + +Mr. CURRY. And this, too; it seemed like there was a great demand by +the general public to know what was going on. + +Mr. RANKIN. Yes. And that is what you were trying to satisfy? + +Mr. CURRY. That is what I was trying to do. + +Mr. RANKIN. Those are all the questions. + +Mr. McCLOY. I don't think I have anything else. + +Mr. RANKIN. Thank you very much, Chief, for all of your help. + +Mr. CURRY. Thank you for your consideration. + +Mr. RANKIN. I want to offer the Exhibits 701 through 708, both +inclusive. + +Mr. McCLOY. They may be admitted. + +(Commission Exhibits Nos. 701 through 708 were received in evidence.) + + +TESTIMONY OF J. W. FRITZ + +Mr. McCLOY. You know the purpose of what we are here for, captain? + +Mr. FRITZ. I think so. + +Mr. McCLOY. We have a very broad mandate to look into all the +circumstances relating to these unfortunate incidents that occurred in +Dallas on November 22 last year, and thereafter. + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. + +Mr. McCLOY. And we have had Chief Curry on this morning, as I am sure +you understand, and we would like to continue our investigation through +you. We understand that you were in very direct contact with this +problem of investigation, and I will ask you to stand and raise your +right hand, sir. + +Do you solemnly swear the testimony you will give in this hearing will +be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you +God? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. Will you state your name, please? + +Mr. FRITZ. J. W. Fritz. + +Mr. BALL. Where do you live? + +Mr. FRITZ. I live in Dallas. + +Mr. BALL. Could you tell us something about yourself; tell us where you +were born and what your education is and what your training has been as +a police officer? + +Mr. FRITZ. I was born in Dublin, Tex., and lived there for several +years. My father moved to New Mexico, and I grew up at Lake Arthur, N. +Mex. And then I came back to Texas, and came to the police department +in January of 1921, and have been there ever since. + +Mr. BALL. You started as a patrolman, did you, in the Dallas Police +Department? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I started as a patrolman, worked as a patrolman +approximately 2 years, I am not sure of the exact time and I was then +moved to the detectives' office and have come up through the ranks +there, up and down. + +Mr. BALL. You are now a captain of police, are you? + +Mr. FRITZ. Captain of homicide and robbery bureau; yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. How long have you held that office? + +Mr. FRITZ. Since it was set up, I believe, in 1932 or 1933, I am not +sure. + +Mr. BALL. You have been head of homicide and robbery detail since 1932 +or 1933? + +Mr. FRITZ. That is right. I have had other jobs, too. One time I had +the whole CID; they didn't call it CID at that time; they called it +detectives' office, but I kept the homicide and robbery under my +supervision during that time. I later went back with the homicide and +robbery, full time. + +Mr. BALL. Is there a division of detectives separate from homicide and +robbery? + +Mr. FRITZ. Well, we call it now the CID. It would be ordinarily called +the detective division; yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. Who is in charge of that? + +Mr. FRITZ. Who is in charge of it? + +Mr. BALL. Yes. + +Mr. FRITZ. Of course, we are all directly under the chief, and Chief +Stevenson is the head of the CID, M. W. Stevenson. + +Mr. BALL. Have you had any special training in police schools or places +like that? + +Mr. FRITZ. Well, of course, I have had a good many years of experience, +and I attempted, I still go to school to our police schools, and I now +attend seminars at different places, Oklahoma University and Texas +University and go to most any training school that is available. + +Mr. BALL. On November 22, 1963, you had been told the President or +before November 22, 1963, you had been told that the President was +coming to Dallas? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. And had you taken certain precautions for his safety? + +Mr. FRITZ. Well, we had taken some precautions but those were changed. +We were told in the beginning that we would be in the parade directly +behind it, I don't know whether it was the second or third car, but the +Vice President's car, that we would be directly behind that, and we did +make preparation for that. + +But at 10 o'clock the night before the parade, Chief Stevenson called +me at home and told me that had been changed, and I was assigned with +two of my officers to the speakers' stand at the Trade Mart. + +Mr. BALL. Was most of your work out at the Trade Mart that day? + +Mr. FRITZ. Well, we didn't have a great deal of work to do there, other +than check the speakers' stand and make a check to see if everything +was all right before the President got there. He would have been there +in 10 more minutes. + +Mr. BALL. Did you check the waiters who had been hired? + +Mr. FRITZ. That wasn't my job. + +Mr. BALL. Someone else did? + +Mr. FRITZ. Someone else did; yes. + +Mr. BALL. How many men did you have assigned? + +Mr. FRITZ. Where? + +Mr. BALL. With you at the Trade Mart. + +Mr. FRITZ. Two. + +Mr. BALL. Who were they? + +Mr. FRITZ. Detectives Sims and Boyd. + +Mr. BALL. And they are both homicide? + +Mr. FRITZ. Both homicide officers; yes. I had other officers assigned +to different places. I had two of my officers assigned to ride in the +car that was in front of the parade a half mile, with Chief Lumpkin. +That was Senkel and Turner. + +Mr. BALL. You were at the Trade Mart when you heard the President had +been shot? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. That was about what time you heard that? You have a little +notebook there. + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I have a notebook. + +Mr. BALL. Did you make notes as of that time? + +Mr. FRITZ. We made this, not at that time, we made this after the +tragedy. + +Mr. BALL. How long after? + +Mr. FRITZ. We started on it real soon after, and we have been working +on it ever since. + +Mr. BALL. Did somebody assist you in the preparation of that notebook? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. Who was that? + +Mr. FRITZ. I had several officers assist me with this, and some +secretaries, of course, that helped us with it. I had my lieutenant, T. +L. Baker, help me to put this book together, this larger book, I think +you have a copy of it there, and to make some additional books like +this. + +Of course, we worked the whole office ever since it happened so it is +hard to say just who helped. + +Mr. BALL. Now, the book you are talking about is a notebook that you +have with you, the book at which you are looking now? + +Mr. FRITZ. This is the book I am talking about. + +Mr. BALL. You made a formal report, didn't you, to the attorney general +of Texas? + +Mr. FRITZ. We, we didn't make it for the attorney general of Texas. +At the time we made this we were just making, we were told that we +would probably need a report for this investigation, and we started +immediately to making this. We didn't know at that time the attorney +general would need one of these but when we were told he would need one +we, of course, sent him one, too. + +Mr. BALL. What I want to do is distinguish between the books you are +looking at for this record. + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. You have a book that is of some size there? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. And you call that what? + +Mr. FRITZ. Well, "Investigation of the Assassination of President +Kennedy." + +Mr. BALL. That is the same as Commission's Document No. 81B. So, then, +you have a smaller book before you, haven't you? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes; a little index book. + +Mr. BALL. An index. + +Mr. FRITZ. It really is an index book for this larger file but it is +kind of a quick reference book. + +Mr. BALL. I see. Now, what time did you, what time was it that you +heard the President had been shot? + +Mr. FRITZ. I show that he was shot at 12:35, and one of the Secret +Service men who was assigned the same location where we were assigned, +got a little call on his, evidently got a call on his little transistor +radio and Chief Stevenson, who was also assigned to some part of the +building there, came to me and told me that the President had been hit +at the underpass, and asked me to go to the hospital and see what I +could do. + +Mr. BALL. You say you know he was shot at 12:35? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. You mean that is the time you heard about it? + +Mr. FRITZ. Well, we heard about it immediately after that, and we +arrived and we checked---- + +Mr. BALL. What time did you hear about it? + +Mr. FRITZ. Just when Chief Stevenson came to me and told me. + +Mr. BALL. Did you make a note of it at the time? + +Mr. FRITZ. No sir; I didn't make a note of it at the time. + +Mr. BALL. When you heard of this what did you do? + +Mr. FRITZ. Immediately left, and I told the two officers with me, Mr. +Sims and Boyd that we would run to our police car that was parked +nearby, listened to radio call to see whether it was a hoax or whether +it was the truth. It was only 10 minutes' time for the President's +arrival, we didn't want to leave unless this was a genuine call, and a +true call. + +When we got to the radio, of course, we began to get other news. We +went to Parkland Hospital as we had been instructed, and as we drove +up in front of the hospital, we I suppose intercepted the chief, Chief +Curry, between the curb and the hospital, and I told him we had had a +call to the hospital but I felt we were going to the wrong place, we +should go to the scene of the crime and he said, "Well, go ahead," so I +don't think our car ever quit rolling but we went right to the scene of +the crime. + +Mr. BALL. Did you go directly to a building? + +Mr. FRITZ. Directly to the Texas School Book Depository Building. + +Mr. BALL. What time did you arrive there? + +Mr. FRITZ. Well, sir; we arrived there--we arrived at the hospital at +12:45, if you want that time, and at the scene of the offense at 12:58. + +Mr. BALL. 12:58; the Texas School Book Depository Building. + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes. + +Mr. BALL. Were there any officers there at the time? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. In the front? + +Mr. FRITZ. Several officers; yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. Do you know who they were? + +Mr. FRITZ. I couldn't give you the name of all of them. + +Mr. BALL. What did you do when you got to this building? + +Mr. FRITZ. Some officer told us they thought he was in that building, +so we had our guns---- + +Mr. McCLOY. Thought who was in the building? + +Mr. FRITZ. The man who did the shooting was in the building. So, we, +of course, took our shotguns and immediately entered the building and +searched the building to see if we could find him. + +Mr. BALL. Were there guards on the doors of the building at that time? + +Mr. FRITZ. I am not sure, but I don't--there has been some question +about that, but the reason I don't think that--this may differ with +someone else, but I am going to tell you what I know. + +Mr. BALL. All right. + +Mr. McCLOY. By all means. + +Mr. FRITZ. After I arrived one of the officers asked me if I would like +to have the building sealed and I told him I would. + +Mr. BALL. What officer was that? + +Mr. FRITZ. That is a uniformed officer, but I don't know what his +name was, he was outside, of course, I went upstairs and I don't know +whether he did because I couldn't watch him. + +Mr. BALL. Then what did you do? + +Mr. FRITZ. We began searching the floors, looking for anyone with a gun +or looked suspicious, and we searched through hurriedly through most +all the floors. + +Mr. McCLOY. Which floor did you start with? + +Mr. FRITZ. We started at the bottom; yes, sir. And, of course, and I +think we went up probably to the top. + +Different people would call me when they would find something that +looked like something I should know about and I ran back and forth from +floor to floor as we were searching, and it wasn't very long until +someone called me and told me they wanted me to come to the front +window, the corner window, they had found some empty cartridges. + +Mr. BALL. That was on the sixth floor? + +Mr. FRITZ. That is right; the sixth floor, corner window. + +Mr. BALL. What did you do? + +Mr. FRITZ. I told them not to move the cartridges, not to touch +anything until we could get the crime lab to take pictures of them just +as they were lying there and I left an officer assigned there to see +that that was done, and the crime lab came almost immediately, and took +pictures, and dusted the shelfs for prints. + +Mr. BALL. Which officers, which officer did you leave there? + +Mr. FRITZ. Carl Day was the man I talked to about taking pictures. + +Mr. BALL. Day? + +Mr. FRITZ. Lieutenant Day; yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. Do you know whether he took the pictures or not? + +Mr. FRITZ. I feel like he did but I don't know because I didn't stay to +see whether he could. + +Mr. BALL. You didn't know whether he took the pictures? + +Mr. FRITZ. I went on searching the building. I just told them to +preserve that evidence and I went right ahead. + +Mr. BALL. What happened after that? + +Mr. FRITZ. A few minutes later some officer called me and said they had +found the rifle over near the back stairway and I told them same thing, +not to move it, not to touch it, not to move any of the boxes until we +could get pictures, and as soon as Lieutenant Day could get over there +he made pictures of that. + +Mr. BALL. After the pictures had been taken of the rifle what happened +then? + +Mr. FRITZ. After the pictures had been made then I ejected a live +shell, a live cartridge from the rifle. + +Mr. BALL. And who did you give that to? + +Mr. FRITZ. I believe that I kept that at that time myself. Later I gave +it to the crime lab who, in turn, turned it over to the FBI. + +Mr. BALL. Did you put any marking of yours on the empty cartridge? + +Mr. FRITZ. On that loaded cartridge? + +Mr. BALL. On that loaded cartridge. + +Mr. FRITZ. I don't know, I am not sure, I don't think so. + +Mr. BALL. Was there any conversation you heard that this rifle was a +Mauser? + +Mr. FRITZ. I heard all kinds of reports about that rifle. They called +it most everything. + +Mr. BALL. Did you hear any conversation right there that day? + +Mr. FRITZ. Right at that time? + +Mr. BALL. Yes. + +Mr. FRITZ. I just wouldn't be sure because there were so many people +talking at the same time, I might have; I am not sure whether I did or +not. + +Mr. BALL. Did you think it was a Mauser? + +Mr. FRITZ. No sir; I knew--you can read on the rifle what it was and +you could also see on the cartridge what caliber it was. + +Mr. BALL. Well, did you ever make any--did you ever say that it was a +7.65 Mauser? + +Mr. FRITZ. No sir; I am sure I did not. + +Mr. BALL. Or did you think it was such a thing? + +Mr. FRITZ. No sir; I did not. If I did, the Mauser part, I won't be too +positive about Mauser because I am not too sure about Mauser rifles +myself. But I am certainly sure that I never did give anyone any +different caliber than the one that shows on the cartridges. + +Mr. BALL. Did you initial the rifle? + +Mr. FRITZ. The rifle; no, sir. + +Mr. BALL. You didn't. Who did you give the rifle to after you ejected +this live cartridge? + +Mr. FRITZ. I believe that that rifle, I didn't take the rifle with me, +Lieutenant Day took that rifle, I believe, to the city hall, and later +I asked him to bring it down--I don't believe I ever carried that rifle +to city hall. I believe Lieutenant Day carried it to city hall, anyway +if you will ask him he can be more positive than I. + +Mr. BALL. While you were there Mr. Truly came up to you? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; where the rifle was found. That was about the +time we finished Mr. Truly came and told me that one of his employees +had left the building, and I asked his name and he gave me his name, +Lee Harvey Oswald, and I asked his address and he gave me the Irving +address. + +Mr. BALL. This was after the rifle was found? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; after the rifle was found. + +Mr. BALL. Another witness has testified that the rifle was found at +1:22 p.m., does that about accord with your figures or your memory? + +Mr. FRITZ. Let's see, I might have that here. I don't think I have that +time. + +Mr. BALL. Do you have the time at which the shells were found? + +Mr. FRITZ. No, sir; I don't have that time. + +Mr. BALL. How long did you stay there at the Texas School Book +Depository? + +Mr. McCLOY. Can I ask one question there, did you take any precautions +as to fingerprints before you ejected this? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. + +Mr. McCLOY. So in your opinion your fingerprints wouldn't show? + +Mr. FRITZ. He could have taken mine but I let him dust first before I +ejected a shell. + +Mr. BALL. How long did you stay at the Texas School Book Depository +after you found the rifle? + +Mr. FRITZ. After he told me about this man almost, I left immediately +after he told me that. + +Mr. BALL. You left almost immediately after he told you that? + +Mr. FRITZ. Almost after he told me that man, I felt it important to +hold that man. + +Mr. BALL. Did you give descriptions to Sims and Boyd? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I told them to drive me to city hall and see if +the man had a criminal record and we picked up two other officers and +my intentions were to go to the house at Irving. When I got to the city +hall, I asked, because, I will tell you why I asked because while we +were in the building we heard that our officer had been killed, someone +came in and told me, I asked when I got to my office who shot the +officer, and they told me his name was Oswald, and I said, "His full +name?" And they told me and I said, "That is the suspect we are looking +for in the President's killing." + +So, I then called some of my officers to go right quickly, and asked +them about how much evidence we had on the officer's killing and they +told me they had several eye witnesses, and they had some real good +witnesses, and I instructed them to get those witnesses over for +identification just as soon as they could, and for us to prepare a real +good case on the officer's killing so we would have a case to hold him +without bond while we investigated the President's killing where we +didn't have so many witnesses. + +Mr. BALL. Now, you instructed some other officers to go to Irving, +didn't you? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I did. + +Mr. BALL. And you told Sims and Boyd to stay with you? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I don't believe I sent them to Irving, I have the +names of the officers I sent to Irving. + +Mr. BALL. Who did you send to Irving? + +Mr. FRITZ. To Irving, Officer Stovall, Rose, and Adamcik. + +Mr. BALL. After you had done that what did you do? + +Mr. FRITZ. I sent some officers--you mean right at that time? I also +sent officers over to the Beckley address, you know, as soon as we got +there, I don't believe we had the Beckley address at this part of this +question. + +Mr. BALL. You didn't have it at that time, did you? + +Mr. FRITZ. Not right at this time, but as soon as I got to that address. + +Mr. BALL. Let's come to that a little later and we find out when you +got there. + +Mr. FRITZ. When I got there? + +Mr. BALL. Yes. What did you do after you had sent the officers to +Irving? + +Mr. FRITZ. When I started to talk to this prisoner or maybe just before +I started to talk to him, some officer told me outside of my office +that he had a room on Beckley, I don't know who that officer was, I +think we can find out, I have--since I have talked to you this morning +I have talked to Lieutenant Baker and he says I know maybe who that +officer was, but I am not sure yet. + +Mr. BALL. Some officer told you that he thought this man had a room on +Beckley? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. Had he been brought into the station by that time? + +Mr. FRITZ. He was at the station when we got there, you know. + +Mr. BALL. He was? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; so then I talked to him and I asked him where his +room was on Beckley. + +Mr. BALL. Then you started to interrogate Oswald, did you? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. And you called him into your room? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. Will you describe the interrogation room, what it looks like +and where it is located? + +Mr. FRITZ. It is on the, room 317, on the third floor of the courts +building, and it isn't a large office. I believe it is 9-1/2 feet by 14 +feet, I have the exact measurements that I think are correct. Glass all +around, and it has a door leading out into a hallway. My secretaries +are seated in the front. There is a lieutenant's office and desk across +the hall from me. To my right and through the back window out of my +office would be the squadroom where the officers write their reports. +And at the end of the hall I have an interrogation room and one +interrogation in back of the squadroom. + +Mr. BALL. Your room opens onto---- + +Mr. FRITZ. A little hallway. + +Mr. BALL. A little hallway? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. That is not the main hall that goes through the third floor, +is it? + +Mr. FRITZ. Sir? No, no, a little hallway in the office. + +Mr. BALL. The main corridor on the third floor--your office does not +open onto the main corridor of the third floor, does it? + +Mr. FRITZ. My own office? + +Mr. BALL. Yes. + +Mr. FRITZ. No, sir; when I say my office, the homicide and robbery +office, my office opens onto the main hallway. + +But my little office, a private office opens into a smaller hallway. + +Mr. BALL. Where was Oswald being kept before you got there, what room +was Oswald in? + +Mr. FRITZ. When I got there he was in the front interrogation room at +the end of the little hall. + +Mr. BALL. Here is a map or a diagram drawn by Chief Curry. It is +Commission Exhibit 701. Take a look at this, is that a diagram of the +floor? + +Mr. FRITZ. This would be my office right here. + +Mr. BALL. That would be the entry to the homicide and robbery? + +Mr. FRITZ. Homicide and robbery bureau. + +Mr. BALL. This is your office? + +Mr. FRITZ. My office opens right here. + +Mr. BALL. Off of the hall? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. Off the homicide and robbery? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes; there should be another line, wait just a minute. There +is a little mistake right here, would it be all right if I correct it? + +Mr. BALL. Go ahead and correct it, your office is farther back from the +hall, isn't it? + +Mr. FRITZ. You see this, coming up from the hall, down at this end +the administrative office, the chief's office, and the dispatcher's +office over here, and over here is the chief's office back here, here +are some assistant chiefs all along here, and in this corner. Now, in +coming down this hall, this is open right in here that makes a square +that goes into the other building in city hall, and this comes to the +elevators, the elevators are right here. + +Now then, right here in this little jail office, a little small office +for the jail elevators right here, and two toilets right here. Now +then, this should have a hallway in here like that, beginning right +here. + +Mr. BALL. You are adding to Chief Curry's map showing a little hallway? + +Mr. FRITZ. That is right. This is the lieutenant's office right here. + +Mr. BALL. You are marking "Lieutenant's office." + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; and that is his--that is placed there just like +my office is, and right at the end of this hall, right here, using a +little part of that probably, but in there is a little conference room +right in here which comes clear across here. + +Here, I have a desk, a metal desk with all the records, daily record, +the working records stacked right on here for the benefit of the +officers who work in this squadroom right here with these desks. + +Mr. BALL. Where is the door to your office? + +Mr. FRITZ. Here is the door to my office right here. + +Mr. BALL. Mark that, please. Show me where Oswald was kept. + +Mr. FRITZ. In this little place right here. + +Mr. BALL. Put a big X there where Oswald was kept. + +Mr. FRITZ. At first? + +Mr. BALL. At first. + +Mr. FRITZ. He was there when I came in. We didn't keep him there long. + +Mr. BALL. That was only a few steps from your office? + +Mr. FRITZ. Only a few steps. That is where he was when I came into the +office. + +Mr. BALL. In the room marked "X" on this Exhibit No. 701 is where he +was? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. After a few moments you had him come in, in a little while, +to your office? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. Do you have that in time when he came into your office? + +Mr. FRITZ. The chief's map would have been, I could have made this +better if I had used the chief's map and put the lieutenant's office +over here. + +Mr. BALL. Don't worry about it. That is close enough. We have him from +X which is the conference room into your office. + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes; my desk is right here and I sit behind it right here +and there are some chairs and telephone table right here and I had him +sitting in a chair, right here. + +Mr. BALL. Right beside you? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I have other chairs along here. + +Mr. BALL. All right. + +Now, Captain, about what time did you first bring him to your office? + +Mr. FRITZ. Let's see, I have it right here. Oswald was arrested at 1:40 +and I think he was taken to the city hall about 2:15 and I started +talking to him probably a little bit after that. + +Mr. BALL. About what time? + +Don't you have a time marked in your report there? + +Mr. FRITZ. I think so. + +Mr. BALL. Of 2:25. + +Mr. FRITZ. 2:25? + +Mr. BALL. On page 237 of your report, your report of Sims and Boyd +refers to a time that he was brought to your room, and I believe 165. + +Mr. FRITZ. My report, my report should have a report right there that +should show it. This shows here 2:15 and I don't think that is right. + +Mr. BALL. Mr. Baker's report on 165 gives the time also. + +Mr. FRITZ. The nearest that I have here then would be shortly after +2:15 p.m. + +Mr. BALL. You will notice that Sims and Boyd make it, state they +brought him from the conference room to your office at about 2:20. + +Mr. FRITZ. That might be all right because I have 2:15 here but I think +2:15 may be 5 or 10 minutes too early. + +Mr. BALL. It was soon after you got there? + +Mr. FRITZ. Soon after I got there. + +Mr. BALL. That you brought him into your office? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. Who was present when you talked with him? + +Mr. FRITZ. At that time, when I first brought him in there there would +be Sims and Boyd and probably one or two officers from the office, I +am not sure, just who else might have been there. I know those two, I +am sure, I believe those two were there. Just about the time I started +talking to him, I had just started to question him, I got a phone +call from Mr. Shanklin, Gordon Shanklin, agent in charge of the FBI +calling for Mr. Bookhout, and I asked Mr. Bookhout to go to pick up the +extension. + +Mr. BALL. Was Mr. Bookhout there? + +Mr. FRITZ. He had just come into the lieutenant's office and Mr. +Shanklin asked that Mr. Hosty be in on that questioning, he said he +wanted him in there because of Mr. Hosty knowing these people and he +had been talking to them and he wanted him in there right then. + +So, I got up from my desk and walked over to the lieutenant's office +and asked Mr. Bookhout to come in, the reason I asked both of them to +come in and Mr. Bookhout is in my office most of every day and works +with us in a lot of cases and asked him to come in with Mr. Hosty. + +Mr. BALL. So Bookhout and Hosty came into your office? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. Was anyone else present? + +Mr. FRITZ. I don't remember whether there was anyone else right at that +time or not. + +Mr. BALL. Do you remember what you said to Oswald and what he said to +you? + +Mr. FRITZ. I can remember the thing that I said to him and what he said +to me, but I will have trouble telling you which period of questioning +those questions were in because I kept no notes at the time, and these +notes and things that I have made I would have to make several days +later, and the questions may be in the wrong place. + +Mr. BALL. What is your best memory of what you said to him when he +first came in? + +Mr. FRITZ. I first asked him as I do of most people something about +where he was from, and where he was raised and his education, and I +asked him where he went to school and he told me he went to school in +New York for a while, he had gone to school in Fort Worth some, that +he didn't finish high school, that he went to the Marines, and the +Marines, and finished high school training in the Marines. + +And I don't remember just what else. I asked him just the general +questions for getting acquainted with him, and so I would see about how +to talk to him, and Mr. Hosty spoke up and asked him something about +Russia, and asked him if he had been to Russia, and he asked him if he +had been to Mexico City, and this irritated Oswald a great deal and he +beat on the desk and went into a kind of a tantrum. + +Mr. BALL. What did he say when he was asked if he had been to Mexico +City? + +Mr. FRITZ. He said he had not been. He did say he had been to Russia, +he was in Russia, I believe he said for some time. + +Mr. BALL. He said he had not been in Mexico City? + +Mr. FRITZ. At that time he told me he had not been in Mexico City. + +Mr. BALL. Who asked the question whether or not he had been to Mexico +City? + +Mr. FRITZ. Mr. Hosty. I wouldn't have known anything about Mexico City. + +Mr. BALL. Was there anything said about Oswald's wife? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. He said, he told Hosty, he said, "I know you." +He said, "You accosted my wife on two occasions," and he was getting +pretty irritable and so I wanted to quiet him down a little bit because +I noticed if I talked to him in a calm, easy manner it wasn't very hard +to get him to settle down, and I asked him what he meant by accosting, +I thought maybe he meant some physical abuse or something and he said, +"Well, he threatened her." And he said, "He practically told her she +would have to go back to Russia." And he said, "He accosted her on two +different occasions." + +Mr. BALL. Was there anything said about where he lived? + +Mr. FRITZ. Where he lived? Right at that time? + +Mr. BALL. Yes. + +Mr. FRITZ. I am sure I had no way of asking him where he lived but I am +not too sure about that--just how quick he told me because he corrected +me, I thought he lived in Irving and he told me he didn't live in +Irving. He lived on Beckley as the officer had told me outside. + +(At this point Mr. Dulles entered the hearing room.) + +Mr. FRITZ. And I asked him about that arrangement and I am again, I +can't be too sure when this question was asked. I asked him why his +wife was living in Irving and why he was living on Beckley and he said +she was living with Mrs. Paine. Mrs. Paine was trying to learn to speak +Russian and that his wife, Mrs. Oswald, had a small baby and Mrs. Paine +helped with the baby and his wife taught Mrs. Paine Russian and it +made a good arrangement for both of them and he stayed over in town. +I thought it was kind of an awkward arrangement and I questioned him +about the arrangement a little bit and I asked him how often he went +out there and he said weekends. + +I asked him why he didn't stay out there. He said he didn't want to +stay out there all the time, Mrs. Paine and her husband didn't get +along too well. They were separated a good part of the time and I asked +him if he had a car and he said he didn't have a car, he said the +Paines had two cars but he didn't use their cars. + +Mr. BALL. Did you ask him anything about his address or did he +volunteer the address? + +Mr. FRITZ. He volunteered the address at Beckley? + +Mr. BALL. Yes. + +Mr. FRITZ. Well, I will tell you, whether we asked him or told him one, +he never did deny it, he never did deny the Beckley Street address at +all. The only thing was he didn't know whether it was north or south. + +Mr. BALL. Did you ask him whether it was north or south? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, but he didn't know. But from the description of +surroundings we could tell it was North Beckley. + +Mr. BALL. Up to that time you hadn't sent any men out to North Beckley, +had you? + +Mr. FRITZ. Well, I sent them out there real soon and Officer Potts +called me back from out there and talked to me on the telephone and +gave me a report from out there on the telephone, and I am sure that +that is the time that he told me about the way he was registered, and I +asked Oswald about why he was registered under this other name. + +Mr. BALL. What other name? + +Mr. FRITZ. Of O. L. Lee. + +Mr. BALL. O. H. Lee? + +Mr. FRITZ. O. H. Lee. He said, well, the lady didn't understand him, +she put it down there and he just left it that way. + +Mr. BALL. Did you ask him whether he had signed his name O. H. Lee? + +Mr. FRITZ. No, I hadn't asked him. + +Mr. BALL. Did you know that he had personally registered? + +Mr. FRITZ. No, sir; I did not. + +Mr. BALL. He said the lady didn't understand him? + +Mr. FRITZ. He said the lady didn't understand him and he just left it +that way. + +Mr. BALL. How long did this first questioning take? + +Mr. FRITZ. Of course, I talked to him several times during that +afternoon. I would have to go out and talk to every officer and give +them different assignments and talk to them about these witnesses, and +help some in getting the witnesses over there. + +I also asked Lieutenant Day to bring the rifle down after I sent after +Mrs. Oswald, and had her to look at the rifle. She couldn't identify +it positively but she said it looked like the rifle that he had, but +she couldn't say for sure. She said she thought he brought it from New +Orleans. + +Mr. BALL. How long a time did you sit with Oswald and question him this +first time? + +Mr. FRITZ. The first time, not but a few minutes. + +Mr. BALL. That was the time Hosty and Bookhout were there? + +Mr. FRITZ. That is right. But sometimes when I would leave the office +to do something else, it is hard to imagine how many things we had +happening at the one time or how many different officers we had doing +different things without seeing it but we were terribly busy. + +I had called all my officers back on duty and had every one of them +assigned to something, so going back and forth kept me pretty busy +running back and forth at the time of questioning. + +I don't know when I would leave, I suppose Mr. Bookhout and Mr. Hosty +asked him a few questions, but I don't believe they questioned him a +great deal while I was gone. + +Mr. BALL. You said just a few minutes, what did you mean by that, 15, +20, 25? + +Mr. FRITZ. It would be pretty hard to guess at a time like that because +we weren't even quitting for lunch so I don't even know, time didn't +mean much right at that time. For a few minutes, you would think 30 or +40 minutes the first time. + +Mr. BALL. Thirty or forty minutes? + +Mr. FRITZ. I am guessing at that time. + +Mr. BALL. He hadn't been searched up to that time, had he? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; he had been searched. + +Mr. BALL. Wasn't he searched later in the jail office? + +Mr. FRITZ. He was searched, the officers who arrested him made the +first search, I am sure. He had another search at the building and I +believe that one of my officers, Mr. Boyd, found some cartridges in his +pocket in the room after he came to the city hall. I can't tell you the +exact time when he searched him. + +Mr. BAIL. You don't have the record of the time when he was searched? + +Mr. FRITZ. No. + +Mr. BALL. You remember they found a transfer of Dallas Transit Company? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; found a transfer. + +Mr. BALL. And some bullets? + +Mr. FRITZ. Bullets; yes, sir. Cartridges. + +Mr. BALL. He had an identification bracelet, too, didn't he? + +Mr. FRITZ. I am not sure about that. + +Mr. BALL. You don't remember? + +Mr. FRITZ. No. + +Mr. BALL. You had a showup that afternoon? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. + +Mr. McCLOY. May I ask what kind of bullets these were? + +Mr. FRITZ. .38, cartridges for a .38 pistol. + +Mr. McCLOY. Pistol? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, pistol cartridges. + +Mr. BALL. You had a showup that afternoon? + +Mr. FRITZ. That first showup was for a lady who was an eye witness and +we were trying to get that showup as soon as we could because she was +beginning to faint and getting sick. + +In fact, I had to leave the office and carry some ammonia across the +hall, they were about to send her to the hospital or something and we +needed that identification real quickly, and she got to feeling all +right after using this ammonia. + +Mr. BALL. Do you remember her name? + +Mr. FRITZ. I have her name here. + +Mr. BALL. Was that Mrs. Markham? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, Helen Markham. + +Mr. BALL. That was the first showup, was it? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. Were you there? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. With her? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. Will you tell me what happened there? + +Mr. FRITZ. She looked at these people very carefully, and she picked +him out and made the positive identification. + +Mr. BALL. What did she say? + +Mr. FRITZ. She said that is the man that I saw shoot the officer. + +Mr. BALL. Who did she point out? + +Mr. FRITZ. She pointed out Oswald; yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. In your showup room you have the prisoners separated from the +visitors? + +Mr. FRITZ. There is a screen. They are on a stage with numbers over +their heads for identification, and measurements to show their height, +and this is lighted back there so the people can see them plainly, +and the people who are looking at them usually sit at desks out some +distance, probably as far as here from that window from the showup +screen. + +Mr. BALL. Near the window, you mean about 15, 20 feet. + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes; about that far. + +Mr. BALL. And then, now in this showup there were two officers of the +vice squad and an officer and a clerk from the jail that were in the +showup with Oswald? + +Mr. FRITZ. That is true. I borrowed those officers, I was a little bit +afraid some prisoner might hurt him, there was a lot of excitement and +a lot of feeling right about that time so we didn't have an officer in +my office the right size to show with him so I asked two of the special +service officers if they would help me and they said they would be glad +to, so they took off their coats and neckties and fixed themselves +where they would look like prisoners and they were good enough to stand +on each side of him in the showup and we used a man who works in the +jail office, a civilian employee as a third man. + +Mr. BALL. Now, were they dressed a little better than Oswald, do you +think, these three people? + +Mr. FRITZ. Well, I don't think there was a great deal of difference. +They had on their regular working clothes and after they opened their +shirts and took off their ties, why they looked very much like anyone +else. + +Mr. BALL. They were all handcuffed together, were they? + +Mr. FRITZ. I am not sure, I don't remember for sure if they were all +handcuffed together or not. They probably did. I couldn't be positive +about that. + +Mr. BALL. Now, after you had had the showup with Helen Markham, did you +question Oswald again? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. In your office? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. Go directly from the showup room up there? + +Mr. FRITZ. Well, I am not sure whether directly, but shortly, there +wouldn't be too much time when we talk to him after that. + +Mr. BALL. Your records show the showup for Helen Markham was 4:45. + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. Do you think that is about right? + +Mr. FRITZ. I think that is about right. + +Mr. BALL. All right, now how long after that would you say you went +back to your office and talked to him again? + +Mr. FRITZ. I would say within, it would take us a few minutes, you +know, to get him back from the showup, probably 15 minutes, something +like that. + +Mr. BALL. Who was present? + +Mr. FRITZ. Twenty minutes. + +Mr. BALL. Who was present at this questioning? + +Mr. FRITZ. This particular questioning? + +Mr. BALL. Yes. + +Mr. FRITZ. I believe--I don't want to be sure about whether Mr. Hosty +stayed at this next time or not because he left at some time. Mr. +Bookhout stayed and my officers were there. + +Mr. BALL. Now, there was a time when you asked him where he worked and +what he did? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. And was that the first---- + +Mr. FRITZ. That was the first time. + +Mr. BALL. The first question--what did he tell you about that? + +Mr. FRITZ. He told me he worked at the Texas School Book Depository. + +Mr. BALL. Did he tell you---- + +Mr. FRITZ. I asked him how he got his job down there, too. + +Mr. BALL. What did he say? + +Mr. FRITZ. He told me that someone that he knew, a lady that he knew +recommended him for that job and he got that job through her. I believe +the records show something else but that is what he told me. + +Mr. BALL. Did you ask him what happened that day; where he had been? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. What did he say? + +Mr. FRITZ. Well he told me that he was eating lunch with some of the +employees when this happened, and that he saw all the excitement and he +didn't think--I also asked him why he left the building. He said there +was so much excitement there then that "I didn't think there would be +any work done that afternoon and we don't punch a clock and they don't +keep very close time on our work and I just left." + +Mr. BALL. At that time didn't you know that one of your officers, +Baker, had seen Oswald on the second floor? + +Mr. FRITZ. They told me about that down at the bookstore; I believe Mr. +Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him--I think he +told me, person who told me about, I believe told me that they met him +on the stairway, but our investigation shows that he actually saw him +in a lunchroom, a little lunchroom where they were eating, and he held +his gun on this man and Mr. Truly told him that he worked there, and +the officer let him go. + +Mr. BALL. Did you question Oswald about that? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I asked him about that and he knew that the +officer stopped him all right. + +Mr. BALL. Did you ask him what he was doing in the lunchroom? + +Mr. FRITZ. He said he was having his lunch. He had a cheese sandwich +and a Coca-Cola. + +Mr. BALL. Did he tell you he was up there to get a Coca-Cola? + +Mr. FRITZ. He said he had a Coca-Cola. + +Mr. BALL. That same time you also asked him about the rifle. + +Mr. FRITZ. I am not sure that is the time I asked him about the rifle. +I did ask him about the rifle sometime soon after that occurred, and +after the showup; I am not sure which time I asked him about the rifle. + +Mr. BALL. Did you bring the rifle down to your office? + +Mr. FRITZ. Not to him; not for him to see. + +Mr. BALL. You never showed it to him? + +Mr. FRITZ. No, sir. I asked him if he owned a rifle and he said he did +not. I asked him if he had ever owned a rifle. He said a good many +years ago he owned a small rifle but he hadn't owned one for a long +time. I asked him if he owned a rifle in Russia and he said, "You know +you can't own a rifle in Russia." He said, "I had a shotgun over there. +You can't own a rifle in Russia." And he denied owning a rifle of any +kind. + +Mr. BALL. Didn't he say that he had seen a rifle at the building? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; he told me he had seen a rifle at the building 2 +or 3 days before that Mr. Truly and some men were looking at. + +Mr. BALL. You asked him why he left the building, didn't you? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. He told you because he didn't think there would be any work? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. Did you ask him what he did after he left the building? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. What did he say? + +Mr. FRITZ. He told me he went over and caught a bus and rode the bus to +North Beckley near where he lived and went by home and changed clothes +and got his pistol and went to the show. I asked him why he took his +pistol and he said, "Well, you know about a pistol; I just carried it." +Let's see if I asked him anything else right that minute. That is just +about it. + +Mr. BALL. Did you ask him if he killed Tippit? + +Mr. FRITZ. Sir? + +Mr. BALL. Did you ask him if he shot Tippit? + +Mr. FRITZ. Oh, yes. + +Mr. BALL. What did he say. + +Mr. FRITZ. He denied it--that he did not. The only thing he said he had +done wrong, "The only law I violated was in the show; I hit the officer +in the show; he hit me in the eye and I guess I deserved it." He said, +"That is the only law I violated." He said, "That is the only thing I +have done wrong." + +Mr. BALL. Now, in this first conversation he told you that he had lived +at 1026 Beckley, didn't he? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. He didn't know whether it was north or south. + +Mr. BALL. And you sent a group of officers out there to search that +address? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; that is right. + +Mr. BALL. Before you talked to him the second time you had talked to +Potts on the telephone, had you not? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I had. + +Mr. BALL. He told you what he had done? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. I should have remembered that when I talked to you +this morning. + +Mr. BALL. Wasn't there some conversation also about what his political +beliefs were? + +Mr. FRITZ. I believe that is later. I asked him about his political +beliefs and he said that he believed in fair play for Cuba. He said +he was a member of the Fair Play for Cuba organization. They had +headquarters in New York, had an office in New Orleans. + +At one time he had been secretary for this organization down there. I +asked him if he belonged to any other organizations of any kind, and he +said he belonged to the American Civil Liberties Union, and I asked him +what dues he paid. He said, "$5 per month." I believe he said, or for a +year. I am not positive about that. I would have to look at my notes. + +Mr. BALL. Was that at the first or second questioning? + +Mr. FRITZ. I think it was the second or third; that was later. + +Mr. BALL. Later on? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. I don't think I talked to him about his political +beliefs until later. + +Mr. BALL. Did you say anything to him about an attorney the first time +you talked to him? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; the first time. He asked about an attorney, and +I told him he certainly could have an attorney any time he wanted it. +I told him he could have an attorney any time he liked, any attorney +he wanted. I told him, I said, we will do it. He said he wanted an +attorney in New York. And he gave me his name, Mr. Abt, and he said +that is who he wanted, and I told him he could have anyone he liked. He +said, well, he knew about a case that he had handled some years ago, +where he represented the people who had violated the Smith Act, and he +said, "I don't know him personally, but that is the attorney I want." + +He said, "If I can't get him then I may get the American Civil +Liberties Union to get me an attorney." + +Mr. BALL. Was there anything said about calling him on the telephone? + +Mr. FRITZ. A little bit later. + +Mr. BALL. Not that time? + +Mr. FRITZ. Not that minute. A little bit later, he asked something +else about an attorney and I said, "Did you call an attorney?" And he +said, "You know I can't use the telephone." And I said, "Yes, you can; +anybody can use a telephone." So, I told them to be sure to let him use +a telephone and the next time I talked to him he thanked me for that, +so I presume he called. + +Mr. BALL. You don't know whether he called? + +Mr. FRITZ. I don't know whether he did or not. + +Mr. BALL. When you say a little bit later, you mean another period of +questioning? + +Mr. FRITZ. Sometime during that talk. + +Mr. BALL. You haven't identified these periods of questioning by time. + +Mr. FRITZ. I can't identify them positively. I can do the best I can +by memory, but I wouldn't want to try to answer any of these questions +by time because I might get them in the wrong question and in the +wrong--time span. + +Mr. BALL. At 6:30 you had another showup, at which time McWatters, +Guinyard, and Callaway--do you remember those witnesses? Callaway is +the car salesman, and Sam Guinyard is the porter at the used-car lot at +the corner of Patton and Jefferson, and McWatters is a cabdriver--no; +is a busdriver. + +Mr. FRITZ. We have the names; if those names are right, that is true. +At that time on this showup we put some officers up on the stage with +him; officers stayed on the stage with him during the showup. + +Mr. BALL. I point that time out as 6:30 because it appears that you +started to question Oswald after you had the Markham showup sometime +after 4:35, 4:40, 4:45. Did you question him steadily from then until +6:30, the time of the second showup? + +Mr. FRITZ. I don't--I don't believe there was any time when I went +through a very long period without having to step to the door, or step +outside, to get a report from some pair of officers, or to give them +additional assignments. + +Mr. BALL. Where did you keep him; in what room? + +Mr. FRITZ. In my office there. + +Mr. BALL. He was in your office all the time? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; within there. + +Mr. BALL. Between the two showups at 4:35 and 6:30, he was in your +office all the time? + +Mr. FRITZ. Well, I believe he was there all that time; let's see, 4:30 +to 6:30; I don't remember him being carried out there any time. + +Mr. BALL. Was he being questioned by somebody all the time, whether you +or somebody else? + +Mr. FRITZ. I doubt it, because I don't think those officers talked to +him very much while I was out of the office, I think they might have +asked him a few questions, but didn't ask him much. + +Mr. BALL. Were you present at the showup when Callaway and Guinyard and +the busdriver were there? + +Mr. FRITZ. I don't believe so. + +Mr. BALL. Now, your records show that in your office at 6:37 there was +an arraignment; do you remember that? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I remember that arraignment. + +Mr. BALL. Will you tell us what happened then? It doesn't show +arraignments. + +Mr. FRITZ. Do you show arraignment for 7:30? + +Mr. BALL. No; 6:30. 7, you discussed, you met with Alexander, the +district attorney's office, didn't you? + +Mr. FRITZ. I probably did. I probably talked to him about the evidence. + +Mr. BALL. He was arraigned at 7:10. + +Mr. FRITZ. He was in our outer office most all the time and I talked to +him two, three different times. + +Mr. BALL. Did he ever take part in the questioning of Oswald? + +Mr. FRITZ. I don't believe so; no, sir. + +Mr. BALL. What happened at 7:10? + +Mr. FRITZ. 7:10 we had this arraignment with Judge David Johnston, +and present. I was present, and Officers Sims, Boyd, Hall, and Mr. +Alexander from the district attorney's office, and that was in my +office. + +Mr. BALL. How was the arraignment conducted? + +Mr. FRITZ. Well, the judge gave him a warning, talked to him for a +little bit. + +Mr. BALL. What warning did he give him? + +Mr. FRITZ. He advised him of his rights. I believe he had a form; I +couldn't repeat it, of course, but I believe he had some forms that he +went over with him. + +Mr. BALL. What rights did he advise him of; do you know? + +Mr. FRITZ. Of his rights for an attorney, and everything that he told +was supposed to be voluntary and things of that kind. + +Mr. BALL. He was advised that he had a right to an attorney, was he? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I am sure he was; I advised him on that on two or +three different occasions. + +Mr. BALL. Did--you have a rule in Texas, do you, that whatever a +witness, a person in custody, says cannot be used against him unless he +is warned? + +Mr. FRITZ. We do have; yes, sir. We have to warn them before we can +use the testimony. We have to warn them in the beginning before he is +questioned. + +Mr. BALL. Before he is questioned you must warn him? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes. + +Mr. BALL. Before you questioned Oswald the first time, did you warn him? + +Mr FRITZ. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. What did you tell him? What were the words you used? + +Mr. FRITZ. I told him that any evidence that he gave me would be used +against him, and the offense for which the statement was made, that it +would have to be voluntary, made of his own accord. + +Mr. BILL. Did he reply to that? + +Mr. FRITZ. He told me that he didn't want a lawyer and he told me once +or twice that he didn't want to answer any questions at all. And once +or twice he did quit answering any questions and he told me he did want +to talk to his attorney, and I told him each time he didn't have to if +he didn't want to. So, later he sometimes would start talking to me +again. + +Mr. BALL. Do you remember when you warned him again? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I warned him two or three different times; yes, +sir. + +Mr. BALL. Do you remember when those times were? + +Mr. FRITZ. No, sir; but during the afternoon. + +Mr. BALL. They were--you were more or less continuously questioning +through the afternoon, were you? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. Now, at 7:10, he was arraigned in your office? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. By arraign you mean he was informed of the charge against him? + +Mr. FRITZ. That is right. + +Mr. BALL. He wasn't asked to plea. + +Mr. FRITZ. Before a judge, before a justice of the peace, a magistrate. + +Mr. BALL. It is not your practice to ask for a plea at that stage, is +it? + +Mr. FRITZ. No, sir; we don't. + +Mr. BALL. All you do is advise him of his rights and the charge against +him? + +Mr. FRITZ. That is right, I am not a lawyer, you might feel--I don't +want to leave a bad impression, I am just telling you what we do. + +Mr. BALL. What the practice is in Texas. + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. Did Oswald make any reply to Judge Johnston? + +Mr. FRITZ. He said a lot of sarcastic things to him. + +Mr. BALL. What did he say? + +Mr. FRITZ. Irritable. I can't remember all the things that he said. He +was that way at each arraignment. He said little sarcastic things, some +of the things were a little impudent things. + +Mr. BALL. After the arraignment, your records show that there was--he +talked to an agent named Clements, do you remember that? + +Mr. FRITZ. I believe that during one of the times when I was out, had +to leave the office for a minute to attend to something, Mr. Clements +asked me if it would be all right for him to take a little personal +history. + +Mr. BALL. Were you present at that time? + +Mr. FRITZ. No. + +Mr. BALL. That was in your office? + +Mr. FRITZ. In the office. + +Mr. BALL. Who was there at the time? + +Mr. FRITZ. I don't know. He was there, I know some of my officers were +there, they had to watch him all the time. + +Mr. BALL. Sims and Boyd? + +Mr. FRITZ. If they weren't there, some homicide officers were. + +Mr. BALL. You had two officers with him all times? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; sometimes three. + +Mr. BALL. Always with him in the room? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; all the time. They never questioned him but they +stayed in the room. + +Mr. BALL. Then your records show another showup at 7:50? + +Mr. FRITZ. At what time? + +Mr. BALL. 7:50, that is the third showup. Mrs. Davis---- + +Mr. FRITZ. That would be showup No. 3. + +Mr. BALL. That is showup No. 3. + +Mr. FRITZ. Showup No. 3 was held for Barbara Jean Davis. + +Mr. BALL. And Virginia Davis. + +Mr. FRITZ. Virginia Davis. + +Mr. BALL. Were you there at the time of the showup? + +Mr. FRITZ. No, sir; I don't believe I was there, Mr. Hall, Mr. Sims, +Mr. Boyd, and Mr. Moore. + +Mr. BALL. Do you know who chose the people for the showup there? + +Mr. FRITZ. Who showed the people; yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. Who chose the people. There is a Walter, Richard Walter +Borchgardt. + +Mr. FRITZ. Are those the people you mean for the showup? + +Mr. BALL. Yes. + +Mr. FRITZ. No, sir; I don't know who chose those people. + +Mr. BALL. Don Braswell and John Abel. + +Mr. FRITZ. No, sir; that would be done by my officers. + +Mr. BALL. And you don't think you were present at that? + +Mr. FRITZ. No, sir; I don't believe so. + +Mr. BALL. Did you ever ask him if he had kept a rifle in the garage at +Irving? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I did. I asked him and I asked him if he had +brought one from New Orleans. He said he didn't. + +Mr. BALL. He did not. + +Mr. FRITZ. That is right. + +I told him the people at the Paine residence said he did have a rifle +out there, and he kept it out there and he kept it wrapped in a blanket +and he said that wasn't true. + +Mr. BALL. Do you remember when that was that you asked him? + +Mr. FRITZ. No, sir; during some of those questions. + +Mr. BALL. It was after Stovall and Adamcik had come back? + +Mr. FRITZ. I believe so. + +Mr. BALL. Now, during the evening, did you question him some more? + +Mr. FRITZ. Well, I am sure that I did. Let me see. + +Mr. BALL. It shows he was fingerprinted at 8:55. + +Mr. FRITZ. I probably talked to him a little bit more after that. It +shows he was fingerprinted at what time? + +Mr. BALL. 8:55. Or 9 o'clock, around 9 o'clock. Fingerprinted, at that +time there was a paraffin test of the hands and face. + +Mr. FRITZ. I don't believe he was fingerprinted. I think we made the +paraffin test in my office. + +Mr. BALL. There was a paraffin test. + +Mr. FRITZ. I allowed them to use any office right there to make a +paraffin test. + +Mr. BALL. And your records show he was fingerprinted there, too. + +Mr. FRITZ. It is possible, I didn't stay there with him. He could have. +I don't think they fingerprinted him at that time. I wouldn't see any +need for it. + +Mr. BALL. Did you ever talk--you remember Wesley Frazier who came into +the department and made a statement, do you, the boy who---- + +Mr. FRITZ. I think I remember some man. I believe that is his correct +name, some man who came in with some story about seeing Oswald run from +the building. + +Mr. BALL. No. + +Mr. FRITZ. That is not the one? + +Mr. BALL. A boy who lived in Irving who drove Oswald weekends back and +forth from Irving. + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes. + +Mr. BALL. You remember you talked to him that night and he told about +a package that Oswald carried into the Texas School Book Depository +Building that morning. + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; that is right. + +Mr. BALL. Do you remember what that was? + +Mr. FRITZ. He said he asked him what it was and he told him it was +curtain rods. + +Mr. BALL. Did you ever talk to Oswald about that? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I did. + +Mr. BALL. When? + +Mr. FRITZ. I talked to him about that on the last morning before his +transfer. + +Mr. BALL. That was on Sunday morning? + +Mr. FRITZ. Sunday morning, that would be the 24th, wouldn't it? + +Mr. BALL. Yes. + +Mr. FRITZ. And I asked him about that and he denied having anything +to do with any curtain rods. It is possible that I could have asked +him that on one of those other times, too, but I know I asked him that +question the last morning. + +Mr. BALL. Well, you learned about it on Friday night according to your +reports here when Mr. Frazier came in and you gave Frazier a polygraph +test. + +Mr. FRITZ. I hesitated to ask him about those curtain rods and I will +tell you why I hesitated, because I wanted to find out more about that +package before I got started with the curtain rods because if there +were curtain rods I didn't want to mention it to him but we couldn't +find--I talked to his wife and asked her if they were going to use any +curtain rods, while I was talking to her that afternoon and she didn't +know anything about it. + +No; I believe I talked to Mrs. Paine, one of them. + +Mr. BALL. Do you think you talked to Oswald before Sunday morning about +curtain rods? + +Mr. FRITZ. It is possible but I know I talked to him Sunday morning. + +Mr. BALL. Now, did you tell him what Frazier had told you? + +Mr. FRITZ. I don't know that I told him what Frazier had told me but I +told him someone had told me. + +Mr. BALL. What did you tell him? + +Mr. FRITZ. I told him he had a package and put it in the back seat and +it was a package about that long and it was curtain rods. He said he +didn't have any kind of a package but his lunch. He said he had his +lunch and that is all he had, and Mr. Frazier told me that he got out +of the car with that package, he saw him go toward the building with +this long package. + +I asked him, I said, "Did you go toward the building carrying a long +package?" He said, "No. I didn't carry anything but my lunch." + +Mr. BALL. Did Frazier ever tell you how long the package was? + +Mr. FRITZ. He just measured, told me about that long. + +Mr. BALL. Approximately how long? + +Mr. FRITZ. I am guessing at this, the way he measured, probably 26 +inches, 27 inches, something like that. Too short for the length of +that rifle unless he took it down, I presume he took it down if it was +in there, and I am sure it was. + +Mr. BALL. Do you remember what time you--was it the way Frazier showed +it to you--was it the size of a rifle that was broken down? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; it would be just about right. + +Mr. BALL. Later that night you took him down to the showuproom again, +didn't you, when you had a press interview? + +Mr. FRITZ. No, sir; I didn't have a press conference. + +Mr. BALL. You didn't? + +Mr. FRITZ. No. + +Mr. BALL. Did you give any instructions to the press conference? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; the chief told me he wanted him brought down for a +press conference, and I told my officers to take them down and I asked +the chief to let me put it on the stage. I was a little bit afraid +something might happen to him in front of that stage, someone in the +crowd might hurt him but he said no, he wanted him out there in the +front, and I told him I would like to put him on the stage so that the +officers could jerk him inside the jail office if anything happened but +he said no, he wanted him in front, so I told the officers to take him +down. + +I went down later to see how everything was going but I couldn't get +in. The crowd had jammed clear back out into the hall. + +Mr. BALL. Do you know what time you sent him up to the jail? + +Mr. FRITZ. I have it here, I think--12:05; yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. 12:05? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. + +Mr. McCLOY. May I ask you a question? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. + +Mr. McCLOY. Where was the--where did you first see the gun that was +presumably used in the murder of Tippit? + +Mr. FRITZ. Of Tippit? + +Mr. McCLOY. Tippit, yes; .38-caliber pistol. + +Mr. FRITZ. The officers brought that in, you know, when they brought +him in from the arrest at Oak Cliff. + +Mr. McCLOY. And they had that, you had seen it at about the time you +first saw Oswald? + +Mr. FRITZ. Well, a few minutes later. + +Mr. McCLOY. A few minutes later? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. + +Mr. McCLOY. It did show signs from your experience of having been +recently fired? + +Mr. FRITZ. I don't believe you can tell about that too well any more. +You know the old style ammunition you could tell if a gun had been +fired recently by the residue left in the barrel and smelling the +barrel, but with the new ammunition they don't have that. + +Mr. McCLOY. And this was new ammunition that he was using? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; he was using new ammunition. + +Mr. McCLOY. Was the gun fully loaded when it was taken from him? + +Mr. FRITZ. I didn't see it loaded, of course, it would have been +unloaded. I understood it was fully loaded, but I didn't see it. + +Mr. DULLES. That is he had replaced the bullets that he had used, is +that it? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; the people told us as he ran across the yard he +was reloading the gun as he ran across the yard. Yes; the witnesses +told us that. + +Mr. McCLOY. If I can take you back a little further also. + +Mr. FRITZ. All right, sir. + +Mr. McCLOY. Did you see the gun in the position, the rifle I am talking +about now. + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. + +Mr. McCLOY. Did you see the rifle in the position in which it was found? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I did. + +Mr. McCLOY. Where was it found? + +Mr. FRITZ. It was found back near the stairway in a little--some boxes +were stacked about this far apart, about that far apart. The rifle +was down on the floor and partially under these boxes back near the +stairway in the corner of the building. + +Mr. McCLOY. This was on the sixth floor? + +Mr. FRITZ. Sixth floor; yes, sir. + +Mr. McCLOY. Nobody had touched it by the time you saw it? + +Mr. FRITZ. No, sir; nobody touched it. They called me as soon as they +saw it and I went back there and I saw it. + +Mr. McCLOY. Then you say the rifle was then dusted? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. + +Mr. McCLOY. Does that mean the laboratory people had already come there +then? + +Mr. FRITZ. He came down from where he had been; he was on the same +floor checking the empty cartridges, and he came back. + +Mr. McCLOY. Oh, yes. + +Mr. FRITZ. To the back, when I called him, and he came back there and +checked the rifle; yes, sir. + +Mr. McCLOY. When you went up to the sixth floor from which Oswald +apparently had fired these shots, what did it look like there, what was +the--how were things arranged there? Was there anything in the nature +of a gun rest there or anything that could be used as a gun rest? + +Mr. FRITZ. You mean up in the corner where he shot from, from the +window? + +Mr. McCLOY. Yes. + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; there were some boxes stacked there and I believe +one box, one small box I believe was in the window, and another box was +on the floor. There were some boxes stacked to his right that more or +less blinded him from the rest of the floor. If anyone else had been on +the floor I doubt if they could have seen where he was sitting. + +Mr. McCLOY. Did you see anything other---- + +Mr. FRITZ. Lieutenant Day, of course, made a detailed description of +all of that and he can give it to you much better than I can. + +Mr. McCLOY. He is going to be here? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; and he will give it to you in detail; yes, sir. + +Mr. DULLES. When was the paper bag covering that apparently he brought +the rifle in, was that discovered in the sixth floor about the same +time? + +Mr. FRITZ. No, sir; that was recovered a little later. I wasn't down +there when that was found. + +Mr. DULLES. It was recovered on the sixth floor, was it not? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I believe so. We can check here and see. I believe +it was. But I wasn't there when that was recovered. + +Mr. BALL. Here is a picture of Commission Exhibit 514. + +Mr. FRITZ. That is the--do I have it turned around? + +Mr. BALL. Do you recognize it? + +Mr. FRITZ. That is it. + +Mr. BALL. Is that the scene that was photographed by the crime lab +group? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; that is right. But there is one thing that this +picture is a little bit deceiving in one way. This picture is taken +with a man standing, no doubt, on boxes up high like this, standing +down level on the floor. This gun was partially under the end of those +boxes right there. You see the camera evidently took a picture under +like that, and he got a little more gun than you would see if you were +standing on the floor. + +Mr. BALL. I want to ask you about a showup. + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. Callaway and Guinyard and McWatters. You did you say you were +present at that showup? That is No. 2. + +Mr. FRITZ. No. 2 showup. I show there Leavelle, Brown, and Dougherty. +It doesn't show that I was at that showup. + +Mr. BALL. You were at that showup? + +Mr. FRITZ. No, sir; it doesn't show. + +Mr. BALL. Did you talk to Callaway before he went to the showup? + +Mr. FRITZ. Callaway--I will have to look there to see. Can you tell me +something about what he has testified? + +Mr. BALL. Callaway is a tall blond man, he was a used car salesman, +used carlot on the corner of Patton and Jefferson. + +Mr. FRITZ. I believe Officer Leavelle talked to him. Any of these +witnesses when I say I didn't talk to them, that doesn't mean I didn't +go out and say something to them but I didn't question them. + +Mr. BALL. Did you say to anyone of these witnesses, "We think we have +got the man that killed Tippit and he is probably the man who killed +the President"? Anything like that? + +Mr. FRITZ. I don't remember saying anything like that. + +Mr. BALL. Did you say, "I want you to look at him good because we want +to make the identification." + +Mr. FRITZ. Oh, no. We didn't need to. The first witness that went down +with me convinced me on the Tippit killing. + +Mr. McCLOY. That is Mrs. Markham? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes; Helen Markham. And she was a real good witness and she +identified him positively and picked him out in a manner that you could +tell she was honest in her identification. + +Mr. BALL. We came up to the time you got him in jail that is at 12:05. + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. Were you through with him at that time? + +Mr. FRITZ. No, sir. + +Mr. BALL. Did you see him again? + +Mr. FRITZ. I believe we had another arraignment, did we not? + +Mr. BALL. You had an arraignment charging him with the assassination of +President Kennedy, murder of President Kennedy. + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I went to that arraignment. + +Mr. BALL. That was at what time? I believe you showed it at 1:35 a.m. +in your records. + +Mr. FRITZ. That would be about right. + +Mr. BALL. 1:35? + +Mr. FRITZ. I will tell you in a minute to be sure. I show 1:35. + +Mr. BALL. That was where? + +Mr. FRITZ. In the identification bureau. + +Mr. BALL. Who was present? + +Mr. FRITZ. That is just outside the jail. + +Mr. BALL. Who was present at that time? + +Mr. FRITZ. Well, I show Bill Alexander of the district attorney's +office, Henry Wade. That was before Judge Johnston also, and I was +there, and I am sure of three or four other people that I can't name. + +I think Chief Curry might have gone to this, I can't answer for him, +but I believe he might have. + +Mr. BALL. That is one, 1:35 a.m., shortly after midnight was the +arraignment. + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. Now, your records show that he was checked in the jail at +1:10 a.m. and it doesn't show a checkout when he was taken to the +arraignment. + +Mr. FRITZ. To the arraignment. It probably wouldn't show that. +Sometimes those cards, I don't usually make cards if the man is still +in the custody of the jailers, and sometimes, of course, they might +miss a card anyway because we use a lot of civilian employees up there. + +Mr. BALL. And the jailer was there with him, wasn't he? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. He brought him out. + +Mr. BALL. Another thing, that day, at sometime during the 22d when you +questioned Oswald, didn't you ask him about this card he had in his +pocket with the name Alek Hidell? + +Mr. FRITZ. I did; yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. What did you ask him about that? + +Mr. FRITZ. I believe he had three of those cards if I remember +correctly, and he told me that was the name that he picked up in New +Orleans that he had used sometimes. One of the cards looked like it +might have been altered a little bit and one of them I believe was +the Fair Play for Cuba and one looked like a social security card or +something. + +Mr. BALL. Yes. + +Mr. FRITZ. We have pictures of those cards here. You no doubt have them. + +Mr. BALL. Yes. We have them. Did he say that he had used that as a name? + +Mr. FRITZ. He told me that is a name he picked up in New Orleans. + +Mr. BALL. Did he say---- + +Mr. FRITZ. I presumed by that he had used it by saying he had picked it +up in New Orleans. + +Mr. BALL. To one officer he said he didn't want to talk about that or +he wouldn't talk about that? + +Mr. FRITZ. That is right. Very often he would do that. He would tell +him some things and tell me some things. + +Mr. BALL. I am talking about this card, A. Hidell. Do you recall +whether he told you he had picked it up in New Orleans and--or did he +tell you he didn't want to talk about it? He wouldn't talk about it? + +Mr. FRITZ. He didn't tell me he wouldn't want to talk about it. He told +me he had picked it up down there and when I questioned further then he +told me he didn't want to talk about it. + +Mr. BALL. Now, the next morning or the next day you questioned him +again, didn't you? + +Mr. FRITZ. Let's see, that would be on the 23d. + +Mr. BALL. You had another showup on the 23d in the afternoon, but +apparently that morning before the showup you talked to him in your +office? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. What do your records show as to the first time you talked to +him on November 23? + +Mr. FRITZ. Let's see. + +Mr. BALL. I believe if you will look on page 6 of 137B of your formal +report that will refresh your memory. + +Mr. FRITZ. Which part of this do you want now? + +Mr. BALL. I want to know what time you started to question him on +November 23. + +Mr. FRITZ. I think I can get that time out of the little book. + +Mr. BALL. If you look at the top of page 6 there. + +Mr. FRITZ. I don't have it. + +Mr. BALL. Do you have 137B? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes; I have it. I show 10:25 a.m. + +Mr. BALL. 10:35? + +Mr. FRITZ. 10:25. + +Mr. BALL. 10:25 a.m.? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. Who was present at this time? Still--look at your notes there. + +Mr. FRITZ. I show here Jim Bookhout, Forrest Sorrels, special agent in +charge of Secret Service. Robert Nash, who is U.S. marshal there in +Dallas, and an officer besides myself. + +Mr. BALL. What officer beside yourself? + +Mr. FRITZ. I have that in here. + +Mr. BALL. Tell me what you talked about this morning on the 23d? You +called him down there for a certain purpose, didn't you? + +Mr. FRITZ. Let's see if this is the morning of the 24th, is it--is this +the 23d or 24th? + +Mr. BALL. This is Saturday morning, the 23d. + +Mr. FRITZ. Saturday morning. + +Mr. BALL. You learned certain things from your investigation of the day +before, hadn't you? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. One of them was you found he had a transfer, didn't you, in +his pocket when he was arrested? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I sure talked to him about the transfers. + +Mr. BALL. All right. What did he say? + +Mr. FRITZ. He admitted the transfer. + +Mr. BALL. I don't want you to say he admitted the transfer. I want you +to tell me what he said about the transfer. + +Mr. FRITZ. He told me that was the transfer the busdriver had given +him when he caught the bus to go home. But he had told me if you will +remember in our previous conversation that he rode the bus or on North +Beckley and had walked home but in the meantime, sometime had told me +about him riding a cab. + +So, when I asked him about a cab ride if he had ridden in a cab he said +yes, he had, he told me wrong about the bus, he had rode a cab. He +said the reason he changed, that he rode the bus for a short distance, +and the crowd was so heavy and traffic was so bad that he got out and +caught a cab, and I asked him some other questions about the cab and +I asked him what happened there when he caught the cab and he said +there was a lady trying to catch a cab and he told the busdriver, the +busdriver told him to tell the lady to catch the cab behind him and he +said he rode that cab over near his home, he rode home in a cab. + +I asked him how much the cabfare was, he said 85 cents. + +Mr. BALL. Did you ask him if he went directly to his home? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; he said he went straight home. + +Mr. BALL. Didn't you learn from the cabdriver that he hadn't taken him +to 1026 North Beckley? + +Mr. FRITZ. I knew he had taken him near there but I am telling you what +he told me, he told me he had taken him home. + +Mr. BALL. Did you ask him whether he had gone directly home? + +Mr. FRITZ. No, sir; I don't think so. + +Mr. BALL. Then you found out the day before about the Wesley Frazier +package, hadn't you? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I found out about the package from Irving. + +Mr. BALL. Yes. + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. And also that he usually went home on Friday night and this +time he went home on Thursday night. + +Mr. FRITZ. I asked him why he had changed nights. + +Mr. BALL. Yes, sir. + +Mr. FRITZ. And let me see what he told me about why he had changed. The +man I talked to told me he usually went out on weekends, on Friday, so +I believe he told me, I am not positive why he told me why he went home +on this different night but I think he told me because someone else was +going to be over there on weekends or something to that effect. + +I can look right here and see what he told me. + +Mr. BALL. All right, look and see. You also asked him that day about +the curtain rods, didn't you? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. Had you asked him about that the night before, do you know or +was this the first time you talked to him about it? + +Mr. FRITZ. I don't think I asked him the night before, I am sure I did +not. I am sure I did not ask him the night before. I remember I was +pretty hesitant about asking him about them at all because I told you +I didn't want to tell him--I didn't want him to tell me about curtain +rods until I found out a little more about them. + +Mr. BALL. But you asked him about them this morning? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. He had told Frazier that he had curtain rods in the package? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; he denied having curtain rods or any package other +than his lunch. + +Mr. BALL. Didn't you also ask him what he had done when he went home, +what, when he went to 1026 North Beckley? + +Mr. FRITZ. When he went to Beckley? + +Mr. BALL. What he did. + +Mr. FRITZ. What he did when he went on North Beckley? + +Mr. BALL. After the cab ride, what he had done. + +Mr. FRITZ. This time he told me a different story about changing the +clothing. He told me this time that he had changed his trousers and +shirt and I asked him what he did with his dirty clothes and he said, I +believe he said, he put them, the dirty clothes, I believe he said he +put a shirt in a drawer. + +Mr. BALL. And you asked him again, didn't you, what he was doing at the +time the President was shot? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. What did he say? + +Mr. FRITZ. Well, he told me about the same story about this lunch. + +Mr. BALL. He mentioned who he was having lunch with, did he not? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; he told me he was having lunch when the President +was shot. + +Mr. BALL. With whom? + +Mr. FRITZ. With someone called Junior, someone he worked with down +there, but he didn't remember the other boy's name. + +Mr. BALL. Did he tell you what he was eating? + +Mr. FRITZ. He told me, I believe, that he had, I am doing this from +memory, a cheese sandwich, and he also mentioned he had some fruit, I +had forgotten about the fruit until I looked at this report. + +Mr. BALL. Did he say that was in the package he had brought from home? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; there was one reason I asked him about what was +in the package, we had had a story that had been circulated around the +meantime about some chicken bones. I am sure you heard of that, and I +wanted to find for sure what he did have in his lunch and he told me +about having--he told me they did not have any chicken out there and +I also talked with the Paines and they told me they didn't have any +chicken in the icebox, they did have some cheese. + +Mr. BALL. But he said he had had lunch with Junior? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; and with someone else. + +Mr. BALL. Did you find out that there was an employee named Junior, a +man that was nicknamed Junior at the Texas School Book Depository? + +Mr. FRITZ. Probably we have it here, some of the officers probably did, +we had all these people checked out. I didn't do it myself probably. + +Mr. BALL. That same morning, you asked him also about his affiliations, +didn't you ask him if he belonged to the Communist Party? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I asked him if he belonged to the Communist Party. + +Mr. BALL. What did he say? + +Mr. FRITZ. He said he did not. He said he never had a card. He told me +again that he did belong to the Fair Play for Cuba organization, that +he was in favor of the Castro revolution and I don't remember what else +he might have told me. + +Mr. BALL. What about the pistol that he had on him when he was +arrested, did you question him about that this morning? + +Mr. FRITZ. That morning? + +Mr. BALL. Your notes show that you did. + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I talked to him about the pistol and asked him +where he got it. + +Mr. BALL. What did he say? + +Mr. FRITZ. He told me he had got it about 6 or 7 months before in Fort +Worth but he wouldn't tell me where he got it. When I asked him a +little further about that he told me he didn't want to talk any further +about the pistol. + +Mr. BALL. Did the FBI, did any FBI agent question him that morning? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; Mr. Bookhout asked a few questions along, I don't +remember just exactly what they asked, but he asked him a few questions. + +Mr. BALL. Was there any further questioning about an attorney, whether +or not he wanted a lawyer and who he wanted? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; there probably was because I talked to him about +a lawyer a number of times and he said he didn't want the local +attorneys, some attorney had been up to see him after one of these +questionings, and he said he didn't want him at all. He wanted Mr. Abt. +And he couldn't get him and I told you about the ones there in the +American Civil Liberties Union. + +Mr. BALL. Didn't he tell you at one time he didn't want to answer any +questions until he talked to his lawyer? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; he told me that two or three times. + +Mr. BALL. This morning he told you that, didn't he? + +Mr. FRITZ. He probably did. + +Mr. BALL. Look on your notes there on the page 137D and see whether or +not that refreshes your memory? (Commission Document 81B.) + +Mr. FRITZ. 137G? + +Mr. BALL. 137D. + +Mr. FRITZ. I told him--you know he had told me he could not use the +telephone because he didn't have the money to pay for a call. I told +him he could call collect from the jail to call anyone he wanted to, +and I believe at that time he probably thanked me for that. + +But I told him that we allowed all prisoners to do that. + +Mr. BALL. Did he say he didn't have money enough? + +Mr. FRITZ. He told me that but as I said I told him he didn't need the +money, he could call him collect, and use the jail phone, telephone. + +Mr. BALL. What did he say? + +Mr. FRITZ. That seemed to please him all right, because he evidently +did because the next time I saw him he thanked me for letting him use +the phone, but I told him it wasn't a favor; everyone could do that. + +Mr. DULLES. Do you know who he called? + +Mr. FRITZ. I don't know, I wasn't there. + +Mr. DULLES. Is there any record? + +Mr. FRITZ. I don't believe there would be. I think you give him the use +of the telephone and they could call when they wanted to. He could have +called half a dozen people if he wanted to. + +Mr. DULLES. He couldn't make a long distance call, could he? I suppose +he could if he called collect. + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes. + +Mr. BALL. Was Mr. Kelley of the Secret Service present at this time, +this morning? + +Mr. FRITZ. He was there most of the time after the 22d. He wasn't there +on the 22d. + +Mr. BALL. This is the morning of the 23d we are talking about. + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; he was there, yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. Did you ever ask him what he thought of President Kennedy or +his family? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I asked him what he thought of the President. + +Mr. BALL. What did he say? + +Mr. FRITZ. What he thought about the family--he said he didn't have any +particular comment to make about the President. + +He said he had a nice family, that he admired his family, something to +that effect. At one time, I don't have this in my report, but at one +time I told him, I said, "You know you have killed the President, and +this is a very serious charge." + +He denied it and said he hadn't killed the President. + +I said he had been killed. He said people will forget that within a few +days and there would be another President. + +Mr. DULLES. Did he say anything about Governor Connally? + +Mr. FRITZ. No, sir; I don't think I questioned him about the Governor +at that time. I might have asked him at one time. I remember telling +him at one time he shot the Governor. + +Mr. DULLES. Will you give us that? + +Mr. FRITZ. He denied shooting any of them. + +Mr. DULLES. Did he express any antipathy for or friendship for---- + +Mr. FRITZ. No, sir; he didn't. He didn't express--during one of Mr. +Hosty's talks with him he had talked to him about Governor Connally, +and about some letters but that information I don't have. That is +something Mr. Hosty will have to tell you about. + +Mr. BALL. Your notes show at 11:33 he went back to the jail and about +an hour later at 12:35 he was brought back. + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. In your office for another interview. + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. In which Mr. Kelley of the Secret Service was present? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. + +Mr. DULLES. Are we now on Saturday noon? + +Mr. BALL. Yes, sir; this is noon about 12:35. + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. In the meantime your officers had brought back from Irving +some pictures that they found in the garage, hadn't they? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. And you had had them blown up, hadn't you? + +Mr. FRITZ. That is right. + +Mr. BALL. What pictures--and you showed Oswald a picture at this time? + +Mr. FRITZ. A picture of him holding a rifle and wearing the pistol. +It showed a picture of him holding a rifle and wearing the pistol. I +showed him first an enlarged picture. + +Mr. BALL. I will show you Commission Exhibit No. 135. + +Mr. FRITZ. That is the picture. + +Mr. BALL. That is the picture you showed him? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; that is a similar picture, that is a copy of the +picture I showed him. + +Mr. BALL. You had had your laboratory enlarge the picture that your men +had brought back from Irving? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; he said that wasn't his picture, he said, "I have +been through that whole deal with all people in the cameras," he said, +"One has taken my picture and that is my face and put a different +body on it." He said, I know all about photography, I worked with +photography for a long time. That is a picture that someone else has +made. I never saw that picture in my life." + +I said, "Wait just a minute, and I will show you one you have seen +probably," and I showed him the little one this one was made from and +when I showed him the little one he said, "I never have seen that +picture, either." He said, "That is a picture that has been reduced +from the big one." + +Mr. BALL. I show you Commission No. 133, is that the small picture? + +Mr. FRITZ. The small picture; yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. A picture of the small picture? + +Mr. FRITZ. A picture of the small picture, I guess this is. + +Mr. BALL. There are two pictures on 133. Which one was it? + +Mr. FRITZ. On the left. + +Mr. BALL. The one on the left? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; the one holding the two papers. + +Mr. BELIN. As you face the picture? + +Mr. BALL. As you face the picture the one on the left? [Exhibit No. +133-A.] + +Mr. FRITZ. There is a lot of questioning in our mind about the time of +this middle day questioning here. We checked it over and over and we +can't be sure about the time and I don't want to go on record as not +knowing whether this time is correct because it might not be. + +Mr. BALL. You mean 12:35? + +Mr. FRITZ. 12:35. + +Mr. BALL. But you do know this conversation---- + +Mr. FRITZ. I do know we talked to him a number of times all along, and +these questions and answers are right, but the times may be off. + +Mr. BALL. You did show him this picture, a picture of Oswald with a +rifle and pistol? + +Mr. FRITZ. I showed him that at one of those interviews, yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. And he denied that that was a picture of him. + +Mr. FRITZ. That is true; yes, sir; that is right. + +Mr. BALL. There was another showup that afternoon at 2:15? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. At which time two cabdrivers, one named Scoggins and one +named Whaley were shown Oswald. Were you present at that showup? + +Mr. FRITZ. I don't think so. I will look and see right quickly but I +don't think I was. That would have been on the 23d. + +Mr. BALL. Yes. + +Mr. FRITZ. That shows him--M. G. Hall--wait a minute, I am in the wrong +one, pardon me. Showup No. 4, shows Officers V. S. Hinkel, Walter +Potts, M. G. Hall, C. W. Brown, and J. R. Leavelle who was with the +people handling the showup. + +Mr. BALL. Your records also show that you were brought--he was brought +to your office again at 6 o'clock? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. Will you look at page 138B of your notes. (Commission +Document 81B) Was that the time you talked to him about the rifle? + +Mr. FRITZ. 6 o'clock? + +Mr. BALL. Yes. + +Mr. FRITZ. That is when I showed an enlarged picture, yes, sir, that is +what I show here, yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. In the meantime you had gone out to Neely Street, hadn't you, +to try to determine whether or not this was the place for the rifle? + +Mr. FRITZ. No, sir; we didn't find that out until some time later. + +Mr. BALL. You didn't? + +Mr. FRITZ. No, sir; we had heard of the Neely Street address but we +didn't know that that was the place where the picture was taken. But +later on, Mr. Sorrels and some of the Secret Service men called me +and they had found out, I believe from Marina, that that is where the +picture was made and they called me and asked me to go with them and we +made some other pictures out there to show the place. + +Mr. BALL. On this evening at 6 o'clock who was present at the +questioning? + +Mr. FRITZ. At the questioning, just a minute. + +Mr. DULLES. What is the reference to the Marines? + +Mr. BALL. Marina. + +Mr. DULLES. Marina, I didn't catch it. + +Mr. BALL. Who was present at that, do you remember, on 6 o'clock on +Saturday evening, the 23d? See page 138B. + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I believe Mr. Bookhout, Inspector Kelley, myself, +and officers. + +Mr. McCLOY. This was an interrogation? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes. + +Mr. BALL. Was that the time when he told you, someone superimposed the +picture on his face? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; that is right. + +Mr. BALL. After he had talked to you a while he told you he didn't want +to talk to you any more, didn't he? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. Look on the second page, 138C, and tell me what happened. +Give me in your own words what occurred there. + +Mr. FRITZ. You mean about the picture? + +Mr. BALL. Tell me in your own words, yes. + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; at that time he told me that--the first of +the page up here is when he told me he didn't want to answer more +questions. "I just told you about that but you want to know something +else about this other party." + +Mr. BALL. You talked to him sometime later. + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I showed him this map, showed him a map of the +city of Dallas that he had, and the map had been brought in from his +address on North Beckley, and he told me that those markings, they had +several markings on this map, one of them was near---- + +Mr. BALL. Wait a minute, isn't that the next morning? We are talking +about Saturday night now, you have told us about showing him the +enlarged photograph. + +Mr. FRITZ. I show 9:30 the morning of the 24th. + +Mr. BALL. I am talking about the night. + +Mr. FRITZ. All right. + +Mr. DULLES. 6:30 at night. + +Mr. BALL. 6:30 in the evening. + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. You showed him the photographs? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; pictures. + +Mr. BALL. And he told you they weren't his? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. What did he tell you then? Didn't he tell you then he didn't +want to answer any more questions? + +Mr. FRITZ. Let's see if he did. + +Mr. BALL. Yes. + +Mr. FRITZ. That is the time that he told me about the photography, that +he knew all about photography, and then he said, he didn't want to +answer any more questions. + +Mr. BALL. What time did you put him back in jail? + +Mr. FRITZ. 7:15 p.m. + +Mr. BALL. And you didn't see him again that night? + +Mr. FRITZ. No, sir. + +Mr. BALL. Now, the next morning you checked him out of jail? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; the 24th we had him down in the morning, yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. Who was present that time? + +Mr. FRITZ. That time here at 9:30 in the morning, one of the postal +inspectors, Mr. Holmes, Mr. Sorrels, Mr. Bookhout, and I am not sure +about Mr. Sorrels staying in there all the time. He was in there part +of the time, and that is the time that I showed him the map, too, that +morning with these markings on it. + +Mr. BALL. What did he say? + +Mr. FRITZ. Well, he said they didn't mean anything. Those markings were +places he had gone looking for work. I asked him at that time, too, +more about his religious beliefs, and Inspector Kelley asked him what +he thought about religion and he said he didn't think too much of it. I +believe he said of the philosophy of religion. + +So he asked him two or three other questions and he was a little +evasive so I asked him if he believed in a deity. He said he didn't +care to discuss that with me. + +Mr. BALL. What else was said? + +Mr. FRITZ. I asked him, too, I believe on that same morning, I asked +him more about his political beliefs and he told me he didn't belong to +any political party and he told me he was a Marxist but that he wasn't +a Marxist-Leninist, that he was just a Marxist, and that he again told +me that he believed in the Castro revolution. That is the morning of +the transfer. + +Mr. BALL. You asked him about the gun again, didn't you? + +Mr. FRITZ. I asked him about a lot of things that morning, I sure did. + +Mr. BALL. Tell us about it. + +Mr. FRITZ. He denied anything about Alek Hidell, and again about his +belief in the Fair Play for Cuba. + +Mr. BALL. What about the rifle? + +Mr. FRITZ. I asked him about the Neely Street address and he denied +that address. He denied having a picture made over there and he even +denied living there. I told him he had people who visited him over +there and he said they were just wrong about visiting. + +Mr. BALL. Did you ask him again about the rifle, did you ask him if +that was the picture, that that rifle was his? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I am sure I did. + +Mr. BALL. Look at your notes. + +Mr. FRITZ. All right, sir. Yes, sir; I did. I asked him again if that +was his picture holding the rifle and he said it was not. + +Mr. BALL. What did he say? + +Mr. FRITZ. He denied it. He said he didn't have any knowledge of the +picture at all. He said someone else had made it, he didn't know a +thing about it or the rifle. + +Mr. BALL. Didn't you also that same morning again ask him if he brought +a sack with him to work on the morning the President was killed? + +Mr. FRITZ. Well, I asked him. I believe that morning I might have asked +him that. I believe I asked him about the sack. + +Mr. BALL. Without looking at your notes there let me ask you this. + +Mr. FRITZ. All right. + +Mr. BALL. When you did ask him about the sack, you did ask him about +it, a sack at one time bringing a sack to work that morning? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes; I did. + +Mr. BALL. And you asked him the size and shape of the sack, didn't you? + +Mr. FRITZ. He never admitted bringing the sack. I showed him the size +probably in asking him if he brought a sack that size and he denied it. +He said he brought his lunch was all he brought. + +Mr. BALL. Didn't he say when you asked him the size and shape of the +sack that he had with him, he said, "I don't recall, it may have been +a small sack or a large sack. You don't always find one that fits your +sandwiches," something like that. + +Mr. FRITZ. That might be true but he said it was a small sack. He said +it was a lunch sack. + +Mr. BALL. Didn't you ask him where he usually kept his sacks, how he +carried it when he came to work in the car? + +Mr. FRITZ. I asked him where he had the sack--his lunch, and he said he +had it in the front seat with him. + +Mr. BALL. Did you ask him if he put any sack in the back seat? + +Mr. FRITZ. He said he did not. + +Mr. BALL. Did you tell him that Frazier had told you that he had had a +long parcel and placed it in the back seat? + +Mr. FRITZ. I am not sure about saying Frazier, I am looking at this +note to see if I did. + +Mr. BALL. The driver of the car---- + +Mr. FRITZ. I remember telling him that someone told me that and I might +have told him that two people saw him because not only Frazier but +Frazier's sister saw that package, you know, and I did question him +about that. + +Mr. BALL. Did he say anything like this? "He might be mistaken or +perhaps thinking about some other time when he picked me up." + +Mr. FRITZ. That is probably right. + +Mr. BALL. Do you remember that? + +Mr. FRITZ. I don't remember it this time but if it is in that note that +is probably right. + +Mr. BALL. On the curtain rods story, do you remember whether you ever +asked him if he told Frazier that he had curtain rods in the package? + +Mr. FRITZ. If I asked him what, please, sir? + +Mr. BALL. Did you ever ask Oswald whether or not he had told Frazier +that he had curtain rods in the package? + +Mr. FRITZ. I am sure I did but I can't remember that right now. But I +am sure I asked him that because I must have asked him that because I +asked him a lot of questions, I asked him if he was fixing his house, I +remember asking about that, and he said he was not. + +Mr. BALL. He said he was what? + +Mr. FRITZ. He was not. + +Mr. BALL. He said he was not fixing it? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes. + +Mr. BALL. Do you know what he said in reply to your question? + +Mr. FRITZ. No, sir; I don't remember what he said about that. + +Mr. BALL. Was he questioned about post office boxes that morning? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I did, I asked him about those post office boxes, +because the postal inspector had told us about those boxes, and Mr. +Holmes did most of the talking to him about the boxes, and he knew +about the boxes and where they were, and he said he had, and I asked +him too if he had ordered a rifle to be shipped to one of those boxes, +and he said he had not, to one of those box numbers. + +Mr. BALL. Did you ask him why he had the boxes? + +Mr. FRITZ. He told me that he had, one of the boxes, if I remember +correctly, he never admitted owning at all. The other box he told me he +got his, he kept to get his mail, that he said he got some papers from +Russia and correspondence with people from Russia and he used that box +for his mail. + +Mr. BALL. How long did you talk to him this morning of November 24? + +Mr. FRITZ. Morning, well, let's see, I am not sure what time we started +talking to him. + +Mr. BALL. 9:30. + +Mr. FRITZ. 9:30, we talked to him then until about--I have the exact +time here. + +Mr. BALL. Can we cut it shorter, your records show 11:15 in your office. + +Mr. FRITZ. Here it is, 11:15. + +Mr. BALL. Is that right? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. First of all, I am going to go through some generally without +identifying the particular place but just the subject matter. + +In an interview with him you did ask him about the pistol, didn't you? + +Mr. FRITZ. Which pistol, the one he shot Tippit with? + +Mr. BALL. The one he had with him when he was arrested. + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I asked him about it, yes, I did. + +Mr. BALL. You asked him when he got it and where he got it? + +Mr. FRITZ. He said he bought it in Fort Worth about 6 or 7 months ago. + +Mr. BALL. How long ago? + +Mr. FRITZ. 6 or 7 months. + +Mr. BALL. Did he tell you where in Fort Worth? + +Mr. FRITZ. No, sir; he wouldn't tell me. + +Mr. BALL. Did you ask him? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I asked him. + +Mr. BALL. What did he say? + +Mr. FRITZ. He just wouldn't tell me. + +Mr. BALL. Did you ask him why he had five live .38 caliber bullets in +his shirt? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes; in his pocket? + +Mr. BALL. Yes. + +Mr. FRITZ. No; I didn't ask him that. + +Mr. BALL. You didn't ask him that? + +Mr. FRITZ. No. + +Mr. BALL. Now you did ask him about the photograph, his photograph, the +photograph that was found in his garage? + +Mr. FRITZ. That is right. + +Mr. BALL. That shows him with a rifle and pistol? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes. + +Mr. BALL. What did he say? + +Mr. FRITZ. He said it was not his picture at all. + +Mr. BALL. You did ask him if he had purchased a rifle from Klein's +store in Chicago, Ill., didn't you? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes; I did. + +Mr. BALL. What did he say? + +Mr. FRITZ. He said he did not. + +Mr. BALL. You did ask him how he explained the photograph, didn't you? + +Mr. FRITZ. How he explained the photograph? + +Mr. BALL. Yes. + +Mr. FRITZ. I asked him about the photograph and he said someone else +took it. It wasn't his picture at all. He said someone in the hall had +taken his picture and made that photograph. + +Mr. BALL. In other words, he said the face was his face but the picture +was made by somebody superimposing his face? + +Mr. FRITZ. That is right; yes. + +Mr. BALL. He denied ever having lived on Neely Street, did he? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; he did. + +Mr. BALL. And you asked him also if he had ever owned a rifle? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. What did he say? + +Mr. FRITZ. He said he had not. He said a long time ago he owned a small +rifle. + +Mr. BALL. What size did he say? + +Mr. FRITZ. He didn't say. He said small rifle. + +Mr. BALL. Did you ask him if he kept a rifle in Mrs. Paine's garage at +Irving, Tex.? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; and I asked him if he brought it from New Orleans +and he said no. + +Mr. BALL. Did you ask him where he kept, if he did keep a rifle in a +blanket? + +Mr. FRITZ. I asked him if he kept it in a blanket and he said no. + +Mr. BALL. Didn't you tell him someone told you he had kept it there? + +Mr. FRITZ. Someone told me he had a rifle and wrapped in a blanket and +kept it in the garage and he said he didn't. It wasn't true. + +Mr. BALL. Did he at any time tell you when you asked him if he owned a +rifle, did he say, "How could I afford to order a rifle on my salary of +a dollar and a quarter an hour," something like that? + +Mr. FRITZ. I don't remember that. + +Mr. BALL. You asked him whether or not he shot President Kennedy, +didn't you? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. What did he say? + +Mr. FRITZ. He said he did not. + +Mr. BALL. And you asked him if he shot Governor Connally? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; he said he didn't do that, he said he didn't shoot +Tippit. + +Mr. BALL. With reference to where he was at the time the President was +shot, did he tell you what floor of the building he was on? + +Mr. FRITZ. I feel sure that he told me he was on the second floor. + +Mr. BALL. Look at 136B. + +Mr. FRITZ. All right, sir. + +Mr. BALL. The second paragraph down, 136B. + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; second floor; yes, sir. He said he usually worked +on the first floor. I asked him what part of the building at the time +the President was shot. He said he was having lunch at about this time +on the first floor. + +Mr. BALL. In his first interview you say that Hosty asked him if he had +been to Mexico. + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes; he did. + +Mr. BALL. He denied it. Did he say he had been at Tijuana once? + +Mr. FRITZ. I don't remember him saying he had been at Tijuana. + +Mr. BALL. What did you remember him saying? + +Mr. FRITZ. I remember him saying he had been to Russia, told me he had +been to Russia, and was over there for some time, and he told Hosty +that he had a record of that, knew he had been there, told him a number +of things so far as that is concerned. + +Mr. BALL. What did he say about Mexico? + +Mr. FRITZ. Mexico, I don't remember him admitting that he had been to +any part of Mexico. + +Mr. BALL. What do you remember him saying? + +Mr. FRITZ. I remember he said he did not go to Mexico City and I don't +remember him saying he ever went to Tijuana. + +Mr. BALL. In your report at 138E you have made a statement there of the +conditions under which this interrogation proceeded, haven't you? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes; I did. + +Mr. BALL. Will you tell us about that. You can describe it either as +you state it here in your own words, but tell us what your difficulties +were? + +Mr. FRITZ. I can tell you in just a minute. My office is small as you +know, it is a small office, it doesn't have too much room to begin with. + +With all the outer office full of officers who all wanted to help and +we were glad to have their assistance and help, and we appreciate it, +but in the hallway we had some 200 news reporters and cameramen with +big cameras and little cameras and cables running on the floors to +where we could hardly get in and out of the office. + +In fact, we had to get two police officers assigned to the front door +to keep them out of the office so we could work. + +My office is badly arranged for a thing of this kind. We never had +anything like this before, of course. I don't have a back door and I +don't have a door to the jail elevator without having to go through +that hall for 20 feet, and each time we went through that hallway to +and from the jail we had to pull him through all those people, and +they, of course, would holler at him and say things to him, and some of +them were bad things, and some were things that seemed to please him +and some seemed to aggravate him, and I don't think that helped at all +in questioning him. I think that all of that had a tendency to keep him +upset. + +Mr. BALL. What about the interview itself? + +Mr. FRITZ. Now the interview itself inside, of course, we did have a +lot of people in the office there to be interviewing a man. It is much +better, and you can keep a man's attention and his thoughts on what you +are talking to him about better I think if there are not more than two +or three people. + +But in a case of this nature as bad as this case was, we certainly +couldn't tell the Secret Service and the FBI we didn't want them to +work on it because they would have the same interest we would have, +they would want to do anything they could do, so we, of course, invited +them in too but it did make a pretty big crowd. + +Mr. BALL. Did you have any tape recorder? + +Mr. FRITZ. No, sir; I don't have a tape recorder. We need one, if we +had one at this time we could have handled these conversations far +better. + +Mr. BALL. The Dallas Police Department doesn't have one? + +Mr. FRITZ. No, sir; I have requested one several times but so far they +haven't gotten me one. + +Mr. BALL. And you had quite a few interruptions, too, during the +questioning, didn't you? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; we had quite a lot of interruptions. I wish we had +had--under the circumstances, I don't think there is much that could +have been done because I saw it as it was there and I don't think there +was a lot that could have been done other than move that crowd out of +there, but I think it would have been more apt to get a confession out +of it or get more true facts from him if I could have got him to sit +down and quietly talked with him. + +Mr. BALL. While he was in your custody up to this time at 11:15, when +he left your office what precautions did you take for his safety in +custody? + +Mr. FRITZ. In custody. We took all kinds of precautions to keep him, +anyone from hurting him. We had an officer go with the jailer and back +and we did everything we thought we could do. + +As I told you a while ago we even put officers on the stage with him +and when we couldn't do that put officers at the end of the stage with +him so they could get quickly to him if anybody tried to hurt him or +molest him. + +Mr. BALL. In your office you always had officers with him? + +Mr. FRITZ. Always, right near him. + +Mr. BALL. When you went down this crowded hallway, how did you protect +him? + +Mr. FRITZ. There were officers went with him each time. + +Mr. BALL. How many? + +Mr. FRITZ. From three to six. + +Mr. BALL. And in the jail, what did you do? + +Mr. FRITZ. In the jail, I don't know. I didn't handle the jail. + +Mr. BALL. You didn't handle the jail? + +Mr. FRITZ. No, sir; I don't handle the jail. I am sure though they used +more than average precautions up there. + +Mr. BALL. When you left at 11:15, what was your purpose in leaving at +11:15? + +Mr. FRITZ. To transfer him to the--you are talking about the 24th? + +Mr. BALL. On the 24th, yes. + +Mr. FRITZ. To transfer him to the county jail. + +Mr. BALL. Had you been requested by Sheriff Decker to transfer him +there before? + +Mr. FRITZ. No, sir. I had talked to the chief about transferring him +down there. The chief had called me on the 23d, on the 23d, I can't +give you the exact minute, probably a little after noon, he had called +me and asked me when we would be ready to transfer him and I told him +we were still questioning him. We didn't want to transfer him yet. He +said, "Can he be ready by about 4 o'clock? Can he be transferred by 4 +o'clock?" I told him I didn't think we could. + +Mr. BALL. That would be Saturday afternoon? + +Mr. FRITZ. That would be the 23d, would be Saturday, yes, sir. Then he +asked me could he be ready by 10 o'clock in the morning, so I could +tell these people something definitely, and I felt sure we would be +ready by then. However, we didn't, we ran overtime as you can see by +this report, an hour and a half over, when they come over to transfer +him. + +Mr. BALL. Why did you say you would not be ready by 4 o'clock on +Saturday? + +Mr. FRITZ. We wanted to ask him some more questions, to get more +information. + +Mr. BALL. Did you consider transferring him at night? + +Mr. FRITZ. At night? + +Mr. BALL. Yes. + +Mr. FRITZ. During the night on Saturday night, I had a call at my home +from uniformed captain, Captain Frazier, I believe is his name, he +called me out at home and told me they had had some threats and he had +to transfer Oswald. + +And I said, well, I don't know. I said there has been no security +setup, and the chief having something to do with this transfer and you +had better call him, because--so he told me he would. + +Mr. BALL. Did you think---- + +Mr. FRITZ. He called me back then in a few minutes and he told me he +couldn't get the chief and told me to leave him where he was. I don't +think that transferring him at night would have been any safer than +transferring, may I say this? + +Mr. BALL. Yes. + +Mr. FRITZ. Any safer than transferring him during the day. I have +always felt that that was Ruby who made that call, I may be wrong, but +he was out late that night and I have always felt he might have made +that call, if two or three of those officers had started out with him +they may have had the same trouble they had the next morning. + +I don't know whether we had been transferring him ourselves, I don't +know that we would have used this same method but we certainly would +have used security of some kind. + +Mr. BALL. Now weren't you transferring him? + +Mr. FRITZ. Sir, yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. What do you mean if we were transferring him ourselves? + +Mr. FRITZ. I mean transferring like I was told to transfer him. + +Mr. BALL. I beg your pardon? + +Mr. FRITZ. I was transferring him like the chief told me to transfer +him. + +Mr. BALL. How would you have transferred him? + +Mr. FRITZ. I did do one thing here, I should tell you about. When the +chief came back and asked me if I was ready to transfer him, I told him +I had already complained to the chief about the big cameras set up in +the jail office and I was afraid we couldn't get out of the jail with +him with all those cameras and all those people in the jail office. + +So when the chief came back he asked if we were ready to transfer and I +said, "We are ready if the security is ready," and he said, "It is all +set up." He said, "The people are across the street, and the newsmen +are all well back in the garage," and he said "It is all set." + +And at that time he told me, he said, "We have got the money wagon up +there to transfer him in," and I said, "Well, I don't like the idea, +chief, of transferring him in a money wagon." We, of course, didn't +know the driver, nor who he was, nor anything about the money wagon, +and he said, "Well, that is all right. Transfer him in your car like +you want to, and we will use the money wagon for a decoy, and I will +have a squad to lead it up to the central expressway and across to the +left on Elm Street and the money wagon can turn down Elm Street and you +can turn down Main Street, when you get to Main Street, going to the +county jail," and he told me he and Chief Stevenson would meet me at +the county jail, that is when we started out. + +Mr. BALL. How would you have done it if you were going to do it? + +Mr. FRITZ. Well, I hesitate to say because it didn't work good this +way. If I had done it like I would do it or usually do it or something +and it hadn't worked I would be just in the same shape you know, and +it would be just as bad, so I don't like to be critical of something +because it turned out real bad. + +You can kind of understand my--I know that our chief didn't know +anything was going to happen or he surely wouldn't have told me to +transfer it that way. + +Mr. BALL. How would you have done it? + +Mr. FRITZ. Well, we transferred Ruby the next day at about the same +time, and I had two of the officers from my office to pick me up away +from the office. We drove by the county jail, saw that the driveway was +open. We had about the same threats on him that we did with Oswald. +We saw that the driveway was open. I went back to the bus station and +I called one of my officers upstairs, gave him the names of two other +officers, told him to get those two officers and not tell anyone even +in the office where they were going, mark Ruby transferred temporarily, +which means coming to the office or going for some fingerprints or +anything, mark him transferred temporarily, bring him down to the jail +elevator at the bottom of the jail, put two of them to stay in the jail +elevator with him. For the other one to come to the outside door and +when he saw our car flush with the door, bring that man right through +those cameras and put him in the back seat, and they did, they shot him +right through those people and they didn't even get pictures and we had +him lie down on the back seat and two officers lean back over him and +we drove him straight up that same street, turned to the left down Main +Street, ran him into the jail entrance, didn't even tell the jailer we +were coming and put him in the jail. It worked all right. + +But now if it hadn't worked, you know, I don't want to be saying that +I know more about transferring than someone else, because this could +happen to me. I could see if it happened to Ruby, I would have had all +the blame. + +Mr. BALL. Now, if on that morning at 11:15 you planned to transfer him, +didn't you, according to the chief's orders? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I did. + +Mr. BALL. And you were through questioning him, weren't you? + +Mr. FRITZ. Sir? + +Mr. BALL. You were all through questioning him? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; we had everything that we could do at that time. I +would have talked to him later in the county jail but we didn't need to +hold the man any longer. + +Mr. BALL. Had he been handcuffed? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; and I told--he was already handcuffed, and I told +one of the officers to handcuff his left hand to Oswald's right hand, +and to keep him right with him. + +Mr. BALL. That was Leavelle? + +Mr. FRITZ. Leavelle, yes, sir. He first started the other hand on the +other side, and I told Officer Graves to get on the other side and +Montgomery to follow him, and I would go down and an officer by the +name of Swain who works across the hall from us came over and offered +to help us, he went down the jail elevator and he went out ahead of me +and I went out in back of him and I was approaching our car to open the +back door to put him in, they were having a terrible time to get the +car in through the people--they were crowding all over the car--and I +heard the shot and I turned just in time to see the officers push Ruby +to the pavement. + +Mr. BALL. When you came out of the jail door were the lights on? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; the lights were on. I don't believe they were on +as we came to the door, but they came out immediately as we were coming +out of the door, and I asked one of the officers, two of them answered +me if everything was secure and they said everything was all right. So +we came out. + +Mr. BALL. What about the lights? + +Mr. FRITZ. The lights were almost blinding. + +Mr. BALL. Did you see the people in the crowd? + +Mr. FRITZ. I could see the people but I could hardly tell who they +were, because of the lights. I have been wearing glasses this year and +with glasses those lights don't help you facing a bright light like +that, the lights were glaring. + +Mr. BALL. How far ahead of Ruby were you? + +Mr. FRITZ. Well. I thought they were right behind me almost but I +noticed from the picture they were a little further back than I +actually thought they were, probably where Mr. Baker is to this +gentleman. I believe maybe a little bit farther than that, maybe +about---- + +Mr. BALL. How far behind Oswald were you, how far behind Oswald. Oswald +was behind you? + +Mr. FRITZ. Behind me. + +Mr. BALL. How many feet would you say? + +Mr. FRITZ. In feet I would say probably 8 feet. + +Mr. BALL. Did you ever know of Jack Ruby? + +Mr. FRITZ. No, sir; I never did know him. I never knew him at all. Some +of the officers knew him. But I never knew him. + +Mr. BALL. Were there any flashbulbs or were they just steady beams of +light? + +Mr. FRITZ. I didn't see any flashing lights. These were steady blinding +lights that I saw. That I couldn't see, you might say. + +Mr. DULLES. These were television cameras? + +(Discussion off the record.) + +Mr. BALL. Did you hear of Warren Reynolds? + +Mr. FRITZ. Warren Reynolds? + +Mr. BALL. Who was shot sometime afterwards? + +Mr. FRITZ. Used car lot man? + +Mr. BALL. Used car lot? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I talked to him. He was shot through the head. + +Mr. BALL. Yes. + +Mr. FRITZ. I didn't talk to him very long because I didn't have to +talk to him long or I didn't have to talk to him very long but he told +me two or three different stories and I could tell he was a sick man +and he had no doubt brain damage from that bullet and he is apt to say +anything. + +Mr. BALL. What did he say? + +Mr. FRITZ. He told me that--he told me two or three stories, one story +he told me when they first brought him into me, for me to talk to him, +he told me that he saw this Ruby coming down there and he told him--he +said he followed him up and saw which way he went. + +Mr. BALL. Ruby? + +Mr. FRITZ. Saw Oswald. + +Mr. BALL. Oswald? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, Oswald, and I questioned him further and I asked him, +how far, how close was the closest you were ever to him, how far were +you from him? He said, well, from that car lot across the street there. +Well, of course, if he had been at a car lot across the street it would +be difficult to follow him on the sidewalk. It would be quite difficult +so I talked to him for just a short time and I didn't bother with him +any more. + +I already had some history on him because the other bureau, the forgery +bureau had been handling him and they had already told me a lot about +him. They discounted anything that he told. + +Mr. BALL. Did you find out who shot him and why he was shot? + +Mr. FRITZ. This man on the car lot? + +Mr. BALL. Yes. + +Mr. FRITZ. They think it might have been over a car deal but they are +not positive and I don't know that he will ever tell them. + +Mr. BALL. Have you ever discovered any connection between the shooting +of Warren Reynolds and the killing? + +Mr. FRITZ. Never. + +Mr. BALL. The assassination of the President? + +Mr. FRITZ. None at all. + +Mr. BALL. The killing of Tippit? + +Mr. FRITZ. No; we found nothing. We checked it. + +Mr. BALL. Any connection between Oswald and Warren Reynolds or Ruby and +Warren Reynolds? + +Mr. FRITZ. We found no connection. We had all kinds of rumors, of +course, that they were connected, and we didn't find anything. + +Mr. BALL. Did you investigate it? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I had some officers investigate it, and the +forgery bureau investigated him because they were already working on +the shooting case. They handled all the shootings where people are not +killed. + +Mr. BALL. I see. + +Had you originally planned to be in the motorcade, had you been ordered +to be? + +Mr. FRITZ. At first? + +Mr. BALL. Yes, sir. + +Mr. FRITZ. I had been; yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. Then it was changed, what day? + +Mr. FRITZ. Ten o'clock the night before the parade, I got a call at +home telling me that my assignment had been changed and told me to go +to the speaker's tent. + +Mr. BALL. Who called you? + +Mr. FRITZ. Chief Stevenson. + +Mr. BALL. Do you think that made any difference? + +Mr. FRITZ. I don't know. I wouldn't want to say because it is like +telling about those transfers, where we would have been in that parade +we would have been pretty close under that window we might have had a +man shot or have good luck or bad luck. + +Mr. DULLES. I didn't quite get you where were you to be in the +motorcade if you had been? + +Mr. FRITZ. Right behind the Vice President's car. + +Mr. DULLES. Behind the Vice President's car? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. + +Mr. DULLES. Had there been a plan for a car in front of the President's +car? + +Mr. FRITZ. I don't know, I didn't make the arrangements for the parade. +That was only--those were the only instructions I had--was that one +assignment. + +Mr. BALL. Did you--do you feel any resentment toward the Secret Service +or the FBI men because they were in your office? + +Mr. FRITZ. Oh, no, no, because I work with them all the time. + +Mr. BALL. You do? + +Mr. FRITZ. Mr. Bookhout is in my office with the FBI. My books are all +on the outside and they check my books as often as I do. + +Mr. BALL. Well, do you think you could have done a better job perhaps +if there hadn't been some investigators? + +Mr. FRITZ. I don't know, that would be kind of a bad question. + +Mr. BALL. I mean questioning Oswald. + +Mr. FRITZ. Maybe they would have done better if I hadn't been there. + +Mr. DULLES. How was the cooperation, was it pretty good between the +Secret Service and the FBI? + +Mr. FRITZ. We got along fine with the Secret Service and FBI a hundred +percent. + +Mr. McCLOY. Captain Fritz, did you have charge of the attempted +shooting of General Walker? + +Mr. FRITZ. No; that wasn't homicide, it would be handled by Captain +Jones, it would have been the other bureau. + +Mr. McCLOY. Captain Jones. Have we examined Captain Jones? + +Mr. HUBERT. A deposition has been taken. + +Mr. DULLES. You had nothing to do with the investigation of the Walker +case? + +Mr. FRITZ. Not at all. That happened to be Captain Jones and Lieutenant +Cunningham. + +Mr. DULLES. Did that case come up at all in any of your interrogations +of Oswald? Did you ever ask him whether he was involved or anything of +that sort? + +Mr. FRITZ. I don't think that I ever asked him about that. If I did, I +don't remember it. I don't remember asking about that, asking him about +that at all. We had a little information on it but I didn't want to mix +it up in that other case and I didn't want to mix it up. + +Mr. McCLOY. I would like to go back some distance. When you first went +into the building there. + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. + +Mr. McCLOY. And as of your knowledge, when did the first broadcast go +out of a description of Oswald, according to what information you had +on the subject? + +Mr. FRITZ. I wouldn't have that because I hadn't heard a broadcast of +a description when I went into the building. So if one went out it +probably was after I went in. + +Mr. McCLOY. When Mr. Truly told you that one of his men was missing? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; then he gave me a description of him. + +Mr. McCLOY. And he gave you a description at that time? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes; home address. + +Mr. McCLOY. That was his home address and also a description? + +Mr. FRITZ. His home address and a description, what he looked like, his +age, and so forth. + +Mr. McCLOY. Now that description, to whom was that description given? + +Mr. FRITZ. Well, I never did give it any anyone because when I got to +the office he was there. + +Mr. McCLOY. He was there when you got to the office? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes. + +Mr. McCLOY. I understand---- + +Mr. FRITZ. I think I could help you a minute about that description +that went out over the radio but I didn't hear it. When I got to the +building, some officer there told me, said we think the man who did +the shooting out of the window is a tall, white man, that is all I +had. That didn't mean much you know because you can't tell five or six +floors up whether a man is tall or short. + +Mr. McCLOY. Did you question the colored men that were on the fifth +floor? + +Mr. FRITZ. I talked to part of them. Most of them were questioned by +the other officers, investigating officers I had assigned there; yes, +sir. I talked to very few of them. I did do this. I did assign an +officer to take affidavits from all of those people. + +Mr. McCLOY. Were you present at the showup at which Brennan was the +witness? + +Mr. FRITZ. Brennan? + +Mr. McCLOY. Brennan was the alleged---- + +Mr. FRITZ. Is that the man that the Secret Service brought over there, +Mr. Sorrels brought over? + +Mr. McCLOY. I don't know whether Mr. Sorrels---- + +Mr. FRITZ. I don't think I was present but I will tell you what, I +helped Mr. Sorrels find the time that that man--we didn't show that he +was shown at all on our records, but Mr. Sorrels called me and said he +did show him and he wanted me to give him the time of the showup. I +asked him to find out from his officers who were with Mr. Brennan the +names of the people that we had there, and he gave me those two Davis +sisters, and he said, when he told me that, of course, I could tell +what showup it was and then I gave him the time. + +Mr. McCLOY. But you were not present to the best of your recollection +when Brennan was in the showup? + +Mr. FRITZ. I don't believe I was there, I doubt it. + +Mr. McCLOY. Did you ever inspect these premises on Neely Street? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I did. With the Secret Service. We went over there +and we searched that apartment thoroughly. It was vacant. The man came +over that owned it, opened the house for us, we searched it thoroughly +and went through the yard and made some pictures in the backyard +exactly like that with another man, of course, holding the papers. + +Mr. McCLOY. Are the pictures in the record? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; we have them in the record, the ones we made over +there. I suppose you have them here. + +Mr. McCLOY. Do we have the pictures? + +Mr. BALL. I don't believe we have any pictures that you made. + +Mr. FRITZ. Of the one we made over in the backyard. + +Mr. McCLOY. I think it is important we get those because of the charge +this picture was doctored. Have a picture of the premises which these +pictures were taken. + +Mr. BALL. Maybe Lieutenant Day has them. + +Mr. FRITZ. No, sir; those pictures were made with--we have them, I am +sure of that, our men made the pictures. I believe we have them right +here. Maybe we didn't bring them, but we have them. + +Mr. BALL. Could you send them to us? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes; Lieutenant Day may have some with him. His men have +them. + +Mr. BALL. Maybe Lieutenant Day has them. I have a few questions here. +You mentioned that Hosty, the first day he was there you said that he +said he knows these people. Did he tell you that he knew Oswald? + +Mr. FRITZ. Well, I will tell you, he wasn't talking to me really. + +Mr. BALL. What did he say to Oswald? + +Mr. FRITZ. That was the agent--what did Hosty say to Oswald? + +Mr. BALL. Yes. + +Mr. FRITZ. Or what did---- + +Mr. BALL. Did Hosty say? + +Mr. FRITZ. I thought you meant what about Shanklin said to Hosty. + +Mr. BALL. Did Hosty say to you that he knew Oswald? + +Mr. FRITZ. I heard Mr. Shanklin tell Mr. Hosty on the telephone. I had +Mr. Bookhout pick up the telephone and I had an extension. + +Mr. BALL. What did he hear? + +Mr. FRITZ. He said is Hosty in that investigation, Bookhout said no. +He said, "I want him in that investigation right now because he knows +those people he has been talking to," and he said some other things +that I don't want to repeat, about what to do if he didn't do it right +quick. So I didn't tell them that I even knew what Mr. Shanklin said. I +walked out there and called them in. + +Mr. BALL. Was Oswald handcuffed at all times during the interrogation? + +Mr. FRITZ. I believe he was; yes, sir, I believe we kept him handcuffed +at all times. The first time we brought him in he was handcuffed with +his hands behind him and he was uncomfortable and I had the officers +change them and put his hands up front. + +Mr. BALL. Was he fed any time during that day? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; he was. I don't remember buying him something +to eat. I usually do, if they are hard up in jail at the time I buy +something to eat but some of the other officers remember me buying him +food but the only thing he would drink was I believe some milk and ate +a little package of those crackers sandwiches and one of the other +officers bought him a cup of coffee and that is all he would either eat +or drink, that is all he wanted. + +Mr. BALL. Now he talked to his wife and---- + +Mr. FRITZ. And his mother. + +Mr. BALL. And his brother, Robert? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I am pretty sure he did. + +Mr. BALL. Where did he talk to them? + +Mr. FRITZ. I believe that would be up in the jail. He didn't want them +in my office. + +Mr. BALL. Do you have that jail---- + +Mr. FRITZ. Wait just one second. No, sir; that was in the jail. + +Mr. BALL. Is the jail wired so that you can listen to conversations? + +Mr. FRITZ. No, sir; it isn't. Sometimes I wish I could hear some of the +things they say but we don't. + +Mr. BALL. In other words, you don't monitor conversations? + +Mr. FRITZ. No, sir; we let them talk to anyone they want to. If they +are allowed to use the telephone, of course, they are allowed free use +of it. Sometimes they do a little better than that. Sometimes they +place a long distance call and charge it to the city. + +Mr. McCLOY. When you went in, Captain Fritz, and you saw the site which +Oswald is alleged to have fired the shot from---- + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. + +Mr. McCLOY. Did you see any signs of a lunch there, a chicken there? + +Mr. FRITZ. No, sir; I will tell you where that story about the chicken +comes from. At the other window above there, where people in days past, +you know had eaten their lunches, they left chicken bones and pieces +of bread, all kinds of things up and down there. That isn't where he +was at all. He was in a different window, so I don't think those things +have anything to do with it. Someone wrote a story about it in the +papers, and we have got all kinds of bad publicity from it and they +wrote in telling us how to check those chicken bones and how to get +them from the stomach and everything. + +Mr. DULLES. What was Oswald's attitude toward the police and police +authority? + +Mr. FRITZ. You know I didn't have trouble with him. If we would just +talk to him quietly like we are talking right now, we talked all right +until I asked him a question that meant something, every time I asked +him a question that meant something, that would produce evidence he +immediately told me he wouldn't tell me about it and he seemed to +anticipate what I was going to ask. In fact, he got so good at it +one time, I asked him if he had had any training, if he hadn't been +questioned before. + +Mr. DULLES. Questioned before? + +Mr. FRITZ. Questioned before, and he said that he had, he said yes, the +FBI questioned him when he came back from Russia from a long time and +they tried different methods. He said they tried the buddy boy method +and thorough method, and let me see some other method he told me and he +said, "I understand that." + +Mr. DULLES. Did you ask him whether he had had any communist training +or indoctrination or anything of that kind? + +Mr. FRITZ. I asked him some questions about that and I asked him where +he was in Russia. He told me he was in Russia, first I believe he told +me, first I believe he said in Moscow, and then he said he went to +Minsk, Russia, and I asked him what did you do, get some training, go +to school? I suspected he had some training in sabotage from the way +he talked and acted, and he said "no, I worked in a radio factory." He +acted like a person who was prepared for what he was doing. + +Mr. DULLES. Have you any views of your own as to motive from your talks +with him? Did you get any clues as to possible motive in assassinating +the President? + +Mr. FRITZ. I can only tell you what little I know now. I am sure that +we have people in Washington here that can tell far more than I can. + +Mr. DULLES. Well, you saw the man and the others didn't see the man. + +Mr. FRITZ. I got the impression, I got the impression that he was doing +it because of his feeling about the Castro revolution, and I think that +he felt, he had a lot of feeling about that revolution. + +(At this point the Chief Justice entered the hearing room.) + +Mr. FRITZ. I think that was the reason. I noticed another thing. I +noticed a little before when Walker was shot, he had come out with +some statements about Castro and about Cuba and a lot of things and if +you will remember the President had some stories a few weeks before +his death about Cuba and about Castro and some things, and I wondered +if that didn't have some bearing. I have no way of knowing that other +than just watching him and talking to him. I think it was his feeling +about his belief in being a Marxist, I think he had--he told me he had +debated in New Orleans, and that he tried to get converts to this Fair +Play for Cuba organization, so I think that was his motive. I think he +was doing it because of that. + +Mr. DULLES. Did he express any animosity against anyone, the President +or the Governor or Walker or anybody? + +Mr. FRITZ. No, sir; he did not. Not with me he didn't. + +Mr. DULLES. Not with you? + +Mr. FRITZ. No, sir. He just, the fact he just didn't talk about them +much. He just didn't say hardly anything. When I asked him he didn't +say much about them. + +Mr. McCLOY. You knew Officer Tippit? + +Mr. FRITZ. I wanted to tell you one thing before I forget. One time I +asked him something about whether or not, either I asked him or someone +else in there asked him, if he thought he would be better off, if he +thought the country would be better off with the President killed and +he said, "Well, I think that the Vice President has about the same +views as the President has." He says he will probably do about the same +thing that President Kennedy will do. + +Mr. DULLES. Oswald said that to you? + +Mr. FRITZ. Either to me or someone, it could be one of the other +officers who asked that question while they were talking about him. + +Mr. McCLOY. Of course, you knew Officer Tippit? + +Mr. FRITZ. I didn't know him. I didn't know him. No, sir. + +Mr. McCLOY. He didn't work directly under you? + +Mr. FRITZ. I looked at his record and saw that the chief of the +personnel file and I looked at the personnel file and I talked to a +number of officers who did know him and they speak very highly. + +Mr. DULLES. Have you ever reviewed his record since these events? + +Mr. FRITZ. I didn't exactly review it but I read a good part of it and +the chief read a good part of it to me. + +Mr. DULLES. The record is good? + +Mr. FRITZ. The record is good. It was average, it looked better than +a lot of them do. It is all right. It had the same little things that +happen to most officers, maybe some little complaint about something +minor, nothing of any consequence. + +Mr. McCLOY. So far as you know he had no connection with Ruby? + +Mr. FRITZ. I am sure he did not. I think I know what you people have +probably heard. We hear all kinds of rumors down our way and I am not +trying to volunteer a lot of things here. I know you have a lot of +business to do, have you heard something about some connection between +Oswald and Ruby and Tippit, and some fourth person. I heard some story, +we didn't find any ground for it at all. We didn't find any connection +of any kind that would connect them together. I can't even find a +connection between Ruby and Oswald and I can't place them in the same +building at the same time nor place them in the same building together, +YMcA, one of them lived there and one of them was taking some kind of +an athletic course there. + +Mr. McCLOY. But not at the same time? + +Mr. FRITZ. Well, I can't place them there at the same time; no, sir. + +Mr. DULLES. Have you discovered any connection between any of your +officers and Ruby? + +Mr. FRITZ. Well, I think a lot of the officers knew Ruby. I think about +two or three officers in my office knew him, and I think practically +all of the special service officers who handle the vice and the clubs +and the liquor violations, I think nearly all of them knew him and, of +course, the officer knew him who had arrested him carrying pistols a +time or two, two or three times, uniformed officer mostly. He seemed to +be well known. It seems a lot of people in town knew him. But I never +was in his place and I didn't know him. Twenty years ago I might have +been in his place. + +Mr. BALL. Captain Fritz, from being with Oswald for a couple of days +what were your impressions about him? Was he afraid, scared? + +Mr. FRITZ. Was he afraid? + +Mr. BALL. Yes. + +Mr. FRITZ. No, sir; I don't believe he was afraid at all. I think he +was a person who had his mind made up what to do and I think he was +like a person just dedicated to a cause. And I think he was above +average for intelligence. + +I know a lot of people call him a nut all the time but he didn't talk +like a nut. He knew exactly when to quit talking. He knew the kind of +questions. I could talk to him as long as I wanted to if I just talked +about a lot of things that didn't amount to anything. But any time I +asked him a question that meant something he answered quick. + +Mr. BALL. Did you ever hear of a lawyer in Chicago that called up and +offered to help Ruby? + +Mr. FRITZ. Some lawyer from Chicago sent him a wire. + +Mr. BALL. Did you see the wire? + +Mr. FRITZ. I saw the wire; yes. + +Mr. BALL. Do you know who the lawyer was? + +Mr. FRITZ. No, sir; I don't remember his name. I believe he probably +had it delivered to the jail. + +Mr. BALL. To Oswald, a lawyer from Chicago offered his services to +Oswald? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes; Ruby too. But I am talking about the one to Oswald. I +don't know that I would even know his name if I heard it. + +Mr. BALL. We have some pictures here from the crime laboratory as +we have marked Exhibits 712, 713, and 714. The witness has already +identified a picture of Oswald. I show you this, Captain, can you tell +me which one of these pictures on Exhibit 714 that you showed to Oswald +the day when you interrogated him, asked him it that was his picture? + +Mr. FRITZ. It is the one with the two papers in his hand. + +Mr. BALL. The one to the right. Did you ever show him the one to the +left? + +Mr. FRITZ. I don't think so. + +Mr. BALL. We offer 713, 712, and 714 as two pictures taken. + +Mr. FRITZ. These are the pictures I told about a while ago. + +Mr. BALL. They were taken by your crime lab? + +Mr. FRITZ. Our crime lab took these pictures when I went over there +with Mr. Sorrels. + +Mr. BALL. Where were they taken? + +Mr. FRITZ. In the backyard of the Neely Street address. If you will +note, you will see in this picture, you notice that top right there of +this shed. Of course, this picture is taken up closer, but if you step +back further you can see about where the height comes to on that shed +right there. Not exactly in the same position. + +Mr. BALL. I offered these. (Commission Exhibits Nos. 712, 713, and 714 +were admitted.) + +Mr. FRITZ. It shows the gate. + +Mr. BALL. Indicating the location of the picture taken--this set will +indicate the pictures were all taken at the Neely Street backyard. + +Mr. DULLES. You recall the date of these pictures, in April? + +Mr. FRITZ. I believe they will be dated on the back of them. + +Mr. DULLES. April, so the trees would be about the same. + +Mr. BALL. When were the pictures taken by your crime lab? + +Mr. FRITZ. I am not sure but I believe the date will be on the back of +the picture. November 29, 1963. Picture made by Officer Brown who works +in the crime lab. + +Mr. BALL. Captain, I would like to ask you some more questions about +your prisoner. + +Mr. FRITZ. All right, sir. + +Mr. BALL. The first day that you had Oswald in custody, did you +get a notice from the FBI, any of the FBI officers that there had +been a communication from Washington suggesting that you take extra +precautions for the safety of Oswald? + +Mr. FRITZ. No, sir; there was not. + +Mr. BALL. Do you recall whether or not on Friday---- + +The CHAIRMAN. What was your answer to that? + +Mr. FRITZ. I did not, I got no such instructions. In fact, we +couldn't--we would have taken the precautions without the notice but we +did not get the notice, I never heard of that. + +Mr. BALL. Do you recall that on Friday, November 22, Wade asked you or +did he or didn't District Attorney Wade ask you to transfer Oswald to +the county jail for security? + +Mr. FRITZ. That would be on the night of the 22d? + +Mr. BALL. On the night of the 22d. + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; he asked me if I would transfer him that night. + +Mr. BALL. What did you tell him? + +Mr. FRITZ. I told him we didn't want to transfer him yet. We wanted to +talk to him some more. We talked a little bit. He didn't actually want +him transferred. He just was more or less talking about whether or not +we wanted to transfer him. + +Mr. BALL. Now on Saturday Decker called you and asked you to transfer +him? + +Mr. FRITZ. On Saturday did he call me and ask me to transfer him? + +Mr. BALL. Yes, that would be the 23d. + +Mr. FRITZ. No, sir; he did not. + +Mr. BALL. Did Chief Curry tell you that Decker had called or anything +of that sort? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; when I was talking to Chief Curry on one of those +conversations, I don't think it is the conversation now when he told +me about the hours, I think it is another conversation, I told him, I +said, "I don't know whether we were going to transfer him or Decker was +going to transfer him," and Chief Curry said, "We are going to transfer +him, I have talked to Decker, we are going to transfer him." + +Mr. BALL. When were the plans for the transfer made? + +Mr. FRITZ. When were the plans made? + +Mr. BALL. Yes; do you know? + +Mr. FRITZ. I don't know about that. The only thing I know is what I +told you about when the chief told me about would he be ready by 10 +o'clock that morning, and I told him I thought we could. + +Mr. BALL. You didn't make the plans yourself? + +Mr. FRITZ. No, sir. + +Mr. BALL. They were made by the chief? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; they were made by the chief. + +Mr. BALL. When did the chief first tell you what the plans were? + +Mr. FRITZ. That was on the 23d. He didn't tell me about all the plans, +of course, at that time because I told you when he came up to tell us +about that, when he asked when we were ready to go he told me about the +armored car, that is the first I had ever heard of that. + +Mr. BALL. Did you ever tell any of the press the time that Oswald would +be moved? + +Mr. FRITZ. No, sir; I don't believe I did. I was interrogated by a +bunch of them as I started to leave the office on the night of the 23d. +As we started to the elevator, a group of us from my office, and some +of the FBI officers, we started to the elevator some 10 or 20 reporters +came up and said the chief said we were going to transfer him at 10 +o'clock the next morning and if we were and I didn't talk to them so I +don't think I ever said much if anything to them because I know one of +them followed me almost to my parking lot, I know, asking me questions +about the transfer. + +Mr. BALL. At 11:15 when they left your office, do you know whether or +not there was any broadcast over your radio as to your movements? + +Mr. FRITZ. On our radio? + +Mr. BALL. Yes. + +Mr. FRITZ. I wouldn't know. + +Mr. BALL. Or on any radio, were there any radio broadcasters on your +floor at that time? + +Mr. FRITZ. Any of those newsmen? + +Mr. BALL. Newsmen? + +Mr. FRITZ. Oh, yes; they might not have been on the floor but they were +all down in the basement. You are talking about the morning of the 24th? + +Mr. BALL. On the morning of the 24th when you were moving? + +Mr. FRITZ. Any number of them downstairs. I don't remember whether +there were any upstairs or not. There probably was maybe a few of them +because I don't think there was any time when there wasn't a few of +them up there, but we didn't leave through that hall and go through the +elevator. We went through the mail elevator. + +Mr. BALL. On the 22d and 23d, the third floor was full of newspapermen +and photographers? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; all the time, completely full. + +Mr. BALL. Had they left the third floor on the 24th? + +Mr. FRITZ. A lot of them had; yes, sir. A lot of them had, and were +downstairs in the basement. + +Mr. BALL. How about the television cameras? + +Mr. FRITZ. I noticed--television cameras, they were downstairs too. + +Mr. BALL. They weren't up on the third floor? + +Mr. FRITZ. I don't believe--there could have been one or two of them +left up there, I don't think many of them were still up there. + +Mr. BALL. Most of them were downstairs? + +Mr. FRITZ. Most of them were downstairs. I wouldn't say there weren't +any up there because I don't think there was any time when there wasn't +at least a few of them up there. + +Mr. BALL. Now, when you went down the jail elevator and you said you +got out and went forward to see if everything was secure. What did you +mean by that? + +Mr. FRITZ. Well, I meant if everything, it was all right for us to go +to our car with him. We didn't want to leave the jail office with him +unless everything was all right because as long as we were in the jail +office we could put him back in the elevator and if everything wasn't +all right, I didn't want to come out with him. + +Mr. BALL. And you went ahead, didn't you? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; first Lieutenant Swain and then I went out and +then the other officers followed me with the prisoner. + +Mr. BALL. Was the car there you were going to get in? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. Had you reached the car yet? + +Mr. FRITZ. I was just in the act of reaching for the door to open the +back door, I looked at that picture, and it doesn't show the exact +distance I was from the car but I couldn't have been any further than +reaching distance. + +Mr. BALL. When you left, or after Ruby shot Oswald, he was taken +upstairs, wasn't he? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; he was. He was first carried into the jail office, +you mean Ruby? + +Mr. BALL. Ruby, when Ruby shot Oswald? + +Mr. FRITZ. Oswald was carried into the jail office and put on the floor +there. Ruby was brought into the jail office. Now I believe that Ruby +was brought into the jail office after Oswald, I believe Oswald was +already on the floor or behind there because I know the officers had +taken Ruby upstairs went behind me and I saw them pass behind me with +him to the jail. + +Mr. BALL. Did you talk to Ruby? + +Mr. FRITZ. Did I talk to him; no, sir; I talked to him later. + +Mr. McCLOY. I wonder if at this time you would want a little recess? + +Mr. FRITZ. No, sir; I am comfortable. + +Mr. McCLOY. I think we kept the chief on a little bit too long this +morning. + +Mr. FRITZ. If it is all right with you. + +Mr. BALL. Did you talk to Ruby at that time? + +Mr. FRITZ. No, sir; not at that time. + +Mr. BALL. Later? + +Mr. FRITZ. I talked to him later, probably an hour later. I guess I +have the exact time here if you need it. + +Mr. BALL. What did Ruby say to you, do you have the exact time? + +Mr. FRITZ. Well, he told me, I told him, I, of course, wanted to know +something about premeditation because I was thinking about the trial +too and I told him I wanted to ask him some questions and he said, +well, he first said, "I don't want to talk to you, I want to talk to +my lawyers," and he said, I believe he told me too that he had been +advised by a lawyer, and I asked him some other question and he said, +"Now if you will level with me and you won't make me look like a fool +in front of my lawyers I will talk to you." + +I didn't ask him one way or the other, but I did ask him some questions +and he told me that he shot him, told me that he was all torn up about +the Presidential killing, that he felt terribly sorry for Mrs. Kennedy. +He didn't want to see her to have to come back to Dallas for a trial, +and a lot of other things like that. + +Mr. BALL. Did you ask him how he got down to the jail? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes; I did. + +Mr. BALL. What did he say? + +Mr. FRITZ. He told me he came down that ramp from the outside. So I +told him, I said, "No, you couldn't have come down that ramp because +there would be an officer at the top and an officer at the bottom and +you couldn't come down that ramp." He said, "I am not going to talk to +you any more, I am not going to get into trouble," and he never talked +to me any more about it. + +Mr. BALL. Did you ever talk to him again? + +Mr. FRITZ. I don't think I ever talked to him after that. I talked to +him a little while then and I don't believe I ever talked to him after +that. I asked him when he first decided to kill Oswald, and he didn't +tell me that. He told me something else, talked about something else. + +Mr. BALL. What was that time, you said you could give us the time? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I can give you the time. 3:05. + +Mr. BALL. What time? + +Mr. FRITZ. 3:05. + +Mr. BALL. 3:05 in the afternoon? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. Did you know that Archer or Dean or Newman had talked to Ruby? + +Mr. FRITZ. I didn't know that they had talked to him. I knew that some +officers had talked to him but I didn't know who they were. + +Mr. BALL. Were there any reports given you by any one of these three +men, Dean---- + +Mr. FRITZ. They weren't given to me. Those reports were given to the +investigative team that the chief setup headed by Captain Jones and +some of the inspectors and they gave me a copy. I have copies of it. + +Mr. BALL. You have copies of those reports? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I do. + +Mr. BALL. Do you know, did you know prior to the trial of Ruby that +either Dean or Archer or Newman, either one, had claimed to have talked +to Ruby about his premeditation in the killing of Oswald? + +Mr. FRITZ. Well, sir, I didn't know, I wouldn't have known that. They +never told me about that. I wouldn't have known. I think that maybe the +chief had taken some report from Dean, but I didn't see that until, I +think I put it in this book a few days ago. + +Mr. BALL. Well now, did you have charge of the investigation of the +Oswald killing? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. You were in charge of that? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. Then all the reports would come to you? + +Mr. FRITZ. Come here; yes, sir. With one exception. The reports from +all those officers in the security in the basement. You see, I had +nothing to do with setting up the security in the basement, that +was under the security division and the chief might have given that +assignment to, those are in a different book, they are in a report +made to this investigative team appointed by the chief. We have their +copies, too. + +Mr. BALL. Well, but you had charge of the investigation of the homicide? + +Mr. FRITZ. The homicide but I didn't have charge of the investigation +of the basement incident. + +Mr. BALL. Well, the reason for my question is that there has been some +question raised as to testimony in the Ruby trial of these men, Dean, +Archer, and Newman. + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I heard that. + +Mr. BALL. And they have testified to certain statements made that they +heard from Ruby afterward, and the question is whether or not these men +have reported to you that they had heard that. + +Mr. FRITZ. They didn't report it to me; no, sir. + +Mr. BALL. Or reported it in writing to their department? + +Mr. FRITZ. They didn't report it to me, if they reported to anyone +I didn't get it. But I understand that Dean had made some kind of +special report to the chief but that wasn't to me. + +Mr. BALL. Did you ever know a man named Roger Craig, a deputy sheriff? + +Mr. FRITZ. Roger Craig, I might if I knew which one he was. Do we have +it here? + +Mr. BALL. He was a witness from whom you took a statement in your +office or some of your men. + +Mr. FRITZ. Some of my officers. + +Mr. BALL. He is a deputy sheriff. + +Mr. FRITZ. One deputy sheriff who started to talk to me but he was +telling me some things that I knew wouldn't help us and I didn't talk +to him but someone else took an affidavit from him. His story that he +was telling didn't fit with what we knew to be true. + +Mr. BALL. Roger Craig stated that about 15 minutes after the shooting +he saw a man, a white man, leave the Texas State Book Depository +Building, run across a lawn, and get into a white Rambler driven by a +colored man. + +Mr. FRITZ. I don't think that is true. + +Mr. BALL. I am stating this. You remember the witness now? + +Mr. FRITZ. I remember the witness; yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. Did that man ever come into your office and talk to you in +the presence of Oswald? + +Mr. FRITZ. In the presence of Oswald? + +Mr. BALL. Yes. + +Mr. FRITZ. No, sir; I am sure he did not. I believe that man did come +to my office in that little hallway, you know outside my office, and +I believe I stepped outside the door and talked to him for a minute +and I let someone else take an affidavit from him. We should have that +affidavit from him if it would help. + +Mr. BALL. Now this man states that, has stated, that he came to your +office and Oswald was in your office, and you asked him to look at +Oswald and tell you whether or not this was the man he saw, and he +says that in your presence he identified Oswald as the man that he had +seen run across this lawn and get into the white Rambler sedan. Do you +remember that? + +Mr. FRITZ. I think it was taken, I think it was one of my officers, and +I think if he saw him he looked through that glass and saw him from the +outside because I am sure of one thing that I didn't bring him in the +office with Oswald. + +Mr. BALL. You are sure you didn't? + +Mr. FRITZ. I am sure of that. I feel positive of that. I would remember +that I am sure. + +Mr. BALL. He also says that in that office---- + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. After he had said, "That is the man," that Oswald got up from +his chair and slammed his hand on the table and said, "Now everybody +will know who I am." Did that ever occur in your presence? + +Mr. FRITZ. If it did I never saw anything like that; no, sir. + +Mr. BALL. That didn't occur? + +Mr. FRITZ. No, sir; it didn't. That man is not telling a true story if +that is what he said. Do you have any--could I ask a question, is it +all right if I ask a question? + +Mr. McCLOY. All right, go ahead. + +Mr. BALL. Go ahead. + +Mr. FRITZ. I was going to ask if we had any affidavits from any of our +officers that would back that up? If they did I never heard of it. + +Mr. BALL. If you are here tomorrow. + +Mr. FRITZ. It is something I don't know anything about. + +Mr. BALL. If you are here tomorrow I would like to show you the +deposition of the man for you to read it. + +Mr. FRITZ. I am sure I would know that. The only time I saw the man hit +the desk was when Mr. Hosty talked to him and he really got upset about +that. + +Mr. DULLES. Is that in the testimony, have you testified about that? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. + +Mr. McCLOY. That shows his agitation over the alleged---- + +Mr. FRITZ. Questioning. + +Mr. McCLOY. Questioning of his wife. + +Mr. FRITZ. That is right. + +Mr. BALL. In the light of your experience in this case, do you think +you should alter your regulations with the press, have a little more +discipline when the press are around? + +Mr. FRITZ. We can with the local press. We can't do much with those +people that we don't know from those foreign countries, and from +distant States, they don't ask us. They just write what they hear of +and we read it. + +Mr. BALL. No; but I mean in the physical control of your plant there? + +Mr. FRITZ. There at city hall? + +Mr. BALL. Do you think you should alter your policy? + +Mr. FRITZ. We think we can control it normally, because those officers, +those people from the press there wouldn't come in and start taking +pictures without permission. They wouldn't do that without asking, and +then usually I ask a prisoner because some prisoners don't want their +pictures taken and sometimes they do, if they want it taken why it is +all right. Sometimes we don't let them take them at all, depending on +circumstances. + +Mr. BALL. Do you permit television interrogation of your prisoners in +jail? + +Mr. FRITZ. No, sir. + +Mr. BALL. Or in the---- + +Mr. FRITZ. In the jail I don't have charge of the jail but I am sure +they don't because I haven't heard of that. We don't have it in the +office either. + +Mr. McCLOY. But---- + +Mr. FRITZ. I don't think it is a good idea at all because I don't know +what that man might say. + +Mr. BALL. I agree. + +Mr. McCLOY. You would have jurisdiction to keep out foreign +correspondents if you wanted to? + +Mr. FRITZ. Keep them out of the office; yes, sir. + +Mr. McCLOY. Keep them out of the building? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I wouldn't have charge of the building but I can +keep them out of my office, up to that door, I can have enough officers +I can take care of that fine. Out in that building, that is more or +less a job for the uniform division. + +Mr. DULLES. A job for the uniform division, the police? + +Mr. FRITZ. A job for the uniform division, they can take charge of it +and they have uniforms. + +Mr. DULLES. Who establishes the policy? + +Mr. FRITZ. The chief of police establishes the policy. He has +assistants, of course. + +Mr. McCLOY. You have testified that you were really hampered in your +investigation, in your interrogation of Oswald by reason of the +confusion. + +Mr. FRITZ. I think so. + +Mr. McCLOY. By reason of too many people being around, isn't that right? + +Mr. FRITZ. I think so, but I am not sure that could have been avoided +under these circumstances. + +Mr. McCLOY. Well, couldn't you---- + +Mr. FRITZ. I think that---- + +Mr. McCLOY. Couldn't you have demanded that your office be cleared so +that you could have a quiet investigation? + +Mr. FRITZ. I could hardly tell the Secret Service and the FBI or any +other Federal agency--I had the outer office had Texas Rangers out +there, several of them, and you could understand why they would be in +there because the Governor had been shot and they work directly for the +Governor out of Austin, so you could hardly tell people like that that +you don't want them to help. + +Now, if this were just an average case, just an average hijacking case +we have, we could easily, we could handle it with all ease but where +the President of the United States is killed it would be hard to tell +the Secret Service and the FBI that they couldn't come in. + +Mr. McCLOY. But you could have told the newspaper people, the media +people that they couldn't come in. + +Mr. FRITZ. I didn't let them come in my office or in my part of the +office. + +Mr. McCLOY. They never were in your office when you were examining +Oswald? + +Mr. FRITZ. Never. I think one of them got inside of the outer office +but someone immediately put him out. + +Mr. DULLES. What is the jurisdiction of the city manager as compared to +the chief of police, does he have authority over the chief of police? + +Mr. FRITZ. The city manager is our big boss, he is over all of us. He +is over the chief of police and he operates the city. He is responsible +only to the mayor and city council. And I think that they give him a +pretty free hand. + +We have got a city manager and he tells, he sets the policies, of +course, maybe I made a mistake when I told you that the chief of police +sets the policies of our police department, but the city manager would +set the policies for the city as a whole. + +Mr. BALL. I have no further questions. + +Mr. McCLOY. Do you have anything else that you think that is on your +mind that might help us in getting at the rockbottom of either the +Oswald murder or the President's murder? + +Mr. FRITZ. I believe that you people know about everything that we +know. We have tried to get everything in this book. We have tried not +to withhold anything, and I will tell you something about this case +that I told some people in the beginning. + +I don't know of anything about this case that we can't tell all about, +the truth about it from start to finish now. I think the truth fits it +better than anything we can do to it. I hope I have gotten this story +to you correctly. I hope I haven't made some mistakes in some of my +testimony about time and the dates and things because if I have---- + +Mr. McCLOY. Are there any further leads that you would like to follow +up or do you feel that the case is from your point of view closed in +terms of-- + +Mr. FRITZ. We won't ever close it. We never close any murder case and +we won't ever close it. I will tell you what, if anything came up about +this case that we thought we could do to help on it, and it came up +10 years from now we would work on it. We would work on it regardless +of what time it came up. I do think this, that there have been a lot +of things about this case that we won't be able to handle. If we get +any information about anything that involves foreign relations we will +pass that on to the people who know what to do with it. We won't try to +handle anything like that because we might do a very wrong thing. We +would give that to either the FBI or the Secret Service, depending on +the type of information it was, and they would pass it on to wherever +they wanted to. + +Mr. McCLOY. Are there any pending leads in this case that you feel that +you would like to follow up beyond? + +Mr. FRITZ. Right now? + +Mr. McCLOY. Right now. + +Mr. FRITZ. I don't believe we have one. Do you think of any lead to +follow up? I can't think of one. If I thought of one we would sure +start on it. But I don't think we have. + +Mr. BALL. There is one problem here in your records that we asked +about. Where was Oswald between 12:35 a.m., and 1:10 a.m., on Saturday, +November 23, that is right after midnight? + +Mr. FRITZ. Right after midnight. + +Mr. BALL. The jailer's records show he was checked out. + +Mr. FRITZ. I think I know where he was right after midnight. I think +he went to the identification bureau to be fingerprinted and have his +picture made. + +Mr. BALL. You know. You can probably advise him and he can tell us. +What is it? + +Mr. FRITZ. I think that, if it is the time that I am thinking about, if +it is the time that after he was, after he had his arraignment, I think +from what we found out since then that he went there for picture and +fingerprints. + +Mr. BALL. I have no further questions. + +Mr. FRITZ. Maybe you should ask Lieutenant Baker here something that I +don't know anything about, that he knows, that might help to clarify +that question you asked me just then. I thought he went for the +picture, but tell him. + + +TESTIMONY OF T. L. BAKER + +Mr. McCLOY. Lieutenant, will you be sworn, please? + +Raise your right hand. Do you solemnly swear to tell the truth, the +whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? + +Mr. BAKER. I do. + +Mr. BALL. State your name. + +Mr. BAKER. T. L. Baker. + +Mr. BALL. What is your occupation? + +Mr. BAKER. Lieutenant, police department, Dallas, Tex. + +Mr. BALL. You are up here with Captain Fritz? + +Mr. BAKER. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BALL. And you are the man who prepared Commission Document 81-B; is +that correct? + +Mr. BAKER. I assisted in it, sir. + +Mr. BALL. You were sort of the editor, is that right? + +Mr. BAKER. Something like that. + +Mr. BALL. The question we addressed to Captain Fritz was where was +Oswald between the 12:35 and, I believe, 1:10 in the evening, 1:10 +a.m., on Saturday, November 23, that is, right after midnight? + +Mr. BAKER. Yes, sir; at 12:35 a.m., Lieutenant Knight of the I.D. +bureau took him out of the jail on the fifth floor and with the +assistance of Sergeant Warren and one of the jailers brought him to the +fourth floor where the I.D. bureau was located. + +Mr. McCLOY. The I.D. bureau is the identification bureau? + +Mr. BAKER. Yes, sir. There in the presence of Sergeant Warren and +this jailer, one of his assistants, he was processed through the I.D. +bureau, which consists of taking his pictures and fingerprints and +making up the different circulars that go to the FBI, and so forth. +When they had finished processing him, he returned him to the jail. +Lieutenant Knight released him. He was placed back in the jail at 1:10. +Approximately 1:30 Sergeant Warren received a call from Chief Curry, +advising him to bring him back to the identification bureau the same +place, for arraignment. Sergeant Warren and the same jailer returned +him to the I.D. bureau, where he was arraigned by Judge Johnston at +approximately 1:35 a.m. This arraignment took approximately 10 minutes, +and he was returned to the fifth-floor jail by Sergeant Warren at +approximately 1:45 a.m. + +Mr. BALL. That is all. + +Mr. McCLOY. Thank you very much. + + +TESTIMONY OF J. W. FRITZ RESUMED + +Mr. DULLES. Could I ask just one question? + +Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. + +Mr. DULLES. Had you or your office, to your knowledge, ever heard of +Oswald prior to November 22, 1963? + +Mr. FRITZ. No, sir; I never heard of him, and I don't believe anyone in +my office had ever heard of him, because none of them knew him when we +got him. That was our first---- + +Mr. DULLES. There are no reports; you found no reports in your files? + +Mr. FRITZ. No, sir. + +Mr. DULLES. About him that antedated November 22, 1963? + +Mr. FRITZ. We had no reports on him at all. + +Mr. McCLOY. Did you ever hear of a man named Weissman? Does that mean +anything to you, Bernard Weissman? + +Mr. FRITZ. The name sounds familiar. I don't know him. I saw that ad +that he had in the paper, and had his name signed to it at the bottom. + +Mr. McCLOY. But that is all you know about him? + +Mr. FRITZ. That is all I know about him. + +Mr. McCLOY. Any other questions? + +Mr. DULLES. I have no other questions. + +Mr. McCLOY. We are through. We thank you very much for your +cooperation, Captain. + + +TESTIMONY OF J. C. DAY + +Mr. McCLOY. Do you solemnly swear the testimony you give at this +hearing will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, +so help you God? + +Mr. DAY. I do. + +Mr. BELIN. State your name for the Commission. + +Mr. DAY. J. C. Day. + +Mr. BELIN. What is your occupation? + +Mr. DAY. Lieutenant, Dallas Police Department assigned to the crime +scene search section of the identification bureau. + +Mr. BELIN. How old are you? + +Mr. DAY. Fifty. + +Mr. BELIN. How long have you been associated with the Dallas Police +Department? + +Mr. DAY. Twenty-three years. + +Mr. BELIN. Did you go to school in Texas? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. How far did you get through school? + +Mr. DAY. Through high school. + +Mr. BELIN. And then what did you do? + +Mr. DAY. I went to work for a machinery company there in Dallas for +about 9 years before I went with the city. + +Mr. BELIN. Then you went there directly to the city? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. Were you on duty on November 22, 1963? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. Could you describe your activities from about noon on of +that day? + +Mr. DAY. I was in the identification bureau at the city hall. About a +quarter of one I was in the basement of the city hall, which is three +floors under me--actually I am on the fourth floor--and a rumor swept +through there that the President had been shot. + +I returned to my office to get on the radio and wait for the +developments. Shortly before 1 o'clock I received a call from the +police dispatcher to go to 411 Elm Street, Dallas. + +Mr. BELIN. Is there any particular building at that particular location? + +Mr. DAY. The Texas School Book Depository, I believe is the correct +name on it. + +Mr. BELIN. Did you go there? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir; I went out of my office almost straight up 1 +o'clock. I arrived at the location on Elm about 1:12. + +Mr. BELIN. What did you do when you got there? + +Mr. DAY. I was directed to the sixth floor by the police inspector who +was at the front door when I arrived. + +Mr. BELIN. Do you know who that was? + +Mr. DAY. Inspector Sawyer. + +Mr. BELIN. What did you do when you got to the sixth floor? + +Mr. DAY. I had to go up the stairs. The elevator--we couldn't figure +out how to run it. When I got to the head of the stairs, I believe +it was the patrolman standing there, I am not sure, stated they had +found some hulls over in the northeast corner of the building, and I +proceeded to that area--excuse me, southeast corner of the building. + +Mr. BELIN. Now, in your 23 years of work for the Dallas Police +Department, have you had occasion to spend a good number of these years +in crime-scene matters? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. How long, about? + +Mr. DAY. The past 7 years I have been--I have had immediate supervision +of the crime-scene search section. It is our responsibility to go to +the scene of the crime, take photographs, check for fingerprints, +collect any other evidence that might be available, and primarily we +are to assist the investigators with certain technical parts of the +investigation. + +Mr. BELIN. Do you carry any equipment of any kind with you when you go +there? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. We have a station wagon equipped with fingerprint +equipment, cameras, containers, various other articles that might be +needed at the scene of the crime. + +Mr. BELIN. Have you had any special education or training or background +insofar as your crime-scene work is concerned? + +Mr. DAY. In the matter of fingerprints, I have been assigned to the +identification bureau 15 years. During that time I have attended +schools, the Texas Department of Public Safety, on fingerprinting; also +an advanced latent-print school conducted in Dallas by the Federal +Bureau of Investigation. I have also had other schooling with the Texas +Department of Public Safety and in the local department on crime-scene +search and general investigative work. + +Mr. BELIN. Now, I believe you said that you were informed when you got +there that they had located some hulls? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. What did you do then? + +Mr. DAY. I went to the northeast corner--southeast corner of the +building, and first made photographs of the three hulls. + +Mr. McCLOY. What floor was this? + +Mr. DAY. On the sixth floor. I took photographs of the three hulls as +they were found before they were moved. + +Mr. BELIN. I am going to hand you some pictures here and ask you to say +if these pictures are the photographs you took. First, I will hand you +a picture marked "Commission Exhibit 715," and ask you to state, if you +know, what this is. + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. That is one of the photographs we made of the hulls +on the floor. + +Mr. BELIN. Now, who took the actual picture? + +Mr. DAY. Detective Studebaker; R. L. Studebaker. + +Mr. BELIN. Who is he? + +Mr. DAY. At my direction. + +Mr. BELIN. Who is he? + +Mr. DAY. He is one of the officers who took this under my supervision, +and he accompanied me from the office to this building. + +Mr. BELIN. Can you see in this picture the location of the hulls? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. I wonder if you could take this pen and circle the hulls +that you see there. + +Mr. McCLOY. I only see two. + +Mr. DAY. The other one doesn't show in this picture, I don't believe. + +Mr. BELIN. You have circled two hulls that appear to be resting near +what would be the south wall of the building; is that correct? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. Can you see the third hull in that picture? + +Mr. DAY. I think you can barely see the tip end of it sticking out +there. I believe that is it. + +Mr. BELIN. Do you want to circle where you think you can see the third +tip sticking out? I am now going to hand you what is marked "Commission +Exhibit No. 716," and ask you to state, if you know, what this is. + +Mr. DAY. This is another view taken from a different angle of the same +location. All three hulls are clearly visible here. + +Mr. BELIN. Would you circle the three hulls on Exhibit 716? Do you know +whether or not Exhibit 716 and Exhibit 715 were taken before these +hulls were moved? + +Mr. DAY. They were taken before anything was moved, to the best of my +knowledge. I was advised when I got there nothing had been moved. + +Mr. BELIN. Who so advised you? + +Mr. DAY. I believe it was Detective Sims standing there, but I could be +wrong about that. + +Mr. BELIN. Now, turning again to Exhibit 715, I notice that there is a +box in a window which is partially open. I am going to first ask you to +state what window this is. + +Mr. DAY. This is the south window closest to Houston Street or, in +other words, it is the easternmost window on the south side of the +building on the sixth floor. + +Mr. BELIN. Was this window in about the same location with respect to +how far it was open at the time you got there? + +Mr. DAY. That is the position it was in when I got there. + +Mr. BELIN. All right. I notice boxes throughout the picture, including +the box in the window. To the best of your knowledge, had any of those +boxes been moved prior to the time the picture, Exhibit 715, was taken? + +Mr. DAY. No, sir; they had not. + +Mr. BELIN. Now, I am going to show you a picture which has been +identified previously in Commission testimony as Commission Exhibit +482, which purports to have been a picture taken by a newspaper +photographer shortly after the assassination, showing the easternmost +windows on the south side of the fifth and the sixth floor of the Texas +School Book Depository Building. + +You will notice there are two Negro males looking out of the lower pair +of windows, which would be the fifth-floor windows, and above that +there is one window which appears to be open with a box or boxes in it. + +I am going to first ask you to state whether or not the boxes in that +picture, Exhibit 482, appear to be in the same location as you saw them +when you first got on the crime scene. + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir; I believe they are. + +Mr. BELIN. Now, as you face the picture, the box to the right, which +would be to the east, has a corner sticking out, or just a corner of +the box shows. Is that the same box that appears to be resting on the +window ledge in Exhibit 715? + +Mr. DAY. In my opinion, it is. + +Mr. BELIN. I also note there is another box that appears to be in the +window on Exhibit 482. Is this box shown at all on either Exhibit 715 +or 716, if you know? + +Mr. DAY. No; I don't think it is. + +Mr. BELIN. What do you think happened to this other box in the window +on Exhibit 482? + +Mr. DAY. I think the box you see through the window is to the west of +the box you see here. + +Mr. BELIN. You are pointing out that the box you see in the window, and +you are now pointing to Exhibit 482---- + +Mr. DAY. I think that is east of the four boxes shown in your No. 715. +Well, there are---- + +Mr. BELIN. Let me give you another question. On Exhibit 715 there is +only one box shown in the window actually resting on the ledge, which +is the box that you identified the corner out of in the eastern part of +the window shown on 482. + +Now, what is the fact as to whether or not this other box on 482 would +have been resting on the ledge, or is it a pictorial view of something +that actually was in back of the window? + +Mr. DAY. I think this is one of the boxes 2 feet 11 inches back from +the wall. There were two stacks of them, one behind the window sill +that you see here. + +Mr. BELIN. You are pointing to the window sill between the pair of +windows on Exhibit 482? + +Mr. DAY. That you can't see in this picture. This one is the other one +I am trying to say, this stack here--there are two stacks of boxes +here. This one is behind here. You can't see it. + +Mr. BELIN. What you are pointing is, as you point to Exhibit 715, you +are saying that the tier of boxes which is in the left foreground, if +you were standing outside taking a picture, would be hidden by the +heavy beam between the windows, but beyond that, to the east of that, +there is another tier of boxes of which you think this other box in +Exhibit 482 is one; am I correct? Is this correct? + +Mr. DAY. That is correct. + +Mr. BELIN. Handing you Exhibit 716, will you see this at all on Exhibit +716? + +Mr. DAY. This is the box, I think, showing here. + +Mr. BELIN. Do you want to make an X on the box on Exhibit 716 that you +think is the other box showing in the window on Exhibit 482? + +Mr. DAY. The corner that is showing I don't believe shows in the +picture. + +Mr. BELIN. All right. You put an X on a box which I would say, looking +at this picture, appears to be the fourth box starting from the bottom +count, and you believe that is the picture or--that is the box that is +shown in the window? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. All right. + +Mr. DAY. I don't know what time this was taken. Do you? + +Mr. BELIN. Well, you are asking with regard to Exhibit 482? We know it +was taken, I would say, not more than a minute after the shooting. This +is our best recollection based on testimony of the two people in the +window below, because this was their position as they saw the shooting, +and the photographer himself says that after the shots were fired, he +jumped out of the motorcade and took two shots of the building. This +could have been the first or the second shot he took. He used two +different cameras, so I don't imagine it would have been very long +after the actual shots were fired. + +For the record, I should add one other thing at this point. There is +testimony by the deputy sheriff that found the shells, that after he +found them he leaned out of the window to call down to try and tell +someone that he found something, and it is conceivable that he moved a +box, although he did not so testify. In other words, I don't want you +to take this as the testimony of anyone---- + +Mr. DAY. What I am getting at, this box doesn't jibe with my picture of +the inside. + +Mr. BELIN. You are pointing now to the other box on Exhibit 482. You +say that does not jibe with the chart that you have here that you +brought with you of boxes that you had inside. + +Let me ask you this: When did you prepare your chart of boxes inside? + +Mr. DAY. This chart here was prepared on the 25th. However, pictures +were made immediately after my arrival. + +Mr. BELIN. You are talking now about Exhibit 715 and Exhibit 716? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir; don't jibe with that box there. + +Mr. BELIN. What I am asking you then is this: Is it possible that +the box that is shown on Exhibit 482 is not shown on Exhibit 715 and +Exhibit 716? By that I mean not the box that you see a corner of, but +I am talking about the other box that is clear to the west of the +easternmost window. + +Mr. DAY. I just don't know. I can't explain that box there depicted +from the outside as related to the pictures that I took inside. + +Mr. BELIN. In other words, what you are saying is that on the sixth +floor window the westernmost box on Exhibit 482, you cannot then relate +to any of the boxes shown on Exhibits 715 or 716? + +Mr. DAY. That is correct. + +Mr. BELIN. Do you wish to correct your testimony with regard to the X +you placed on the fourth box on the stack in Exhibit 716? + +Mr. DAY. Yes; that is just not the same box. It is not the same box. +This is the first time I have seen No. 482. + +Mr. BELIN. All right. We will substitute for 716 then a copy of the +picture without the X mark on it. + +Mr. McCLOY. 482 was taken by the news photographer? + +Mr. BELIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. McCLOY. Immediately after the shooting? + +Mr. BELIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. McCLOY. The two colored men were still in the position where they +were? + +Mr. BELIN. Yes, sir. He actually took two pictures. He took one of +the building--that showed most of the south side of the building, +and another with a different kind of lens that was aimed up to that +particular corner. I will check to see if I can find the other picture, +Mr McCloy. Commission Exhibit 480 is the first picture that he took, or +I shouldn't say the first--one of the two pictures he took. + +You can see the southeast corner window on the sixth floor, and I will +show you, Lieutenant Day, that you can still see two of those boxes +there, and you can see on the window below, at least you can see, one +of the Negro men. The other picture was Exhibit 481, and I believe 482 +was actually an enlargement of 481. + +Mr. DAY. I still don't quite understand that one in relation to +pictures here unless something was moved after this was taken before I +got there. + +Mr. BELIN. What you are saving is on that southeast corner window, on +the sixth floor, you do not understand the box that is the westernmost +box of the two boxes in the window unless it was moved by someone +before you got there to take the pictures? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. What about the other box as shown on Exhibit 482, does that +appear to be in substantially the same position as the box in the +window shown on your Exhibit 715? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir; it appears to be the same. + +Mr. BELIN. Now, on Exhibit 715, that box appears to be almost resting +against the east part of the window where it does not so appear on +Exhibit 482. Is this an optical illusion on 715? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir; I don't think it was up against the window sill. It +was over as indicated on 482. + +Mr. BELIN. Lieutenant Day, you took some two pictures of those shell +casings. Let me first get you through all the pictures you took. + +Where did you next take pictures on the sixth floor after you took the +pictures of the shell casing; what did you do then? + +Mr. DAY. I went, after these were taken--after your number---- + +Mr. BELIN. 715 and 716. + +Mr. DAY. Were taken, I processed these three hulls for fingerprints, +using a powder. Mr. Sims picked them up by the ends and handed them +to me. I processed each of the three; did not find fingerprints. As +I had finished that, Captain Fritz sent word for me to come to the +northwest part of the building, the rifle had been found, and he wanted +photographs. + +Mr. BELIN. All right. You have mentioned these three hulls. Did you put +any initials on those at all, any means of identification? + +Mr. DAY. At that time they were placed in an envelope and the envelope +marked. The three hulls were not marked at that time. Mr. Sims took +possession of them. + +Mr. BELIN. Well, did you at any time put any mark on the shells? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. All right. Let me first hand you what has been marked as +"Commission Exhibit," part of "Commission Exhibit 543-544," and ask you +to state if you know what that is. + +Mr. DAY. This is the envelope the shells were placed in. + +Mr. BELIN. How many shells were placed in that envelope? + +Mr. DAY. Three. + +Mr. BELIN. It says here that, it is written on here, "Two of the three +spent hulls under window on sixth floor." + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. Did you put all three there? + +Mr. DAY. Three were in there when they were turned over to Detective +Sims at that time. The only writing on it was, "Lieut. J. C. Day." Down +here at the bottom. + +Mr. BELIN. I see. + +Mr. DAY. "Dallas Police Department," and the date. + +Mr. BELIN. In other words, you didn't put the writing in that says, +"Two of the three spent hulls." + +Mr. DAY. Not then. About 10 o'clock in the evening this envelope came +back to me with two hulls in it. I say it came to me, it was in a group +of stuff, a group of evidence, we were getting ready to release to the +FBI. I don't know who brought them back. Vince Drain, FBI, was present +with the stuff, the first I noticed it. At that time there were two +hulls inside. + +I was advised the homicide division was retaining the third for their +use. At that time I marked the two hulls inside of this, still inside +this envelope. + +Mr. BELIN. That envelope, which is a part of Commission Exhibits 543 +and 544? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir; I put the additional marking on at that time. + +Mr. BELIN. I see. + +Mr. DAY. You will notice there is a little difference in the ink +writing. + +Mr. BELIN. But all of the writing there is yours? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. Now, at what time did you put any initials, if you did put +any such initials, on the hull itself? + +Mr. DAY. At about 10 o'clock when I noticed it back in the +identification bureau in this envelope. + +Mr. BELIN. Had the envelope been opened yet or not? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir; it had been opened. + +Mr. BELIN. Had the shells been out of your possession then? + +Mr. DAY. Mr. Sims had the shells from the time they were moved from the +building or he took them from me at that time, and the shells I did not +see again until around 10 o'clock. + +Mr. BELIN. Who gave them to you at 10 o'clock? + +Mr. DAY. They were in this group of evidence being collected to turn +over to the FBI. I don't know who brought them back. + +Mr. BELIN. Was the envelope sealed? + +Mr. DAY. No, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. Had it been sealed when you gave it to Mr. Sims? + +Mr. DAY. No, sir; no. + +Mr. BELIN. Handing you what has been marked "Exhibit 545," I will ask +you to state if you know what this is. + +Mr. DAY. This is one of the hulls in the envelope which I opened at 10 +o'clock. It has my name written on the end of it. + +Mr. BELIN. When you say, on the end of it, where on the end of it? + +Mr. DAY. On the small end where the slug would go. + +Mr. BELIN. And it has "Day" on it? + +Mr. DAY. Scratched on there; yes, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. With what instrument did you scratch it on? + +Mr. DAY. A diamond point pencil. + +Mr. BELIN. Did anyone else scratch any initials on it that you know of? + +Mr. DAY. I didn't see them. I didn't examine it too close at that time. + +Mr. BELIN. Do you know what kind of a cartridge case that is? + +Mr. DAY. It is a 6.5. + +Mr. BELIN. Is that the same kind of a cartridge case that you saw when +you first saw these cartridge cases? + +Mr. DAY. Yes. + +Mr. BELIN. Is there any other testimony you have with regard to the +chain of possession of this shell from the time it was first found +until the time it got back to your office? + +Mr. DAY. No, sir; I told you in our conversation in Dallas that I +marked those at the scene. After reviewing my records, I didn't think +I was on all three of those hulls that you have, indicating I did not +mark them at the scene, then I remembered putting them in the envelope, +and Sims taking them. + +It was further confirmed today when I noticed that the third hull, +which I did not give you, or come to me through you, does not have my +mark on it. + +Mr. BELIN. Now, I did interview you approximately 2 weeks ago in +Dallas, more or less? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. At that time what is the fact as to whether or not I went +into extended questions and answers as contrasted with just asking +you to tell me about certain areas as to what happened? I mean, I +questioned you, of course, but was it more along the lines of just +asking you to tell me what happened, or more along the lines of +interrogation, the interrogation we are doing now? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. Which one? + +Mr. DAY. Wait a minute now. Say that again. I am at a loss. + +Mr. BELIN. Maybe it would be easier if I just struck the question and +started all over again. + +Mr. DAY. I remember you asking me if I marked them. + +Mr. BELIN. Yes. + +Mr. DAY. I remember I told you I did. + +Mr. BELIN. All right. + +Mr. DAY. I got to reviewing this, and I got to wondering about whether +I did mark those at the scene. + +Mr. BELIN. Your testimony now is that you did not mark any of the hulls +at the scene? + +Mr. DAY. Those three; no, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. I believe you said that you examined the three shells today? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. While you were waiting to have your testimony taken here? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir; that is what confirmed my thinking on this. The +envelope now was marked. + +Mr. BELIN. And the shells were in the same envelope that it was marked? + +Mr. DAY. Yes. + +Mr. BELIN. Now, I am going to ask you to state if you know what +Commission Exhibit 543 is? + +Mr. DAY. That is a hull that does not have my marking on it. + +Mr. BELIN. Do you know whether or not this was one of the hulls that +was found at the School Book Depository Building? + +Mr. DAY. I think it is. + +Mr. BELIN. What makes you think it is? + +Mr. DAY. It has the initials "G. D." on it, which is George Doughty, +the captain that I worked under. + +Mr. BELIN. Was he there at the scene? + +Mr. DAY. No, sir; this hull came up, this hull that is not marked came +up, later. I didn't send that. + +Mr. BELIN. This was---- + +Mr. DAY. That was retained. That is the hull that was retained by +homicide division when the other two were originally sent in with the +gun. + +Mr. BELIN. You are referring now to Commission Exhibit 543 as being the +one that was retained in your possession for a while? + +Mr. DAY. It is the one that I did not see again. + +Mr. BELIN. It appears to be flattened out here. Do you know or have you +any independent recollection as to whether or not it was flattened out +at the small end when you saw it? + +Mr. DAY. No, sir; I don't. + +Mr. BELIN. Now, handing you what has been marked as Commission Exhibit +544, I will ask you to state if you know what this is. + +Mr. DAY. This is the second hull that was in the envelope when I marked +the two hulls that night on November 22. + +Mr. BELIN. I have now marked this envelope, which was formerly a part +of Commission Exhibits 543 and 544 with a separate Commission Exhibit +No. 717, and I believe you testify now that Commission Exhibit 544 was +the other shell that was in the envelope which has now been marked as +Commission Exhibit No. 717. + +Mr. DAY. Yes. + +Mr. BELIN. Does that cartridge case, Exhibit 544, have your name on it +again? + +Mr. DAY. It has my name on the small end where the slug would go into +the shell. + +Mr. BELIN. Are all of the three shells of the same caliber? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. Is there any other testimony you have with regard to the +cartridge cases themselves? + +Mr. DAY. No, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. Can you explain how you processed these shells for +fingerprints? + +Mr. DAY. With black fingerprint---- + +Mr. McCLOY. May I ask before you get to that, is this all your +handwriting? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. McCLOY. The narrative as well as the signature? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir; this and this. That is not, this is not. + +Mr. McCLOY. Who is that, what is that initial, do you know? + +Mr. DAY. I think that is Vince Drain, the FBI agent it was released to. +It looks like a "V. D." I don't know whether his initial is "E" or not. + +Mr. McCLOY. Can you identify those marks up there, what they are? + +Mr. DAY. Those "Q" numbers, I believe, are FBI numbers affixed here in +Washington. + +Mr. BELIN. Returning to Exhibit 717---- + +Mr. McCLOY. Not returning. That is what that last question was about. + +Mr. BELIN. I believe the last questions were the initials on the +cartridge cases. Strike the question then. + +We will start all over again. On Commission Exhibit No. 717 I see some +initials with the notation "11-22-63" in the upper left-hand corner as +you take a look at the side which has all of your writing on it here. +Do you know whose initials those are? + +Mr. DAY. I think it is Vince Drain, FBI, but I am not sure. + +Mr. BELIN. You think it is the initials of Vincent E. Drain? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir; I am not sure if his middle initial is "E". I know +it is Vince Drain. + +Mr. BELIN. Now, on the other side I see some other initials on here +with some date and time. Do you know whose initials those are? + +Mr. DAY. "R. M. S." stands for R. M. Sims, the detective whom I turned +it over to. That is the date and the time that he took it from me. + +Mr. BELIN. What date and time does it show? + +Mr. DAY. November 22, 1963, 1:23 p.m. + +Mr. BELIN. Now, I believe you originally stated that you had all three +of these cartridge hulls put in Exhibit 717, is that correct? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. And then you turned it over to Detective Sims? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. Was the envelope sealed when you turned it over to Detective +Sims? + +Mr. DAY. No, sir; I don't think so. + +Mr. BELIN. Did you seal it? + +Mr. DAY. No, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. When you got the envelope back later that night was the +envelope sealed? + +Mr. DAY. I don't think so. + +Mr. BELIN. To the best of your knowledge, had it been sealed and +reopened or was it just unsealed? + +Mr. DAY. To the best of my knowledge it was not sealed. It is possible +I could be wrong on that, but I don't think it was sealed. + +Mr. McCLOY. In order to make the record perfectly clear, at least my +understanding perfectly clear, did I understand that you testified that +your initial which appears on that exhibit was--not your initial but +your signature which appears on that exhibit was--put on there before +the other writing, namely to the effect that there were two of the +three hulls enclosed, that was put on the envelope? + +Mr. BELIN. You are referring, Mr. McCloy, to the signature on the +bottom of Commission Exhibit 717, "Lieutenant J. C. Day." + +Mr. McCLOY. That is what I am referring to. + +Mr. DAY. That was put on there before. + +Mr. McCLOY. That was put on there---- + +Mr. DAY. At 1:23 p.m. + +Mr. BELIN. And the remainder of the writing was put on that night at +the Dallas Police Department, is that right? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir; about the same time that I marked those two hulls. + +Mr. BELIN. Could you tell us what exactly you did in testing those +hulls for fingerprints? + +Mr. DAY. I used fingerprint powder, dusted them with the powder, a dark +powder. No legible prints were found. + +Mr. BELIN. After you did this, you dusted the prints and you put them +in the envelope, 717, and then what did you do? + +Mr. DAY. I released them to Detective Sims or rather he took them. + +Mr. BELIN. And then what did you do? + +Mr. DAY. At that time I was summoned to the northwest corner of the +building. + +Mr. BELIN. Then what did you do? + +Mr. DAY. Sir? + +Mr. BELIN. Then what did you do? + +Mr. DAY. I met Captain Fritz. He wanted photographs of the rifle before +it was moved. + +Mr. BELIN. Do you remember if Captain Fritz told you that the rifle had +not been moved? + +Mr. DAY. He told me he wanted photographs before it was moved, if I +remember correctly. He definitely told me it had not been moved, and +the reason for the photographs he wanted it photographed before it was +moved. + +Mr. BELIN. I am going to hand you what the reporter has marked or what +has been marked as Commission Exhibit 718, and ask you to state, if you +know, what this is. + +Mr. DAY. This is a photograph made by me of the rifle where it was +found in the northwest portion of the sixth floor, 411 Elm Street, +Dallas. + +Mr. BELIN. I am going to hand you what has been marked as Commission +Exhibit 719 and ask you to state if you know what that is. + +Mr. DAY. It is a picture of the portion of the northwest floor where +the rifle was found. This is a distance shot showing the stack of boxes. + +Mr. BELIN. Is Commission Exhibit 718 a print from the same negative as +Commission Exhibit 514? + +Mr. DAY. The same negative? + +Mr. BELIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. DAY. No, I don't think so. This is a copy of this picture. + +Mr. BELIN. You are saying 514 was made, I assume, as a copy of 718. By +that you mean a negative, a second negative, was made of 718 from which +514 was taken? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. Otherwise it is the same? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. 718 appears to be a little clearer and sharper. + +Mr. DAY. You can tell from looking at the two pictures which is the +copy. + +Mr. BELIN. Was any other picture of that rifle made in that position? + +Mr. DAY. Nos. 22 and 23 were both made. + +Mr. BELIN. Your pictures which you have marked No. 22 and No. 23 were +both made, one was made by you, is that Commission Exhibit 718---- + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. And the other was made by---- + +Mr. DAY. Detective Studebaker. + +Mr. BELIN. Whose knee appears? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir; showing. Identical shots, we just made both to be +sure that one of us made it, and it would be in focus. + +Mr. BELIN. For this reason I am introducing only 718, if that is +satisfactory. + +Mr. McCLOY. Very well. + +Mr. BELIN. How did you stand to take the picture, Exhibit 718? + +Mr. DAY. I was on top of a stack of boxes to the south of where the gun +was found. + +Mr. BELIN. I wonder if you could put on Exhibit 719 the location with +an "X" where you stood to take the picture, 718. + +Mr. DAY. I was in that position looking this way, but you can't tell +which box I was on looking from that angle. + +Mr BELIN. I mean, you have placed an "X" on Exhibit 719. Were you +sitting or standing on top of a stack of boxes in that general area? + +Mr. DAY. Kneeling. + +Mr. BELIN. Kneeling? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. In what direction would your face have been? + +Mr. DAY. Facing north and down. + +Mr. BELIN. Facing north and looking down? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir; to the floor. + +Mr. BELIN. Can you see the rifle at all in Exhibit 719? + +Mr. DAY. No, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. Had the rifle been removed when 719 was taken, if you know? + +Mr. DAY. I don't remember. + +Mr. BELIN. Could you locate with an arrow on Exhibit 719 the place +where the rifle would have been? + +Mr. DAY. Here. + +Mr. BELIN. You have so noted with an arrow on 719. Was the rifle +resting on the floor or not? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. It was? + +Mr. DAY. The rifle was resting on the floor. + +Mr. BELIN. What else did you do in connection with the rifle at that +particular time? + +Mr. DAY. Captain Fritz was present. After we got the photographs I +asked him if he was ready for me to pick it up, and he said, yes. I +picked the gun up by the wooden stock. I noted that the stock was too +rough apparently to take fingerprints, so I picked it up, and Captain +Fritz opened the bolt as I held the gun. A live round fell to the floor. + +Mr. BELIN. Did you initial that live round at all? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir; my name is on it. + +Mr. BELIN. When did you place your name on this live round, if you +remember? + +Mr. DAY. How? + +Mr. BELIN. When? + +Mr. DAY. At the time, that was marked at the scene. + +Mr. BELIN. Handing you Commission Exhibit No. 141. I will ask you to +state if you know what this is. + +Mr. DAY. It has "Day" on it where I scratched it on the small end where +the slug goes into the shell. + +Mr. BELIN. What is this, what is Exhibit 141? + +Mr. DAY. That is the live round that fell from the rifle when Captain +Fritz opened the bolt. + +Mr. BELIN. What did you do with this after you put your name on it? + +Mr. DAY. Captain Fritz took possession of it. I retained possession of +the rifle. + +Mr. BELIN. Did you process this live round at all for prints? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir; I did. I did not find any prints. + +Mr. McCLOY. Before Captain Fritz ejected the live cartridge, did you +dust the rifle for fingerprints? + +Mr. DAY. Not before. + +Mr. BELIN. Did you dust the bolt for fingerprints? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. Before the live round was ejected? + +Mr. DAY. No, no; the only part that Captain Fritz touched was the round +nob. I looked at it through a glass and decided there was not a print +there, and it would be safe for him to open the bolt. + +Mr. BELIN. You did this before it was ejected, before the live round +was ejected? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. Who held the rifle while you looked at it with the glass? + +Mr. DAY. I held it. + +Mr. BELIN. In one hand? + +Mr. DAY. One hand, using the glass with the other. + +Mr. BELIN. How did you try to process the live round for prints? + +Mr. DAY. With black fingerprint powder. + +Mr. BELIN. Let me ask you this in an effort, perhaps, to save time. In +all of your processing of prints did you use anything other than this +black powder at the scene that day? + +Mr. DAY. No, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. So whenever you say you processed for prints you used black +powder, is that correct? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. McCLOY. When was the rifle as such dusted with fingerprint powder? + +Mr. DAY. After ejecting the live round, then I gave my attention to +the rifle. I put fingerprint powder on the side of the rifle over the +magazine housing. I noticed it was rather rough. + +I also noticed there were traces of two prints visible. I told Captain +Fritz it was too rough to do there, it should go to the office where I +would have better facilities for trying to work with the fingerprints. + +Mr. McCLOY. But you could note with your naked eye or with a magnifying +glass the remnants of fingerprints on the stock? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir; I could see traces of ridges, fingerprint ridges, on +the side of the housing. + +Mr. BELIN. Lieutenant Day, as I understand it, you held the stock of +the rifle when Captain Fritz operated the bolt? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. Now, when you first came over to see the rifle, was it +easily visible or not? + +Mr. DAY. I beg pardon? + +Mr. BELIN. When you first came over to see the rifle, when you were +first called there, what is the fact as to whether or not it was easily +visible? + +Mr. DAY. No, sir; you had to look over the box and down to see it. You +could not see it ordinarily walking down the aisle. + +Mr. BELIN. Was anything resting on top of it? + +Mr. DAY. On top of the gun? + +Mr. BELIN. Yes. + +Mr. DAY. No, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. Do you have any estimate as to how wide or what the width +was of that particular area in which the rifle was placed? In other +words, the area between the boxes, how much space was there? + +Mr. DAY. It was just wide enough to accommodate that rifle and hold it +in an upright position. + +Mr. BELIN. Was the location at which you found the rifle completely +surrounded by boxes or was it kind of like two parallel rows of boxes +without boxes at either end of it? + +Mr. DAY. There was three or four rows of boxes there. + +Mr. BELIN. What I mean is this: If you can visualize a narrow squared +"O," was it more like a narrow squared "O" so far as the boxes were +concerned, with sort of an island of space in the center or was it more +like just two basic rows of boxes with nothing at either end? + +Mr. DAY. I don't quite follow you there. + +Mr. BELIN. I will restate the question this way. + +Mr. DAY. There were four parallel lines of boxes. The second line from +the north side was not completely filled. In other words, there was +vacant places in this particular line. + +Mr. BELIN. I am going to hand you what has been marked Commission +Exhibit 139 and ask you to state if you know what this is. + +Mr. DAY. This is the rifle found on the sixth floor of the Texas Book +Store at 411 Elm Street, November 23, 1963. + +Mr. BELIN. What date? + +Mr. DAY. November 22, 1963. + +Mr. BELIN. Does it have any identification mark of yours on it? + +Mr. DAY. It has my name "J. C. Day" scratched on the stock. + +Mr. BELIN. And on the stock you are pointing to your name which is +scratched as you would hold the rifle and rest it on the stock, +approximately an inch or so from the bottom of the stock on the sling +side of the stock, is that correct? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. Do you have any recollection as to what the serial number +was of that? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir; I recorded it at the time, C-2566. + +Mr. BELIN. Before you say that---- + +Mr. DAY. C-2766, excuse me. + +Mr. BELIN. Do you have any record of that with you or not? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir; this is the record I made of the gun when I took it +back to the office. Now, the gun did not leave my possession. + +Mr. BELIN. From the time it was found at the School Book Depository +Building? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir; I took the gun myself and retained possession, took +it to the office where I dictated---- + +Mr. BELIN. Could you just read into the record what you dictated. + +Mr. DAY. To my secretary. She wrote on the typewriter: "4 x 18, coated, +Ordinance Optics, Inc., Hollywood, California, 010 Japan. OSC inside a +clover-leaf design." + +Mr. BELIN. What did that have reference to? + +Mr. DAY. That was stamped on the scopic sight on top of the gun. On the +gun itself, "6.5 caliber C-2766, 1940 made in Italy." That was what was +on the gun. + +I dictated certain other stuff, other information, for her to type for +me. + +Mr. BELIN. Well, you might just as well dictate the rest there. + +Mr. DAY. "When bolt opened one live round was in the barrel. No prints +are on the live round. Captain Fritz and Lieutenant Day opened the +barrel. Captain Fritz has the live round. Three spent hulls were found +under the window. They were picked up by Detective Sims and witnessed +by Lieutenant Day and Studebaker. The clip is stamped 'SMI, 9 x 2.'" + +Mr. BELIN. Could you tell us what other processing you did with this +particular rifle? + +Mr. DAY. Beg pardon? + +Mr. BELIN. What other processing did you do with this particular rifle? + +Mr. DAY. I took it to the office and tried to bring out the two prints +I had seen on the side of the gun at the bookstore. They still were +rather unclear. Due to the roughness of the metal, I photographed them +rather than try to lift them. + +I could also see a trace of a print on the side of the barrel that +extended under the woodstock. I started to take the woodstock off and +noted traces of a palmprint near the firing end of the barrel about 3 +inches under the woodstock when I took the woodstock loose. + +Mr. BELIN. You mean 3 inches from the small end of the woodstock? + +Mr. DAY. Right--yes, sir. + +Mr. McCLOY. From the firing end of the barrel, you mean the muzzle? + +Mr. DAY. The muzzle; yes, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. Let me clarify the record. By that you mean you found it on +the metal or you mean you found it on the wood? + +Mr. DAY. On the metal, after removing the wood. + +Mr. BELIN. The wood. You removed the wood, and then underneath the wood +is where you found the print? + +Mr. DAY. On the bottom side of the barrel which was covered by the +wood, I found traces of a palmprint. I dusted these and tried lifting +them, the prints, with scotch tape in the usual manner. A faint +palmprint came off. + +I could still see traces of the print under the barrel and was going to +try to use photography to bring off or bring out a better print. About +this time I received instructions from the chief's office to go no +further with the processing, it was to be released to the FBI for them +to complete. I did not process the underside of the barrel under the +scopic sight, did not get to this area of the gun. + +Mr. BELIN. Do you know what Commission Exhibit No. 637 is? + +Mr. DAY. This is the trace of palmprint I lifted off of the barrel of +the gun after I had removed the wood. + +Mr. BELIN. Does it have your name on it or your handwriting? + +Mr. DAY. It has the name "J. C. Day," and also "11/22/63" written on it +in my writing off the underside gun barrel near the end of foregrip, +C-2766. + +Mr. BELIN. When you lift a print is it then harder to make a photograph +of that print after it is lifted or doesn't it make any difference? + +Mr. DAY. It depends. If it is a fresh print, and by fresh I mean hadn't +been there very long and dried, practically all the print will come off +and there will be nothing left. If it is an old print, that is pretty +well dried, many times you can still see it after the lift. In this +case I could still see traces of print on that barrel. + +Mr. BELIN. Did you do anything with the other prints or partial prints +that you said you thought you saw? + +Mr. DAY. I photographed them only. I did not try to lift them. + +Mr. BELIN. Do you have those photographs, sir? I will mark the two +photographs which you have just produced Commission Exhibits 720 and +721. I will ask you to state what these are. + +Mr. DAY. These are prints or pictures, I should say, of the latent--of +the traces of prints on the side of the magazine housing of the gun No. +C-2766. + +Mr. BELIN. Were those prints in such condition as to be identifiable, +if you know? + +Mr. DAY. No, sir; I could not make positive identification of these +prints. + +Mr. BELIN. Did you have enough opportunity to work and get these +pictures or not? + +Mr. DAY. I worked with them, yes. I could not exclude all possibility +as to identification. I thought I knew which they were, but I could not +positively identify them. + +Mr. BELIN. What was your opinion so far as it went as to whose they +were? + +Mr. DAY. They appeared to be the right middle and right ring finger of +Harvey Lee Oswald, Lee Harvey Oswald. + +Mr. BELIN. At the time you had this did you have any comparison +fingerprints to make with the actual prints of Lee Harvey Oswald? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir; we had sets in Captain Fritz' office. Oswald was in +his custody, we had made palmprints and fingerprints of him. + +Mr. BELIN. Is there any other processing that you did with the rifle? + +Mr. DAY. No, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. At what time, if you know, did you release the rifle to the +FBI? + +Mr. DAY. 11:45 p.m. the rifle was released or picked up by them and +taken from the office. + +Mr. BELIN. Was that on November 22? + +Mr. DAY. November 22, 1963. + +Mr. BELIN. At what time did these same photographs which are the same +as Commission Exhibit 720 and 721 of this print---- + +Mr. DAY. About 8 o'clock, somewhere around 8 o'clock, in that +neighborhood. + +Mr. BELIN. Of what date? + +Mr. DAY. November 22, 1963. + +Mr. BELIN. What about the lift which has previously been marked as +Commission Exhibit 637? + +Mr. DAY. About what? + +Mr. BELIN. When did you turn that over to the FBI? + +Mr. DAY. I released that to them on November 26, 1963. I did not +release this---- + +Mr. BELIN. You are referring now---- + +Mr. DAY. On November 22. + +Mr. BELIN. You are referring to Commission Exhibit 637? + +Mr. DAY. Yes. + +Mr. BELIN. Is there any particular reason why this was not released on +the 22d? + +Mr. DAY. The gun was being sent in to them for process of prints. +Actually I thought the print on the gun was their best bet, still +remained on there, and, too, there was another print, I thought +possibly under the wood part up near the trigger housing. + +Mr. BELIN. You mean the remaining traces of the powder you had when you +got the lift, Exhibit 637, is that what you mean by the lift of the +remaining print on the gun? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. Actually it was dried ridges on there. There were +traces of ridges still on the gun barrel. + +Mr. BELIN. Can you tell the circumstances under which you sent Exhibit +637 to the FBI? + +Mr. DAY. We released certain evidence to the FBI, including the gun, on +November 22. It was returned to us on November 24. Then on November 26 +we received instructions to send back to the FBI everything that we had. + +Mr. BELIN. Did you do that? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir; and at that time I sent the lift marked---- + +Mr. BELIN. 637. + +Mr. DAY. Yes. The gun was sent back again, and all of the other +evidence that I had, including cartons from Texas Bookstore, and +various other items, a rather lengthy list. + +Mr. BELIN. Had the FBI in the interim returned the gun to you then +after you sent it to them on November 22? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. When the rifle was photographed, as I understand it, you +were the one who lifted it out of there, is that correct? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. Was it wedged in very tight or could you readily lift it up +without moving any boxes? + +Mr. DAY. It came out without moving any boxes. It wasn't wedged in. + +Mr. McCLOY. Am I to understand your testimony, Lieutenant, about the +fingerprints to be you said you were positive--you couldn't make a +positive identification, but it was your opinion that these were the +fingerprints of Lee Oswald? + +Mr. DAY. Well, actually in fingerprinting it either is or is not the +man. So I wouldn't say those were his prints. They appeared similar +to these two, certainly bore further investigation to see if I could +bring them out better. But from what I had I could not make a positive +identification as being his prints. + +Mr. McCLOY. How about the palmprint? + +Mr. DAY. The palmprint again that I lifted appeared to be his right +palm, but I didn't get to work enough on that to fully satisfy myself +it was his palm. With a little more work I would have come up with the +identification there. + +Mr. BELIN. Lieutenant Day, what is the fact as to whether or not +palmprints are a sound means of identification of an individual? + +Mr. DAY. You have the same characteristics of the palms that you do +the fingers, also on the soles of feet. They are just as good for +identification purposes. + +Mr. BELIN. Is there anything else you did in connection with the rifle, +the cartridges, the live cartridge, or the taking of prints from any of +these metallic objects that you haven't talked about yet? + +Mr. DAY. No, sir; I believe that is the extent of the prints on any of +those articles. + +Mr. BELIN. Did you make a positive identification of any palmprint or +fingerprint? + +Mr. DAY. Not off the rifle or slug at that time. + +Mr, BELIN. At any other time did you off the rifle or the slugs? + +Mr. DAY. After I have been looking at that thing again here today, that +is his right palm. But at that time I had not no---- + +Mr. BELIN. When you are saying you looked at that thing today, to what +are you referring? + +Mr. DAY. Your No. 637 is the right palm of Oswald. + +Mr. BELIN. Handing you what has been marked "Exhibit 629" I ask you to +state if you know what this is. + +Mr. DAY. That is the right palm of Lee Harvey Oswald. + +Mr. BELIN. Do you know where this print was taken? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir; it was taken by Detective J. B. Hicks in Captain +Fritz' office on November 22, 1963. + +Mr. BELIN. Did you take more than one right palmprint on that day, if +you know? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir; we took two, actually we took three. Two of them +were taken in Captain Fritz' office, and one set which I witnessed +taking myself in the identification bureau. + +Mr. BELIN. Any particular reason why you took more than one? + +Mr. DAY. In most cases, when making comparisons, we will take at least +two to insure we have a good clear print of the entire palm. + +Mr. BELIN. Now, based---- + +Mr. DAY. One might be smeared where the other would not. + +Mr. BELIN. Based on your experience, I will ask you now for a +definitive statement as to whether or not you can positively identify +the print shown on Commission Exhibit 637 as being from the right palm +of Lee Harvey Oswald as shown on Commission Exhibit 629? + +Mr. DAY. Maybe I shouldn't absolutely make a positive statement without +further checking that. I think it is his, but I would have to sit down +and take two glasses to make an additional comparison before I would +say absolutely, excluding all possibility, it is. I think it is, but I +would have to do some more work on that. + +Mr. BELIN. Could you do that here in Washington before you go back, +sir, or would this necessitate going back to Dallas? + +Mr. DAY. If I had the proper equipment I think I could do it here. I +don't have very good equipment for making comparisons here. I need two +fingerprint glasses. + +It was my understanding the prints had been identified by the FBI. I +don't have official word on it. + +Mr. BELIN. Is there any other thing that you did with regard to the +rifle that you haven't discussed this far that you can remember right +now? + +Mr. DAY. No, sir; I released it to the FBI then, and they took +possession of it. + +Mr. BELIN. Did you ever hear this rifle referred to as a 7.65 Mauser or +as any type of a Mauser? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir; it wasn't referred to as that. Some of the newsmen, +when I first carried the rifle out, asked me if it was a .30-06, and at +another time they asked me if it was a Mauser. I did not give them an +answer. + +Mr. BELIN. Were there newsmen on the sixth floor at the time the rifle +was found, if you know? + +Mr. DAY. I think there was. + +Mr. BELIN. Did you ever describe the rifle as anything but a +6.5-caliber with regard to the rifle itself? + +Mr. DAY. I didn't describe the rifle to anyone other than police +officers. + +Mr. BELIN. Is the description that you used with the police officers +the same that you dictated here into the record from your notes? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. Anything else with regard to the rifle? + +Mr. DAY. I can't think of anything else that I did with it at the time. + +I don't know whether you are interested in this or not, but about, +it must have been about 8:30 I was processing the gun on the fourth +floor---- + +Mr. BELIN. Of the police department there? + +Mr. DAY. Of the police department where my office is. The +identification bureau. And Captain Fritz came up and said he had Mrs. +Oswald in his office on the third floor, but the place was so jammed +with news cameramen and newsmen he did not want to bring her out into +it. + +Mr. BELIN. Was this the wife or the mother of Lee Harvey Oswald? + +Mr. DAY. That was Marina, Oswald's wife. She had her baby with her, or +babies, and there was an interpreter down there. He wanted her to look +at the gun to see if she could identify it, didn't want to bring her +in through the crowd, and wanted to know if we could carry it down. He +said, "There is an awful mob down there." + +I explained to him that I was still working with the prints, but I +thought I could carry it down without disturbing the prints, which I +did. + +We waded through the mob with me holding the gun up high. No one +touched it. Several of the newsmen asked me various questions about +what the gun was at that time. I did not give them an answer. + +When I went back to the office after Marina Oswald viewed the gun, they +still were hounding me for it. I told them to check with the chief's +office, he would have to give them the information, and as soon as I +got back to my office I gave a complete description, and so forth, to +Captain King on the gun. + +Mr. BELIN. Were you there when Marina Oswald was asked whether or not +she could identify it? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. But I didn't understand what she said. I was +standing across the room from her where I couldn't understand. The +interpreter said something to her and said something to Captain Fritz. +I didn't catch what was said. I mentioned that because there was some +talk about a Mauser and .30-06 at the time and various other things, +that is the reason I mentioned it. + +Mr. BELIN. You just refused to answer all questions on that, is that +correct? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. It wasn't my place to give them that information. I +didn't know whether they wanted it out yet or not. + +Mr. McCLOY. There was never any doubt in your mind what the rifle was +from the minute you saw it? + +Mr. DAY. No, sir; It was stamped right on there, 6.5, and when en route +to the office with Mr. Odum, the FBI agent who drove me in, he radioed +it in, he radioed in what it was to the FBI over the air. + +Mr. BELIN. What else did you do, or what was the next thing you did +after you completed photographing and inspecting the rifle on the sixth +floor of the Texas School Book Depository Building for whatever prints +you could find, what did you do next? + +Mr. DAY. I took the gun at the time to the office and locked it up in a +box in my office at Captain Fritz' direction. + +Mr. BELIN. Then what did you do? + +Mr. DAY. I went back to the School Book Depository and stayed there. +It was around three that I got back, and I was in that building until +about 6, directing the other officers as to what we needed in the way +of photographs and some drawing, and so forth. + +Mr. BELIN. What did you do when you got back, what photographs did you +take? + +Mr. DAY. We went, made the outside photographs of the street, we made +more photographs inside, and did further checking for prints by using +dust on the boxes around the window. + +Mr. BELIN. I hand you what has been marked as "Commission Exhibit 722" +and ask you to state if you know what this is. + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. This is a view of Houston Street looking south from +the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository Building. + +Mr. BELIN. Do you know when that was taken? + +Mr. DAY. About 3 or 3:15, somewhere along there, on November 22, 1963. + +Mr. McCLOY. You say from the sixth floor; was it from the farthest east +window? + +Mr. DAY. The south window on the east end of the building. + +Mr. BELIN. You don't mean that. State that again. What side of the +building was the window on? + +Mr. DAY. It was on the south side of the building, the easternmost +window. + +Mr. BELIN. At the time you took Exhibit 722 had any boxes been moved at +all? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. Here is Exhibit 724, and I will ask you to state if you know +what that is. + +Mr. DAY. This is a view from the same window looking southwest down Elm +Street. Actually this is the direction the shots were fired. When this +picture was made---- + +Mr. BELIN. When you say this picture you are referring to--I think I +have skipped a number here. + +Mr. McCLOY. This is 722. + +Mr. BELIN. All right. When 722 was made, you---- + +Mr. DAY. I did not know the direction the shots had been fired. + +Mr. BELIN. All right. I'm going to hand you what I have already marked +as 724. What about that one? + +Mr. DAY. This was made, 724 was made, some 15 to 20 minutes after 722 +when I received information that the shooting actually occurred on Elm +rather than Houston Street. The boxes had been moved at that time. + +Mr. BELIN. In 724 there are boxes in the window. Were those boxes in +the window the way you saw them, or had they been replaced in the +window to reconstruct it? + +Mr. DAY. They had simply been moved in the processing for prints. They +weren't put back in any particular order. + +Mr. BELIN. So 724 does not represent, so far as the boxes are +concerned, the crime scene when you first came to the sixth floor; is +that correct? + +Mr. DAY. That is correct. + +Mr. BELIN. Let me ask you this: Had all of the boxes of the stack in +724 been replaced there or had any of the boxes been in a position they +were at the time you first arrived at the building, if you know? + +Mr. DAY. No, sir; they had not been placed in the proper position or +approximate position at the time we arrived. + +Mr. BELIN. Now, I am going to hand you what I will mark as "723" and +ask you to state if you know what this is. + +Mr. DAY. 726---- + +Mr. BELIN. No; 723. + +Mr. DAY. 723 is the southeast corner of the sixth floor of the Texas +School Book Depository Building. + +Mr. BELIN. Who took that picture, if you know? + +Mr. DAY. Detective Studebaker. + +Mr. BELIN. Was it taken under your direction and supervision, Mr. Day? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir; I was present. The two metal boxes you will note to +the left, are our fingerprint equipment that inadvertently got into the +picture with a wide-angle lens camera. + +Mr. BELIN. When you say to the left---- + +Mr. DAY. To the right. + +Mr. BELIN. You mean as you face the picture to the right. + +Mr. DAY. Yes. + +Mr. BELIN. Do you want to circle on Exhibit 723 your fingerprint +equipment? + +Mr. DAY. Yes. + +Mr. BELIN. Now, I will ask you to state if you know if this picture was +taken before any of the boxes shown on 723 were moved. + +Mr. DAY. To the best of my knowledge they had not been moved. + +Mr. BELIN. And straight ahead the camera is pointed toward it? + +Mr. DAY. To the south. + +Mr. BELIN. At which window? + +Mr. DAY. Toward the window where the hulls were found. + +Mr. BELIN. I'm going to hand you what has been marked as "725," and ask +you to state if you know what this is. + +Mr. DAY. That is a view of the same window as 723 except it shows the +full length of the aisle. + +Mr. BELIN. Was 725 taken before the boxes were moved, if you know? + +Mr. DAY. I beg your pardon? + +Mr. BELIN. Was Commission Exhibit 725 taken before any boxes were +moved, if you know? + +Mr. DAY. To the best of my knowledge, nothing had been moved. + +Mr. BELIN. I'm going to hand you what has been marked as 726 and ask +you to state if you know what this is. + +Mr. DAY. This is the next aisle over, or the next aisle west of the +aisle shown in 723. Actually, this was taken on November 25. Some +movement had been made of the boxes as shown in 723. + +Mr. BELIN. All right. So you now are saying Commission Exhibit 726 was +taken on November 25---- + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. And there had been some movement of the boxes? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. Generally did it depict the area as you saw it on November +22? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. I am handing you Commission Exhibit 727 and ask you to state +if you know what that is. + +Mr. DAY. 727 is the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository, +taken looking east along the inside of the south wall. + +Mr. BELIN. When was that taken? + +Mr. DAY. November 25, 1963. + +Mr. BELIN. Just by general means of identification, perhaps it might +help to see when some pictures were taken and some pictures were not +taken. I think you can see on Exhibit 727 that the shadows show that +the sun would not as yet have reached a due south position. Is that +correct? + +Mr. DAY. That is correct. It was taken in the morning. This is the +morning shadow. + +Mr. BELIN. Handing you what has been marked 728, would you state if you +know what this is? + +Mr. DAY. This is the third aisle from the east side of the building, +sixth floor, Texas School Book Depository. + +Mr. BELIN. Was that taken on November 22 or November 25? + +Mr. DAY. It was taken on November 22, 1963. + +Mr. BELIN. Again you can note the shadows at this time, and it would +appear as a southwesterly sun. + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. I notice a pop bottle there. Do you know whether or not that +pop bottle was there at the time you got to the scene? + +Mr. DAY. It was, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. Was it in the same relation as that two-wheeler cart, if you +know? + +Mr. DAY. To the best of my knowledge nothing had been moved there. + +Mr. BELIN. Did you see anything else with the pop bottle when you were +in that area? + +Mr. DAY. There was a brown-paper sack, like a lunch sack. + +Mr. BELIN. About how large? + +Mr. DAY. It does not show in the picture. + +Mr. BELIN. Where would the sack have been located? + +Mr. DAY. Sir? + +Mr. BELIN. Where would that sack have been located, if you know? + +Mr. DAY. I don't remember. + +Mr. BELIN. Would this have been at the third pair of windows counting +from the east; when you meant the third aisle, did you mean the third +set of windows also? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. You mentioned a sack that would have been at that third +aisle. Was any kind of a sack found on the sixth floor, if you know? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. What other kind of a sack was found? + +Mr. DAY. A homemade sack, brown paper with 3-inch tape found right in +the corner, the southeast corner of the building near where the slugs +were found. + +Mr. McCLOY. Near where the hulls were found? + +Mr. DAY. Near where the hulls. What did I say? + +Mr. McCLOY. Slugs. + +Mr. DAY. Hulls. + +Mr. BELIN. I'm going to hand you what has been marked as Commission +Exhibit 729 and ask you to state if you know what this is. + +Mr. DAY. 729 is a photograph of the inside wall, south and east walls, +right at the corner of the building at the sixth floor of the Texas +Book Depository. + +Mr. BELIN. I notice some pipes on the right portion of this picture as +you face it, and I also notice a box. + +I will first ask you to state if this picture was taken before or after +anything was removed from the area. + +Mr. DAY. The sack had been removed. + +Mr. BELIN. Had any change been made of the position of that box that is +set off by itself in the center of the picture? + +Mr. DAY. I don't think the box--well, it is possible the box had been +moved. This is an approximate position of it. The box had been dusted +for powder and--dusted for prints. The black powder is visible on it. +It is possible the box may have been moved a tiny bit. + +Mr. BELIN. Where was the sack found with relation to the pipes and that +box? + +Mr. DAY. Between the sack and the south wall, which would be the wall +at the top of the picture as shown here. + +Mr. BELIN. You mean between--you said the sack. + +Mr. DAY. I mean the pipe. The sack was between the pipe and the wall at +the top of the picture. + +Mr. BELIN. That wall at the top of the picture would be the east wall, +would it not? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir; laying parallel to the south wall. + +Mr. BELIN. Did the sack--was it folded over in any way or just lying +flat, if you remember? + +Mr. DAY. It was folded over with the fold next to the pipe, to the best +of my knowledge. + +Mr. BELIN. I will now hand you what has been marked as Commission +Exhibit 626 and ask you to state if you know what this is, and also +appears to be marked as Commission Exhibit 142. + +Mr. DAY. This is the sack found on the sixth floor in the southeast +corner of the building on November 22, 1963. + +Mr. BELIN. Do you have any identification on that to so indicate? + +Mr. DAY. It has my name on it, and it also has other writing that I put +on there for the information of the FBI. + +Mr. BELIN. Could you read what you wrote on there? + +Mr. DAY. "Found next to the sixth floor window gun fired from. May have +been used to carry gun. Lieutenant J. C. Day." + +Mr. BELIN. When did you write that? + +Mr. DAY. I wrote that at the time the sack was found before it left our +possession. + +Mr. BELIN. All right, anything else that you wrote on there? + +Mr. DAY. When the sack was released on November 22 to the FBI about +11:45 p.m., I put further information to the FBI reading as follows: +"FBI: Has been dusted with metallic magnetic powder on outside only. +Inside has not been processed. Lieut. J. C. Day." + +Mr. BELIN. Did you find anything, any print of any kind, in connection +with the processing of this? + +Mr. DAY. No legible prints were found with the powder, no. + +Mr. BELIN. Do you know whether any legible prints were found by any +other means or any other place? + +Mr. DAY. There is a legible print on it now. They were on there when it +was returned to me from the FBI on November 24. + +Mr. BELIN. Do you know by what means they found these? + +Mr. DAY. It is apparently silver nitrate. It could be another compound +they have used. The sack had an orange color indicating it was silver +nitrate. + +Mr. BELIN. You mean the sack when it came back from the FBI had a---- + +Mr. DAY. Orange color. It is another method of processing paper for +fingerprints. + +Mr. BELIN. Was there anything inside the bag, if you know, when you +found it? + +Mr. DAY. I did not open the bag. I did not look inside of the bag at +all. + +Mr. BELIN. What did you do with the bag after you found it and you put +this writing on after you dusted it? + +Mr. DAY. I released it to the FBI agent. + +Mr. BELIN. Did you take it down to the station with you? + +Mr. DAY. I didn't take it with me. I left it with the men when I left. +I left Detectives Hicks and Studebaker to bring this in with them when +they brought other equipment in. + +Mr. BELIN. By this you are referring to the bag itself? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. Did you ever get the kind of sample used at the School Book +Depository? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir; on the afternoon of November 22, 1963. I had the bag +listed as---- + +Mr. BELIN. Commission Exhibit 626 or 142. + +Mr. DAY. On the first floor of the Texas School Book Depository, and +I noticed from their wrapping bench there was paper and tape of a +similar--the tape--as of the same width as this. I took the bag over +and tried it, and I noticed that the tape was the same width as on the +bag. + +Mr. BELIN. Did it appear to have the same color? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. All right. Then what did you do? + +Mr. DAY. Sir? + +Mr. BELIN. Then what did you do? + +Mr. DAY. I directed one of the officers standing by me, I don't know +which, to get a piece of the tape and a piece of the paper from the +wrapping bench. + +Mr. BELIN. Handing you what has been marked as Commission Exhibit 677, +I will ask you to state if you know what this is. + +Mr. DAY. This is the tape and paper collected from the first floor in +the shipping department of the Texas School Book Depository on November +22, 1963. + +Mr. BELIN. Does this have any identification marks on it? + +Mr. DAY. It has my name, "J. C. Day, Dallas Police Department," and +also in my writing. "Shipping Department." + +Mr. BELIN. Any other writing on there that you recognize? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir; Detective Studebaker, who was with me, and in his +writing it says. "Paper sample from first floor, Texas School Book +Depository, Studebaker, 11-22-63." + +The tape also has Studebaker's writing on it, "Tape sample from first +floor." + +Mr. BELIN. I will ask you to state if you know what are Exhibits 730, +731 and 732? + +Mr. DAY. These are photographs of the wrapping bench on the first +floor, Texas School Book Depository, taken by me on April 13, 1964, +after I had talked to you when I was back in the building. I didn't +have a previous picture of this wrapping bench. + +Mr. BELIN. Does that represent the location on the first floor of +the School Book Depository Building where you got the tape sample, +Commission Exhibit 677? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir; it is approximately the same. I do not think the +benches had been changed since the November shooting. + +Mr. BELIN. Do you recognize at any point on any of the exhibits the +actual tape machine that was used? + +Mr. DAY. The one that we removed this from was the north roll and tape +on the east side of the bench. + +Mr. BELIN. You are now pointing at Exhibit 730. I notice a roll of +paper underneath the bench in the center of the picture. Is that where +you got the big paper, the main paper on Commission Exhibit 677? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. To the best of my knowledge that is the roll we tore +the paper off of. + +Mr. BELIN. What about tape itself? + +Mr. DAY. The tape was from the machine immediately above that roll of +paper on top of the bench. + +Mr. BELIN. Were there other tape machines there also? + +Mr. DAY. Yes; but I didn't notice them at the time. + +Mr. BELIN. How did you get the tape from out of the machine, if you +remember? + +Mr. DAY. Just pulled the tape off and tear it out and tear it off. + +Mr. BELIN. Was there a lever at all that you used, if you remember if +there is such a lever? + +Mr. DAY. I don't remember. I don't think we used the lever. + +Mr. BELIN. What did you do with Commission Exhibit 677? + +Mr. DAY. I released this, I released 677 to Vince Drain of the FBI, +11:45 p.m., November 22, 1963. + +Mr. BELIN. I am going to hand you what has been marked as Commission +Exhibit 733 and ask you to state if you know what this is. + +Mr. DAY. This is the southeast corner of the sixth floor at the window +where the shooting apparently occurred. The boxes in front of the +window, to the best of our knowledge, in the position they were in when +we arrived there on November 22, 1963. + +Mr. BELIN. So 733 represents a reconstruction in that sense, is that +correct? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. What about Exhibit---- + +Mr. DAY. This, by the way, was taken on November 25, 1963. + +Mr. BELIN. All right. What about 734? + +Mr. DAY. That is another view of the same boxes shown in 733. + +Mr. BELIN. In 734 you can also see this juncture of the south and east +walls of the sixth floor where you say the bag was found; is that +correct? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. I want to turn for the moment to 729. I notice that the +box on 729 appears to have a portion of it torn off and then replaced +again. Is this correct or not? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. I am going to hand you what has been marked as Commission +Exhibit 649 and ask you to state if you know what this is. + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. This is a portion torn from the box shown in 729. + +Mr. BELIN. While you are holding that I'm going to hand you Commission +Exhibit 648 and ask you to state if you know what this is. + +Mr. DAY. That is the box shown in 729 at the center of the picture. + +Mr. BELIN. Is that the box, 648, from which 649 was torn? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir; it is. + +Mr. BELIN. Could you relate what transpired to cause 649 to be torn +from 648? + +Mr. DAY. After I returned to the sixth floor of the Texas School +Book Depository after delivering the gun to my office, we processed +the boxes in that area, in the area of the window where the shooting +apparently occurred, with powder. This particular box was processed and +a palmprint, a legible palmprint, developed on the northwest corner of +the box, on the top of the box as it was sitting on the floor. + +Mr. BELIN. Then what did you do when you developed this print? + +Mr. DAY. I placed a piece of transparent tape, ordinary Scotch tape, +which we use for fingerprint work, over the developed palmprint. + +Mr. BELIN. And then what did you do? + +Mr. DAY. I tore the cardboard from the box that contained the palmprint. + +Mr. BELIN. Then what did you do? + +Mr. DAY. The box was left in its position, but the palmprint was taken +by me to the identification bureau. + +Mr. BELIN. Did you make any identification of it? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. Later that night when I had a chance to get +palmprints from Lee Harvey Oswald. I made a comparison with the +palmprint off of the box, your 729, and determined that the palmprint +on the box was made by the right palm of Lee Harvey Oswald. + +Mr. BELIN. Did you make any identification on Exhibit 649 which would +indicate that this is the palmprint you took? + +Mr. DAY. It has in my writing, "From top of box Oswald apparently sat +on to fire gun. Lieut. J. C. Day," and it is marked "right palm of +Oswald. Lieut. J. C. Day." + +There is also an arrow indicating north and where the palmprint was +found. It further has Detective Studebaker's name on it, and he also +wrote on there, "From top of box subject sat on." + +Mr. BELIN. Now, when was that placed on that exhibit, that writing of +yours, when was it placed on there? + +Mr. DAY. It was placed on there November 22, 1963. + +Mr. BELIN. Can you identify by any way Commission Exhibit 648? + +Mr. DAY. This has my name "J. C. Day" written on it. It also has "R. L. +Studebaker" written on it. It has written in the corner in my writing, +"Southwest corner box 18 inches from wall." + +Mr. BELIN. I also see the name "W. H. Shelley" written on there. Do you +know when this was put on? + +Mr. DAY. W. H. Shelley is the assistant manager apparently of the Texas +School Book Depository. + +Mr. BELIN. Did he put it on at the time you found the box? + +Mr. DAY. No, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. Do you know when that was placed on there? + +Mr. DAY. That was placed there November 26. The box was not removed, +just the cardboard was removed on November 22--excuse me, November 25 I +should say that he put his name on there. I returned to the School Book +Depository on November 25 and collected this box. + +Mr. McCLOY. Did he say southwest on that or southeast? + +Mr. BELIN. I believe he said that he has here that the southwest corner +of the box is 18 inches from the wall. + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir; that being the south wall. + +Mr. McCLOY. This is the southwest corner of the box he is talking about? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. That is what is written on Commission Exhibit 648. + +Mr. McCLOY. It depends on where that box was. It is kind of a removable +direction, isn't it? + +Mr. BELIN. I am going to hand you what has been marked Commission +Exhibit 641, Exhibit. 653, and Exhibit 654, and ask you to state if you +know what these are. I will start with 641 first. + +Mr. DAY. 641 is a box found in front of the window, Texas School Book +Depository. Apparently the gun had rested across this. This is the top +box now of two that were sitting in the window. + +Mr. McCLOY. At the sixth floor window from which the shots are alleged +to have been fired? + +Mr. DAY. Where the gun was fired from. + +Mr. BELIN. Does this box appear on Commission Exhibit 715? + +Mr. DAY. No, sir; this does not show. + +Mr. BELIN. In other words, what you are saying is that the box, 641, is +not the box which is shown in the window on 715? + +Mr. DAY. That is correct. + +Mr. BELIN. Taking a look now at the box No. 653, I want to ask you to +state if you know what this is. + +Mr. DAY. This is the box that is shown on 715, that is in the window. + +Mr. BELIN. Does it have any means of identification? + +Mr. DAY. It has my name "J. C. Day," also "R. L. Studebaker" marked +"Box B." + +Mr. BELIN. I see you have a notation about the top, which appears to be +reading on the side of the box. What does that mean? + +Mr. DAY. That is the top of the box as it was sitting in the window +sill, on the window sill. + +Mr. BELIN. I see you have an arrow with the arrow pointing to the north. + +Placing the box on the table here with the arrow pointing in a north +direction, it would appear the box is lying on its side, is that +correct? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. Is that the way you found it in the window before you moved +it? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. Is that the way it is shown on 715? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. Is there any kind of a mark to show what the contents of +this box were? + +Mr. DAY. It says "Ten Rolling Readers." + +Mr. BELIN. Is there anything, any other identification, that you found +on it? Did you dust this for prints? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. Did you find any? + +Mr. DAY. Not with the powder. + +Mr. BELIN. Did you find any in any way? + +Mr. DAY. No; I didn't find any. + +Mr. BELIN. Do you know if anyone else found any? + +Mr. DAY. No, sir; I don't. + +Mr. BELIN. When did you put your initials on the boxes, 653 and 641, if +you know? + +Mr. DAY. I am not certain whether it was the 22d or 25th when we +collected the boxes. + +Mr. BELIN. I notice your initials are also on 641, is that correct? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. Again you have marked the side of the box as being the top, +is that correct? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. Putting your initials on there? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir; and my name is on it "J. C. Day." + +Mr. BELIN. If you put your initials on or your name on on November 25, +how do you know this was the same box that was there when you first +came? + +Mr. DAY. There was a scar on the top of or the top side of this box +that was sitting there. I noticed that at the time. I thought the +recoil of the gun had caused that. I later decided that was in the +wrong direction. It was not the recoil of the gun but I did notice this +scar on the box. + +Mr. BELIN. When you came back on the 25th where did you find this box, +641? + +Mr. DAY. They were still in the area of the window but had been moved +from their original position. + +Mr. BELIN. Does that scar appear on the box in 733? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. I see there was one box in the window which you have +reconstructed as being box 653, am I correct on that? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. And then there is a box which is stacked on top of another +box, the upper box of that two-box stack is 641, is that correct? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. And there is a scar on top of that. Is this the same one +that you referred to at the top of 641? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. Do you know when you initialed box No. 653? + +Mr. DAY. No, sir; I don't know exactly which day it was. + +Mr. BELIN. Do you have any independent recollection of this being the +same box you saw in the window? + +Mr. DAY. I beg pardon? + +Mr. BELIN. Do you have any independent recollection of this being the +same box that you saw in the window, if you don't remember when you +initialed it? + +Mr. DAY. No, sir; except that it was still there in that area and had +been dusted on the 25th. We did dust it on the 22d. + +Mr. BELIN. Let me ask you this: When you were dusting it were there +remains of the dust on there? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. When you put your initials on on the 25th were the dust +remains still there? + +Mr. DAY. The dust was still there; yes, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. On all of these boxes, 641 and 653, and now handing you 654, +was there dust on 654 also? + +Mr. DAY. All boxes had dust on them when I collected them. + +Mr. BELIN. Were boxes Nos. 641, 653, and 654 open or closed? + +Mr. DAY. They were closed and had books in them. + +Mr. BELIN. Did they have tape around them? + +Mr. DAY. They were sealed with tape. + +Mr. BELIN. Turning to 664, do you see your name as a means of +identification on this box? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir; "J. C. Day." It also has the name "R. L. Studebaker" +on it. + +Mr. BELIN. I see there is an arrow pointing north here, is that correct? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. And the box appears with--it appears to have "top" written +on the box as it stands on one end, is that correct? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir; that is the top side as it was standing on the floor. + +Mr. BELIN. Now, again turning to Exhibit 733, do you see where box 654 +was then? + +Mr. DAY. It would be the bottom box of the center stack. There are two +boxes. + +Mr. BELIN. There are two boxes, and the upper box is marked "Ten +Rolling Readers," and 654 would be below that one? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. That is a reconstructed photo, to the best of your +knowledge, as to where the boxes were? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. McCLOY. Is there any indication on any of these boxes which you +could identify as indicating on which box the rifle rested? + +Mr. DAY. I beg your pardon? + +Mr. McCLOY. Is there any indication on any of these boxes that could +tell you where the rifle rested? + +Mr. DAY. No, sir. + +Mr. McCLOY. When it was fired? + +Mr. DAY. No, sir; I couldn't find a thing there. + +Mr. BELIN. I am going to hand you what has been marked Commission +Exhibit 735 and 736 and ask you to state if you know what these are. + +Mr. DAY. 735 is the right palm of Lee Harvey Oswald's palmprint. 736 is +the left palmprint of Lee Harvey Oswald. + +Mr. BELIN. Do you know when these prints were made? + +Mr. DAY. They were made November 22, 1963. + +Mr. BELIN. Does your name appear on these? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. With the permission of Commissioner McCloy, would it be +possible to have Xerox copies substituted for these so that the +original can go back with Lieutenant Day? + +Mr. McCLOY. Yes. + +Mr. BELIN. As I understand it, these are the last original copies you +have of palmprints of Lee Harvey Oswald. + +Mr. DAY. Yes. + +Mr. BELIN. Were you there when these prints were made? + +Mr. DAY. No, sir. The prints that were made in my presence, which I +compared with these, I can state are his, were sent to the FBI. + +Mr. BELIN. Would these be the same prints as shown on Commission +Exhibit 628 and 629? + +Mr. DAY. No, sir. They are still not the originals. They had my name +on it when I saw them sign it. But I did compare these with ones I saw +made personally of Oswald, and I can say this is his left hand, his +left palm, and his right palm. + +Mr. BELIN. So you are saying 735 and 736 are his right and left palms. +What about 628 and 629? + +Mr. DAY. 629 is the right palm, and 628 is the left palm of Lee Harvey +Oswald. + +Mr. BELIN. What about 627, can you state what that is, if you know? + +Mr. DAY. That is a set of fingerprints, standard set of fingerprints, +of Lee Harvey Oswald taken by Detective J. B. Hicks on November 22, +1963. + +Mr. BELIN. You have just examined these with your magnifying glass, is +that correct? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. And you so identify these? + +Mr. DAY. They are the fingerprints of Lee Harvey Oswald, whose +palmprints appear in 735 and 736. + +Mr. BELIN. Lieutenant Day, did you ever try to make any ballistic +identification of the bullet slug that was removed from the residence +of General Walker? + +Mr. DAY. No, sir. I don't do that work. We have a laboratory in Dallas +that we ask to do that. Wait a minute now, you said identification? My +answer should be no, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. I will ask you this. Have you ever seen Commission Exhibit +573 before, if you know? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir; I have. + +Mr. BELIN. Could you tell us what 573 is? + +Mr. DAY. This slug was gotten from the home of former General Edwin +Walker, 4011 Turtle Creek, April 10, 1963, by Detective B. G. Brown, +one of the officers under my supervision. He brought this in and +released it to me. + +Mr. BELIN. You are reading now from a report that is in your +possession, is that correct? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. Those are the official records of my office. + +Mr. BELIN. Was that prepared under your supervision? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. In the regular course of your duties at the Dallas Police +Department? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. The slug has my name "Day" scratched in it. + +Mr. BELIN. Do you know whether or not any ballistic identification was +made of this slug with regard to any rifle it may have been fired from? + +Mr. DAY. No, sir. I released that to the FBI agent B. D. Odum on +December 2, 1963, at 4:10 p.m. + +Mr. BELIN. Has that ever been back in your possession since that time? + +Mr. DAY. Not since that time. + +Mr. BELIN. Prior to that time do you know whether or not any positive +ballistic identifications were made of Exhibit 573 with regard to the +rifle from which it might have been fired? + +Mr. DAY. It had not been compared with any rifle, to the best of my +knowledge. + +Mr. BELIN. At this point we would like to offer and introduce in +evidence Commission Exhibits Nos. 715 through 734, inclusive. + +Mr. McCLOY. They have all heretofore been identified? + +Mr. BELIN. Yes, they have; and I think 715 is the first one, and if +there have been any prior to 715 I would offer to introduce that also. + +Mr. McCLOY. They may be admitted. + +(Commission Exhibits Nos. 715 through 734 inclusive, were received in +evidence.) + +Mr. BELIN. I am also going to introduce 735 and 736. These are the +Xerox copies of those cards, of those palmprint cards, that I believe +you had, sir. Am I correct in that, and according to my records, the +next number for introduction of exhibits is 737. + +Mr. McCLOY. They may be admitted. + +(Commission Exhibits Nos. 735 and 736 were received in evidence.) + +Mr. BELIN. I am now going to hand you No. 737 and ask you to state if +you know what this is. + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. This is the rifle found on the sixth floor of the +Texas School Book Depository November 22, 1963. + +Mr. BELIN. Who took that picture? + +Mr. DAY. I took it myself. + +Mr. BELIN. When? + +Mr. DAY. About 9 or 9:30 p.m., November 22, on the fourth floor of the +City Hall in my office. + +Mr. BELIN. I am going to now hand you what has been marked as 738 and +ask you to state if you know what this is. + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. This is a photograph of most of the evidence that +was returned to the FBI the second time on November 26, 1963. It was +released to Agent Vince Drain at 2 p.m., November 26. + +Mr. BELIN. Who took that picture, if you know? + +Mr. DAY. I beg pardon? + +Mr. BELIN. Who took that picture? + +Mr. DAY. I took this picture. + +Mr. BELIN. I am going to now hand you what has been marked as +Commission Exhibit 739 and ask you to state if you know what this is. + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir; this is a view of the Texas School Book Depository +made from about a half block south looking north on Houston Street on +November 22, 1963. + +Mr. BELIN. Now, returning for the moment to Exhibit 738, do you +recognize any items in there as items that you turned over to the FBI? + +Mr. DAY. All of these items were released to the FBI. + +Mr. BELIN. Which ones are there now? + +Mr. DAY. There is a shirt. + +Mr. BELIN. This is the same shirt that has been marked Commission +Exhibit 150? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. All right. What else? + +Mr. DAY. A revolver. + +Mr. BELIN. Did you put any initials on the revolver or not? + +Mr. DAY. No, sir; I don't think I did. + +Mr. BELIN. All right. What else? + +Mr. DAY. A blanket. + +Mr. BELIN. Is that the blanket that has been marked "Commission Exhibit +140" here? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. All right. What else? + +Mr. DAY. A live round. + +Mr. BELIN. Is that the live round that you earlier identified as what +Captain Fritz ejected from the rifle? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. What else? + +Mr. DAY. Two spent hulls, and an envelope in which they were in. + +Mr. BELIN. Those are the ones you have earlier identified, is that +Correct? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. What else? + +Mr. DAY. One piece of cardboard with a palmprint on it that has been +identified as that of Oswald. + +Mr. BELIN. That is the piece of cardboard that you tore off this +cardboard box, the cardboard box being Commission Exhibit No. 648, is +that correct? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. What else? + +Mr. DAY. Two--correction, one .38-caliber slug, and a button off a +policeman's uniform. + +Mr. BELIN. Is that slug, do you know where that came from? + +Mr. DAY. I didn't personally collect that. It was in the stuff that was +given to Vince Drain. + +Mr. BELIN. All right. Anything else, if you know? + +Mr. DAY. There is a plastic box, I don't remember what was in it, a +slip of paper reading "Dallas County Hospital District," laying with +the box, and there is an envelope laying with the live round with +information stating that it is a live round from the gun found on the +sixth floor of the Texas Book Depository. + +Mr. McCLOY. Did you refer to the paper sack? + +Mr. DAY. Yes; I didn't mention that. Also one homemade paper bag +previously identified as the bag found in the southeast corner of the +sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository. + +Mr. McCLOY. What is the revolver that you previously mentioned, where +did it come from? + +Mr. DAY. I understand that was the one that was in Oswald's possession, +reportedly the one used to shoot the officer. + +Mr. BELIN. You don't have any independent knowledge of that, do you? + +Mr. DAY. No, sir; I did not collect that. + +Mr. BELIN. I am going to hand you what has been marked "Commission +Exhibit 740" and ask you to state if you know what that is. Do you have +any further comments, by the way, of 738? + +Mr. DAY. I can tell from this what it is. + +Mr. BELIN. You are looking toward your own inventory and you are +pointing to a picture of Exhibit 738? + +Mr. DAY. Yes; it was a bullet fragment taken from the body of John +Connally at Parkland General Hospital in Dallas. The slip was in +connection with a fragment, the hospital slip previously mentioned. + +Mr. BELIN. Anything else on 738? + +Mr. DAY. That is all that is in the picture. + +Mr. BELIN. All right. What about exhibit---- + +Mr. DAY. There was one other article released with this, an envelope +containing the three negatives I made of the prints on the side of the +magazine housing of that 6.5 rifle, which I did not definitely identify +as belonging to Oswald. + +Mr. BELIN. Anything else on 738? + +Mr. DAY. That is all, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. What about Exhibit 740? + +Mr. DAY. 740 is a photograph looking northeast toward the Texas School +Book Depository. This shows Elm Street at the point at which the +President was shot. + +Mr. BELIN. Do you know when that was taken? + +Mr. DAY. November 22, 1963, in the afternoon sometime after 3 o'clock. + +Mr. BELIN. All right. I am going to hand you Exhibit 741 and ask you to +state if you know what this is. + +Mr. DAY. 741 is a photograph of the lunchroom area on the second floor +of the Texas School Book Depository taken November 25, 1963. + +Mr. BELIN. Do you know what direction the camera is facing? + +Mr. DAY. The camera is facing west looking toward the west door of the +lunchroom. + +Mr. BELIN. All right. I'm going to hand you what has been marked +"Exhibit 742" and ask you to state if you know what this is. + +Mr. DAY. That is the outside of the door shown in the picture on 741, +which door---- + +Mr. BELIN. There appear to be two doors shown on 741. One door that is +open and one door that is closed with the window in it. + +Mr. DAY. This is outside of the door that is closed with the window +in it. This picture looks east, made on the second floor of the Texas +School Book Depository from a position near the stairway. + +Mr. BELIN. That would be the stairway coming---- + +Mr. DAY. Stairway coming down from the third floor. + +Mr. BELIN. I will hand you what has been marked "743" and ask you to +state if you know what this is. + +Mr. DAY. 743 is a photograph of the stairway leading to the third floor +from the second floor of the southwest corner of the Texas School Book +Depository. Make a correction on that previous picture 742. I stated +that was taken from a position of the stairway leading to the third +floor. It should read taken from a position of the stairway leading to +the first floor. + +Mr. BELIN. Is there any other evidence pertaining to fingerprints or +palmprints that you have not discussed? + +Mr. DAY. I can't think of any at the present time. I believe that +pretty well covers my participation in this investigation. + +Mr. BELIN. Is there any other evidence that you can think of pertaining +to the rifle that you have not discussed that you can think of at this +time? + +Mr. DAY. Not that I can think of. + +Mr. BELIN. Is there any other thing that you did pertaining to the +investigation of the assassination of the President that you can think +of at this time? + +Mr. DAY. Under my direction they made paraffin casts of the hand of Lee +Harvey Oswald in Captain Fritz' office. + +Mr. BELIN. This was done under your direction? + +Mr. DAY. I directed them to make it, and also paraffin casts or just of +a piece of paraffin on the left side of the face to see if there were +any nitrates there. + +Mr. BELIN. On the left side or right side of the face? + +Mr. DAY. Right side. + +Mr. BELIN. Do you know what the results of the paraffin tests were? + +Mr. DAY. The test on the face was negative. + +Mr. BELIN. Had you ever done a paraffin test on a face before? + +Mr. DAY. No; actually--had it not been for the particular type of case +and this particular situation here--we would not have at this time. It +was just something that was done to actually keep from someone saying +later on, "Why didn't you do it?" + +Actually, in my experience there, shooting a rifle with a telescopic +sight there would be no chance for nitrates to get way back or on the +side of the face from a rifle. + +Mr. BELIN. Well, the chamber, the nature of the chamber of the rifle, +would that have anything to do with that? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. In what way? + +Mr. DAY. A rifle such as that one we are talking about here from the +sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository, in my opinion, would +not throw nitrates back to where a man's face was when he is looking +through a telescopic sight. + +Mr. BELIN. Well, when you ran these tests you had understood that the +man, Oswald, had fired a pistol, too, hadn't he? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. Would you expect to have any positive tests from a pistol on +the cheek? + +Mr. DAY. I would expect more with a revolver with an open cylinder than +I would from a rifle. Actually, for most practical purposes, I would +not be surprised if there would be no nitrates from a man firing a +rifle. + +Mr. BELIN. What about on the hands? + +Mr. DAY. Even on the hands. It is possible, but it is more likely with +a revolver where you have a revolving cylinder and an opening between +the cylinder and the actual barrel where the nitrates can come out. + +Mr. McCLOY. That was the type of pistol that was used to kill Tippit, +wasn't it? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. McCLOY. Did the paraffin show up nitrate? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir; nitrates were present on the cast made of Oswald's +hands. + +Mr. BELIN. Is there anything else, are there any other comments you +have with regard to the paraffin test, sir? + +Mr. DAY. No, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. You are showing me your report of paraffin findings. Is this +the same report that was sent into the FBI, if you know? + +Mr. DAY. I think they were sent a report. This is the report submitted +by the laboratory at Dallas who first processed this paraffin. Later +on the FBI did come and want this paraffin, and it was turned over to +them, also the can from which this was made. I don't know what purpose +they wanted it for. + +Mr. BELIN. I believe you mentioned that you took a measurement of the +area in which the long paper bag was found to show how big an area that +was with relation to the easternmost pair of windows on the east side +of the building, and the--on the south side of the building rather--and +on the southeast corner juncture of the south wall to the east wall. + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. All right. Handing you what has been marked as "Commission +Exhibit 734"--you are using another exhibit there---- + +Mr. DAY. It is the same, it would be the same. I just had my +measurements on there, was all. + +Mr. BELIN. 729, is this the one that you have here? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. All right. + +How far would the distance be between the east wall and the east side +of that easternmost pipe? + +Mr. DAY. Two feet, seven inches. + +Mr. BELIN. Do you have what the measurements were between the south +wall and that box that you tore the piece off of to make the palmprint +takeoff? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir; it would be 19-1/2 inches. Actually the box was +marked "18 inches." If you will note there are six boards. I thought +they were 3 inches wide. On doublechecking I found they were 3-1/4 +inches wide which would make a 1-1/2 inch difference in six boards. + +Mr. BELIN. And I believe you have already said that the bag was folded +over when it was found, is that correct? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. Now, on the picture, 734, this is the reconstruction of the +boxes in the window, is that correct? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. Does that represent, to the best of your recollection, the +way the boxes were at the time you first came upon the crime scene, if +you know? + +Mr. DAY. It is an approximate location. I may be a little too far from +the west to what they actually were when we got there on November 22. + +Mr. BELIN. Is there any other information you can think of, any facts +that you can think of, whether I have asked you or not, that you feel +are in any way relevant to the area of inquiry, the assassination of +the President, the murder of Officer Tippit, or anything else? + +Mr. DAY. I can't think of anything right now. + +Mr. BELIN. All right. + +Now, I'm going to hand you what has been marked as "Commission Exhibit +744," and ask you to state if you know what this is. + +Mr. DAY. 744 is a picture of Officer M. N. McDonald, and shows +the scratch on the side of his face made somewhere close to 2 +p.m., November 22, 1963, by Detective J. M. Craft--correction, I +believe he is a patrolman, Patrolman J. M. Craft, who is assigned +to identification, to the identification bureau, and did the actual +snapping of the shutter. + +Mr. BELIN. Was this picture taken under your supervision? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. I am going to hand you what has been marked "Commission +Exhibit 745" and ask you to state if you know what this is. + +Mr. DAY. 745 is a photograph of Don Ray Ables, Dallas Police Department +jail clerk, who was on duty, and placed in the showup November--I don't +know whether it was the 23d or 22d, one of those 2 days, along with Lee +Harvey Oswald at the Dallas Police Department showup room. + +Mr. BELIN. Do you know about how tall Don Ray Ables is, if you know? + +Mr. DAY. He is about 5'6", or 7", but I would have to get his accurate +measurements to get it. In other words, he is not a large man. + +Mr. McCLOY. There were more than he in the showup with Oswald, which +Oswald was in, that is, he wasn't the only one in the showup besides +Oswald? + +Mr. DAY. I don't think so, but I don't know, sir. + +Mr. McCLOY. You weren't present at the showup? + +Mr. DAY. No, sir. + +Mr. BELIN. At this time we would offer and introduce into evidence +Exhibits 736 through 745. + +Mr. McCLOY. They may be admitted. + +(The items marked Commission Exhibits Nos. 736 through 745 for +identification were received in evidence.) + +Mr. BELIN. Any other questions that you have, Mr. McCloy? + +Mr. McCLOY. On the crime scene, that is, on the sixth floor, did you +notice any chicken bones or chicken remnants of a chicken sandwich or +lunch or the whereabouts, if you did see them? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir; there was a sack of some chicken bones and a bottle +brought into the identification bureau. I think I still have that sack +and bottle down there. The chicken bones, I finally threw them away +that laid around there. + +In my talking to the men who were working on that floor, November 25, +they stated, one of them stated, he had eaten lunch over there. + +Mr. McCLOY. Someone other than Oswald? + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir; so I discarded it, or disconnected it with being +with Oswald. Incidentally, Oswald's fingerprints were not on the +bottle. I checked that. + +Mr. McCLOY. They were not on the bottle? + +Mr. DAY. No, sir. + +Mr. McCLOY. Did you go on the fifth floor and make any investigation on +the fifth floor? + +Mr. DAY. I was there but I didn't have any photographs taken or do much +investigating there. + +My work was mostly confined to the sixth, second and the first floors. + +Mr. McCLOY. I noticed that in the picture you took of the sixth floor +window, the picture that had the hulls on the floor, there seemed to be +a break in the floor between--against the wall where the wood did not +reach the brick of the wall. Was that hole, so far as you recall, all +the way through from the sixth floor to the fifth floor? + +Mr. DAY. No, sir; I checked that. A hull could not go down through +there. You could see the bottom of it. There was no hull in there. + +Mr. McCLOY. I'm not saying there was any hull in there. I was wondering +whether that aperture, whatever it was, not related to the hulls, +whether that went all the way through to the fifth floor. + +Mr. DAY. No, sir; I don't think so. I think it was tight there and +nothing---- + +Mr. McCLOY. The colored man testified he could see air from the fifth +floor to the sixth floor. + +Mr. DAY. I may be wrong, but I did make a search in that area for the +hulls and determined none could be in there. As far as from the bottom +looking up, I couldn't say. + +Mr. McCLOY. I don't think I can think of anything else to ask you, +anything else I would like to ask you, Lieutenant Day. + +Mr. BELIN. Lieutenant Day, we want to thank you for your splendid +cooperation here. We appreciate your coming up and staying over and +staying late tonight, and we know it has taken time on your part. + +Mr. DAY. I hope I have helped you and not confused you. + +Mr. McCLOY. You indicated one thing, Lieutenant, that you didn't have +quite the proper equipment here tonight to make the comparisons that +you might want to make. + +Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. McCLOY. Did I hear that you were going to stay over and go to the +FBI laboratory in the morning? + +Mr. DAY. Well, they are trying to make reservations to leave tonight +if they can get them. I do not know whether they can. On that print +it would take me some work to do that before I could eliminate all +possibility of it not being his print. I feel it is his from what I +have seen of it, but before I can take the witness stand and say that +is his, I would want to do some more work on it. What it would take, I +don't know. I understand that it was identified. What process they used +I don't know. + +Mr. McCLOY. By someone else, by some other agency? + +Mr. DAY. Yes. + +Mr. McCLOY. Can you restate again for the record what you can +positively identify in terms of fingerprints or palmprints and +Oswald's---- + +Mr. DAY. The palmprint on the box he apparently sat on I can definitely +say it is his without being in fear of any error. The other, I think it +is his, but I couldn't say definitely on a witness stand. + +Mr. McCLOY. By the other, you mean the other palmprint? + +Mr. DAY. The palmprint and that tracer print aside the trigger housing +or the magazine housing. + +Mr. McCLOY. Thank you very much. + +(Whereupon, at 9:15 p.m. the President's Commission recessed.) + + + + +_Thursday, April 23, 1964_ + +TESTIMONY OF LYNDAL L. SHANEYFELT, ROBERT INMAN BOUCK, ROBERT CARSWELL, +AND WINSTON G. LAWSON + +The President's Commission met at 9:10 a.m. on April 23, 1964, at 200 +Maryland Avenue NE., Washington, D.C. + +Present were Chief Justice Earl Warren, Chairman; Senator John Sherman +Cooper, Representative Gerald R. Ford, John J. McCloy, and Allen W. +Dulles, members. + +Also present were Melvin Aron Eisenberg, assistant counsel; Samuel A. +Stern, assistant counsel; Howard P. Willens, assistant counsel; Charles +Murray, observer; and Dean Robert G. Storey, special counsel to the +attorney general of Texas. + + +TESTIMONY OF LYNDAL L. SHANEYFELT + +Mr. McCLOY. Do you solemnly swear the testimony you give in this case, +this hearing, will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the +truth, so help you God? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. I do. + +Mr. McCLOY. You know why we are here? It is to ascertain all the facts +and circumstances which seem to be relevant to the assassination of the +President and the death of his alleged assassin, and there are certain +identifications which I believe you can be helpful to us with, and with +that I will just ask you to respond to the questions. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Shaneyfelt, can you state your full name, please? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes, Lyndal L. Shaneyfelt. + +(At this point, the Chief Justice entered the hearing room.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. Can you give us your position? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. I am a special agent with the Federal Bureau of +Investigation, assigned to the FBI laboratory. + +Mr. EISENBERG. What unit? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. I am in the document section of the FBI Laboratory here +in Washington. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Does your work in that section customarily include +photographic work as well as written documents? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is true. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Could you briefly give us your qualifications as an +expert in photography, Mr. Shaneyfelt? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; I have been in photographic work since about 1937. +I started working with the FBI in 1940. Three years prior to this I had +worked as a newspaper photographer in Hastings, Nebr., and on entering +the FBI I worked in the photographic section of the FBI for about 8 +years before I became a special agent. I became an agent in 1951, spent +a year in Detroit as a field investigator, and then was returned to the +laboratory and assigned as a document examiner. I was also assigned +cases involving photographic examinations, because of my extensive +experience in photography. + +I have a B.C.S. degree from Southeastern University here in Washington. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Can you estimate the number of photographic examinations +you have made? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. This would be just an estimate. I would estimate +approximately 100, between 100 and 300. I couldn't come any closer than +that. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Have you testified in court on the subject? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; I have. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, may this witness testify as an expert in +the area of photography? + +Mr. McCLOY. Yes; I think he is qualified. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Shaneyfelt, I now hand you two small photographs +which have been already marked "Commission Exhibit 133," and I ask you +whether you are familiar with these photographs? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; I am. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, for the record, these photographs appear to show +Lee Harvey Oswald in two different poses, and they were found by police +officers, following his apprehension, at one of the premises at which +he resided. + +Mr. Chairman, I would like your permission to mark these photographs +"A" and "B" for easy identification; they have already been marked +"Commission Exhibit 133." + +Again for the record, there are two poses represented in these +photographs. In one the rifle is held--a rifle is held--in front of the +body, and in one it is held somewhat above the torso. I am marking the +rifle--that photograph in which the weapon is held in front of the +body--as A, and the photograph in which the weapon is held somewhat +above the body as B. + +Mr. McCLOY. When you say above the body, you mean above and to the +right side of the body as Oswald faces the viewer? + +Mr. EISENBERG. Yes, sir. + +Mr. Shaneyfelt, have you prepared reproductions of Exhibit 133A to show +the weapon pictured therein in further detail? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; I have. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Could you show us those reproductions? Did you prepare +these yourself, Mr. Shaneyfelt? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; I did. They were prepared by rephotographing +Commission Exhibit 133A, to preparing a negative from which I made a +variety of prints of different densities to bring out the detail of the +rifle. + +Mr. EISENBERG. When you say "of different densities," could you explain +that in lay terms? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; to try to get greater variation between the light +and dark areas of the photograph, or to bring out or enhance the +contrast so that the detail is more apparent. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, I would like these photographs admitted as +Commission Exhibit 746. + +Mr. McCLOY. You want to put them all into one exhibit? + +Mr. EISENBERG. Yes; and I will subnumber them A, B, C, D, E. + +Mr. McCLOY. Have you identified these sufficiently? + +Mr. EISENBERG. Yes; I have. + +Mr. McCLOY. I wonder whether you have? + +Mr. EISENBERG. The witness has identified these as subphotographs of +133A. There are five photographs, is that correct, Mr. Shaneyfelt? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. + +Mr. McCLOY. Different dimensions? + +Mr. EISENBERG. Two photographs being what size? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Two 11 by 14 inches, and three 8 by 10 inches. + +(At this point Representative Ford entered the hearing room.) + +Mr. McCLOY. Very well, they will be admitted. + +(Commission Exhibit No. 746 was marked and received in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. Let the record show I have marked these "Exhibits 746 A, +B, C, D, E", the two larger photographs being marked "A" and "B," and +three smaller photographs being marked "C," "D," and "E." + +Mr. Shaneyfelt, I now hand you a rifle, Commission Exhibit 139, +which for the record I will state is the rifle which was used in the +assassination, and I ask you whether you are familiar with this weapon? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Have you prepared a photograph of this weapon, Mr. +Shaneyfelt, showing it in approximately the same manner as it is shown +in Commission Exhibit 133A, but without it being held by anyone? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did you prepare this photograph? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. I prepared it myself. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And that is an 8- by 10-inch photograph, is it? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, may I have this admitted as 747? + +Mr. McCLOY. It may be admitted. + +(The photograph referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 747, and +received into evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. Have you prepared a simulated photograph showing this +weapon, Commission Exhibit 139, held in approximately the same pose as +it appears to be held in Commission Exhibit 133A? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. I have; yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And that is an 8- by 10-inch photograph? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Which you prepared yourself? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; I prepared the photograph myself, having the rifle +held in approximately the same position as in Exhibit 133A, and I +attempted to duplicate the lighting of the photograph, Exhibit 133A. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, may I have this admitted? + +Mr. McCLOY. It may be admitted. + +(The photograph referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 748, and +was received into evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. Where was this photograph prepared, Mr. Shaneyfelt? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. This was prepared in the FBI laboratory. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Was this inside or outside? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Outside. + +Mr. EISENBERG. On the roof? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. On the roof of the Justice Building. + +Mr. EISENBERG. I see the head of the individual in the photograph is +blacked out. Can you explain the reason for that? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. I blanked out the head because it was one of the +employees of the FBI, and I felt it was desirable to blank out the head +since it was not pertinent. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, Mr. Shaneyfelt, based upon Exhibit 133A, upon your +reproductions of Exhibit 133A, consisting of the Exhibits Nos. 746 A +through E; and upon your photograph of the rifle, Exhibit 747, and your +simulation of 133A, Exhibit 748--have you formed an opinion concerning +whether Exhibit 139, the rifle used in the assassination, is the same +or similar to the rifle pictured in Exhibit 133A? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; I have. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Can you give us that opinion? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; I compared the actual rifle with the photograph, +Exhibit 133A, and with the photographs that I prepared from Exhibit +133A, as well as the other simulated photograph and the photograph +of the rifle, attempting to establish whether or not it could be +determined whether it was or was not the same. + +I found it to be the same general configuration. All appearances were +the same. I found no differences. I did not find any really specific +peculiarities on which I could base a positive identification to the +exclusion of all other rifles of the same general configuration. + +I did find one notch in the stock at this point that appears very +faintly in the photograph, but it is not sufficient to warrant positive +identification. + +Mr. EISENBERG. When you say "this point," you are pointing to the right +side of the weapon, to a point approximately 14 to 15 inches in front +of the bolt when the bolt is turned down--is that correct? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Shaneyfelt, looking at this Commission Exhibit 139, +the weapon, I see that the stock is curved downward, about 8 inches--at +a point approximately 8 inches--from the butt of the weapon, and that +it then recurves upward at an angle of approximately 10° to the plane +of the forepart of the butt--is that correct? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, I will hand you Commission Exhibits 746 A through +E, and I will ask you to select from those exhibits the photograph +which best brings out the various details of the weapon. + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. I believe that the contour of the stock is best shown +in Commission Exhibit 746E. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, could you take---- + +Mr. McCLOY. Is that better shown than in the larger pictures? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. I believe it is; yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Could you take a marking pencil, Mr. Shaneyfelt, and +circle the point at which the curve and recurve appear to show, and +mark that circle with an A? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. You circled a point which is marked predominantly by a +highlight, is that correct? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, without tampering with the original, 133A, I wonder +whether you could show to the Commissioners the highlight as it appears +on the original photograph? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; the highlight is right at that point there, the +bright spot at that point. + +Mr. McCLOY. I think I might say for the record, I don't believe you +identified the place where these photographs were purported to be sited. + +As I understand it these are from the Neely residence? + +Mr. EISENBERG. No, sir; I think they were located in the Paine garage. +The Neely residence---- + +Mr. McCLOY. The photographs were located in the Paine garage. I am +talking about the site of the photograph. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Yes, sir; I think we will show that with independent +testimony. + +Mr. McCLOY. In the garden of the Neely residence. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Shaneyfelt, I will hand you Exhibits 747 and +748, which are the pictures of the rifle and the simulated picture +approximating 133A, and I will ask you to again mark with a circle +designated A the curve and recurve of the stock of 139. + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Here. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Could you compare the manner in which the curve and +recurve marked "A" appears on these photographs with the manner in +which it appears on 746, the photograph you have--746E, the photograph +you circled earlier? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes. At a point approximately 6 to 8 inches from the +base of the stock, where the stock curves downward, there is a nob +formed, and on that nob there is a strong highlight which appears in +photograph 746E, and in the simulated photograph, and the photograph of +the rifle. The actual stock curves slightly around that highlight, and +then recurves back up toward the bolt, and this is visible in Exhibit +746E, and in the simulated photographs 748 and 747. + +Mr. EISENBERG. So again in 747 and 748 the recurve appears primarily as +a highlight; is that correct? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. That is the most outstanding point. + +Mr. EISENBERG. I also observe, Mr. Shaneyfelt, the telescopic sight on +Exhibit 139, the weapon. Referring again to 746E, your reproduction, +which shows somewhat greater detail because of the contrast, could you +circle the telescopic sight appearing in that picture, and mark it "B"? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Right here. + +Mr. EISENBERG. I wonder whether you could again show to the +Commissioners the telescopic sight on the original 133A? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes. Along that area, just at the base of the hand. +It runs right across from this area to the base of the hand below the +rifle and above the bolt. + +Mr. McCLOY. It is quite apparent, isn't it? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; it is quite apparent. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, Mr. Shaneyfelt, again referring to 746E, could you +circle the end of the weapon, the end of the barrel of the weapon, and +mark it "C"? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Here. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, towards the upper right of the point you have +marked as the end of the weapon there is a little mark of some +type--right near the point which you have marked "C." + +Is that mark part of the end of the weapon? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. No; I interpret that mark as a shadow on the building, +a slight shadow on the building. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Just to make that clear, could you draw an arrow within +your circle pointing to the end of the weapon? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; I have done it. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, Mr. Shaneyfelt, I hand you a negative which, for +the record, appears to be a negative of 133B, which is the photograph +showing the weapon held slightly above and to the right, and I ask you +if you are familiar with this negative? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes, I am. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Shaneyfelt, have you examined this negative to +determine whether the picture 133B is in fact a print made directly or +indirectly from the negative? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. I have examined it for that purpose +and determined that Exhibit 133B is a print from this negative. + +Mr. EISENBERG. May I have this negative introduced into evidence as +Exhibit 749? + +Mr. McCLOY. Have you any other identification as to this negative as to +where it was found? + +Mr. EISENBERG. Yes; for the record only, nothing that this witness can +testify to---- + +Mr. McCLOY. State for the record where it was found. + +Mr. EISENBERG. For the record, this was also found at one of Oswald's +residences, I believe the Paine address at which Marina was staying at +the time Oswald was apprehended. + +Mr. McCLOY. This will be proved? + +Mr. EISENBERG. This will be proved separately. + +The CHAIRMAN. Will this negative deteriorate as time goes on? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. No. + +The CHAIRMAN. It will not? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. It should not. + +The CHAIRMAN. Yes. + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Normally this depends on the processing, how well it +has been processed and how well it has been fixed and washed. If it +were going to deteriorate it would have begun by now. + +The CHAIRMAN. I see--and it has not yet begun? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. It has not begun. There is no indication that there +will be any extensive deterioration. + +Representative FORD. Have we shown any place in the record that that +print or a negative came from a camera---- + +Mr. EISENBERG. That is what I was going to proceed to do, sir. + +Mr. Chairman, may we have this admitted as Exhibit 749? + +Mr. McCLOY. Admitted. + +(Commission Exhibit No. 749 was marked and received in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. I asked you before whether you could say whether this +negative, which is now 749, had been used directly or indirectly to +make the print 133B? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Could you say whether it had been used either directly +or indirectly? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. It is my opinion that it was used directly to make the +print. However, I cannot specifically eliminate the possibility of an +internegative or the possibility of this photograph having been copied, +a negative made by copying a photograph similar to this from which this +print was made. + +I think this is highly unlikely, because if this were the result of a +copied negative, there would normally be evidence that I could detect, +such as a loss of detail and imperfections that show up due to this +added process. + +Although a very expertly done rephotographing and reprinting cannot +positively be eliminated, I am reasonably sure it was made directly +from the negative. + +Mr. EISENBERG. But at any rate if it was not made directly it was +made indirectly? The only process that could have intervened was a +rephotographing of the photograph and making a negative and then a new +print? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Shaneyfelt, I now hand you an Imperial Reflex Duo +Lens camera. Let me state for the record, that this camera was turned +over to the FBI by Robert Oswald, the brother of Lee Harvey Oswald, on +February 24, 1964. + +Robert Oswald identified the camera as having belonged to Lee Oswald +and stated that he, Robert, had obtained it from the Paine residence in +December 1963, several weeks after the assassination. + +On February 25, 1964, Marina was given the camera and she identified it +as the one which she had used to take the pictures 133A and 133B. + +Mr. Shaneyfelt, are you familiar with this camera? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; I am. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, may I have this admitted as 750? + +Mr. McCLOY. It may be admitted. + +(Commission Exhibit No. 750 was marked and received in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. When did you receive the camera, Mr. Shaneyfelt? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. It was--I can't pinpoint the date exactly, I don't +have the notes here for that. It was, I would say, the latter part of +February, not too long after it had been recovered on February 24. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Was it in working order when you received it? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. No; it had been slightly damaged. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Could you explain that? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. In order to be able to make a photograph with the +camera, I had to make slight repairs to the shutter lever, which had +been bent. I straightened it and cleaned the lens in order to remove +the dirt which had accumulated. These were the only things that had to +be done before it was usable to make pictures with it. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did you clean the inside or the outside of the lens? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. The outside of the lens. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And the shutter lever you are referring to is the little +red-tipped lever protruding at the outside of the camera? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. + +Mr. EISENBERG. What did you do with it exactly? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. I bent it out straight. It was bent over. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Could a layman have performed these repairs? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; he could have. + +Mr. EISENBERG. How would you characterize this camera in terms of +expense, Mr. Shaneyfelt? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. It is a relatively inexpensive camera. It is what we +refer to as a fixed-focus box-type camera. A simple box-type camera +with a simple one-shutter speed and no focusing ability, fixed focus. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Do you know where the camera was made? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. It was made in the United States. At the base of the +camera it has the name Imperial Reflex, made in U.S.A., on the front, +below the lens. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Shaneyfelt, did you compare the negative, Exhibit +749, with the camera, Exhibit 750, to determine whether the negative +had been taken in that camera to the exclusion of all other cameras? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; I did. + +Mr. EISENBERG. What conclusion did you come to? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. I reached the conclusion that the negative, which is +Commission Exhibit 749, was exposed in the camera, Commission Exhibit +750, and no other camera. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Can you explain how you were able to arrive at such a +conclusion? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; I can. + +In order to make an examination of this type, it is necessary to make a +negative with the camera, using the camera, because the examination is +based on the aperture at the back of the camera, at the film plane. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Have you prepared a photograph of that aperture at the +film plane? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; I have an enlarged photograph of that aperture, +that I made so that it would better show the back of the camera, with +the back removed to show the film plane opening or aperture. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did you take this photograph of the back of the camera +yourself, Mr. Shaneyfelt? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. It was made under my supervision. + +Mr. EISENBERG. May I have this admitted as 751? + +Mr, McCLOY. It may be admitted. + +(Commission Exhibit No. 751 was marked and received in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. What is the enlargement here, by the way? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Approximately two and a half times. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, having reference to the chart, Mr. Shaneyfelt, +could you explain it in a little more detail, the basis of your +examination? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; the basis of the examination was a close +microscopic study of the negative made in the camera to study the +shadowgraph that is made of the edge of the aperture. + +As the film is placed across the aperture of the camera, and the +shutter is opened, light comes through and exposes the film only in the +opening within the edges. Where the film is out over the edges of the +aperture it is not exposed, and your result is an exposed negative with +a clear edge, and on the negative then, the edges of that exposure of +the photograph, are actually shadowgraphs of the edges of the aperture. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Could you circle or mark with arrows the edges you are +referring to as "these edges" or "this edge," that is, the edges of the +aperture opening at the plane of the film? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes. + +Representative FORD. This would be true in every picture taken? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. That would be true of every picture taken and is true +of virtually every camera--every roll-film type camera. It would not +be true of a press-type camera where the film is loaded into separate +holders; then the holder becomes the thing that will leave identifying +characteristics. + +On any 35 mm. or Leica camera, roll-film camera, box cameras of all +types, having an arrangement, where the film goes across an opening +leaving an exposed area at the aperture and unexposed area around the +aperture, this would be true. + +Mr. EISENBERG. When you say "virtually every camera" you are including +every type of camera with this type of aperture? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; I would include every camera with this type of +film arrangement and aperture. + +Mr. EISENBERG. You held up a negative before---- + +The CHAIRMAN. Just a moment, gentlemen, you will excuse me, I must go +over to the Court now. You will be able to proceed the rest of the day, +will you? + +Fine. I will be back as soon as I finish. + +(At this point the Chief Justice left the hearing room.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Shaneyfelt, you were holding up a negative which +appears to be a negative of a simulated photograph you showed us +before, Exhibit 748. Is it such a negative? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. It is true. That is the negative from which that +exhibit was made. The negative was exposed in the camera which is +marked Commission Exhibit No. 750. I exposed it myself. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, may I have this negative admitted as 752? + +Mr. McCLOY. It may be admitted. That is the negative from which that +exhibit was made? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes. + +(Commission Exhibit No. 752 was marked and received in evidence.) + +Mr. McCLOY. And you took that picture? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. I took that picture myself. + +Representative FORD. Is this a recognized technique or procedure used +in or among experts such as yourself? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes. We have used this technique of camera +identification with film on several occasions. It doesn't arise too +often. As it normally arises, the majority of examinations that I +have made in this connection are the identification of a camera that +has been stolen and the serial number removed so that it can't be +identified, the owner cannot identify it. We then take the owner's film +and the camera that has been recovered and make this examination and +determine that this is in fact the camera that the owner's film was +exposed in, thereby showing ownership. + +So, it is a recognized technique, we do it regularly. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And you have performed such examinations yourself, Mr. +Shaneyfelt? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Shaneyfelt, what is the basis of your statement, the +theoretical basis of your statement, that every camera with this type +of back aperture arrangement is unique in the characteristics of the +shadowgraph it makes on the negative? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. It is because of the minute variations that even two +cameras from the same mold will have. Additional handwork on cameras, +or filing the edges where a little bit of plastic or a little bit of +metal stays on, make individual characteristics apart from those that +would be general characteristics on all of them from the same mold. + +In addition, as the film moves across the camera and it is used for +a considerable length of time, dirt and debris tend to accumulate +a little--or if the aperture is painted, little lumps in the paint +will make little bumps along that edge that would make that then +individually different from every other camera. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Is this similar then to toolmark identification? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Very similar, yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Have you prepared a chart on which you have illustrated +some of the more prominent points which led you to your identification, +Mr. Shaneyfelt? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; I have. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, this chart shows on the left a copy of your +simulated picture number 748 and on the right a copy of the picture +133B, is that correct? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And you prepared this chart yourself? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; I did. + +Mr. EISENBERG. May I have this admitted as 753, Mr. Chairman? + +Mr. McCLOY. It may be admitted. + +(Commission Exhibit No. 753 was marked and received in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. Before we get to this chart, I wonder whether you could +take the negative itself, that is, Exhibit 749, and place it over the +camera, Exhibit 750, so that the Commissioners can see how it runs +across these--across the sides of the aperture you have been discussing? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes. I might state that this film at the time it is +put in the camera is in a long strip, and at the time of processing +it is cut apart into separate negatives. There is an unexposed area +between each exposure, and they are cut apart for printing and storage +and returning. So that then this would be in a long strip of film--the +camera being held in this position, which is the normal position for +taking a photograph. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And that is upright? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Upright--will give you an image which on the film +is upside down because of the light reflecting from the face, going +through the lens and going down here; so this negative, Commission +Exhibit 749, would have been on the film plane in this manner at the +time the exposure was made. + +The blackened area that you see would be the area that was exposed, and +because of the aperture frame, the clear area around the edge was not +exposed. + +Mr. McCLOY. Yes. + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. And this edge between the dark and the light then +becomes the shadowgraph of this aperture of the camera. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Your Commission Exhibit 753 illustrates that +shadowgraph, or actually shows that shadowgraph, Mr. Shaneyfelt? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct, the charts were printed to show the +entire negative and reproduce the shadowgraphs of Commission Exhibit +749 and Commission Exhibit 752. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Could you refer now to that chart? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes, sir. Referring to the chart then, the examination +was made by comparing the edges, not only for size but general contour, +and I have marked with numbers from 1 through 8 some of the more +outstanding points of identification. + +The eight points are not all that accounted for the identification. The +identification is based on the fact that not only those eight points +but every place else is the same on both negatives. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And the contours are also the same? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. The contours are the same, yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. So you have taken these eight points for demonstrative +purposes? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Rather than as being actually what you rested your +identification on, is that correct? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. + +Point No. 1 which is in the lower right hand corner, as you view the +picture of the chart---- + +Mr. McCLOY. Lower left-hand corner? + +Mr. EISENBERG. As you view it, lower left hand? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. As you view it, lower left hand of both of the charts, +shows a notch that makes the shadowgraph other than a straight line. + +Representative FORD. This is very clear. + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. This appears the same in both charts. Point No. 2 is +another similar notch except that it is a double one, and the little +notches are smaller. This again is the same in both charts. + +Point No. 3 is more of an indentation, a slight curvature where the +edge curves out a little and back in toward the corner. It is not as +pronounced a dent. + +Point No. 4 is only visible by looking at the chart in this direction +because---- + +Mr. EISENBERG. This direction being from left to right as you look? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Left to right, because although this line looks +straight it actually dips down and back up again. + +Mr. EISENBERG. "This line" is the line at the top of that exhibit? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. The line of the shadowgraph at the top of the +photograph. + +Representative FORD. That is point No. 4? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Four. Point No. 5 again is a slight dent or bulge in +the edge and shows in both charts. + +No. 6 is a more shallow and wide indentation along the edge. + +Point No. 7 is again the same type of a characteristic as the others, +but a little different shape. + +Point No. 8 is a little fragment of bakelite or debris extending out +from the edge, that shows in both of the charts in the same manner. In +addition the corner at eight tends to curve in towards the picture as +it approaches the corner, there tends to be a curvature in and not a +nice neat square corner. + +In addition, between points 2 and 3 there is a very definite S-curve +where the bakelite from which the camera is made apparently warped +slightly making this S-curve, and this is apparent in both charts. +Again, more apparent as you hold the photograph flat and look down the +line. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, the margins of the shadowgraph in the right-hand +side of the chart, which is based upon 133B, look somewhat larger than +the margins on the left-hand side. + +Could you explain that? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. That was merely a matter of masking during the printing +process. + +Mr. EISENBERG. That is to say it is the interior which is crucial +rather than the width of the margin? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. + +Mr. McCLOY. This mark along the bottom appears in one. How do you +explain that? + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. McCloy is pointing to a mark along the right-hand +side, a white mark along the bottom of the shadowgraph. + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; that is the cut edge of the negative, where this +particular negative has been cut very close to the shadowgraph line and +this then appears as a white line along the chart and represents the +actual edge of the negative. + +The other three edges of that negative and all four edges of the other +negative do not show in the photograph. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Was this chart actually prepared by use of exhibits--by +the negatives, Exhibits 749 and 752, Mr. Shaneyfelt? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; I made the charts directly from those negatives. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Approximately what is the enlargement here? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Approximately eight times. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, can you explain why--eight times? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Six to eight, it is in that area. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Can you explain why the enlargement of 133B is haloed +with a white, light halo? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; the reason for that was to print the photograph +so that it would be clearly a photograph of the negative and show the +individual in the picture but not print too dark around the outside +edges to give the best possible reproduction of the shadowgraph. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, Captain Fritz of the Dallas Police has stated that +in his interrogations, Oswald--Lee Harvey Oswald--stated, in effect, +that while the face in Exhibit 133A was his face, the rest of the +picture was not of him--this is, that it was a composite of some type. + +Have you examined 133A and 133B to determine whether either or both are +composite pictures? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; I have. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And have you--can you give us your conclusion on that +question? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; it is my opinion that they are not composites. +Again with very, very minor reservation, because I cannot entirely +eliminate an extremely expert composite. I have examined many composite +photographs, and there is always an inconsistency, either in lighting +of the portion that is added, or the configuration indicating a +different lens used for the part that was added to the original +photograph, things many times that you can't point to and say this is +a characteristic, or that is a characteristic, but they have definite +variations that are not consistent throughout the picture. + +I found no such characteristics in this picture. + +In addition, with a composite it is always necessary to make a print +that you then make a pasteup of. In this instance paste the face in, +and rephotograph it, and then retouch out the area where the head was +cut out, which would leave a characteristic that would be retouched out +on the negative and then that would be printed. + +Normally, this retouching can be seen under magnification in the +resulting composite--points can be seen where the edge of the head had +been added and it hadn't been entirely retouched out. + +This can nearly always be detected under magnification. I found no such +characteristics in these pictures. + +Representative FORD. Did you use the technique of magnification in your +analysis? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes. + +In addition, in this instance regarding Commission Exhibit 133B which +I have just stated, I have identified as being photographed or exposed +in the camera which is Exhibit 750, for this to be a composite, they +would have had to make a picture of the background with an individual +standing there, and then substitute the face, and retouch it and then +possibly rephotograph it and retouch that negative, and make a print, +and then photograph it with this camera, which is Commission Exhibit +750, in order to have this negative which we have identified with the +camera, and is Commission Exhibit 749. + +This to me is beyond reasonable doubt, it just doesn't seem that it +would be at all possible, in this particular photograph. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Shaneyfelt, did you attempt to determine whether +133A had been photographed through the camera, Commission Exhibit 750? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. No; I did not, because in order to make an examination +to determine whether a photograph is made with a particular camera, you +must have the negative or you must have a print of the negative that +shows that shadowgraph area, and Commission Exhibit 133A does not show +that shadowgraph area. + +Therefore, no comparison could be made. It is not possible. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Does the shadowgraph area show on 133B? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. No; it does not. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Why does it not show on either 133 A or B? + +M. SHANEYFELT. Because they are printed in a normal processing +procedure, where this area is normally blocked out to give a nice white +border and make the picture a little more artistic. In the printing +process, masks are placed over the area, or the shadowgraph, in order +to cover it up, and the resulting print is a photograph with a nice +white border. + +Mr. EISENBERG. So that you have to have the negative to make the kind +of identification you have made for us earlier? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Looking at 133B, are the observable characteristics of +the weapon pictured in this picture--shown in this picture--similar to +the observable characteristics of Exhibit 139, the weapon used in the +assassination? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; they are less apparent in this photograph because +it is a photograph of the bottom, or the base of the rifle, the bottom +of the rifle along the trigger-guard area, but it does show this bottom +of the rifle in that photograph. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Looking at 133A and 133B, do the lighting conditions +seem to have been similar? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. They are consistent, entirely consistent, in both +photographs, the lighting on the face is the same, the lighting on the +background is identical, there appear to be no major differences or no +significant differences. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, I would like to draw your attention for a moment +to this sling on Exhibit 139, and I would like to state for the record +that this sling is not thought to be actually a rifle sling, but some +type of homemade sling, that is, the firearms expert has so testified. + +Does this sling appear in either Commission Exhibits 133A or 133B? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. It is my opinion that it does not. Commission Exhibit +133A has such a small portion of the sling showing that it--you cannot +establish that it is or is not the same sling that is presently on the +rifle. + +However, Commission Exhibit 133B does show the sling, since it shows +the bottom of the rifle, and I find it to be different from the sling +that is presently on the rifle. It has the appearance of being a piece +of rope that is tied at both ends, rather than a leather sling, and it +is my opinion that it is a different sling than is presently on the +rifle. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Just again a homemade simulated sling, is that it? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. It has that appearance, yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. You testified that you have a much smaller view of +the sling, or what passes for a sling, on 133A than on 133B. Is the +sling or simulated sling on 133A, that portion of it which is visible, +consistent with the sling on 133B? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; it is entirely consistent. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Also looks like a piece of rope, is that it? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; it has that appearance. + +Representative FORD. Can you tell from a negative about when it was, +the picture was taken, or can you develop any time from that? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. It is possible on some negatives. In this instance +it is not. On some negatives there is a numbering system along the +edge that is coded by the company that indicates manufacturing date, +approximate manufacturing date, and it is usually by year, so that you +could state that a film was coded by the company in 1947, therefore, it +could not have been used prior to 1947. + +This is about as far as one can go in the establishment of time that +a picture was taken from the actual film. This cannot be done in this +instance. + +Representative FORD. I notice on some prints which are now developed +commercially that they have a date on the edge. + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes. + +Representative FORD. Is this a universal practice now? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. No; this varies with the different processors. It is +used by the large companies. I believe Eastman Kodak uses it. Your +larger processing companies use it, but your smaller, maybe one-man +shop or small photographic shop will probably not use it. It is at the +discretion of the shop actually. + +Representative FORD. Can you tell from a print which has been developed +which processing plant processed that print? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Not without some specific stamp of the processing +company on it. + +Mr. EISENBERG. I think we should add here for the record that the sling +which is presently on the rifle is, as any other sling, a removable +sling, and not one that is fixed into the rifle. + +Mr. McCLOY. It seems to me that this band here in Exhibit 746 is a, +might very well be a reproduction of this, this lighter side of this +rather enlarged leather part of the sling. + +It seems to be just about the same length. + +Representative FORD. That is, what is on the, rifle. + +Mr. McCLOY. Which is on the rifle. I wonder, and here it is again in +Commission Exhibit 133A--133A has that--of which it is an enlargement. +Isn't it possible that is a reproduction of that leather sling? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. It could be possible. + +Mr. McCLOY. This is not a string by any means. + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is true; it is broader. I get the impression +by this shadow at the top, closest to the rifle, just below the +bolt, there is a faint shadow there that would indicate a double +string or rope, and it then becomes narrower as you are looking at +the edge of two ropes lying together. On the Exhibit 133B I get the +same interpretation of a double-rope effect, partly because of the +knot-tying and so on, and you see the shadow between the strands +slightly in some areas, and, as I stated before, I cannot, because of +the limited amount of that showing, say that it is not the sling. I +find it more consistent with the sling showing in Exhibit 133B, which +is very definitely---- + +Mr. McCLOY. A bowknot--133B seems to have a knot at the swivels. + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes. + +Mr. McCLOY. Which doesn't appear on the rifle now. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Shaneyfelt, I now hand you the cover of Life +magazine for February 21, 1964, which consists of a photograph quite +similar to Exhibit 133A, and I ask you whether you are familiar with +this photographic cover? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; I am. + +Mr. EISENBERG. May I have this introduced, Mr. Chairman, as 754? + +Mr. McCLOY. It may be admitted. + +(Commission Exhibit No. 754 was marked and received in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. Have you compared Exhibit 754 with Commission Exhibit +133A? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; I have. + +Mr. EISENBERG. What is your conclusion on the basis of that comparison? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. It is my opinion that it is the same picture reproduced +on the front of Life magazine, which is Commission Exhibit 754. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Does Commission Exhibit 754 appear to have been +retouched in any significant way? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; it does. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Could you show the Commission that retouching? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; I could. I might state that it has been my +experience in the field of reproduction of photographs for publication, +in which a halftone screen is made from which the photograph is then +printed, it is normal procedure, and was at the time I worked for a +newspaper, to retouch the photograph to intensify highlights, take out +undesirable shadows, generally enhance the picture by retouching the +photograph so that when it is then made into a halftone strip pattern +for reproduction by printing, this retouching, if it is done well, +does not show as retouching but appears to be a part of the original +photograph. + +This retouching is done either by brush or by airbrush, which is +a device for spraying gray or shades of gray or black, onto the +photograph. I point to the area between the legs of the individual on +Life magazine. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Could you circle that and mark it A on Exhibit 754? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Suppose I use arrows. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Oh, sure. + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. On Exhibit 746B, there is a shadow between the +individual's legs. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Could you mark that A? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. I will mark that A. In that same area of the photograph +on Exhibit 754, that dark shadow has been removed in this area, I will +mark that A. + +Mr. EISENBERG. It appears there is a continuous fence slat there, where +none appears---- + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; the shadow has been removed. Lower down in that +same area of the legs, near the calf of the leg, again, and I will mark +that B, the shadow---- + +Mr. EISENBERG. B on 754? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. 754; has been softened but not entirely eliminated. +That same area is marked B on Commission Exhibit 746B. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Has the weapon been retouched? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. The weapon has been retouched by placing a highlight +along the stock almost up to the end of the bolt. The highlight is +brushed right across the top of the highlight that we have previously +discussed at the nob or the curvature of the stock where it goes down +and then back up to the curve. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Could you put an arrow pointing to the brushed-in +highlight and mark it C? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Can you put an arrow pointing to the original highlight +and mark it D; both on 754 and 746B? You had earlier marked with a +circle 746E at point A, showing the highlight as it appears in 133A? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Of course, this highlight does not appear in that same +area of Commission Exhibit 746B. + +Mr. EISENBERG. You mean the highlight marked C on 754? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Looking at the photograph, at the weapon, the stock +appears to be straight, which does not correspond to the Exhibit +139. As I understand your testimony, this is simply a retouching; +this effect of a straight stock is simply achieved by retouching the +photograph or doctoring it? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is my opinion. I would refer to it as retouching +rather than doctoring, because what has been done has been retouched, +and doctoring infers an attempt to disguise. + +Mr. EISENBERG. I didn't mean to imply such a thing--but retouched, then? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And the actual highlight showing the curve and recurve +still appears as point D? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Can you circle--do you see a telescopic sight on the +Life cover of 754? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; I do. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Could you draw an arrow marking that E? Would it have +been possible to retouch the photograph so that the telescopic sight +does not appear? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Oh, yes; that is possible. With a halftone process--it +is possible to retouch, and then the halftone process destroys the +retouching characteristics and makes it appear as a normal photograph +rather than a retouched photograph. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And again, based upon your newspaper experience and +your experience as a photographer generally, could you state the +possible purpose of such retouching? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. The purpose of the retouching in reproduction work +is merely to enhance the detail so that it will not be lost in the +engraving process. + +Mr. EISENBERG. When you say "enhance the detail," why would a stock be +retouched so as not only to enhance the detail, but actually to change +the apparent configuration? Could you conceive of any reason for that? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. I think the reason that the stock was retouched +straight in the photograph on Life magazine, and my interpretation +would be that the individual retouching it does not have a familiarity +with rifles and did not realize there was curvature there, and in doing +it just made a straight-line highlight without even considering whether +that curved or not. There was curvature in that area which is not +readily apparent--it is quite indistinct--and I think it was just made +without realizing that there was curvature there. + +Mr. EISENBERG. That is, the individual might have thought he was +actually enhancing detail rather than putting in detail which was not +present in the original? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Is there anything else you would like to point out in +this photograph, Exhibit 754? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. There is other retouching at the shoulder, to the left +of the photograph as we view it; that area has had some retouching of +the highlights. Along the barrel of the gun, or the stock of the gun +above the hand, there is retouching, a little highlight enhancement +there. These are all generally consistent with the type of retouching +that we have previously discussed and I have previously pointed out. + +Representative FORD. I am not clear why they would retouch, from a +photographic point of view. + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. They retouch because in the halftone process there is +a loss of detail, and had they not retouched this photograph, had they +not put the highlight along the rifle stock, then you would only have +seen a black area. They were afraid you would only see a black area and +you wouldn't get the definition here of the rifle. You lose the detail, +and you would lose the view of the rifle. You wouldn't see the rifle +there because this line would be lost. The same way along here. This +one very definitely, had they not retouched it, it would have blended +in and been a continuous tone of dark gray all across there. + +Representative FORD. That is--up here--that is, above the hand on the +stock? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. When you said a highlight "along the rifle stock," you +actually meant on top, above the rifle stock? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. The upper edge. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Is it the upper edge, or is it a place that does not +correspond to the rifle stock? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. It is an edge along the rifle stock that corresponds. I +am speaking now of the highlight above the hand. + +Mr. EISENBERG. No; you said before, in describing the highlight which +you can see, you said they drew a highlight "along" the rifle--the +rifle stock. Actually it was drawn, as I understand it, considerably +above the edge of the actual rifle stock? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; that is true. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Have you used this technique yourself? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; I have done retouching of photographs for +halftones; yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. When you said before that this retouching is done by +airbrush or brush, what medium is used in the brush or airbrush to +achieve the effect? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. It is a water-soluble pigment, and it is available in +varying shades of from white to black; it is available in different +shades of gray tones, so that you could actually match the gray tone +of the picture--since in these instances we are dealing entirely with +gray, shades of gray--and you select a gray that is not too prominent +that would give you a highlight that would look normal. + +Mr. EISENBERG. So that the negative is painted, so to speak? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. The actual photograph is painted. + +Mr. EISENBERG. The photograph is painted. Now, would there be any +conceivable reason for eliminating in a retouching the telescopic sight? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. The only reason again would be to enhance the detail. +I cannot determine from Commission Exhibit 754 whether there was +retouching around the stock. There are indications that there is some +retouching--I mean around the telescopic sight. It appears to me they +did do some retouching around the telescopic sight which we have marked +as point E on Commission Exhibit 754. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Without specific reference to 754, might an individual +without experience in rifles have thought that the detail corresponding +to the telescopic sight was extraneous detail, and blocked it out? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; it could be done. + +Mr. EISENBERG. I have no further questions, Mr. Chairman. + +Mr. McCLOY. Do you have anything? + +Representative FORD. No further questions. + +Mr. McCLOY. It may be because I am, and I am sure it is, because of +my ignorance in regard to this composition of photographs, but the +negative of which we have a copy is that from which this photograph was +taken; isn't that right? [Referring to Exhibit 133A.] + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. We do not have the negative of this photograph. + +Mr. McCLOY. You have the negative of this? [Referring to Exhibit 133B] + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. We have the negative of 133B. + +Mr. McCLOY. You have the negative of 133B. That negative in itself +shows no doctoring or composition at all? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. It shows absolutely no doctoring or composition. + +Mr. McCLOY. So that the only composition that could have been made +would have been in this process which you have described of picture on +picture and negative and then photographing? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. And then finally rephotographing with this camera. + +Mr. McCLOY. Rephotographing with this camera, this very camera? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct, and this then, to me, becomes in the +realm of the impossible. + +Mr. McCLOY. Yes. There is nothing in Exhibit 754 that, to you, +insinuates any sinister type of touching up? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. This is entirely innocent retouching, +completely normal operation for a newspaper cut or a magazine +reproduction. + +Mr. McCLOY. I think I have no other questions. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Just two other questions. Is there anything in the +negative of 133B--that is, Commission Exhibit 749--to indicate whether +it was developed commercially or not commercially? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. No; I cannot determine that from the negative. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And finally, I hand you a page from that same issue of +Life, the issue of February 21, 1964, page 80, which has a photograph +similar to the cover photograph, and I ask you whether this photograph +appearing on page 80 appears to you to be the same as the photograph +used on the cover? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; it appears to be the same photograph. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Does the retouching appear to be the same in both? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. The retouching is consistent; yes. It appears to be +slightly clearer in the photograph on page 80; the highlight along the +stock is sharper and more crisp and in more detail. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Again you say "highlight along the stock." + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Along the stock. + +Mr. EISENBERG. You mean the highlight introduced by the retoucher? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes. And the scope appears to be much clearer in the +photograph on page 80 than the photograph on the front cover, which is +Exhibit 754, and is much clearer than is apparent in the photograph +133A. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Can you account for that? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. My only explanation would be retouching, from +retouching around the scope. The primary reason for the additional +clarity between the entire photograph, without specific reference to +the scope, the clarity that I mentioned in the entire photograph on +page 80 as compared with the cover is, I believe, basically the fact +that the cover is so enlarged. There is a tendency on big enlargements +to separate the detail out by enlargement so it appears not as clear, +so a smaller picture will sometimes look clearer than one of the same +picture that has been enlarged. This would account for some of the +additional detail and more distinct sharpness in the photograph. + +Mr. EISENBERG. May this photograph on page 80 be introduced as 755? + +Mr. McCLOY. It may be admitted. + +(Commission Exhibit No. 755 was marked and received in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. One final question: Can you compare the sharpness of the +scope on Exhibit 755 with the sharpness on Exhibit 746E, one of the +reproductions you prepared? + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; there is the same difference in sharpness between +the photograph on Commission Exhibit 755, which is page 80 of Life +magazine, and the photograph which I made from the Government's Exhibit +133A, which is Commission Exhibit 746E. Again this difference in +sharpness, I believe is due to retouching in part, and in part to the +picture in Life magazine being smaller, and thereby the detail is not +spread out so much. It is a combination of retouching of the photograph +and size. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, this concludes my examination. + +Mr. McCLOY. I am further interested as you look at this rifle as +it lies on the table you can see the highlight, even without any +photograph, very clearly. The shine centers on the curvature of the +stock. It is quite interesting. + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is very apparent on Exhibit 748 also, where you +get the duplication of the lighting. This nob tends to reflect more +light. + +Mr. McCLOY. It is obvious that it is right up there as a conspicuous +highlight. I didn't realize that it was so indicative of the curve of +the stock of the rifle. + +Thank you very much indeed for your cooperation and very enlightening +and very interesting testimony. + +Mr. SHANEYFELT. Thank you. + +(Recess.) + + +TESTIMONY OF ROBERT INMAN BOUCK + +Mr. McCLOY. Mr. Bouck, you know the purpose for which you are here? + +Mr. BOUCK. Yes, I do. + +Mr. McCLOY. And we are very happy to have you help us to acquit +ourselves of our responsibility here in determining all of the relevant +circumstances in connection with the assassination of the President. + +I believe you are going to give us something of the routine by which +Presidents are protected? + +Mr. BOUCK. Yes. + +Mr. McCLOY. I will ask you to rise and hold up your right hand. + +Do you solemnly swear the testimony you give in this hearing will be +the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? + +Mr. BOUCK. I do. + +Mr. STERN. Mr. Bouck, I would like to outline first the order of +questioning I have in mind to give you a notion of how I would like to +proceed and how you might respond to particular questions. + +I would like to cover first your biographical background, then +the functions of the Protective Research Section, generally the +organization of the Section, the sources of information on which you +rely regarding potentially dangerous people, the criteria you employ +to determine when an individual might be dangerous, what you do with +the information once you receive it, and then some detail on how your +filing system is set up and operates, how do you get at data. + +Then based on all that background information, the preparations that +were actually made for the President's trip to Texas. + +I will begin by asking you to state your name, age and address. + +Mr. BOUCK. My name is Robert Inman Bouck. I am 49 years of age. I live +at 411 Norwood Drive, Falls Church, Va. + +Mr. STERN. What is your education, Mr. Bouck, at the college level? + +Mr. BOUCK. I have a B.S. degree in police administration. + +Mr. STERN. From what college? + +Mr. BOUCK. From Michigan State College. + +Mr. STERN. And that was awarded when? + +Mr. BOUCK. 1939. + +Mr. STERN. What is your experience in the Secret Service--when did you +join the Service? + +Mr. BOUCK. I came to the Service in 1939 upon leaving college. From +1939 to 1945 I worked on protective assignments for the President and +the presidential family and other people in the Washington area. + +From 1945 until 1951 I worked in Chief's office on supervising and +reorganizing various activities in the Chief's office. + +In 1951 I was loaned to the Treasury Department as coordinator, I +organized schools and directed them in the enforcement area until 1957, +and in 1957 was assigned to the present job I now have of Special +Agent-in-Charge, Protective Research. + +Mr. STERN. Mr. Bouck, I show you this document of six pages which has +been marked Commission Exhibit No. 760. + +Can you identify that for me? + +Mr. BOUCK. Yes. This is a memorandum of December 3 that I prepared, +also a second memorandum of December 3 that I prepared. + +Mr. STERN. And these were prepared in response to instructions to you? + +Mr. BOUCK. In response to instructions from my headquarter's office, +yes. + +Mr. STERN. With the help of these memoranda I would like to touch +briefly upon the functions of the Protective Research Section that you +head--for the moment those functions other than with respect to persons +of concern as a possible danger to the President. + +If you will turn to the last page of this exhibit, there are a list of +other duties of PRS, and would you explain briefly those and give some +idea of the magnitude of the task involved? + +Mr. BOUCK. Yes. + +The manufacture and control of White House passes are the admittance +passes to the White House issued to the press, employees and others +who have occasion to come to the White House or the Executive Office +Building that houses White House staff. This is some four to five +thousand, fluctuating in volume. + +The procurement and evaluation of character investigations and +clearances for some categories of employees, these are the employees +that passes are issued to and these are the clearances that we require. + +Some of them we investigate ourselves, many of them are investigated +by other agencies, and we review and evaluate the results, the number +being roughly the same as the number of passholders in this category. + +The procurement of national agency file checks and determination of +admittance restrictions on a large number of tradesmen, contract +employees and so forth who service the White House--these are non-White +House employees. These are people who come to fix typewriters, clean +rugs and that sort of thing. + +Mr. STERN. Approximately how many people are involved in that category, +Mr. Bouck. + +Mr. BOUCK. This, we have a file of about 20,000 of these people, about +4,000 are active at any one time, and several hundred a month turn over +in this. + +Item No. 4, control of security processing of mail and gifts received +at the White House, this is done by postal and White House employees +under X-rays and security equipment provided by us under our guidance +and we take over whenever any dangerous situation is indicated. This +varies at Christmas time, when there are many hundreds of items +reviewed; normally a few a day. + +No. 5, handling and disposition of suspicious packages or objects that +may contain bombs or infernal devices; we have a bomb transporting +truck, we have bomb analyzing equipment, we have a location and a place +where we can dismantle bombs, and this, I am happy to say, we have had +many scares but we have not had the real thing. We do this frequently +as a precaution on things that we cannot analyze under the X-ray, but +we have not actually had a bomb at the White House. + +Mr. DULLES. May I ask where is the White House mail handled, right in +the White House itself? + +Mr. BOUCK. No; it is handled in the Executive Office Building which is +across the street from the White House. + +Mr. DULLES. The old State, War and Navy Building? + +Mr. BOUCK. Yes, sir. + +No. 6, evaluation of safety and control of disposition of all foods, +beverages and similar consumable items received by the President or +White House as gifts. + +We do not, even though these are handled by White House and post office +employees, we pass judgment as to whether any consumable item may be +used and under what conditions it may be used or whether it must be +destroyed. This particular function we do entirely. + +And again at Christmas time and birthdays it would be very high, many +hundreds of items. Other times a few a day. + +No. 7, control and investigation of---- + +Mr. McCLOY. Can I interrupt there, have you had any poisoned foods? + +Mr. BOUCK. We think not at the White House, but this we are always +watchful for. We have some food that we think sanitationwise is very +bad, it smells bad, it looked bad, some has spoiled and some have been +prepared under very bad conditions but we know of no actual case of +intended poison. We have had some where poisons may have generated +because spoilage has set in. + +Mr. McCLOY. Yes. You don't have a royal taster, do you? (Laughter.) + +Mr. BOUCK. No, I am afraid we do not. + +Control investigations on personnel and establishments that are supply +sources for food, beverages, drugs and so forth, these are the places +that the White House buys those supplies. We find out from the White +House where they would like to buy, we check on the employees of these +establishments, we check on the procedures by which it is handled, and +we check on the sources of their food, where they get the raw materials. + +This is an investigative process and a control process. + +Representative FORD. How often do you go through this process? + +Mr. BOUCK. The process is continuous in that the control, for instance +a White House policeman goes and picks up, when the food is picked +up. But the reinvestigation is every 6 months. We take a new look at +each of these establishments every 6 months to see if any change has +occurred. In between times we have arrangements with Public Health to +make frequent health inspections, much more frequent than an ordinary +establishment would be inspected. + +Representative FORD. If there is a change of an employee at one of +these shops or stores, are you notified? + +Mr. BOUCK. We are supposed to be notified. Sometimes we aren't aware +until we make the next check, although our White House policeman and +our purchasing people do keep watch for this and usually we have +established that only a small percentage of the people who handle White +House orders, perhaps the manager and one clerk. It works quite well. + +No. 8, the performance of technical and electronic inspections to +protect against covert listening devices. + +This is something that has been done for a great many years, the volume +has gotten quite great in recent years, and we do this regularly at +the White House and for the people close to the President, we do it +regularly when he has stopover points on trips. + +Mr. DULLES. Do you ever call the FBI in on this or do you have your own +staffs to handle this detection of listening devices? + +Mr. BOUCK. We have our own staff but we frequently use people of other +agencies, including the FBI where they have specialties or are able to +perform something better than we could. + +Mr. DULLES. Did you consider there is any duplication there, I mean of +facilities in government? + +Mr. BOUCK. No; I think not. This really requires bodies, and if there +is---- + +Mr. DULLES. And skills? + +Mr. BOUCK. Yes; and if, once in a while a special skill is required +that we do not possess then we turn to another agency to help us. + +No. 9, determination of feasibility of application, establishment of +specifications for procurement, and assistance in maintaining operation +of a wide variety of electronic and technical protective aids. These +are alarms, both for hazards, intrusion, and all sorts of dangers where +a mechanical or electronic device can augment personal services. + +Mr. DULLES. Could I just ask on that, do you have arrangements, say, +with the FBI, CIA and others to keep abreast of the art, as it were? + +Mr. BOUCK. Yes. + +Mr. DULLES. I have in mind that time when we discovered the Russians +had developed a new device and applied it in the Embassy in Moscow, +you may recall which was quite novel, when they put in a hollow cavity +inside the shield of the Great Seal of the United States, and then they +could beam on that and they could listen to conversations in the room. +That type of thing, you would be following that up through the FBI or +through the CIA? + +Mr. BOUCK. Very much so, yes. + +We have rather low resources in those areas so the other agencies in +the areas of research and development and hardware help us continuously +and very well. + +Mr. STERN. Now these, Mr. Bouck, as I understand it, are the functions +of PRS which it has in addition to its main responsibility, and would +you describe that just briefly and we will get to that in a minute. + +Mr. BOUCK. Yes, the other responsibility that is not listed here, is +the responsibility of attempting to detect persons who might intend +harm to the President, and to control those persons or take such +corrective measures as we can take securitywise on them. + +Representative FORD. I am not sure I understand that. + +Mr. BOUCK. This is an effort to detect people who might intend to harm +the President, people who make threats against the President, people +who do things that indicate they may intend to harm him, and the +various sort of things we do to see that they do not accomplish that, +to prevent them from accomplishing them. + +Mr. DULLES. Does your particular office maintain the central files for +your agency? + +Mr. BOUCK. For this function? + +Mr. DULLES. For this function. + +Mr. BOUCK. Yes. + +Mr. DULLES. I mean if the FBI sent in to the Secret Service a name or +a description of a particular man, or a particular area that would be +filed in your office? + +Mr. BOUCK. That is right. + +Mr. DULLES. Do you file that alphabetically, by location or how do you +develop those files? + +Mr. BOUCK. The information in its file jackets is filed numerically +but it is indexed alphabetically and by location as well as by certain +other characteristics that may help us find it. + +Mr. McCLOY. To come back to this matter of bugging again, do you feel +that you are thoroughly well equipped, which is a repetition perhaps +of what Mr. Dulles asked, Mr. Dulles' question, do you have an expert +staff that know this business and that keep up to date with the +developments in the area, and that can constantly keep your equipment +in shape? + +Mr. BOUCK. Yes; I think so. I think we, our contacts with the +intelligence community in this area are very excellent. Our people are +excellent. I think our big problem has been one of enough resources. + +Mr. McCLOY. How many bodies have you got in this field? + +Mr. BOUCK. I have three bodies devoted entirely to it, myself and my +assistant have also had years of experience, and we devote part-time to +this, which makes approximately four and a half full time bodies. + +Mr. STERN. This might be a good opportunity, Mr. McCloy, to introduce +this document, marked Commission Exhibit No. 761. + +Do you recognize that? + +Mr. BOUCK. Yes, sir. + +Mr. STERN. Did you prepare it. + +Mr. BOUCK. I prepared it. + +Mr. STERN. And what is it? + +Mr. BOUCK. It is a chart showing the staffing of the Protective +Research Section as of the time of Dallas. + +Mr. STERN. And the category you were just explaining to Mr. McCloy is +the last one? + +Mr. BOUCK. That is right. + +Mr. DULLES. Do you protect from this point of view anyone other than +the President? Do you cover, say, the Vice President's offices in the +Capitol? + +Mr. BOUCK. Yes, sir. + +Mr. DULLES. You do that, too? + +Mr. BOUCK. Yes, sir. + +Mr. DULLES. As far as safes are concerned and as far as listening +devices are concerned? + +Mr. BOUCK. Not safes. + +Mr. DULLES. Not safes? + +Mr. BOUCK. That has not been something that they have desired us to do. +But insofar as---- + +Mr. DULLES. Why shouldn't you do that, I wonder, where he keeps his +secret papers? You mean you don't---- + +Mr. BOUCK. That has not been something that has been determined as +our responsibility. I believe other security officers have been given +that responsibility, and we certainly, of course, help when we find +something in that category, but we have not been asked at any of those +levels to take care of safes. + +Mr. DULLES. But you do take care of listening devices? + +Mr. BOUCK. Yes, sir. + +Mr. DULLES. And for anybody else other than the Vice President in +addition to the White House and the President? + +Mr. BOUCK. The White House, the President, the Vice President, the +close members of the Presidential staff, and the Secretary of the +Treasury. + +Mr. DULLES. Well, would that involve the homes, for example, of the +close members of the President's staff? + +Mr. BOUCK. The very high members, yes, not all, but the very high +members. I think we do about six or seven homes of such people. The +rest is office and working areas. + +Mr. McCLOY. I have some question, I may say, that you have got enough +people to do this from what I know of the art. This is quite a +technical business now. + +Mr. BOUCK. Yes, I know. + +Mr. McCLOY. And the means of counteracting it and so forth, and the +constant surveillance that you have to employ, but you are satisfied +you are well equipped and have got sufficient people to do it? + +Mr. BOUCK. As I mentioned earlier, I think we are well equipped in +know-how and in equipment. Sometimes we are pressed very hard for +enough hours to do it but our people have worked many hours overtime +and I think they have covered this quite well. + +Representative FORD. What results have you obtained? Have you found any +problems? + +Mr. BOUCK. We have not in the United States found any compromise. I am +not sure that perhaps in the open record I should go beyond that. + +(Discussion off the record.) + +Mr. McCLOY. On the record. + +Mr. STERN. From Exhibit 761, Mr. Bouck, it appears that in the area of +processing information regarding threats, potential threats to the life +of the President, there are six people presently working in addition to +yourself and your assistant, one a clerk and five special agents, as +they are designated is that correct? This is as of the time of Dallas. + +Mr. BOUCK. This is as of the time of Dallas. + +Mr. STERN. These special agents are agents who would otherwise be +involved in protective work or in the other activities of the Secret +Service, counterfeiting and the like? + +Mr. BOUCK. Yes. + +Mr. STERN. Is there something about their general training that makes +them particularly desirable in this work or is it the absence of other +people that leads to the use of special agents in this work? + +Mr. BOUCK. They have been selected because of an apparent aptitude for +this work. Some of them, not all, but most of them have had many years +of background in this work that increases their competence. + +Mr. STERN. Are these men permanently assigned to this function or do +they rotate? + +Mr. BOUCK. They are susceptible to other assignment, but this +assignment is something that may continue until the Chief should decide +it was in the interest of the Service to change. It can and has gone +many years for most of us. They do not automatically rotate. + +Mr. STERN. I see. + +As of the time of Dallas the total number of people in the Protective +Research Section was 15 of which 3 were clerks, is that correct? + +Mr. BOUCK. That is correct. + +Mr. DULLES. Could I ask one question that goes back to our earlier +discussion? At the present time the Speaker is next in line in case +anything should happen to the President. + +Do you extend any special protective facilities as far as he is +concerned? + +Mr. BOUCK. This, we are kind of in an advance area here. I do handle +mail that may come in the Protective Research area but I don't think I +am quite qualified to speak on the entire Secret Service relationship +to the Speaker, if I might seem not---- + +Mr. DULLES. What I was getting at was whether there were any special +protection afforded now in view of his, in a sense new position as +being next in line. + +Mr. McCLOY. He is in effect the Vice President. + +Mr. DULLES. He is in effect the Vice President. + +Mr. BOUCK. Yes, I realize that, and I believe this gets into some +areas that involve the wishes of the Speaker, that make this question +a little bit difficult to answer, and I would say we do do what comes +to our attention that we can, but I think the Chief is probably in a +better position to indicate what degree we have gone. I am not really +overly familiar with the exact extent of that degree except as it may +apply here but we do handle in the crank area, and in the Protective +Research subject area, we do handle that material as we would handle it +for the President or Vice President when we are able to get it. + +Mr. McCLOY. Off the record. + +(Discussion off the record.) + + +TESTIMONY OF ROBERT CARSWELL + +Mr. McCLOY. Why don't I swear you, Mr. Carswell? + +Raise your right hand. + +Do you solemnly swear the testimony you will give in this hearing will +be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you +God? + +Mr. CARSWELL. I do. + +Mr. McCLOY. You give your name for the record. + +Mr. CARSWELL. Robert Carswell. Special Assistant to the Secretary of +the Treasury. My address is 3022 Q Street NW., Washington. + +Mr. McCLOY. I think it might be well, Mr. Carswell, if you simply +indicated some of it, in response to the last question, namely, as to +whether or not there was security provided for the Speaker, who is +next in line for the Presidency, and perhaps in view of your duties +as Assistant to the Secretary of the Treasury you might have some +information upon that which would be helpful to us. + +Mr. CARSWELL. Yes. After the assassination in Dallas, the Secret +Service initiated protection of the Speaker. + +The Secretary of the Treasury spoke with the Speaker, and agents were +assigned to him. I am not qualified to say exactly the number of agents +or the duties they perform but in general they provide protection +comparable to that previously provided to the Vice President. + +Mr. DULLES. And Mr. Rowley could furnish us any detail the Commission +might want? + +Mr. CARSWELL. Yes, I would suggest that Chief Rowley is the proper +person to furnish that information. + + +TESTIMONY OF ROBERT INMAN BOUCK RESUMED + +Mr. STERN. I would like to turn now, Mr. Bouck, to the sources of +information for PRS on potentially dangerous individuals. + +Would you describe the various sources you rely upon? + +Mr. BOUCK. Yes. If I might refer to this exhibit that is 760 which +would be page 4 of that, the second memorandum. I believe the front +of that lists the sources. No. 1 is mail, packages, telephone calls, +received at the White House, the President's home, on trips, and so +forth, these are screened, and so forth, in PRS and evaluated and if +they meet certain prescribed criteria they are retained by PRS and +become a source of information. + +Unwelcome visitors to the White House or anywhere else the President +may be is another source. Information received---- + +Mr. DULLES. What page are you on? + +Mr. BOUCK. That is the page. + +Mr. DULLES. The first page? + +Mr. BOUCK. Yes, I am reading from the second paragraph or rather the +tabulation. + +Mr. DULLES. Yes, I find it. + +Mr. BOUCK. Certain information comes directly to us or is developed +by us, item 3. Item 4, reports from other Government agencies, and +officials. Item 5, reports from police departments, State and local +sources, and then we get a certain amount of phone calls, letters and +information that come directly to us from the public. + +Mr. STERN. We may get some notion of the volume of the information you +receive from this document, which is entitled "Protective Research +Cases, November 1961 through November 1963," which would be Exhibit +762. Do you recognize that, Mr. Bouck? + +Mr. BOUCK. I do, I prepared this document. + +Mr. STERN. May it be admitted? + +Mr. McCLOY. It may be admitted. + +(The document referred to, previously marked as Commission Exhibit No. +762, for identification, was received in evidence.) + +Mr. STERN. Turning to the first page in the summary of Exhibit 762, Mr. +Bouck, you have taken the Protective Research cases from November 1961 +to November 1963, which involve residents of the State of Texas, and +these were how many cases? + +Mr. BOUCK. 34. + +Mr. STERN. And you have broken them down by the source of the +information in four categories which are---- + +Mr. BOUCK. Letters or phone calls; detected by the Secret Service; +reported by Federal agencies; reported by local authorities. + +Mr. STERN. Then towards the bottom of that page you have given gross +figures during the same 2-year period of the nationwide activity. Would +you state what the nationwide caseload was? + +Mr. BOUCK. Yes. The cases we received nationwide and did not +investigate because they didn't meet the criteria for investigation +were 7,337. The cases we received and investigated were 1,372. + +During the same period on these cases we arrested 167 people and 91 +investigations were unproductive. They did not solve the cases. + +Mr. STERN. You stated that the volume of information received has been +rising. Would you describe the total for the years 1943, 1953, and 1963? + +Mr. BOUCK. Yes. These do not represent cases. These represent items of +information reported. + +In 1943 we had about 7,000 such items coming to our attention; in 1953 +this had increased to somewhat over 17,000 items. By 1963 this had +increased in excess of 32,000 items. + +Mr. STERN. Each of those items is examined by one of the five Special +Agents working on this area? + +Mr. BOUCK. That is right. + +Mr. STERN. Now of the 34 Texas cases in this 2-year period---- + +Mr. DULLES. Could I ask a question before you get on the Texas cases, +on this record, it indicates that about 6,000 cases were "received but +not investigated" it seems to me for the record it would be well to +have a little more on that as to why they weren't investigated, and so +forth. + +I suppose in a great many cases, you couldn't find who it was. It was +an anonymous letter that came in. Would that be included? + +Mr. BOUCK. Not for the cause of this, sir. I assume you are speaking of +this 7,337 cases. + +Mr. DULLES. That is right. + +Mr. BOUCK. In the bottom table. + +Mr. DULLES. Of those 1,372 were received and investigated? + +Mr. BOUCK. We receive a great deal of information on people that we do +not feel at that time intended to harm the President, but that would +bear watching. We aren't quite sure whether they will become worse in +the future, and this is---- + +Mr. DULLES. Is that among about the 6,000 cases I am referring to? + +Mr. BOUCK. The 7,000. + +Mr. DULLES. Well, there are 7,337 cases received, but not investigated. + +Mr. BOUCK. These are two separate ones. The investigated cases are in +addition. + +Mr. DULLES. This is in addition to that? + +Mr. BOUCK. Yes. + +Mr. DULLES. I see. + +Mr. BOUCK. The 7,000 cases are cases that we received, we looked at, +and felt that we will file it and see if anything more happens on this, +but it doesn't warrant investigative attention until we get something +more alarming than we have. + +Mr. DULLES. Who makes that judgment, is that made in your department? + +Mr. BOUCK. That is made in my department by one of these five agents +that are listed in this document. + +Mr. DULLES. Do you review their determination? + +Mr. BOUCK. I do not review all of them. I review a percentage of their +determinations, and I am consulted on any that are borderline or that +are difficult. + +Mr. STERN. Of the 34 Texas cases, almost half or 15 were reported by +Federal authorities. Is this typical of all information received by PRS +in the course of a year? + +Mr. BOUCK. No, this would be typical of the investigated cases but not +typical of the entire quantity of cases received. + +Mr. STERN. I see. + +Representative FORD. Are the 34 listed here included in the 7,337 or +the 1,372? + +Mr. BOUCK. 1,372. + +Mr. STERN. Do you have a judgment, Mr. Bouck, as to the proportion of +cases coming to you from other agencies, Federal agencies, State and +local agencies, of the total number of cases you have? + +Mr. BOUCK. About 90 percent of the cases generated would be other +than from agencies. The 10 percent that come from Federal and local +agencies, the majority of that come from Federal agencies. I wouldn't +know quite the percentage. But the majority of the 10 percent would be +Federal agencies. + +Mr. STERN. And predominantly from any one agency? + +Mr. BOUCK. Yes, predominantly from the Federal Bureau of Investigation. + +Mr. STERN. As to the 90 percent that is generated internally, as it +were, do you have an opinion as to how many of those arise because of +correspondence with the White House by the subject? + +Mr. BOUCK. The great majority of them arise from telegrams, telephone +calls, unwelcome visitors, letters to the White House. + +Mr. STERN. Unwelcome visitors at the White House? + +Mr. BOUCK. Yes. + +Mr. DULLES. Do you know how many cases within the 7,337 noted here, +which I understand is nationwide, were from Texas? + +Mr. BOUCK. Yes. I believe we show that in the third paragraph, 115 +cases were in Texas. + +Mr. STERN. Yes. + +Mr. BOUCK. In addition to the cases investigated. It is up in the third +paragraph from the top, right under the table, the second paragraph +under the table, sir; right where your finger is, the first line there. + +Mr. DULLES. 115? + +Mr. BOUCK. Yes. + +Mr. DULLES. Did the name of Lee Harvey Oswald appear in your files at +any time prior to the 22d of November 1963? + +Mr. BOUCK. No, sir; we had never heard of him in any context. + +Mr. DULLES. His name doesn't appear at all? + +Mr. BOUCK. Not as of that time. Prior to Dallas, it did not appear in +any fashion. We had no knowledge of the name. + +Mr. DULLES. You had no report from the State Department or the FBI that +covered his trip to Russia or anything of that kind? + +Mr. BOUCK. No, sir. + +Mr. McCLOY. Or of the CIA? + +Mr. BOUCK. No, sir. + +Mr. STERN. Mr. Bouck, what kind of information do you look for, what +are the criteria you apply, in determining whether someone is a +potential danger to the President? What do you ask other agencies, +Federal, State, and local to be on the lookout for? + +Mr. BOUCK. Our criteria is broad in general. It consists of desiring +any information that would indicate any degree of harm or potential +harm to the President, either at the present time or in the future. + +Mr. STERN. Had you ever prior to Dallas had occasion to--for any part +of your activities--list criteria that you would apply in trying to +determine whether someone is a potential danger? + +Mr. BOUCK. We had not had a formal written listing of criteria as such +except in this general form of desiring everything that might indicate +a possible source of harm to the safety of the President. We had some +internal breakdown of information for the processing of certain kinds +of material where the criteria were involved. + +Mr. STERN. I didn't mean to restrict my question to criteria for +external sources, but those you used internally as well. + +Mr. BOUCK. We had some internal, as well. + +Mr. STERN. I show you now a one-page document entitled "The following +criteria are used as guides in determining whether White House mail +is to be accepted for PRS processing," which has been marked for +identification as Commission Exhibit No. 763. Can you identify that? + +Mr. BOUCK. Yes, sir; this is a document that I helped draft some years +ago. It is a document I prepared for the Commission. It is a document +that was used up to and at the time of Dallas. + +Mr. STERN. For what purpose? + +Mr. BOUCK. For the purpose of screening White House mail. The White +House gives us a considerable quantity of mail, not all of which +we--it is desirable that we keep, and this is a guide to the agents in +determining what we should keep and what should go back to be answered +by the White House staff. + +Mr. STERN. This guide is not used by the White House mailroom? This is +an internal guide for your own agents? + +Mr. BOUCK. My own agents. + +Mr. STERN. What instructions does the White House mailroom have as to +mail that is to be sent to you? + +Mr. BOUCK. The White House mail has two general instructions: One, +we supply them with identification information on all existing cases +in which mail is concerned; that any further mail in those cases is +automatically referred to us. + +Their criteria are the same as our other general criteria--that in +addition to these known cases we desire letters, telegrams, or any +other document they receive that in any way indicates any one may have +possible intention of harming the President. + +Mr. STERN. Have you---- + +Mr. DULLES. Could I ask just one question here? + +Mr. STERN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. DULLES. I note that this list does not include membership in +various types of organizations, such as the, for example, the +organizations that are on the Attorney General's list. Have you ever +considered that? + +Mr. BOUCK. Yes; if I might explain, sir; the letters we are talking +about are letters that are written by people, and they rarely include +that kind of information, but we do in other categories, this is for a +special purpose. This is letters only that are sent to the President +which is all this is applied to. This does not apply to other sources +of information, only the one source of letters. + +Mr. STERN. Have you had occasion, Mr. Bouck, before Dallas, to put in +writing criteria to be employed by Secret Service agents in dealing +with uninvited callers at the White House? + +Mr. BOUCK. Yes, sir. + +Mr. STERN. I show you now a document which I have marked for +identification Commission Exhibit No. 764, one page, entitled "The +following criteria are used as guides in determining whether White +House callers should be committed for mental observation." Do you +recognize that? + +Mr. BOUCK. Yes, sir. + +Mr. STERN. Did you have it prepared? + +Mr. BOUCK. I did. + +Mr. STERN. How was this employed? + +Mr. BOUCK. A great percentage of the people who come to see the +President or to the White House gates have been found to be suffering +from mental illness. This involves a determination as to whether a +legal process will take place of committing these people, and in +discussions with the Mental Commission in Washington and elsewhere, +we have found that certain criteria meet their desires in whether or +not we should legally process them. So this was prepared as a guide +to agents in trying to determine whether we could send these people +down for commitment to a mental institution or consideration by the +Commission on Mental Health. + +Mr. STERN. Under the District of Columbia commitment procedures? + +Mr. BOUCK. Yes; that is right. + +Mr. STERN. Beyond these criteria for dealing with White House mail +and uninvited visitors at the White House, what instructions within +the broad framework of your criteria do you give to Treasury law +enforcement officers, including Secret Service agents, with respect to +the kind of information you are interested in receiving? + +Mr. BOUCK. We have participation in a broad program of Treasury schools +which include all of the Treasury agencies as well as participation of +certain other people in our own schools. We have a coordination setup +in Treasury on which the heads of organization levels meets regularly. + +In all of those the Secret Service jurisdiction, the Secret Service +desires and needs in the way of protection of the President have been +included many times over. + +It is a constant, one of those things that is constantly brought up +many times both in the schools and in the coordination needs of the +Secret Service needs and functions in these areas. + +Mr. STERN. Do you participate in other training programs of other law +enforcement agencies? + +Mr. BOUCK. Yes. + +Mr. STERN. Will you describe that and with particular reference to this +problem? + +Mr. BOUCK. We participate both on the national level and at the field +level. Our agents in the field are instructed to accept any invitation +to teach in a police school of any level or security school, and we +have prescribed exact outlines of material they should get across. One +of the main topics being the protection topic. + +We teach in Marine schools here in Washington. We teach in some of the +State activities; a number of the different military activities. We +have had students from most of the bigger agencies of government, CIA, +State, and so forth, who have attended these portions of our training +schools. + +Mr. STERN. What requests do you make to other Federal agencies? + +Mr. BOUCK. We make this same request--that we desire any and all +information that they may come in contact with that would indicate +danger to the President. + +Mr. STERN. How are these requests communicated? + +Mr. BOUCK. They are fundamentally communicated by personal contact of +varying degrees with the FBI. We have a personal liaison contact in +which an individual, a liaison officer actually makes daily contact. + +With the other agencies, other security agencies and enforcement +agencies, we are--people on my staff have personal relationships +where we can call on the telephone and do call on the telephone very +frequently, sometimes some agencies everyday, and they in turn call us. + +Mr. STERN. What agencies do you have these liaison relationships +with--Federal agencies? + +Mr. BOUCK. We have on a commonly used basis, we have some liaison +with almost all of them but on a common using basis we have these +relationships with CIA, with the several military services, with the +Department of State. I have mentioned the FBI. + +Mr. STERN. Central Intelligence Agency? + +Mr. BOUCK. Oh, yes; very much so. They are, especially on trips very, +very helpful. + +Mr. DULLES. Foreign trips? + +Mr. BOUCK. Foreign trips, yes. + +Representative FORD. How often do your people check to see procedures +which are used by these various agencies for the determination of +whether an individual is a dangerous person? + +Mr. BOUCK. We don't do that systematically. We frequently have +such discussions but they are usually on a specific basis. Our +representative will call up and say, "We just received this +information. Would this be of interest to you." + +In these borderline cases, we have much of that, and after discussion +we decide whether it would or would not be. But outside of raising this +question as it comes in connection with business between our agencies +we do not make a practice of just simply querying them on this. We have +not done that, as I recall. + +Representative FORD. You don't lay down a particular criterion for +Agency X, Y, or Z? + +Mr. BOUCK. No. We have the one general criterion that we have advocated +for many years. I think it is quite well understood. We do not see +signs that there were any lack of knowledge that this was our job and +we wished this kind of information. + +Mr. DULLES. Have you made any study going back in history of the +various attempts that have been made, and successful and unsuccessful +attempts, that have been made against Presidents or---- + +Mr. BOUCK. Rulers. + +Mr. DULLES. Or people about to be President, or who have been President? + +Mr. BOUCK. Yes, yes. We have not only studied all of our own but we +have studied all of the assassinations that we could find any record of +for 2,000 years back. And strangely enough some of the thinking that +went on 2,000 years ago seems to show up in thinking of assassinations +today. + +Mr. STERN. Do you increase protection on the Ides of March? + +Mr. DULLES. Is that available? Is that--I don't know. + +Mr. BOUCK. It is available in a rather crude form. It has not been +boiled down to a concise report. + +Mr. DULLES. How voluminous is this? I should be very much interested +in thumbing through it because I have been trying to study the past +history. + +Mr. BOUCK. The rough notes on this are this high. + +Mr. DULLES. A few thousand pages? + +Mr. BOUCK. The studies didn't go beyond that. + +Mr. DULLES. By cases? + +Mr. BOUCK. Yes. Of course, in many of these cases it is very spotty and +these are handwritten notes. We never, outside of extracting in this in +training material and what not, we have never systematized it down to +where it is a readable document as such. + +Mr. DULLES. Have you tried to draw any conclusion out of this study as +to the type of people, the types of causes, the types of incentives? + +Mr. BOUCK. Yes; we have. + +Mr. DULLES. That is in your department, is it, to do this? + +Mr. BOUCK. Yes; it is. We have arrived at some conclusions from it. + +(Discussion off the record.) + +Mr. McCLOY. On the record. Your study of the prior assassinations would +take into account Czolgosz, Guiteau, what type of persons they were? + +Mr. BOUCK. Yes, sir. + +Mr. McCLOY. The thing to me that seems very worthy of research is the +plotter, I mean the political plotter as against, for want of a better +word, the loner, the man who is self-motivated against the man who has +to have a group around him. How do you tell one from the other? I just +was reading last night in Loomis about Madame Corday. She was just as +much of a loner as apparently Mr. Oswald was. + +Mr. DULLES. So was Czolgosz so far as I can make out, and so was +Zangara. Zangara, I was told, planned to shoot Hoover and then he +decided that the climate of Washington wasn't very healthy in February +and March for him because he had stomach trouble, so he decided that +F.D.R. was coming to Miami and it was just as good to shoot him. You +have situations of that kind that defy it. + +Mr. BOUCK. I believe he intended to shoot the King of Italy before that +but he got a chance to migrate before he got an opportunity. + +Mr. DULLES. Zangara? + +Mr. BOUCK. Yes. + +Mr. McCLOY. Do you have any look out for defectors as such? + +Mr. BOUCK. As such we have never been quite able to determine that that +is a valid criterion. We do not as such. + +Mr. McCLOY. You have some suspicions, now, don't you? + +Mr. BOUCK. Yes; we have some suspicions now; yes, sir. + +Mr. DULLES. I wonder whether it would not be useful for this Commission +to have, if it could be reduced to readable form and to assist, the +conclusions of your study if you have such conclusions? + +Mr. BOUCK. We will do that, sir. + +Mr. DULLES. What do you think, do the rest of you agree to that? + +Mr. McCLOY. I think it is part of our mission to try to make +recommendations in regard to the future protection of the Presidents. +Actually, we don't want to go into anything which is going to +compromise the future security of Presidents. We simply want to +augment. What we are concerned about is how well equipped we are to +do the job in the light of all the circumstances and I would think +that any conclusions that you have in this regard, if you--the Secret +Service, Treasury--could convey them to us in a form that perhaps we +might endorse, it might be helpful from your point of view and our +point of view. + +Representative FORD. I would agree with that observation. + +Mr. DULLES. You can possibly define categories. You may find the +loner, you may find a fellow engaged in a plot with others for +political reasons and that would help us very much because we find that +particularly the case we are investigating falls into one of these +classes. + +Mr. BOUCK. All right. + +(Discussion off the record.) + +(At this point Senator Cooper entered the hearing room.) + +Mr. McCLOY. I think we are ready to go ahead. + +Mr. STERN. Fine, Mr. Chairman. I would like to turn now to the actual +processing by PRS of the information they receive and have Mr. Bouck +tell us what happens to an item of information when it is received, +how it is processed, how the references to field offices are made, +and perhaps you might illustrate, Mr. Bouck, from the cases that are +summarized in Commission Exhibit 762. + +Mr. BOUCK. In Exhibit 760, the second memorandum applies to that, and I +will basically follow that unless questions differ. + +Mr. STERN. I think it would be better for you not to read it but to +paraphrase it, tell us what happens. + +Mr. BOUCK. When a document is received by the Secret Service, it +is first searched against our files to see if we have any previous +experience with this individual or with this threat. If it is found +that we do have previous material there is an analysis made, and then a +determination is made at that point as to what the apparent degree of +threat would be on this. + +If it appears that on the surface there is a threat, lookouts will +immediately be issued to the White House detail, the White House police +and various other security details, in order that they may be alerted +to any danger that happens. + +If the danger seems quite strong, a telephone call will be made to the +field office in order to begin the investigation without even waiting +for the mail. The threat is then processed and sent through the mail +with the documents to the office concerned. + +If it is determined that it is a possible danger, a card is put in a +particular file which would alert us in case the President went to that +area that an investigation of a dangerous person were underway. After +the field office has investigated they would attempt to take corrective +action if a law has been violated, the individual will be prosecuted, +if practical, and if the individual is determined to be mentally ill, +attempts will be made to get commitment into a mental institution. + +When the report is submitted back, if the individual is not confined or +is not evaluated as being no danger, then we would put cards in several +control devices, one being a trip index file to make sure that we +alerted the field office when the President went to that area; another +being a control checkup device which means that if this individual is +regarded as dangerous we will keep checking up on him every few months +to see if he is getting worse or see what he is doing. + +Mr. STERN. Could you illustrate by a case or two from Exhibit 762 +the different kinds of matters that come to your attention and the +different ways in which they are processed? + +Mr. BOUCK. Yes. On page 2 of this exhibit happens to be a case that +had its origin in the field, in Denton, Tex., of a potential threat +that appeared to apply to Dallas. It was investigated in the field, and +pictures were obtained, and information was obtained and dispensed to +the White House detail at the time President Kennedy went to Dallas, +and in this particular case, it was subsequently referred to PRS and +has been placed in our files and indexed in our indexes. Case No. 3 is +a similar---- + +Mr. DULLES. May I ask a question there? When you refer to the field +offices, this is the field office of the Secret Service? + +Mr. BOUCK. Field offices of the Secret Service. + +Mr. DULLES. How many do you have? + +Mr. BOUCK. Sixty. + +Mr. DULLES. Sixty? + +Mr. BOUCK. In the United States, and I believe one of those is in +Puerto Rico and one is in Paris, of the 60. + +Mr. DULLES. Those offices cooperate with the FBI offices? + +Mr. BOUCK. Yes. If you will look over these cases, you will see that +as a matter of fact, this page 3, this case is given as originating +with the chief of police of Denton, Tex., but the FBI already also +determined that and they reported that to us almost simultaneously. + +Mr. DULLES. Yes; that doesn't show up on this particular page. + +Mr. BOUCK. No; it is stated, I think in some other exhibit but I +erroneously neglected it here. But you will find in many of those, that +was true on page 5, that indicates a case where the FBI has picked up +information and gave it to us. + +Mr. STERN. You might mention, perhaps, Mr. Bouck, the cases under the +last tab of your exhibit which were cases that were not investigated, +just as a contrast. + +Mr. BOUCK. That is right. These referrals from the FBI are all through +here. Page 8 is another one where they picked up information and gave +it to us. The first four sections relate to the cases in the four +offices of Texas during a 2-year period. The very final one illustrates +just a little sample of the kind of cases we received in Texas which we +did not think warranted investigation. That will give you an idea of +what those cases amounted to. Why we didn't go into them. + +Mr. McCLOY. Let me ask you this: Are your records and equipment modern +in the sense that you have got punchcards on all these, have you got +the type of equipment that you would think that extensive files and +extensive information and quick access to them might be very important. +Do you have IBM machines and do you have punchcards, for example, so +that you can have quick cross references? + +Mr. BOUCK. No, sir. Our files are conventional, card indexes, +conventional folders. We do not have machine operation in that sense. + +Mr. McCLOY. Don't you think that with all this mass of information that +comes in that that would be an asset to you? + +Mr. BOUCK. If I might defer to Mr. Carswell again, I believe that is +in the document you are handling, discussion of that, am I right, Mr. +Carswell, or in the studies that are going on. + +Mr. CARSWELL. Yes. + +Mr. BOUCK. This is part of this big overall consideration again. + +Mr. McCLOY. It just seems to me this is almost a typical case of where +that type of thing can do you a great deal of good. You have it in +industry to a very marked degree. I wonder whether it could be--I don't +know enough about the flow of these things. + +Mr. BOUCK. This is under a great deal of consideration as a part of +this post-Dallas study that Mr. Carswell referred to and I am quite +sure that it will be contained in the final results. + +Mr. McCLOY. Very well. Go ahead. + +Mr. DULLES. Could I ask one question in that connection? You say at +the bottom of the page, this introductory table page, that the total +exceeded 32,000 items. + +Mr. BOUCK. Yes. + +Mr. DULLES. Does that mean now you have cards on 32,000 people? + +Mr. BOUCK. Oh, no; we have cards on close to a million people. + +Mr. DULLES. A million people? + +Mr. BOUCK. Yes. + +Mr. DULLES. This total then is 1-year total? + +Mr. BOUCK. This is a 2-year total--no, wait a minute. I beg your pardon. + +Mr. McCLOY. 1963. + +Mr. BOUCK. This is a 1-year total for 1943, 1-year total for 1953, and +1-year total for 1963. + +Mr. DULLES. That is just the number, and these figures are cumulative +that you have here? + +Mr. BOUCK. No; everyone is a year. + +Mr. DULLES. That is what I mean, you have the total you have to add +this up for previous years, but you don't keep them forever, you take +some of these out. + +Mr. BOUCK. These are not all cards, but these are items of information. +In 1-year cases we might get 40, 50 items in a particular case, and +these items would go in the case files. + +Mr. DULLES. Do you know how many names you have carded now, +approximately? + +Mr. BOUCK. We have not counted them but we think in the vicinity of a +million but they are not all active, you see. We have no way of knowing +when people die in some cases and things like that. So we don't know +just how many of these million are now active. Certainly very much less +than a million. + +Mr. DULLES. But you have a million names carded? + +Mr. BOUCK. Yes. In the indexes. + +Mr. STERN. In the files which you describe as basic files, I believe, +how many cases are current, either in your office or within easy access? + +Mr. BOUCK. About 50,000. + +Mr. STERN. About 50,000. So that 950,000 are in some other storage? + +Mr. BOUCK. Not all of these cards, you see, will represent cases +because we have some cases in which many people are involved. There +would be considerably less cases than there would be card indexes, but +we do have a very sizable storage of cases under National Archives, +some of the older ones having gone to places like the Roosevelt Library. + +(At this point Representative Ford left the hearing room.) + +Mr. STERN. These are your basic files which now have something in the +order of 50,000 active cases? + +Mr. BOUCK. Yes. + +Mr. STERN. And some of these involve more than one individual? + +Mr. BOUCK. Yes. + +Mr. STERN. In these cases? + +Mr. BOUCK. Yes. + +Mr. STERN. A case might be an organization, as I understand it, rather +than an individual? + +Mr. BOUCK. That is right. + +Mr. STERN. And the members of that organization would be collected +under that one case? + +Mr. BOUCK. Yes. + +Mr. STERN. Would they also be listed individually? + +Mr. BOUCK. They would be listed individually if they were of interest +to us as individuals. Sometimes we would get the membership of a group +of people that attended a lecture, let's say, where very derogatory +information was given out about the President, but most of these +people seem like ordinary citizens and it doesn't seem like worth +investigating. We might have 200 people listed in that, this would not +be normal, but it would be a few cases like that. + +Mr. STERN. Now, as I understand it you by no means investigate every +individual who is in one of these 50,000 cases? + +Mr. BOUCK. That is correct. + +Mr. STERN. And what are the criteria that you use? + +Mr. BOUCK. The criteria for investigation are feelings that there is +indeed an indication that there may be a danger to the President. + +Mr. STERN. But there has to be some indication of a potential danger to +the President to get that individual into a case to begin with, I take +it. If it were clear he was not? + +Mr. BOUCK. Yes; but not necessarily a current indication. We take many +of these where we think an individual is becoming hostile and a little +bit disgusted with the President, we take many of those cases to watch +these people. We keep getting information here and there along, and +frequently after we get the second or third piece of information, we +decide indeed this individual is perhaps--does perhaps constitute a +menace, and at that point we would investigate it. + +Mr. STERN. As I understand it, one of the main purposes of your +investigation is to attempt to deal with the dangerous individual at +that time? + +Mr. BOUCK. Yes, sir. + +Mr. STERN. How would you deal with these people whom we are speaking +about? + +Mr. BOUCK. We deal with them primarily in three ways. First, if a law +violation is involved an attempt will be made to see if a prosecution +is in order. + +Mr. STERN. What sort of law violation? + +Mr. BOUCK. Well, we have a threat law, for one, that is under our +jurisdiction. Then in the case---- + +Mr. STERN. This is threats against the President? + +Mr. BOUCK. Threats against the President. Then there is---- + +Mr. DULLES. Is that a local law? + +Mr. BOUCK. No; that is a Federal law. + +Mr. DULLES. It is a Federal law? + +Mr. BOUCK. Yes. + +Mr. STERN. And it involves what sort of act? + +Mr. BOUCK. It involves making a threat to kill the President or to harm +the President. + +Mr. STERN. Not necessarily---- + +Mr. McCLOY. Do you have a citation of that law? + +Mr. BOUCK. It is in some exhibit, I am sure. + +Mr. McCLOY. I think it is well to put it in the record if we have it. + +Mr. DULLES. Yes; I think it would be very good. + +Mr. CARSWELL. Can we supply it? + +Mr. DULLES. Why don't you supply it? + +(It was later supplied as 18 U.S.C., Section 871.) + +Mr. BOUCK. If the investigation indicates that the individual is +mentally unbalanced, which a high percentage are, then attempt will be +made to persuade local authorities to get hospitalization, confinement +in an institution. + +If neither of those are possible, attempts will be made to get local +officers and family, if they will cooperate, to help us keep track +of him, and we will institute checkups from time to time when we are +investigating. Those are basically the control measures that we are +able to use. In some cases we may conduct surveillance, by the way, if +we can't do any of those, and we regard the man as very dangerous. + +Mr. STERN. I show you a 1-page pink card marked for identification +Commission Exhibit No. 765. Can you tell us what that is? + +Mr. BOUCK. Yes; this is a card which we have prepared when an +individual that we have rated as dangerous is placed in an institution, +either a mental institution or a penal institution. We supply that card +to the superintendent of the institution. We ask him to put it in the +front of the individual's case jacket, and it is all filled in so that +the return address and all are on it. The frank portion of it on the +bottom is a frank portion, all he has to do is to indicate whether the +individual has escaped, transferred or been released and drop it in the +mail to advise us on action they may take on letting him out or if he +has escaped. + +Mr. STERN. That is the control you exercise over persons who are +institutionalized in prison or some sort of hospital? + +Mr. BOUCK. Yes. + +Mr. STERN. When an individual is determined after investigation to +present some level of danger but not sufficient to warrant prosecution +or not to be a mentally disturbed person warranting commitment, how do +you control that individual, keep track of him? + +Mr. BOUCK. If we think he is in fact dangerous, he would be in our +checkup file which is really a control device by which at least +every 6 months we reinvestigate and in between times we try to have +arrangements with the family and local officers to let us know if he +leaves town or buys a gun or anything. + +The other device is a geographical card file in which we would put a +card to let us know about this individual in case the President went to +that geographical area so that the office might take a further look and +see if he was a menace. + +Mr. STERN. At the time of Dallas, do you know approximately how many +persons were in institutions under this system where you would be +notified if they left or escaped? + +Mr. BOUCK. I am sorry, I don't have that. + +Mr. STERN. The order of magnitude, any estimate? + +Mr. BOUCK. It would be some thousands but I wouldn't really have a +close idea. I could get that and supply it. I just would have to guess +and it would be a very bad guess. + +Mr. STERN. Fine. But you can determine this for us? + +Mr. BOUCK. Yes. + +Mr. STERN. Good. How many at the time of Dallas would be in your +checkup control file system with this periodic review? + +Mr. BOUCK. About 400. + +Mr. STERN. 400 individuals? + +Mr. BOUCK. That is nationwide. + +Mr. STERN. Again, at the time of Dallas, how many individuals would +have been listed in the trip-index file which you have described? + +Mr. BOUCK. About a hundred. + +Mr. STERN. One hundred in the Nation? + +Mr. BOUCK. Yes. + +Mr. STERN. What are the criteria for putting someone's name in the +trip-index file? + +Mr. BOUCK. The belief on the part of the local field office, with +confirmation from the Protective Research Section that this individual +would indeed constitute a risk to the President's safety, if he went to +that area. + +Mr. STERN. This is done, this is organized, on a geographic basis? + +Mr. BOUCK. Yes. + +Mr. STERN. By Secret Service field offices? + +Mr. BOUCK. Yes. + +Mr. STERN. Is there any other control device that you employed at the +time of Dallas? + +Mr. BOUCK. We had at the time a very small device that we call an +album which has a few, perhaps 12 or 15 people that we consider very +dangerous or at least dangerous and so mobile that we can't be sure +where they might be. This is a constant thing. Copies of these are kept +before the protective personnel at the White House all the time. This +resides in their office. + +Senator COOPER. On that point, if this last category represents a group +that is so highly dangerous, have any individuals in that group reached +the place where they have made such statements as would bring them +under the Federal act which would require prosecution? + +Mr. BOUCK. No, sir; if they were prosecutable we would seek that +solution immediately, and many of them have been taken to the district +attorney and it has just been determined they do not quite meet the +requirements for prosecution. + +Some have been prosecuted, and have served sentences and are out at the +end of sentences but still thought to be dangerous. + +Senator COOPER. Yes. + +Mr. BOUCK. Some have been in mental institutions and discharged, and +there isn't ground to put them back but we are still afraid of them. + +Mr. STERN. Are the individuals who are listed in the trip-index file, +which numbered at the time of Dallas about 100, also listed in the +checkup control files? + +Mr. BOUCK. Yes. Yes; they would, primarily that 100 would to a large +degree be in both places. + +Mr. STERN. Then it is a fair summary, Mr. Bouck, that at the time of +Dallas the number of individuals that you were concerned with were +some thousands, the number you will supply, who were institutionalized +either in prison or in mental hospitals, and with such institutions +you had an arrangement that would promptly notify you of the discharge +or escape of that individual, some 400 on a systematic review, +approximately every 6 months by your field offices, of which 400, 100 +were separately identified as particularly dangerous in the trip-index +file, and some 12 to 15 whose photographs were in the album? + +Mr. BOUCK. Yes; I think---- + +Mr. STERN. As a matter of fact, I would suppose the people in the album +would also be in the checkup control file so really we are talking +about, are we not, the unknown number in institutions, and about 400 +other individuals whom you were actively reviewing and about whom you +would be concerned on the occasion of the President's trip? + +Mr. BOUCK. That is right. + +Mr. STERN. In addition, you had files on, active files on, +approximately 50,000 cases involving at least that number and probably +more, individuals which were your basic library, as it were, but of +reference use only until more information was developed about them? + +Mr. BOUCK. Well, I think you are quite accurate except in the last +category. In these 50,000 cases would be tremendous numbers of cases +that had been given investigative attention, and had been determined +that our first thought or our first indications of danger were not +substantiated. The investigator, and we concurred, felt that the +individual, at least at any particular time, that this particular +individual was not really in fact a menace to the President's life. + +Mr. DULLES. What was the location of these 50,000 cases? We are talking +now about Dallas, is that countrywide? + +Mr. BOUCK. Countrywide. + +Mr. McCLOY. International. + +Mr. BOUCK. It is worldwide over a period of 20 years. + +Mr. DULLES. Yes. Somebody in Thailand, if he was in Thailand wouldn't +be of much danger in Dallas. + +Mr. STERN. But he would, as I understand it, sir, be included in the +basic files if he had come to their attention as a potential danger. + +Mr. DULLES. Someone in New Orleans, for example, he could get up to +Dallas very quickly or if he were in Houston, but this 50,000 covers +the whole world. + +Mr. STERN. Yes; and I think the important point here, Mr. Dulles, is +that these are 50,000 cases of background information, including people +already investigated and found not to represent danger. The number of +cases under active scrutiny at the time of Dallas amounted to about +400, who were reviewed periodically, plus a much larger number, in +the thousands, of persons committed or imprisoned, and as to those, I +expect there would be no problem until they were released. + +Mr. BOUCK. That is right. + +Mr. STERN. And you had a system to be notified about the release or +escape, is that correct? + +Mr. BOUCK. That is correct. + +Mr. DULLES. So can we get from that about the number of cases you felt +to look at in connection with the President's trip to Dallas? + +Mr. BOUCK. We actually---- + +Mr. DULLES. What range would that be? + +Mr. BOUCK. We actually looked at a volume of cases approximating 400 in +connection with the trip to Dallas. + +Mr. STERN. Well---- + +Mr. BOUCK. That is the total file that we looked into. + +Mr. STERN. On a national basis? + +Mr. BOUCK. The total two or three files we looked into would encompass +about that many people. + +Mr. DULLES. All right. That gives me just what I was asking for. + +Mr. STERN. In point of fact, Mr. Bouck, when you looked at the checkup +control file and the trip-index file before the Dallas trip how many +names were reported for the areas in the Dallas field office territory +where the President was to visit? + +Mr. BOUCK. We found no uncontrolled people in the trip file for Dallas. +All of the cases in Dallas were controlled to our satisfaction. We +found also in the checkup file no uncontrolled individuals that we +thought warranted an alert for Dallas. + +Mr. DULLES. Did you ask the FBI or any other local agency for any cases +they might have? + +Mr. BOUCK. Yes, sir. + +Mr. DULLES. In connection with the trip? + +Mr. BOUCK. In fact, they referred several cases to us in connection +with the trip, right prior to the trip on the local level. + +Mr. DULLES. On the local level? + +Mr. BOUCK. On the local level. + +Mr. McCLOY. Being as objective as you can be under the circumstances, +what would you have done if the FBI had told you there was a man named +Oswald in Dallas, who was a defector, had been a defector? + +Mr. BOUCK. I think if they had told us only that, we probably would not +have taken action. If I might qualify it further, if we had known what +all of the Government agencies knew together, and knew that he had that +vantage point on the route, then we certainly would have taken very +drastic action. + +Mr. McCLOY. If they had told you that there was a man named Oswald in +Dallas, who had been a defector, who was employed at the Texas School +Book Depository? + +Mr. BOUCK. Yes, sir; we would have looked at that. + +Mr. McCLOY. You would have looked at that? + +Mr. BOUCK. Yes, sir. + +Mr. McCLOY. Knowing that the Texas School Book Depository was on the +President's route? + +Mr. BOUCK. On the President's route. + +Mr. STERN. Would it have made a difference to you if he was a +legitimate employee of that institution? + +Mr. BOUCK. Well, not from our standpoint of having us look at it. I +can't predict too well what the field office would have done after they +looked. It would depend on what they found out, but the field office +would have checked that. We would has asked them to check it and they +would in fact have checked it not knowing what conclusions they would +have arrived at, I don't quite--I am not quite able to predict just +what measures they would have taken. + +Senator COOPER. May I ask a question on this point? Have you examined +your records since the assassination of President Kennedy to determine +if the name Lee Oswald appears in your files? + +Mr. BOUCK. We have never had it prior in any connection, never in our +records. + +Senator COOPER. I gathered from what you said in response to Mr. +McCloy's question you do not keep any special file relating to +defectors? + +Mr. BOUCK. No, sir. + +Senator COOPER. In this country? + +Mr. BOUCK. Not unless there is something much more to it than the fact +they defected. + +Senator COOPER. Then in the case of Lee Oswald from your statement +that you do not keep any file on defectors, if you had known about his +presence there, what would have been the cause then for you to have +taken special notice of him? + +Mr. BOUCK. The key there would have been a defection plus a knowledge +that he had a vantage point on the route. Those two together would have +required action. + +Senator COOPER. The point I make is, and this again is arguing after +the fact, if the fact he was a defector, plus a vantage point would +make you take notice of him it would seem to me it would be very +substantial evidence to have in your file that he was a defector, +wouldn't you think so? + +Mr. BOUCK. Well, again, this is part of this big study that we are in. +We never before knew, I think, of a defector who did anything like +this so we are not quite sure that defection in itself is a key to an +assassin. However, that combined with certain things, knowing that he +had a vantage point would have caused us to look. + +Mr. STERN. Were there any other characteristics of Oswald that you +believe to have been known to other Federal agencies before November 22 +that would have been important to you in deciding whether or not he was +a potential threat? + +Mr. BOUCK. Yes. I think I have supplied you with a list of about 18 +things that were known to the Federal agencies, but these, I believe, +were spread from Moscow to Mexico City in at least four agencies, so I +am not aware of how much any one agency or any one person might have +known. + +But there was quite a little bit of derogatory information known about +Oswald in this broad expanse of agencies. + +Mr. STERN. Without respect to any such list, what other +characteristics, trying as much as possible to avoid hindsight, do you +think were germane to determine his potential danger? + +Mr. BOUCK. I would think his continued association with the Russian +Embassy after his return, his association with the Castro groups would +have been of concern to us, a knowledge that he had, I believe, been +court-martialed for illegal possession of a gun, of a hand gun in the +Marines, that he had owned a weapon and did a good deal of hunting +or use of it, perhaps in Russia, plus a number of items about his +disposition and unreliability of character, I think all of those, +if we had had them altogether, would have added up to pointing out a +pretty bad individual, and I think that, together, had we known that +he had a vantage point would have seemed somewhat serious to us, even +though I must admit that none of these in themselves would be--would +meet our specific criteria, none of them alone. + +But it is when you begin adding them up to some degree that you begin +to get criteria that are meaningful. + +Senator COOPER. I am sure you have answered what I am going to ask but +I will ask it anyway. Then it is correct prior to the assassination the +Secret Service had no information from any agency or any source---- + +Mr. BOUCK. That is correct. + +Senator COOPER. Relating to Lee Oswald? + +Mr. BOUCK. That is correct. + +Mr. STERN. I believe you said earlier, Mr. Bouck, that before Dallas +you thought the liaison arrangements were satisfactory and that other +Federal agencies, in particular, had full awareness of the kind of +information that the Secret Service was looking for under the general +criteria that you articulated? + +Mr. BOUCK. Yes, sir. + +Mr. STERN. Why then, do you think you were not notified of Oswald? Was +there perhaps something wrong with the system? + +Mr. BOUCK. This, of course, is opinion. In my opinion, there was +no lack of knowledge of what we should have. Insofar as I know no +individual knew enough about Oswald to judge him to meet our criteria +of presenting a danger to the President. I know of no individual who +knew all about Oswald, including the fact that he had a vantage point +on the route. + +If that is so, I don't know. I didn't know. + +Mr. McCLOY. Somebody in the FBI knew it, didn't they? + +Mr. BOUCK. I have no record to know that. They knew certain +information. I have no record that would indicate they knew all of the +derogatory information. + +Mr. McCLOY. I don't know I would say they knew all the derogatory +information but they certainly knew the vantage point and they +certainly knew the defection elements. + +Mr. BOUCK. I know they knew he was in Dallas. Whether they recognized +that as being on the route, I don't know that. + +Mr. McCLOY. I think the record shows he was employed there, or the +deposition shows. + +Mr. BOUCK. I don't know that. + +Mr. STERN. Is it of key importance to what you say now regarding the +information on Oswald before the assassination to identify his vantage +point? If you would take that away from the other characteristics does +he then not become a threat? + +Mr. BOUCK. He would not meet the criteria of a threat as we had it at +that time, if you take that away. + +Mr. STERN. And the criterion was---- + +Mr. BOUCK. That there be some specific indication that a possible +danger to the President existed. + +Mr. DULLES. Off the record. + +(Discussion off the record.) + +Mr. McCLOY. Back on the record. + +Mr. STERN. Well, Mr. Bouck, if the pivotal ingredient is his employment +at that Depository, is that because that showed some, to your mind, +some intention, some desire to be on the route, because access to the +route---- + +Mr. BOUCK. No; it relates him to the President. This, I think if all +the information that was known about him, indicates that he was a +pretty untrustworthy individual, I think there was no indication that +that untrustworthiness might be of a danger to the President until you +associated that he had a vantage point where he might use it toward the +President. + +There was nothing previous that indicated that the President might be +an object of this, and---- + +Mr. STERN. As far as any of us know, any citizen had pretty much the +same sort of access to the parade route. Is there any difference---- + +Mr. BOUCK. We would feel the same way if we knew this much derogatory +type of information about any citizen if we knew he had a particular +vantage point on a route. + +Mr. STERN. But a citizen, possessing all the characteristics you +believe to have been known about Oswald but not having access through +employment or residence or some comparable relationship to the parade +route, would not have been of concern to you under the criteria and +practices in effect at the time of Dallas, is that what you are saying? + +Mr. BOUCK. I think a little broader than that. Access of any kind, +working in a hotel or any point where he might have unusual access. + +If you broaden the question to that, I would say that is what I am +saying. + +Mr. STERN. Unusual access? + +Mr. BOUCK. Yes. + +Mr. McCLOY. If I might intervene here, if I understand it. I don't know +whether it is good but there is speculation and conjecture in it, I +don't know if you will get far with it. Probably if you had known all +the derogatory information that you now know was accumulated in all of +the agencies of the Government irrespective of where this fellow was in +Dallas you might have kept your eye on him. + +Mr. BOUCK. Again, that would be speculation. I don't know. It wouldn't +be normal. It wouldn't fit within our normal category unless we knew he +was--he had a vantage point. We know of tremendous numbers of people +who are bad people that we don't keep an eye on. + +Mr. McCLOY. Yes; but suppose you knew these men, or suppose you +encountered some of these defectors. I am told there are 18 others, +wouldn't you have been somewhat negligent if you didn't check up on him +when he got to the vantage point in Dallas? + +Mr. BOUCK. If we had checked up, I don't know whether we would have +gone beyond that. + +Mr. McCLOY. I don't suggest that but you might have kept him under +surveillance. + +Mr. BOUCK. We would have taken note of this. + +Mr. STERN. Would that have been true if he had not been known to be +living in Dallas, if his last known address was New Orleans? + +Mr. BOUCK. If he had not been living in Dallas we would not have +checked on on him in this trip area even with the other information. + +Mr. STERN. Suppose he had been living in Fort Worth? + +Mr. BOUCK. Well, if we had known he were living in Fort Worth that +would be the same as Dallas, to us. When we speak of a city we speak of +the driving distance or the commutable distance to a city. + +Mr. STERN. We will move very quickly to questions concerning Oswald and +I would like to go back now and cover the details of your file search +and other PRS activity for the Texas trip, the total Texas trip. If +you would start with the first date you heard that the President was +preparing to travel to Texas and tell us what your Section did and what +you found. + +Mr. BOUCK. Our first knowledge of the Texas trip was on November 8 when +the advance agent, Agent Lawson, reported to the Protective Research +Section that the President was going to Texas, and that Dallas was one +of the stops. A check at that time was made of our trip index, and no +cards were found on Dallas to indicate that there was an uncontrolled +dangerous person in Dallas. + +Two such people were found at the Houston stop. This information was +imparted to Mr. Lawson at that time. + +Mr. STERN. Excuse me, could you identify the two Houston cases from +Exhibit 762? + +Mr. BOUCK. Yes; they are in here. Case No. 21 is one. This individual +is a local law-enforcement officer that was not considered awfully +dangerous but again because he might have an unusual vantage point we +made arrangements each time to see that he was not used in any way +that he might have a vantage point. Case 26 is the other one, which is +a case that goes back many, many years of an individual who has been +repeatedly threatening but we have been unable to do much about. She +has been in and out of mental hospitals. + +Mr. STERN. So these were the two cases? + +Mr. BOUCK. The two cases. + +Mr. STERN. That were in the trip-index file involving the jurisdiction +of the Houston field office? + +Mr. BOUCK. Yes. + +A notation was made at that time for the individual in charge of that +section and on the 14th he again checked that file. He pulled out these +two cards, and he checked the checkup file and concluded that these +in the State of Texas were the only two uncontrolled people that we +should alert the field about, and he pulled the case jackets on these +two people and reviewed those, and then caused an alert to be prepared +on these two people, the original being sent to the White House Detail, +and the copy being sent to the field office. + +Mr. STERN. These are the same two Houston cases? + +Mr. BOUCK. Yes. + +Mr. STERN. Was there an additional case added on the 14th? + +Mr. BOUCK. No; not by our section. There were just the two. There were +cases picked up in the field on some of these, but we only sent out the +two cases as being in our opinion of protective concern on that trip. + +Mr. STERN. Would you look, Mr. Bouck, please, at the first page of +Exhibit 760, the first text page, the third paragraph, the middle of +the paragraph, it says, "On November 14, 1963, the above indicated +clerical employee prepared an office memorandum advising the name of +one PRS subject who had previously been referred to the interested +offices and was still of concern and furnishing identifying data on a +new PRS subject who had not been previously included in the alert." + +Mr. BOUCK. These were the two cases. The one we had alerted on a +previous trip, the deputy sheriff one, had not been, that had occurred +since a previous trip and so this was the first time that we had told +the detail and the field office that this individual should be looked +at. Making a total of two. + +Mr. STERN. Were there entries in the trip-index file then for the other +cities that the President was planning to visit or the other field +office areas, Dallas, San Antonio, and El Paso? + +Mr. BOUCK. No; there were no cards on any of the other three cities, +indicating uncontrolled people. + +Mr. STERN. So in the four field offices covering the entire State of +Texas there were in the trip index only two cards both of them residing +in the Houston office area? + +Mr. BOUCK. That is correct. + +Mr. STERN. Now, do you know what was done in Dallas to supplement this +investigation into potentially harmful people? + +Mr. BOUCK. Dallas made contact with the local authorities, they had +contact with the FBI, they had contact with the local police in Dallas, +and also some of the suburbs, particularly Denton, Tex., in which they +received information on several situations and several individuals in +addition to, well, they received this information. + +Mr. STERN. Are those cases summarized in Exhibit 762? + +Mr. BOUCK. Yes; they are. I think the first one of those is page No. 2 +of Exhibit 762, which involved people who had attempted to embarrass +Ambassador Stevenson. Also page 3 is a further one. I believe they +also received information on some scurrilous literature that was being +circulated in Dallas at that time from the FBI. + +Mr. STERN. Now, referring to the visit of Ambassador Stevenson in +October, I believe---- + +Mr. BOUCK. Yes. + +Mr. STERN. Was anything done at the time of that visit in October to +identify the people who were participating in the obstreperous conduct +that occurred? + +Mr. BOUCK. I do not know. It was nothing---- + +Mr. STERN. So far as PRS was concerned? + +Mr. BOUCK. Nothing was done by PRS. + +Mr. STERN. These individuals did come to light in the liaison +activities just prior to President Kennedy's trip to Dallas? + +Mr. BOUCK. Yes, sir. + +Mr. STERN. And they were then, as I understand it, placed in your +permanent records and are now in your trip-index files? + +Mr. BOUCK. That is correct. + +Mr. STERN. Mr. Bouck, since the Stevenson trip received a great deal of +publicity and I take it you knew about it at the time or PRS knew about +it, can you tell us why there was no effort in October to determine +who these people were for possible use if President Kennedy or a later +President should consider a trip to Dallas? + +Mr. BOUCK. Well, there are a great many disturbances and activities +around, and we have never felt that we should document those per se +inasmuch as they did not constitute a jurisdiction--they were not +within our jurisdiction except when the President went to an area, +so it has always been something that we attempted to resolve when we +had jurisdiction in the area because the President was going there, +rather than engage in investigative activity that was not within our +jurisdiction just per se, whenever there was a disturbance. + +Mr. STERN. I am not sure I follow that. I take it your jurisdiction +is to determine, perhaps not to act upon, but to determine people who +might be threats to the President or Vice-President. + +Mr. BOUCK. These people were not judged at that time to be threats to +the President, necessarily. + +Mr. STERN. I see. Their activities in connection with Ambassador +Stevenson's visit did not seem to you at that time---- + +Mr. BOUCK. They did not fit our criteria as being a direct indication +that the President might be harmed, but then when the President went to +that area, then a more serious connotation was put on those people and +they were investigated and were identified and pictures were made of +them and given to the agents. + +Mr. STERN. That is because the President was then going to that area? + +Mr. BOUCK. Yes; that is right. + +Mr. STERN. Suppose the President was going to another area to which +these individuals had moved in between the Stevenson visit and the +hypothetical Presidential trip. You would have had no record of them, +no way of knowing about them, is that correct? + +Mr. BOUCK. No; that would have to--unless it had been reported to me +they had moved, then the only way we would pick that up would be in the +local liaison which begins some days before a trip. + +Mr. STERN. But there would have been no basis to report to you that +they had moved as I understand it because they would not have been +persons of concern to you merely because of their involvement in the +Stevenson affair? + +Mr. BOUCK. That is probably right. + +Mr. McCLOY. To summarize your testimony a bit, I gather that the +fundamental criterion that you were looking for is the potential +threat to the health and life of the President of the United States, +that you are not a general security agency of the United States, but +are directed particularly to that particular objective, and one of +the things that alerts you most is the threat, and then you examine +that threat to determine whether or not it is a serious threat. A lot +of elements enter into that and at that point when it does become a +serious threat, then you put it on your alert files, is that abut right? + +Mr. BOUCK. That is a very good---- + +Mr. McCLOY. Furthermore---- + +Mr. BOUCK. Analysis. + +Mr. McCLOY. Flowing from that the mere fact that a man or woman was a +defector, or a man is a member of a political organization doesn't in +itself embody the threat to the United States, to the President, the +person of the President of the United States. + +Mr. BOUCK. Right. + +Mr. McCLOY. It is only as there is some additional element that causes +you to fear that there is a potential menace that you put in that +category you have been talking about? + +Mr. BOUCK. Yes, sir. + +Mr. STERN. I think we might illustrate that, Mr. McCloy, by a series of +abstracts of cases that Mr. Bouck has prepared. I show you Commission +Exhibit No. 766 for identification. + +Mr. BOUCK. Yes. + +Mr. STERN. And would you describe that and summarize very briefly the +cases involved there which I think are intended to typify, are they +not---- + +Mr. BOUCK. Yes; I prepared this and the thought was that the Commission +might be interested in a couple of examples of how the PRS function has +been helpful in protection, and so three cases have been presented in +this paper. + +Mr. STERN. Mr. Bouck, have you anything you would like to add, any +clarification, any amplification of the matters we have discussed this +morning? + +Mr. BOUCK. I don't believe so. I think Mr. McCloy's summary probably +exceeds anything I could give, and I think it is quite good and +reflects, I believe, what we were trying to get at here. + +Mr. STERN. Have you reviewed the memoranda and other exhibits that +you have identified this morning and do you have any corrections or +additions to make to those? + +Mr. BOUCK. No, sir; I think they are accurate. + +Mr. STERN. Mr. Chairman, I would like to request the admission of all +the exhibits that Mr. Bouck has identified for us this morning. I have +no further questions. + +Mr. McCLOY. They may be admitted. + +(The documents referred to, previously marked as Commission Exhibit +Nos. 760 through 766, were received in evidence.) + +Mr. McCLOY. I have one more question I would like to ask you. In the +light of what you know now about the whole episode, have you come to +any conclusions as to how you ought to operate in the future other than +you did in the Dallas situation? + +Mr. BOUCK. As Mr. Carswell has mentioned, of course, a great deal +of study is being conducted. I think there are a number of other +things that can be done. Great problems arise as to human rights and +constitutional rights and costs and resources and just sheer--dealing +with just sheer volumes of millions of people, and I do not feel I +would want to give final judgment as to whether we should do these +things until we have completed all of these studies, but perhaps there +will be some that will---- + +Mr. McCLOY. Do you at this stage have any definite ideas about any +steps that ought to be taken for the added protection of the President? + +Mr. BOUCK. Well, I have quite a lot of them which are incorporated in +this study. I have been, and as I understand it, the Commission perhaps +will have the benefit of that but I have been very heavily involved +in many, many ways in this study, and as to the final conclusions, of +course, I think maybe it goes all the way to the Congress to decide the +practicality of some of this. + +Mr. McCLOY. I am sure it does. + +Mr. BOUCK. I just don't quite feel in a position to say that I would +want to recommend most of these things without reservation at this +time. If I might, without presuming to evade your question, if we could +delay that a little bit until we have completed this rather massive +look that we are now taking. + +Mr. McCLOY. Very well. Thank you very much for your cooperation, and +very much obliged to you and the Treasury Department for helping us. + +Mr. BOUCK. Thank you, sir. + +Mr. McCLOY. To achieve our--perform our duties. + +Thank you. + +We will adjourn until 2 o'clock. + +(Whereupon, at 1 p.m., the President's Commission recessed.) + + + + +Afternoon Session + +TESTIMONY OF WINSTON G. LAWSON, ACCOMPANIED BY FRED B. SMITH, DEPUTY +GENERAL COUNSEL, TREASURY DEPARTMENT + + +The President's Commission reconvened at 2 p.m. + +Mr. McCLOY. Mr. Lawson, you know the general purpose of what we are +here for? + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes, sir. + +Mr. McCLOY. In the way of trying to get as much information as we can, +not only regarding the assassination of the President but also some +background as to the steps that have been taken to protect him and as +well as perhaps to take some testimony with the thought that we might +be able to recommend measures that might insure future security of our +Presidents. I will ask you, if you will, to rise and I will swear you. + +Do you solemnly swear the testimony you will give in this hearing will +be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you +God? + +Mr. LAWSON. I do. + +Mr. McCLOY. Go ahead. + +Mr. STERN. Mr. Lawson, would you state your name, age, and address for +the record, please? + +Mr. LAWSON. Winston George Lawson, 35 years old, 516 Vista Drive, +apartment 204. Falls Church, Va. + +Mr. STERN. What was your education at the college level? + +Mr. LAWSON. A bachelor of arts with a major in history and government. + +Mr. STERN. From what? + +Mr. LAWSON. University of Buffalo, 1949. + +Mr. STERN. Briefly, what was your employment experience from 1949 to +1959? + +Mr. LAWSON. From the time of my graduation after a couple of +months working for a firm that my father worked for, I became a +wholesale carpet salesman until December 1951, and then I joined the +Carnation Co., manufacturers of milk products nationally, and was a +representative in various capacities for them in New York State. In +1953, March, I went in the Army and I had been a reservist and was +called up as a CIC agent. I had 16 weeks of basic infantry, basic +training, went to the CIC Counterintelligence School in Holabird, +Md.--Fort Holabird, Md.--outside of Baltimore, and then was assigned +eventually to the Lexington field office where I did general +counterintelligence work for the Army, background investigations, and +some interviews of the prisoners, POW's from the Korean war. + +After I returned to civilian life in 1955, I returned to the Carnation +Milk Co. and had various sales or public relations jobs with them in +Poughkeepsie, N.Y., Syracuse, N.Y., generally covering most of the +State of New York. I applied to enter the Secret Service approximately +3 years before I was accepted, and entered the Secret Service in +October 1959 in the Syracuse field office. + +Mr. STERN. Will you tell us of your experience in the Secret Service, +describing briefly each assignment of work? + +Mr. McCLOY. When you say CIC agent you mean---- + +Mr. LAWSON. Counterintelligence agent; yes, sir, in the Army. I was +hired as an agent in the Syracuse field office, and did general +investigative work in the Syracuse area, part of New York State, with +time out for a special assignment during the Eisenhower administration +for approximately 21 days when I had to come to Washington to replace +some agents who were advancing some large trips in South America. I +was away from the Syracuse office in Treasury School for 6 weeks and I +was away from the Syracuse office for 5 weeks while I attended Secret +Service School. + +I was here in Secret Service School during the inauguration of +President Kennedy. The school was let out for that day so that they +could take advantage of the agents that were here in town for post +assignments. After returning to Syracuse for approximately 3 weeks I +was transferred to Washington on the White House detail in March 1961. + +Mr. STERN. And you have been a member of the White House detail. + +Mr. LAWSON. Of the White House detail. + +Mr. STERN. Since then? + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes. + +Mr. STERN. What has your experience been, Mr. Lawson, in doing advance +work for Presidential or Vice Presidential trips? + +Mr. LAWSON. I have assisted on some advances and I have had the overall +responsibility on some others. Some of my overall responsibilities were +Billings, Mont.; Little Rock; Buffalo and Niagara Falls, N.Y.; Cherry +Point, N.C. + +Mr. STERN. Approximately how many trips did you have the major +responsibility for, and how many did you assist on in doing advance +work? + +Mr. LAWSON. I have assisted on five or six and had the major +responsibility on seven or eight, I believe, and then have done what we +call local advances here in the Washington area, if the President is +going to a dinner or to a speech or to a function here in Washington. + +Mr. STERN. Do all members of the White House detail do advance work for +Presidential trips? + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes, sir; after they have been there a few months perhaps, +or sometimes a little less, depending on the need of advances, they +are assigned to go out and help on some advances, and then they will +work regular shift work for a while and then they may be assigned other +advances and then a little bit later have the responsibility of one. + +Mr. McCLOY. Mr. Ford, this is Mr. Lawson from the Secret Service. He +is just giving us his qualifications and giving his experience up to +the time that he was given responsibility in connection with making +preparations, advance preparations, for Presidential trips. + +Mr. STERN. When you are not doing advance work, Mr. Lawson, what are +your general responsibilities? + +Mr. LAWSON. I am assigned to a regular shift, of which there are +three on the White House detail, and we work 2 weeks 4 to 12, 2 weeks +midnights, 2 weeks days. That is generally because if there is a +Presidential movement here in Washington, usually if it is a daytime +engagement the 4-to-12 shift will have to come in and work extra. +If it is an evening engagement, why, the 8-to-4 shift will have to +work extra. And then as the President takes trips, if we are assigned +to work that day we would also go along as a regular working agent, +accompanying him or going just ahead of him. + +Mr. STERN. When you do the advance work for a trip, do you file reports +in connection with the work you have done? + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes, sir. + +Mr. STERN. Do you typically file a report somewhere in the middle of +the advance and then at the end, or how does it work? What are your +responsibilities? + +Mr. LAWSON. Until just prior to the Dallas trip we had a report +which we tried to get out if it was at all possible and send back +to Washington, the complete report at that time, and then write a +supplemental after we returned to Washington, with any changes. The +first advance and the advance that I had in Billings, Mont., and in +Little Rock, Ark., I was able to do that. Those were in September and +October of 1963. However, they changed the reporting system so that we +send a preliminary report, and it was the first one of this type that I +had had after the Dallas trip. So this one has a preliminary report and +also a final survey report. + +Mr. DULLES. How much forenotice did you have of the Dallas trip; do you +recall? + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes, sir; I was notified of it on November 4, which is +quite a bit of notice. + +Mr. DULLES. So you could start your preparations for it on November 4, +approximately? + +Mr. LAWSON. I was notified that there would be a trip, but that I would +have more information on November 8; yes, sir; and I was given more +information on November 8. + +Mr. DULLES. And when was it in that period that you were notified that +Dallas was to be visited? + +Mr. LAWSON. On November 4. + +Mr. DULLES. On November 4? + +Mr. LAWSON. I was told that I would be going to Dallas, but they didn't +know very many of the details yet and wouldn't until November 8. + +Mr. STERN. Mr. Lawson, I show you a document marked for identification +Commission No. 767. Can you identify that? + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes, sir; I can. It is my preliminary report for the Dallas +trip. + +Mr. STERN. And that was prepared when? + +Mr. LAWSON. That was prepared in Dallas, late afternoon or early +evening Tuesday, November 19, and sent to Washington by airplane. + +Mr. STERN. Mr. Chairman, may this be admitted? + +Mr. McCLOY. It may be admitted. + +(Commission Exhibit No. 767 was received in evidence.) + +Mr. STERN. I now show you a document marked for identification +Commission No. 768. Can you identify that, Mr. Lawson? + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes, sir; that is a final survey report which I prepared +upon my return from Dallas. + +Mr. STERN. And that is the final report in this preliminary-final +report arrangement---- + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes, sir. + +Mr. STERN. Which you have described? And can you identify this +additional document marked for identification Commission Exhibit No. +769? + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes, sir; this is a statement of the activities that I had, +to the best of my knowledge, in connection with the Presidential visit +to Dallas covering my activities only pertaining to the Dallas trip +from November 4 through 21. + +Mr. STERN. This, I take it, was not a routine report? + +Mr. LAWSON. No, sir; it was not. + +Mr. STERN. It was prepared because of what transpired at Dallas? Mr. +Chairman, may we have admitted 768 and 769? + +Mr. McCLOY. They may be admitted. + +(Commission Exhibits Nos. 768 and 769 were received in evidence.) + +Mr. STERN. Now, beginning November 8, can you tell us the preparations +for your trip that you did here in Washington? + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes. Acting on the instruction to come into the office on +November 8 for the additional instructions that I had been told I would +receive, Mr. Roy Kellerman, who is an assistant special agent in charge +of the detail, gave myself and other members of the advance teams going +out what information they had up to that time on their respective +stops. Mr. Kellerman told me the name of Mr. Jack Puterbaugh, whom I +would meet on an airplane taking the advance agents to Dallas the next +week. I contacted the White House Communications Agency to see if they +were sending a communications representative along to help out as they +usually did, and was given his name. Mr. Kellerman gave me the name of +a car contact in the Dallas area so that we would be able to obtain +cars for the motorcade, which is normal. + +Mr. STERN. These are cars, as I understand it---- + +Mr. LAWSON. For the Presidential party. + +Mr. STERN. Furnished to you by---- + +Mr. LAWSON. The Ford Motor Co. + +Mr. STERN. By people in the area that you visit---- + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes, sir. + +Mr. STERN. For use during the visit of the President? Were you told +anything about the assistance you would have in doing advance work for +the Dallas trip? + +Mr. LAWSON. Could you be more explicit, please? + +Mr. STERN. Whether you would have another agent assigned to do the work +with you? + +Mr. LAWSON. Oh, yes. I had been told earlier, sometime between November +4 and 8, that another agent would be accompanying me, but, because of +the Presidential trips which were occurring right at that time, that +they would not be able to send out one at the same time, and he would +have to join me later in Dallas after some of the other trips had been +taken care of. + +Mr. STERN. What were the usual arrangements as far as assignments? + +Mr. LAWSON. Quite often two agents would go out at the same time; yes, +sir. + +Mr. STERN. And your responsibilities and those of this other agent when +he joined you pertained only to Dallas; is that correct? + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes, sir. + +Mr. STERN. You were not concerned with any other city in the +President's route? + +Mr. LAWSON. Not on that occasion; no, sir. + +Mr. STERN. And each of those cities had its own advance agent or agents? + +Mr. LAWSON. That is correct. + +Mr. STERN. Doing the same work you were doing? + +Mr. LAWSON. That is correct. + +Mr. STERN. When, in fact, did the other agent join you? + +Mr. LAWSON. On Monday evening. May I refer to the date of this? + +Mr. STERN. Please. + +Mr. LAWSON. November 18; Monday evening. + +Mr. STERN. Now, what steps did you take in Washington before you left, +with respect to determining the names and other information about +persons who might be in the Dallas area and who might be regarded as +potential threats to the President? + +Mr. LAWSON. I went--on November 8, after leaving Mr. Kellerman's +office, I went to the office in the Executive Office Building where +our agents of the Protective Research Section are, and notified agents +at that location that I was being assigned the advance for Dallas, +Tex., trip, the date of this trip, and that I requested them to check +their files and determine as to whether I should have the name of any +individual in the Dallas area who was of record to us as an active +subject. + +Mr. STERN. Was this request made in writing? + +Mr. LAWSON. It was oral, sir. + +Mr. STERN. Is it usually made that way, orally? Do you ever make a +written request? + +Mr. LAWSON. I have never done so. I don't know about the other +individuals. + +Mr. STERN. What did they tell you? + +Mr. LAWSON. I was told after waiting there a little while that +there were no subjects of record in the Dallas area, of active PRS +individuals that we would expect to harm the President. + +Mr. STERN. And this check was made while you were present in the office? + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes, sir; that is correct. + +Representative FORD. How long did it take, for example? + +Mr. LAWSON. I believe I was there approximately 10 minutes. Not much +more than 10 minutes, sir. + +Representative FORD. In other words, they made this check on your +behalf in that period of time? + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes, sir. + +Representative FORD. Do you know how they went about it? Did you +observe how they went about it? + +Mr. LAWSON. In looking back I can recall the individuals going to +certain files, but I have never worked in the PRS Section and I only +know general information about it. + +Representative FORD. You asked somebody to check on the names of people +who might be a threat in Dallas? + +Mr. LAWSON. That is correct, sir. + +Representative FORD. And within a period of 10 minutes they came back +and said there were no names? + +Mr. LAWSON. That is right, sir. + +Mr. DULLES. What was their answer again? I didn't quite clearly hear it +when you said it the first time. + +Mr. LAWSON. I don't believe I could give you an exact answer. + +Mr. DULLES. In general what was your recollection? + +Mr. LAWSON. There were no PRS subjects, active PRS subjects which would +be a threat to the President to our knowledge in the Dallas area in the +files. + +Mr. DULLES. And would you define PRS? + +Mr. LAWSON. Protective Research Section. + +Mr. STERN. Was there a file that you yourself checked preliminary to +your trip? + +Mr. LAWSON. I don't believe so. + +Mr. STERN. Not a file of individuals but a file that might be helpful +to you in your advance work for Dallas? + +Mr. LAWSON. We have files of past trips, some of President +Eisenhower's. I am not sure how long ago they go back because they +are probably taken out and put some place else periodically. But +for example we have all of President Kennedy's trips right now plus +President Johnson's current ones, and an agent could if he desired, if +he was being assigned to a city, go and see if the President had been +there recently, and look in that for names or perhaps if he was going +to the same hotel or something, this would give him names of people +to contact there. He might obtain information. There was no report on +Dallas for President Kennedy. + +Mr. STERN. You checked? + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes, sir. + +Mr. STERN. And found no report. This file would contain the reports +such as your final report which we have marked "768," is that right? + +Mr. LAWSON. That is correct. + +Mr. STERN. There was nothing in there---- + +Mr. LAWSON. No, sir. + +Mr. STERN. Reflecting any recent trip to the Dallas area? + +Mr. LAWSON. That is correct. + +Mr. STERN. Did anything else transpire before you left for Dallas as +far as advance preparation? + +Mr. LAWSON. I picked up paraphernalia that we use, sometimes more than +other times depending on the type of trip it is. If there is to be a +motorcade as there is in this case, we usually get car numbers for +the windows and some identification pins for people who will not have +identification supplied by a local committee, and other paraphernalia +of this type, and I obtained those and took them with me. + +Mr. STERN. Did anything else happen before you left for Dallas? + +Mr. LAWSON. I called the Dallas office, the agent in charge was not in, +and talked to another agent, told him that I was coming down with other +agents on the Texas trip and would be dropped off at approximately 7:30 +on the evening, Tuesday evening, of the next week, and---- + +Mr. STERN. What was the date? + +Mr. LAWSON. I believe that is the 12th of November. That Mr. Puterbaugh +and Chief Warrant Officer Bales from the Communications Agency, White +House, would be accompanying me, and would they make arrangements to +please have us met at the airport and for rooms. And then dictated a +confirming memo before I left on the eighth. + +Representative FORD. Did you have any other contacts with PRS other +than this one? + +Mr. LAWSON. No, sir; I did not. + +Mr. STERN. You then went to Dallas on November 12? + +Mr. LAWSON. That is correct. + +Mr. STERN. What did you do in Dallas from the time of your arrival in +connection with trying to learn about people who might be potentially +dangerous to the President? + +Mr. LAWSON. I was aware of the so-called Stevenson incident and so I +didn't have to be told that there. + +Mr. STERN. How did you become aware of that? + +Mr. LAWSON. I had read it in the paper, and so without making inquiries +I was aware of that when I went there. + +Mr. STERN. You received no specific advice about that from PRS? + +Mr. LAWSON. No, sir; I was aware of this fact. And then of course +it was after I arrived there people were talking about it also. +And although to my knowledge none of the people involved in that +particular incident had threatened the President or were known to us as +threatening the President, I asked Agent Howlett if he would view some +films of this incident that I understood one of the local TV stations +had. + +I was informed of this by a local executive of the local paper who was +on the host committee, that they had such films. And Agent Howlett did +view these and had some still shots made of these individuals, although +we still did not know that they were against President Kennedy or might +harm him in any way. This was an extra on my part. I had asked Agent +Howlett if he had any contact with any individuals, informants in the +area that he might have, that the office might have about rightwing +elements and what they might do, and was told that prior to my arrival +in Dallas they had received some information on some rightwing +activity, and that an investigation had been made, and that he also had +talked to an informant or two I believe. But to their knowledge there +was nothing in the radical-type rightwing movement so-called in the +Dallas area that they knew of that was going to harm President Kennedy. + +Mr. STERN. Did anything else occur? Did you have any discussions of +this problem with the local police? + +Mr. LAWSON. We talked with the local police on many occasions as to +what would happen if there were demonstrations, pickets and so forth, +if they knew of any activity, and I believe S. A. Howlett from the +Dallas office did the same thing. The papers, the newspapers in Dallas +had a few articles on how watchful the police were going to be of the +crowd, with particular emphasis on disturbances or pickets, and some +of the local committee, host committee, as well as some of the local +political groups in the area were worried that perhaps the police +would be overzealous in controlling picketing or disturbances, and +asked me if I could find out just what the police were planning to do +in this event, that there were some wild rumors as to just what the +police were going to do. And because we like to have our local Agents +who have to work with the police in these areas maintain the liaison I +asked Mr. Sorrels if he would contact the chief of police and find out +exactly what they planned to do in relation to picketing, and discussed +the new ordinance that had been passed on the Monday, November 18 I +believe it is, prior to the President's visit. And we were told that +the police would accept peaceful picketing, but that the new ordinance +was strictly to give them some power to act if pickets or individuals +were interfering with lawful assembled groups, if they were trying to +make noise to drown out people who were bona fide speakers at lawful +groups, or if they were trying to interfere with any person entering or +departing a lawful assembly. + +Mr. STERN. Did anything occur in connection with a circular that was +being circulated at the time? + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes sir; I learned of a circular which had been distributed +in various parts of the city, blue in color with President Kennedy's +picture on it, and a list of grievances against him called treasonist +to the United States. I was given a copy of the circular in the +police chief's office, and requested Mr. Sorrels, our local agent +in charge--he had received a copy of this circular, and I asked him +to check with the district attorney's office, the Federal district +attorney, to see if it was against the Federal law. At quick reading +myself it didn't look like it was a violation of Federal law but I was +in no position to judge it, and I could see no direct threat. + +Mr. DULLES. What Federal law did you have in mind then? + +Mr. LAWSON. Under our jurisdiction, sir, of protection of the President +and investigation of letters or other threats in connection to the +President. + +Mr. DULLES. This circular that you referred to is this the +advertisement in the papers? + +Mr. LAWSON. No. + +Mr. DULLES. Was this something different? + +Mr. LAWSON. I never saw the advertisement in the paper the morning of +the 22d, and the first knowledge I had of that particular advertisement +was after I had returned from Dallas. + +(Discussion off the record.) + +Representative FORD. What page? + +Mr. STERN. Exhibit 4 to the attachment of exhibits. + +Mr. Lawson, I show you a one-page document marked "Commission Exhibit +No. 770" for identification with two photographs of President Kennedy, +and the title "Wanted for Treason." Is this a copy, a photograph of the +circular you have been describing? + +Mr. LAWSON. It is, sir. + +Mr. STERN. May it be admitted? + +Mr. McCLOY. It may be admitted. + +(Commission Exhibit No. 770 was received in evidence.) + +Mr. STERN. The newspaper advertisement was a series of questions +addressed to President Kennedy asking why he had done certain things. + +Mr. DULLES. I remember seeing it. Have you any idea as to the number of +these circulars that were distributed, any estimate? + +Mr. LAWSON. No sir; I have no idea how many were put out. They appeared +in certain sections of the city I was told. The police told me they had +no idea who had put them out or when they had been put out, and Mr. +Sorrels said that some had been brought over to his office by the FBI, +which is how he had known about it, and that neither he nor they knew +the source of them. + +Mr. DULLES. And nobody was apprehended or seen in the act of +circulating these. + +Mr. LAWSON. Not to my knowledge. + +Mr. DULLES. By any authority as far as you know? + +Mr. LAWSON. That is right. + +Mr. STERN. In respect to questions like what steps are taken to assure +the security of the President on the trip and how to work out liaison +arrangements with local Federal and municipal authorities, what is your +understanding of the division of responsibility between yourself as the +advance agent and the head of the local Secret Service office? + +Mr. LAWSON. The advance agent who goes out from Washington is +responsible for the overall stop, for making the advance arrangements, +and on the day of the movement would have authority over the other +agents at the stop already or the agents accompanying the President, +and of course the agent in charge of the detail coming from Washington +would also have authority naturally over the agents. + +However, he is just arriving in the city probably for the first time, +and the advance agent would have certain knowledge about certain events +and would have more authority than he does in certain respects or he +would ask his advice. So that there is a boss over the agents which +would be the advance agent and also the gentleman in charge of the +detail coming from Washington. The local agent in charge of the local +office assists the advance agent in all of his arrangements in the +territory that is to be visited, and the local agent in charge conducts +such investigations to assist the advance agent, and the local agent in +charge would be in charge of any liaison with local officials, local +police officials. + +Mr. STERN. Insofar as the concern is for persons who might be dangerous +or threatening to the President, the agent in charge of the Dallas +office would be responsible for liaison arrangements with local +authorities but you ultimately would be responsible as the delegate +of the head of the White House detail, for decisions as to what steps +should be taken? + +Mr. LAWSON. That is correct. + +Mr. DULLES. What police powers, if any, can you exercise in that +situation in a sovereign State? + +Mr. LAWSON. I believe the actual police powers as such would only be +in the event of actual knowledge of a threat on the President's life, +anything that we have jurisdiction of. If we hear of an oral threat +or see a written threat on the life of the President or see someone +attempt to take his life, this is our jurisdiction, and we would be +able to act as such. + +Mr. DULLES. You could effect an arrest. + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes, sir; however, anything which would fall under the +jurisdiction of the local police such as firearms laws or picketing +laws or disturbances or anything like that we have to depend upon the +local police to use their jurisdiction. + +Mr. McCLOY. Suppose the President is shot and you apprehend the +murderer. Can you arrest him and put him into custody? + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes, sir; I could arrest him for the shooting of the +President, but it is my understanding actually for the murder, no, but +because he tried to take the life of the President I could. + +Mr. McCLOY. I understand there may be some question, there is a gap in +the law there that it fits no Federal crime. + +Mr. LAWSON. I will have to refer to counsel here as to just where it +stops, when it becomes murder actually where we have no jurisdiction, +and an attempt on the life of the President. + +Mr. DULLES. Let's take a less-clear case. If you suspected Mr. X was +a man who was going to interfere with the President, although he had +committed no overt act, could you move in then or would you call upon +the local police? + +Mr. LAWSON. If he was a suspect, sir, and we had a belief that he might +try to harm the President while he was in Dallas, I would try to assign +a Secret Service agent in conjunction with local police authorities, +to watch him. If it was a function where it was by invitation only or +there was some kind of control as to how the people got in, you would +make sure that he did not get in because you were watchful of the +ticketholders, et cetera. + +However the function was to be handled; if it was a ball park where +anyone could buy a ticket to go in, then we would just have to have the +man watched, or perhaps the local police themselves somehow could keep +him from going to that ball park. But I as an agent could not. + +Mr. DULLES. Even if the President were in attendance in the ball park? + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes, sir; unless there was some reason that I could have +him arrested, I would not be able to do so. But I would have him +watched if I knew that there might be a threat. + +Mr. DULLES. Am I asking questions that should go to counsel? + +Mr. SMITH. I don't have any disagreement with what Agent Lawson has +said so far. + +Mr. DULLES. Is there not some confusion of jurisdiction though here? + +Mr. McCLOY. Isn't the panel studying this? + +Mr. STERN. We are. + +Mr. McCLOY. That is what I thought. The panel is working on the law. + +Mr. DULLES. You are working on the law? + +Mr. STERN. Yes. + +Mr. DULLES. You have got all the evidence that you want? + +Mr. STERN. Yes; and there is a large area where Federal jurisdiction +does not exist except on some strained theory of conspiracy. There is +no substantive Federal jurisdiction with respect to great areas. + +Mr. LAWSON. Might I add one thing please. The White House detail agents +are supposed to protect the life of the President wherever he is. +If there is a shot from the crowd or something happens, whether the +President is hit or not, get him away, get him out, and still protect +him. However, if you were riding on a car and actually saw someone do +something, and you were able to get to that individual, you would then +hold that person. But a White House detail agent would not drop the +President and then go look for someone who might have tried to harm him +at the time that he is there. That is not our function. + +Mr. STERN. Turning now to the question of the motorcade route, Mr. +Lawson, what can you tell us about how that was selected? + +Mr. LAWSON. On November 8 when Mr. Kellerman was giving me some of the +information on the proposed trip to Dallas, all of the advance agents +for the respective stops were given the current itinerary as prepared +by the White House staff for their stops, and for the Dallas stop there +was a 45 minute time lapse from the time the President landed at the +airport until the time that he attended the luncheon, and at the time +that I left Washington, it had not been decided whether he would attend +this luncheon at the Trade Mart where it later was planned to have it, +or at the Women's Building on the Fair Grounds. And this figured a +great deal in the parade route, the 45 minutes. + +Mr. STERN. The 45 minute time interval? + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes, sir. + +Mr. STERN. Was established for you by the White House? + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes, sir. + +Mr. STERN. And were you specifically instructed to prepare a parade +route or was this your reaction to the time lag? + +Mr. LAWSON. This is my function. I wasn't specifically asked to, but +this would be the function of the advance agent. + +Mr. STERN. Were you instructed that there would be a motorcade? + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes, sir. + +Mr. STERN. And that is what this 45 minutes was for? + +Mr. LAWSON. That is correct. + +Mr. STERN. How was the actual route determined then once the Trade Mart +had been selected as the site for the luncheon? + +Mr. LAWSON. Various routes were under consideration. We could have +gone from the airport direct to the Trade Mart the way that we should +have returned, the 4-mile route returning from the Trade Mart to the +airport, or we could have taken a city street-type route all the +way downtown and all the way back, or we could have taken a freeway +downtown and a freeway back. + +But the route that was chosen was chosen because it was the consensus +of opinion that it was probably the best route under the circumstances. +It allowed us 45 minutes to go from the airport to the Trade Mart at +the speed that I figured the President would go from past experience +with him in advances, and as a regular working agent riding in a +followup car. + +It allowed us to go downtown, which was wanted back in Washington, D.C. +It afforded us wide streets most of the way, because of the buses that +were in the motorcade. It afforded us a chance to have alternative +routes if something happened on the motorcade route. It was the type +of suburban area a good part of the way where the crowds would be able +to be controlled for a great distance, and we figured that the largest +crowds would be downtown, which they were, and that the wide streets +that we would use downtown would be of sufficient width to keep the +public out of our way. Prime consideration in a motorcade is to make +sure the President isn't stopped unless he plans it himself. You must +have room to maneuver, alternative routes to turn off from, room for +buses and so forth, and particularly room to keep the public out of the +street. + +Mr. STERN. What was the extent of your review of the parade route with +the local police? + +Mr. LAWSON. With the local police I went over the entire route on one +occasion, went to the various stops at other times and so actually did +parts of the route at that time, the part of the route which would be +near the stop like the airport and the Trade Mart. But the actual route +I went over with two police officers from the Dallas Police Department. + +Mr. McCLOY. By went over you mean you actually drove along the entire +route? + +Mr. LAWSON. We drove it sir, with them taking notes, and them making +suggestions and Mr. Sorrels and I making suggestions. + +Mr. STERN. To what extent did they actually participate in the decision +that this be the route? + +Mr. LAWSON. They were asked their advice on possible routes that you +could go to the Trade Mart. + +Mr. STERN. And they had no disagreement with the route---- + +Mr. LAWSON. No, sir. + +Mr. STERN. That was actually selected, no criticism of it? What +arrangements did you make with the Dallas police for security along the +route, starting from Love Field and getting to the Trade Mart? + +Mr. LAWSON. A good deal of it was traffic control, both to keep people +out of our path as the motorcade progressed so that they would have at +least the major intersections covered and as many of the other ones as +possible. Those which were not, all intersections that were not able to +be controlled physically by a policeman or more than one policeman were +to be controlled by motorcycles that would hop-skip the motorcade, or +other police vehicles in the motorcade. + +At certain times certain intersections were to be cutoff as we +proceeded so that it would allow time for any traffic ahead of us to +clear the area before we arrived there. Where it was felt from past +experience and the type of area that we were passing through there +would be large crowds, more police were requested for along the route, +and on the routes. + +Mr. STERN. Foot policemen or motorcycle patrolmen? + +Mr. LAWSON. Both, sir. They were requested at the corners to have more +than one policeman, so that there would be policemen for watching the +crowd and controlling the crowd, and other policemen who would have +jurisdiction over the traffic in the area, so that someone wouldn't be +watching the crowd and a car going by him or vice versa. We saw the +underpasses or overpasses or bridges that were on the route, and they +were requested to have officers, depending on the type of installation +there that I just mentioned, the type that it was, either under it or +over it, on the underpasses. The railroad lines were checked and here +was no rail traffic of a scheduled nature over the two rail crossings +that we would pass, none on the way in but two on the way out. + +However, just to make sure that a switch engine or other trains +wouldn't come along about the time we were due there, and then stop +the President's motorcade, why we had police stationed at the railroad +crossings that were on the same level as the road. + +Mr. STERN. What were the instructions that you asked be given to the +police who were stationed on overpasses and railroad crossings? + +Mr. LAWSON. They were requested to keep the people to the sides of +the bridge or the overpass so that--or underpass--so that people +viewing from a vantage point like that would not be directly over the +President's car so that they could either inadvertently knock something +off or drop something on purpose or do some other kind of harm. + +Mr. STERN. This is all people, not just outside members of the public? + +Mr. LAWSON. Any citizen that was trying to view the motorcade, they +were to be kept from right directly over the President's car, if it was +a bridge or an underpass. + +Mr. STERN. What about the deployment of police on rooftops of buildings +at any point along the route? + +Mr. LAWSON. We had--police were requested at points where I knew that +the President would be out of the car for any length of time. + +Mr. STERN. And where was that? + +Mr. LAWSON. At the Trade Mart and at the airport. + +Mr. McCLOY. May I interrupt at this point. During the course of the +motorcade while the motorcade was in motion, no matter how slowly, you +had no provision for anyone on the roofs? + +Mr. LAWSON. No, sir. + +Mr. McCLOY. Or no one to watch the windows? + +Mr. LAWSON. Oh, yes. The police along the area were to watch the crowds +and their general area. The agents riding in the followup car as well +as myself in the lead car were watching the crowds and the windows and +the rooftops as we progressed. + +Mr. McCLOY. It was part of your routine duties when you were going +through a street in any city, to look at the windows as well as the +crowds? + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes, sir; and if the President's car slowed to such a point +or the crowd ever pressed in to such a point that people are getting +too close to the President, the agents always get out and go along the +car. + +Mr. STERN. Perhaps you had better describe the vehicles and passengers +in the motorcade beginning with the pilot car and going, say, through +the Vice Presidential followup car. + +Mr. LAWSON. At one time I could have probably listed them all by name. + +Mr. STERN. No, not their names, but the vehicle order. + +Mr. LAWSON. The vehicle itself, yes sir. + +Mr. STERN. And the agents, the number of agents. + +Mr. LAWSON. And the function of the vehicle. + +Mr. STERN. And the function of the vehicle and the responsibility of +the agents in the vehicle. + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes sir. This varies, but in a usual motorcade, as in this +particular instance, there is what we call a pilot car. This is usually +a local police car that precedes the motorcade some distance, depending +on the crowd. It would usually precede it by at least a quarter of a +mile. This is to see if there is any kind of a disturbance up ahead +far enough so that we are able to take an alternate route if the need +arises. It being a police car, it has radio communications with the +whole network of the police and also the police at the stops, the ones +we have just left and the particular function like the Trade Mart or +airport that we are going to. + +In this car ride a few command officers of the local police department, +and it is their job to make sure that the traffic is stopped as it was +planned to be, look out for any disturbances, and in general be a front +guard for the motorcade. + +Mr. McCLOY. Do you have a communications system with the Secret Service +agents for this pilot car? + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes, sir; because the next car in the motorcade is what we +call a lead car and it is actually a rolling command car. We try to +have a command officer from every jurisdiction of police with a radio +net of their own in that vehicle. Sometimes if you are in an area +where there are State police and local police and sheriff's and quite +a few jurisdictions, where it is a long motorcade and you are going +through various counties you are not able to have a command officer of +every jurisdiction in that. + +But in Dallas the lead ear, the car that I was in directly ahead of the +President was a police car, and of course it had a radio that was in +contact with the pilot car and any other radio on the police net. In +addition to that, I had a portable radio on the Secret Service White +House network. + +Mr. McCLOY. Was there a Secret Service agent riding in the pilot car? + +Mr. LAWSON. No sir; there was not. + +Mr. McCLOY. The first Secret Service agent was---- + +Mr. LAWSON. In the lead car. + +Mr. McCLOY. Was in the lead car. I don't know whether you want to--I +have got to leave. Are you going to ask why they didn't go down Main +Street? + +Mr. STERN. Yes. + +Mr. McCLOY. Take care of that. The suggestion was made yesterday--you +are going to cover that? + +(Discussion off the record.) + +Representative FORD. I would like if I might to follow up with a +question which you asked a minute ago on the record. As I recall your +testimony, Mr. Lawson, you indicated that the police who were assigned +along the route had the responsibility to check windows and the crowd. +Is that what you indicated? + +Mr. LAWSON. And also the agents as they went by; yes sir. It wouldn't +be just a police responsibility; no, sir. + +Representative FORD. How did the police know they had that +responsibility? + +Mr. LAWSON. In our police meetings, of which we had three or four +listed in here, we talked about crowd control and watching the crowd, +and of course the agents just do that anyway. That is part of their +function. And in the newspaper accounts it said how watchful the police +were going to be of all kinds of activity, and actually they requested +public assistance, as I recall it, anyone that noticed anything unusual +they had asked that they notify the police. + +Representative FORD. When you meet with police officials, in this case +Chief Curry, Sheriff Decker, and who else, is this clearly laid out +that the members of their organization have the specific responsibility +of checking windows? Do you followup to see whether this is actually +put in writing to the members of the police force, and the Sheriff's +department? + +Mr. LAWSON. No, sir; I do not followup to see if it was put in writing. + +Mr. DULLES. You mean an external check don't you? You don't mean going +through each building? + +Representative FORD. No. As I understood it, policemen have the +responsibility to check windows and to look at the crowd, and I was +just wondering whether there is any followup to be sure that the chief +of police and the sheriff or anybody else actually makes this specific +communication to the people in their organizations. + +Mr. LAWSON. In this particular instance there was not. Sometimes on my +own advances I have received copies of police directives. Sometimes +this is covered and sometimes there are other directives. This is not +normal though. It is just that the police say "Here is a copy of one +of our orders." Sometimes it is the posting of police, sometimes it +is that. In Berlin where I was assisting on an advance for President +Kennedy's trip in June, we received all kinds of information of this +type, even to the fact where the police had requested anyone to notify +them of anyone that tried to gain entry into their room that didn't +belong there, if it was a business office or if it was a private home +or if all of a sudden they discovered they had a friend that they never +knew they had before and all that. But this is not always done. + +Mr. McCLOY. I want to get it clear. In your presence, in the +instructions to the police in Dallas, did you tell the police to keep +their eye on windows as you went along? + +Mr. LAWSON. I cannot say definitely that I told the police to watch +windows. I usually do. On this particular case I cannot say whether I +definitely said that. I believe I did, but I would not swear to the +fact that I said watch all the windows. + +Mr. McCLOY. I have heard it rumored that there was a general routine +in the Secret Service that when you were going through in a motorcade +or by car, that the problem of watching windows was so great that +you didn't do it. It was only as you came to a stop that it was the +standing instructions that then roofs should be watched and places of +advantage would be inspected or looked at. Is that true? + +Mr. LAWSON. No, sir; the agents in the motorcade are to watch the route +and the rooftops and the windows as they can. Of course there were +thousands of windows there, over 20,000 I believe on that motorcade. +But agents are supposed to watch as they go along. + +Representative FORD. An advance agent such as yourself goes to talk +with local police officials? + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes, sir. + +Representative FORD. Do you have a checklist? Do you have a procedure +in writing that you hand to a local law enforcement agent so that he is +clear as to the responsibilities of himself and his people? + +Mr. LAWSON. No, sir; I have no checklist, although myself I have a +number of things that I have marked down from past advances and seeing +what other individuals do that I usually try to follow. + +However, every situation is so different. Sometimes there are +motorcades and sometimes there are not, and it just wouldn't fit every +situation. + +Representative FORD. But there is no specific list of instructions that +the Secret Service gives to a local law enforcement agency? + +Mr. LAWSON. No. + +Representative FORD. At the time of the Presidential visit? + +Mr. LAWSON. No. + +Representative FORD. Do you think that it would be helpful? + +Mr. LAWSON. It would be helpful in a general way. And it could be +augmented to fit the situation. + +Representative FORD. In other words, if you had general instructions +you could give those to the local law enforcement people, and as you +say, for special circumstances, or different circumstances, you could +augment them at the scene? + +Mr. LAWSON. I believe it would be helpful. For example, I know that +New York police have, because we were up there so often, and I just +returned from there yesterday, they have a checklist of their own in +the police meetings with the Secret Service that they go over, what +time the arrival is, where he is going to be met, is it a motorcade, is +it a helicopter, et cetera. But still there are many more things that +should be in there. + +Representative FORD. But I would think for every Presidential visit +there would be certain mandatory things that would have to be done, +areas of responsibility of Federal officials, areas of responsibility +for local officials. + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes, sir. + +Representative FORD. Such a memorandum or checklist I should think +would be helpful in defining the areas of responsibility, being certain +that there is no misunderstanding as to whose responsibility it is for +A, B, C, or D operations. + +Mr. LAWSON. I agree. + +Mr. STERN. Were any arrangements made to inspect buildings along the +parade route? + +Mr. LAWSON. No, sir; other than those buildings that we were stopping +at. + +Mr. STERN. And this would be? + +Mr. LAWSON. The Trade Mart. + +Mr. STERN. And Love Field? + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes, sir. + +Mr. DULLES. Is it recognized in your business, if it is a fact, that +a building that affords a window that looks down parallel with the +motorcade is an unusually vulnerable point? Do you get the trend of my +question? + +Mr. McCLOY. Parallel rather that at right angles? + +Mr. DULLES. Yes. + +Mr. LAWSON. I know that there are some windows that are more vulnerable +than others, let's say. + +Mr. DULLES. That give a more vulnerable point of attack? + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes, sir; if you were going in a motorcade at 50 or +60 miles an hour and then all of sudden there was some reason why +something narrowed down and you had to slow up or you knew there was +going to be a big crowd here and the President would probably slow his +vehicle like he usually did for big crowds and stand up and wave, then +you would be more concerned about those windows in that area than other +areas. This motorcade to my knowledge, we went 15 or 20 miles an hour +through most of it except the downtown section at about 7 or 10. + +Mr. McCLOY. 10 or 7 did you say? + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes, sir; 7 to 10 miles an hour. + +Mr. DULLES. In this case I assume that if anyone had been looking at +windows, the car that would have seen the rifle and the man would have +been a car several cars back from the President's car, is that not +correct? + +Mr. McCLOY. It might have been the other. + +Representative FORD. The testimony of one of these young men that we +had, if it is accurate, I would have thought that the lead car might +have seen the Book Depository. + +Mr. STERN. We will hear testimony from another passenger in the lead +car, Mr. Sorrels, who was in charge of the Dallas Secret Service +Office, that as the car turned from Houston onto Elm, he saw people +in the windows of the School Book Depository Building. He cannot +recall seeing anyone on the sixth floor, and it is more likely that +he saw people on the fifth floor from his descriptions. He saw some +Negro employees. But he could see from the lead car people in the Book +Depository Building as it came in view around the corner. + +Mr. McCLOY. Did you see anybody in the School Book Depository? + +Mr. LAWSON. No, sir; at this point just as we started around that +corner I asked Chief Curry if it was not true that we were probably +5 minutes from the Trade Mart, and it is quite usual to make a radio +call to your next point of stop that you are 5 minutes away. Therefore +right about the time we turned that corner and were a little ways past +it, I am sure I was speaking on the radio, because the White House +Communications Agency has about the time I gave the 5 minutes away +warning signal, and within seconds after that the shots were fired. + +Representative FORD. As you came or as the lead car came down Houston +Street---- + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes, sir. + +Representative FORD. You were facing the Texas School Depository? + +Mr. LAWSON. Right. + +Representative FORD. Did you look at or scan that building? + +Mr. LAWSON. I do not, no, because part of my job is to look backwards +at the President's car. The speed of the motorcade is controlled by +the President's car, unless is it is an emergency situation. If he +stands up and is waving at the crowd and there are quite a few crowds +then, of course, the car goes slower. If the density of the crowd is +quite scarce or there is a time factor why you are going faster. So +the person in the lead car in this rolling command car usually keeps +turning around and watching the President's car. If his car comes up +on our bumper that means we are not going fast enough and we should go +faster, and you tell the command officer to call the motorcycles, the +pilot car, et cetera, to move out faster. If you notice that his car is +dropping back from you, that means their car wants to go slower and you +do the same thing in reverse. So I was watching the crowds along the +sides, requesting Chief Curry to move motorcycles up or back, depending +on the crowd, move them up towards the President's car because at +certain times people were almost out to the car, and to use them as +kind of a wedge. Other times they were able to drop back or go forward, +so that I was looking back a good deal of the time, watching his car, +watching the sides, watching the crowds, giving advice or asking +advice from the Chief and also looking ahead to the known hazards like +overpasses, underpasses, railroads, et cetera. + +Representative FORD. But as the lead car turned from Main onto Houston +and proceeded toward Elm, you were more preoccupied with looking at the +President? + +Mr. LAWSON. I don't know whether I was looking sideways or backwards +then, but I do recall noticing the Book Depository Building and that +corner and then deciding that we must be about 5 minutes away, and +asking Chief Curry if this was not so and then making a radio broadcast. + +Representative FORD. So as you drove down Houston Street, you didn't +have an opportunity to look at the Texas School Depository? + +Mr. LAWSON. I may have, but I don't remember if I saw this. I was doing +so many things all at once. + +Representative FORD. What was Sorrels' responsibility at this point? + +Mr. LAWSON. His responsibility would be again to watch the crowds and +the windows a little bit more than I because it was my responsibility +to be watching the Presidential car. + +Mr. STERN. He was sitting in the rear right, was he not? + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes, sir; and I was in the right front. + +Representative FORD. He didn't have the responsibility of looking back +like you did? + +Mr. LAWSON. Not as much as I would have; no, sir. + +Representative FORD. In light of the problem of trying to have +individuals in numerous buildings, inspecting the buildings and so +forth, is it desirable to have more people in another car ahead of the +lead car for the purpose of scanning buildings? + +Mr. LAWSON. Giving a personal opinion now, I would say that that would +be a good factor. However, if someone stayed back from the window until +you went by and then stuck his gun out the window, why it might not be +as good. + +Representative FORD. It wouldn't be any worse. + +Mr. LAWSON. No, sir; but if they did see something that wasn't a likely +occurrence, then they could broadcast over the radio stop the President +or turn right or turn left. + +Representative FORD. But as I understand your responsibilities in the +lead car, it doesn't appear that you had an opportunity to do the +scanning? + +Mr. LAWSON. No, sir. + +Representative FORD. Which was necessary. + +Mr. LAWSON. No, sir; I would not. + +Representative FORD. So you are really left up to one individual in the +lead car in the Secret Service for that purpose? + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes. + +Representative FORD. I raise the question whether that is adequate for +the overall purpose. + +Mr. SMITH. Sir, I don't want to interfere with the procedures but could +I ask a question off the record? + +(Discussion off the record.) + +Mr. McCLOY. I think you might go on the record with this. There has +been some question as to whether we are referring directly only to the +lead car or whether to all the personnel in the cavalcade. I gather, +Mr. Ford, you were referring to the personnel in the lead car as +distinguished from the other Secret Service personnel and other police +in the motorcade as a whole? + +Representative FORD. That is correct. I am cognizant of the fact we +have a followup car. What are the responsibilities of those in the +followup car? + +Mr. McCLOY. By followup car do you mean the President's car because +there will be Secret Service men in the President's car too? + +Representative FORD. There was only one on this occasion, or two, the +driver and Mr. Kellerman. The driver was certainly preoccupied, and +as I remember Mr. Kellerman's testimony, he was so engaged he didn't +have an opportunity to do the kind of scanning that would appear to be +necessary. So whatever scanning there was done by either the lead car +or the Presidential car or the followup car primarily had to be done by +the people in the followup car. Is that a fair analysis? + +Mr. LAWSON. I don't recall if you mentioned the pilot car, but they +would have had an opportunity in the pilot car to do some scanning. + +Representative FORD. But there are no Secret Service people there. + +Mr. LAWSON. No Secret Service people in that one. + +Mr. McCLOY. There would be Secret Service men in the Vice Presidential +car, and of course there is the Secret Service car that follows the +Presidential car, all through the route there are interspersed Secret +Service men. + +Mr. DULLES. It must have been the third or fourth or fifth car in the +motorcade that was right opposite the window at the time the assassin +put the rifle well out of the window and shot. + +Mr. McCLOY. Why do you say that? + +Mr. DULLES. The shooting took place when the President's car was +somewhere here (indicating to photograph of scene). It had made the +turn, you see. Here is the building. Now there is the window up here +roughly. He didn't shoot here. They went around the turn and were down +here. There was a barricade there. There was something there that +obstructed the view you will remember. + +Mr. McCLOY. That is the sign here like this. + +Mr. DULLES. It would be down that far. + +Mr. McCLOY. It might have been there. + +Mr. DULLES. As close as that? Whatever it was, the car that was right +opposite the window and going in this direction at that time must have +been the fourth or fifth car--the car which had the best view of the +assassination. You wouldn't be looking I shouldn't think, if you were +in a car here, you wouldn't be looking back there. You would be looking +off here and off here for protection. + +I should think that car in this strange situation, where he was +shooting right down the street--isn't that correct? I don't know if you +have ever followed that up. I don't know what car it is. It is some +car along here, though, that would have been right opposite the window +at the time the shooting took place, not one of the lead cars or the +President's car. + +Mr. STERN. By these cars you mean, sir---- + +Mr. DULLES. In the motorcade. Some of these down here. It might have +been even the wire services or the press cars. I don't know how many +cars but I think from our photographs we ought to be able to identify +that. + +Representative FORD. A man named Jackson who was a photographer in one +of the cars with photographers is an individual who identified the fact +that somebody was in that window with a rifle as I recall. + +Mr. DULLES. He was in one of the press cars was he? + +Representative FORD. Yes. + +Mr. DULLES. The wire service car is the seventh car including the lead +police vehicle. Well, the lead car, if you count the lead car, six, the +sixth car. + +Representative FORD. He testified as I recall that the car in which he +was--was halfway down the block between Main and Elm at the time that +he looked up and saw the building and saw people in windows. + +Mr. DULLES. This is Houston and this is Elm. Houston and Elm isn't it, +not Main. Main and Elm, or yes. + +Representative FORD. However, the time span between the time that the +lead car, the President's car and the followup car came down Houston +and turned down Elm is a relatively short period of time. + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes, sir. + +Mr. McCLOY. By the way, at what speed were you going as you came around +the turn and into Elm Street? You said 7 to 10 downtown. Would it be +about the same speed there? + +Mr. LAWSON. I imagine it was a little faster at this time, sir, because +the downtown section where it was quite heavily populated with people +watching the motorcade, we had been out of that for a while before we +got to the Houston Street turn. So we were probably back up to perhaps +12 or 15 miles an hour by then. + +Mr. McCLOY. But you would have had to slow up a bit coming around the +curve. + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes, sir. + +Mr. STERN. Mr. Lawson, can you tell us why you didn't plan the +motorcade so that it went straight down Main Street to turn right on to +the entrance to the freeway instead of taking this dogleg on Houston +and Elm? + +Mr. DULLES. Jerry, will you take over. + +Representative FORD. Will you proceed please, Mr. Stern? + +Mr. STERN. Yes. + +Mr. LAWSON. You mean why we didn't come straight down Main Street to +the Stemmons Freeway? + +Mr. STERN. Right. + +Mr. LAWSON. Because it is my understanding there isn't any entrance to +the freeway on Main Street. + +Mr. STERN. But you don't yourself recall now or do you? + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes, I was told that there wasn't any entrance that way, +and I myself once when I went to the Trade Mart, not knowing that there +was any entrance to it, went down Main Street. You must enter the +freeway going in the direction that we wanted to go from the Elm Street +extension. + +Mr. STERN. When you went down Main Street you found that you could not +get on to the entrance to the Stemmons Freeway? + +Mr. LAWSON. Going the direction on the freeway towards the Trade Mart, +that is correct. + +Mr. STERN. Which is the direction the motorcade was to go? + +Mr. LAWSON. Was to go; yes, sir. + +Mr. STERN. Have you ever had occasion to provide for building checks +along a motorcade route when you were doing an advance, or is it just +never done? This is as of the time of Dallas. + +Mr. LAWSON. I have never had an advance where I had buildings checked +on our route. + +Mr. STERN. It is not a question---- + +Mr. LAWSON. On a moving route. + +Mr. STERN. It is not a question of your instructions? You could if you +wanted to, I take it? It is just a matter of your discretion and your +training, is that correct? + +Mr. LAWSON. I don't believe it is discretion. It is just that to my +knowledge only inaugurations or when a foreign president or king +comes to Washington, like that where it is a motorcade route known +practically for years in advance of how you are going to go do we +check, start out with enough men, enough time ahead of time to check +the whole route up to that time. + +Mr. DULLES. Is there any practice of going to the superintendent +of a building and putting any responsibility on him to see that +strangers don't come into the building at that time, or assuming any +responsibility at all with respect to the inmates of the building? I +don't know what the practices are. + +Mr. LAWSON. As I stated, sir, there was for inaugurations here in +Washington--we have done building surveys of buildings that overlook +the White House, that overlook the grounds, that overlook areas where +the President goes quite often or where he might be out or something +like that. Yes, sir; we keep those quite up to date. Out on a trip away +from Washington, I have never requested building superintendents to do +this. This was not the usual practice. + +Mr. SMITH. May I ask a question there, sir. Is any of that information +that you just gave the type of thing that is not supposed to be known +publicly? I just don't know how necessary this is to the record, I mean +about checking the buildings around the White House and so on. Is there +anything about that that is sensitive? + +Mr. LAWSON. I would assume that most of the people thought that we did. + +Representative FORD. I think that is the general impression. + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes, sir. + +Mr. SMITH. I can check on that. If there is something in there I might +want to come back on. + +Representative FORD. I think as far as we are concerned if you do check +on it and find that it is something that ought to be left off the +record we could certainly do so. + +Mr. DULLES. It might be declassified as a whole or lower the +classification, so I think it is well to put in the record what you +have said, that this part of the record should be reviewed by the +Secret Service, and if it is a security matter I think they ought to +raise it. I don't think we want to ever disclose anything that the +responsible agency thinks would imperil the life of any President. + +Mr. SMITH. I have in mind what he said and I will check on it right +away. Unless I come back and make some point about it, why you can rest +assured that there will be no problem. + +Representative FORD. Will you call the attention of the Commission to +what you find out, whether it should or should not be in the record? + +Mr. SMITH. Yes, I will. May I tell Mr. Stern? + +Representative FORD. Surely. + +Mr. STERN. Were you aware of a suggestion that a vehicle with +representatives of the Dallas homicide squad be in the motorcade, I +believes behind the Vice President's car, a decision that was changed +just before November 22? + +Can you tell us anything about that? + +Mr. LAWSON. I believe I recall some mention of them asking--I don't +remember if they asked if there should be a car or not but I believe +there was some mention that there be a car, that they could have a car +in the back there. This was not usual procedure. In New York it is, and +on foreign trips it is. + +Mr. DULLES. I understood that car was to be between the lead car I +think and the President's car, was it not, or is it between--no, +between the lead car and the President's car. + +Mr. STERN. I haven't yet seen the transcript of yesterday's session, +sir, and I am not quite sure. + +Representative FORD. My recollection is that it was to follow the +President's car, either behind the followup car or behind the Vice +President's car. + +Mr. DULLES. We can check that. It is somewhere in there. I have a +feeling it was ahead of the President's car but I may be wrong. + +Mr. STERN. I understand we have been advised that at one point there +was such an arrangement and that this was changed, and that Captain +Fritz, the head of the Homicide Division, who was to ride in that car, +went instead at someone's request to the Trade Mart where he was to +participate in security at the speaker's table. Do you know anything +about that? + +Mr. LAWSON. I remember it being mentioned. Whether it was a request or +whether they had already laid it on I do not know, but I do remember it +being mentioned that they could have a car if it was so desired. + +Mr. STERN. If they desired? + +Mr. LAWSON. I don't recall if it was that they would put it in if we +wanted it or if they said that they definitely would put it in or what. + +But it was mentioned, and I hadn't thought of this since. That is why +I am a little hazy on it. But I don't know even who cancelled it, +whether they did or whether we had just said well it is not the normal +procedure so that they did. But as far as Captain Fritz going to the +Trade Mart, I don't know anything about that. + +Mr. STERN. But you did say, I take it, it is normal procedure in New +York? + +Mr. LAWSON. In New York, New York has a special squad of people. One +of their main functions is protection of foreign dignitaries when +they come to visit the U.N. or for any other reason. These people are +used---- + +Mr. DULLES. Do we give more protection to foreign dignitaries than we +do to our own Chief of State? + +Mr. LAWSON. Is that a question for me? + +Mr. DULLES. That is a question. + +Mr. LAWSON. No, sir; I don't believe we do. I don't believe the +security, the advance security arrangements, are quite as stringent. + +Mr. STERN. This New York procedure is something you have worked out +with the New York authorities? + +Mr. LAWSON. I am not aware of the policy arrangements that were made. +I do know that there is a detective car used in New York quite often +filled with this special detail of men. + +Mr. STERN. Do they have a special responsibility in the motorcade? + +Mr. LAWSON. They act as Secret Service agents act in the motorcade. +They help out if there is a stop and we need extra men and so forth. +But I am not aware of why they are there. It wasn't my decision that +they be there. + +Mr. DULLES. Could I ask one question right there. Whose duty is it, +whose responsibility is it to decide how many of these cars will be in +the motorcade, how many protective cars let me say? I am not speaking +of cars for dignitaries or press and so forth, but how many protective +cars are in a motorcade? Does the Secret Service decide that or do +the local police decide it to some extent or do you decide it in +consultation? + +Mr. LAWSON. We have our usual motorcade, and usually it is in +consultation. They take our recommendations quite frankly. + +Mr. DULLES. Have you been giving any consideration to reviewing that +procedure to see whether the existing procedure is the best from the +protective angle? + +Have you any suggestions to give us on that? + +Mr. LAWSON. I believe that the chief's office is, but I am not in a +position to say what they are going to do. + +Mr. DULLES. I think it would be interesting if that was being done. +Maybe it should be done, just to have a good look at it. If you could +advise us as to whether that is under consideration, it might be +helpful. + +Representative FORD. I think it was my understanding that the Treasury +Department is making a review of this whole setup, are they not? + +Mr. SMITH. Yes, I understand so. I understand that we have discussed +with the Chief Justice an arrangement, sort of a question and answer +thing to begin with on this because of the sensitive nature of this +information, to see if adequate information for your purposes can be +developed that way, and then at that point or at some point in the +future it will be decided how this question of the review and new +procedures will be handled. That is my understanding of it. + +(Discussion off the record.) + +Mr. SMITH. I am Fred B. Smith, Deputy General Counsel of the Treasury +Department. + +Representative FORD. Will you stand and be sworn. + +Do you solemnly swear the testimony you are about to give is the truth, +the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? + +Mr. SMITH. I do. + +Mr. DULLES. I wonder if the witness would just repeat. + +(Discussion off the record.) + +Mr. STERN. On the record. + +Representative FORD. Would you repeat what you indicated a moment ago, +Mr. Smith? + +Mr. SMITH. Yes, sir; I have been informed that an arrangement was +worked out with the Chief Justice with respect to the question of +improving procedures for the protection of the President that certain +information would be provided in the form of questions and answers, +and that after that procedure had been fulfilled, consideration would +be given as to such questions as the necessity of further testimony on +such questions and appropriate security arrangements with respect to +such information. + +This is on hearsay. I haven't been involved in that myself. I would +like to ask Mr. Stern if that is in accordance with his understanding. + +Mr. STERN. It is my understanding. + +Mr. DULLES. If it is appropriate I suggest that maybe this question of +the number of protective cars in a motorcade of this nature might be +one of the questions you would be willing to consider, or whoever is +considering this matter would be willing to include among the subjects +of consideration. + +Representative FORD. Will you proceed, Mr. Stern. + +Mr. STERN. I would like to finish on this special New York practice +with you, Mr. Lawson. If an incident were to occur during a motorcade +in New York, is it your understanding that the responsibility of these +New York officials, detectives, would be to investigate the incident or +to stay with the motorcade as the Secret Service would? + +Mr. LAWSON. I am afraid I couldn't answer that. I don't know. + +Mr. STERN. Is there something special about the New York circumstances +that makes it desirable to have these additional detectives that you +don't ordinarily have? + +Mr. LAWSON. Again I don't know. I conceive myself personally--where we +go through quite often--I believe there are more people in the State of +New York than there are in Billings, Mont., and you might have more of +a chance of something occurring in New York. But again I don't know +why it is in New York and not usual in other places. + +Mr. STERN. Was the organization of the motorcade in Dallas typical, +apart from New York? + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes. Quite typical. + +Mr. STERN. Would it be the same in Billings, Mont., or would you have +additional strength in the motorcade in Dallas? + +Mr. LAWSON. As far as escorting people, there were more people in +Dallas. + +Mr. STERN. More celebrities? + +Mr. LAWSON. No; by escorting people I meant motorcycles or something +like that. Again it depends on where you are, even if they have +motorcycles or how many they have. But the makeup of the motorcade +vehicles itself, again depending on who is coming and how many cars +you have is pretty generally the same. A pilot car, a lead car, the +President's car, motorcycles if you have them, some motorcycles if you +have them along the side of the motorcade to help keep it intact or if +it gets split up as it has on occasion to be able to catch them up and +rear vehicles to keep them from passing the motorcade, et cetera. + +Mr. STERN. And the one Presidential followup car. + +Mr. LAWSON. And the Secret Service followup car; yes, sir. This was my +first movement with the President and the Vice President all at the +same time. That was quite out of the ordinary. + +Mr. STERN. And there you added a Vice-Presidential followup car? + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes, sir. + +Mr. STERN. Performing the same function as the Presidential followup? + +Mr. LAWSON. That is correct. + +Mr. STERN. But apart from the motorcycles, I take it if you had been in +Billings, Mont., the organization of the motorcade would have been the +same; is that correct? + +Mr. LAWSON. Just about the same; yes, sir. + +Mr. STERN. I would like to touch briefly on the selection of the Trade +Mart and the security measures there, having in mind that your three +memorandums cover this in great detail. If you could just highlight +and indicate if in any respect your memorandums are inaccurate or +incomplete. The record will rely primarily on your memorandums. + +Mr. LAWSON. I don't know of any incorrectness in it. There might be. + +Mr. STERN. Or any detail that you would want to add? + +Mr. LAWSON. No; I can't. If you have some specific questions. + +Mr. STERN. Why don't you just summarize then how the Trade Mart was +selected, your participation in it, the consideration of alternatives, +the decision ultimately to use the Trade Mart, whether you had any +particular preference between the Trade Mart and the other building +that was considered. Take that part of it first. + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes, sir. The morning after we arrived in Dallas, late in +the morning, we, Mr. Sorrels and Mr. Puterbaugh and myself and another +agent from Dallas, Agent Stewart, went to Mr. Cullum's office who is +the president of the Dallas Chamber of Commerce, a local businessman +who was acting as subcommittee chairman I guess for the local host +committee. + +Mr. STERN. I don't think we need this much detail because we have your +memorandum. If you could just tell us in general terms where you went +and the considerations. + +Mr. LAWSON. Some of us went to Mr. Cullum's office and after talking +with him there for a while we went to the Trade Mart, met with +representatives of the Trade Mart, the general manager of the Trade +Mart, and were shown generally around the building, told how they +usually handled luncheons or dinners or dances that are held there. + +Mr. STERN. Were there particular security problems that the Trade Mart +presented? + +Mr. LAWSON. There were balconies there and also it was a building that +would be used by other people that day. However, this is somewhat good +because it wasn't exactly a public building where anyone could wander +in. The lessees of the showrooms there or their customers have to be +checked in. You either have to be a lessee or a bona fide customer of +a showroom in order to even get in the building. They have kind of a +semisecurity of their own that way. So it was good in that respect. +There were hanging bridges and balconies, as I have said, side +corridors and what not. After we left there, we went to the Women's +Building at the fairgrounds, to look that over, and in this particular +case the food would have had to have been brought in because there +isn't any kitchen there, which was a plus at the Trade Mart. They had +a regular cafeteria there and a catering service, which the Women's +Building didn't have. The Women's Building is on one floor, quite low +ceilinged, and the press coverage that is usually quite in evidence +when the President is anywhere, both from the traveling press with him +and the local press would have required their usual press coverage, and +it would not have been as good in the Women's Building, because of the +low ceilings. + +They usually like to be up at least as high as the President or higher, +1, 2, or 3 feet. So we could put them in a balcony at the Trade Mart +but we could not do so, at least get them any higher because of the +low roof at the Women's Building. There were numerous columns in the +Women's Building that would have blocked everybody's view of the people +at the head dinner table, guests, and the guests there. So there were +pluses and minuses for both buildings, and I so informed people in +Washington and Mr. Puterbaugh informed people in Washington also. + +Representative FORD. Who made the decision as to the Trade Mart or the +Women's Building at the fairgrounds? + +Mr. LAWSON. That was made in Washington, sir. + +Representative FORD. By whom, do you know? + +Mr. LAWSON. I am assuming by the White House. I know that Mr. +Puterbaugh was in contact with the National Democratic Headquarters +people, and they were in contact with the White House and with the +various groups down in Texas, the Governor's office as well. When the +decision was finally made, we were told that it had been made but not +to tell anyone yet because the announcement would come probably from +the Governor's office. + +Representative FORD. Do you make a report in writing in this kind of +a situation, the relative advantages and disadvantages of the two +buildings? + +Mr. LAWSON. No, sir. + +Representative FORD. From a security point of view? + +Mr. LAWSON. No, sir. + +Representative FORD. How do the people in Washington make the decisions +then? + +Mr. LAWSON. Mr. Puterbaugh told the people he was in contact with and I +told Mr. Behn's office what I saw. + +Mr. STERN. Who is Mr. Behn? + +Mr. LAWSON. Mr. Behn is the agent in charge of the White House detail. +What I saw in both buildings. As I say the decision was made back here +in Washington. + +Representative FORD. You summarized your views on this kind of a +situation to Mr. Behn? + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes, sir. + +Representative FORD. Who is your superior. By telephone, not in writing? + +Mr. LAWSON. No, sir. + +Representative FORD. Is this the case in all instances? + +Mr. LAWSON. Well, it usually doesn't happen. Usually I know when you +are going some place if the function is to be at the Statler Hotel or +something like that. + +Representative FORD. Do you know whether or not Mr. Behn made any +recommendations on this? + +Mr. LAWSON. I have no idea. + +Representative FORD. You gave him your observations and your +recommendations? + +Mr. LAWSON. I don't know if I gave it to him. I gave his office. Now +there were at that time two assistants. + +Representative FORD. Did you make a recommendation one over the other? + +Mr. LAWSON. No; I did not. I said that I was sure we could effectively +handle both situations. Again the motorcade was to be taken into +consideration also. If you went to the Trade Mart you would have +certain ways to go and if you went to the Women's Building you would +have certain ways to go. And so they had to decide, someone had +to decide whether they wanted the Trade Mart or certain motorcade +specifications also, in the 45 minute time lapse. + +Mr. STERN. On the basis of your experience, if you had had a strong +preference from a security point of view for one building over the +other do you think that would have been followed in this case? + +Mr. LAWSON. I could have only told them what I thought, and how much +weight it would have had I don't know. + +Mr. STERN. Can you tell us roughly the total number of police, +sheriff's office officials, and Secret Service agents that were engaged +in protecting the President in Dallas and break them down if you can as +between people at the Trade Mart, people on the motorcade route, people +at Love Field? + +Mr. LAWSON. I can give you what I was told was going to--that the +police were going to provide but I won't be able to tell you exactly +what they did provide, and also inform you that I was told that certain +police were going to be shifted from one spot to another. I understood +that as we went by a certain part of the motorcade some of those police +then would be shifted perhaps over to the motorcade route on the way +back in the intervening 1-1/2 or 2 hours that would still elapse. And I +have that in my report if I can turn to it. + +Mr. STERN. Yes; why don't you tell us in total numbers at each location. + +Mr. LAWSON. But again I cannot tell you if these police figures, being +the ones that they gave me, show that these are the same amount of men +that were shifted or if these are separate men, because they were going +to use part on the motorcade and shift them to another spot. + +Now, whether that would double it or what I do not know. At the Trade +Mart 108, and I believe this includes out in the parking lots and on +there. That doesn't mean they were inside the Trade Mart. Along the +Route 90. And escorts 20. Love Field 55, cruising 100. + +Mr. STERN. Cruising? + +Mr. LAWSON. Chief Curry said that naturally they have the rest of the +city to protect and we can't go in and take every policeman that they +have so that someone knows that all the police are going to be involved +and it would be easier to commit certain crimes. But in addition to his +regular police coverage of police cars throughout the city, there were +also going to be some other police cars fairly close to our motorcade +area, so that they could be called in if they had to be. + +Mr. STERN. I see. + +Mr. LAWSON. Detectives, 40; department of public safety uniformed, 40; +rangers, 5; plainclothes, 16; Dallas County Sheriff Department, 14; +fire department, 26; the White House detail agents, 20; agents from the +Vice President's detail, 4; agents from the Dallas office, 4. + +Mr. STERN. So there were 28 Secret Service agents involved? + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes, sir. + +Mr. STERN. At the various locations. Do you know whether the Dallas +police who were used were full-time policemen or were auxiliary +policemen? + +Mr. LAWSON. I do not know. + +Mr. DULLES. Do you happen to know the circumstances under which there +were some certain changes made as to the location of the motorcycle +escort that went close to the President's car? + +Mr. LAWSON. I know that their position varied, depending on the crowds. + +Mr. DULLES. No, I mean apart from that, apart from the crowd situation +do you recall that any orders were given by or on behalf of the +President with regard to the location of those motorcycles that were +particularly attached to his car? + +Mr. LAWSON. Not specifically at this instance orders from him. Just +what I know to be the case from other advances, that unless it is +necessary, it was my understanding that he did not like a lot of +motorcycles surrounding the car. That is why we had four just back +of the President's car, so that they could come up and intercept +anyone running out from the sides easily, or we could call the other +motorcycles back to him if we had to. + +But if there are a lot of motorcycles around the President's car, I +know for a fact that he can't hear the people that are with him in +the car talking back and forth, and there were other considerations I +believe why he did not want them completely surrounding his car. + +Mr. STERN. Can you summarize for us briefly the security arrangements +at Love Field? + +Mr. DULLES. Could I ask one question about the car before we get to +Love Field. There has been testimony here that the back seat, the +seat in which the President and Mrs. Kennedy had sat, could be raised +or lowered I believe by the President himself, could be raised so he +could get a better view of the surrounding people, and then it could be +lowered and put in a normal position. Do you know anything about that +or how that mechanism worked and who worked it? + +Mr. LAWSON. No, sir; I am not familiar with his car except for the fact +that I know that you can raise or lower the seat. Now whether that +is done by him or in the front seat, we do have people that would be +competent to tell you that, however. + +Mr. DULLES. You don't know whether that seat was raised at this +particular time? + +Mr. LAWSON. No, sir. + +Mr. DULLES. As the car went---- + +Mr. LAWSON. I don't believe it would have been starting out. + +Mr. DULLES. I was talking about it at the time of the shooting. + +Mr. LAWSON. No, sir; I have no idea. + +Mr. STERN. Could you now just very briefly and generally summarize the +security arrangements at Love Field and your participation in them. +Were they under your control and supervision? + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes, sir; they were under my control and supervision. +We held our police meeting at the airport last because of problems +involved in finding an area big enough for his motorcade to start +and the planes to park and so forth. This was not actually resolved +until the day before he arrived, and that is why the police meeting +was held at that point quite late. But arrangements were made to have +the general public contained behind a chain link fence which is there +anyway, and any overflow general public to be in a parking lot a little +ways further away from the President, if there was not enough room +behind this chain link fence. Police were along both of these fences to +keep the people in their place. + +There were two service roads which came in between these two general +public areas. We closed off one and used the other because it was the +only service road that most of the wings from the Dallas Air Terminal +were able to use, catering trucks going together, airplanes, mechanics +and people being ferried, crews being ferried and so forth so we +couldn't cut it off directly. + +However, these roads were to be shut off when his plane touched down, +and kept shut off until after his motorcade departed inward, and then +they were to be used again while we were gone and then just before we +returned to the airport they were to be shut off again. + +Mr. STERN. What about police on buildings? + +Mr. LAWSON. Police were requested on the wing of the air terminal that +came out closest to where he would stop, and police were requested to +be on the air cargo building to the rear of this crowd area, which is +a little higher than the small building, the customs building. Any +policeman on the air cargo building would be able to control anybody on +the roof at the customs building. + +Mr. STERN. Were these police stationed to watch the crowd, to watch +persons who might be on the roofs of these buildings, to watch persons +who might be in these buildings? What was their function? + +Mr. LAWSON. The police on the building tops were to make sure that no +unauthorized people were on the building tops, and to watch generally +anything else that they could watch, that they were keeping their +building top clear. And there were police along the fences to watch the +crowd and to keep the people from coming onto the field who were not +supposed to. There were detectives to be assigned throughout the crowd, +to mingle with the crowd so that the people in the crowd would not know +they were detectives. + +Mr. STERN. Was there any particular check of offices inside the +buildings which might present a vantage point overlooking the place +where the President was to land and be received? + +Mr. LAWSON. No, sir. + +Mr. STERN. Were there such overlooking places? + +Mr. LAWSON. There wouldn't have been except in a certain wing way up to +the right of where he landed, quite a ways away. + +There wasn't any building directly in front on the side where he would +come off the plane and walk down. There would be a building to his +right at the very end of a wing that came out, and there was police +on that. The crowd behind the fences would go over to the customs +building, and no one would be able to see out of this one-story customs +building. And behind that was the air cargo building where a policeman +was requested on top. The police were then also requested all the way +along our exit route along the parking lots and the runways as we went +out of the airport and the motorcycle escort vehicles were waiting down +closer to where we made our exit, again because of the room factor. + +Mr. STERN. Did you confer with Air Force representatives who had +responsibility for the President's plane and the Vice President's plane? + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes, sir. I learned that they had been in for a general +meeting of their own the morning of the 13th that I had not been aware +of, but because of the Presidential trips the week before he came to +Dallas, he went to Maryland and he went to New York and he went to a +couple places in Florida, they were not able to send someone out to +help with setting up the airport as soon as was usual. + +And because of a personal problem, the one that was to arrive on +Wednesday morning, didn't arrive until Wednesday evening. I was quite +certain that the area that we were being provided by the local airport +was not going to be sufficient for our motorcade formation, the parking +of three jet planes and so forth. But being a layman, I couldn't really +impress them that this was so. But when the Air Force people did come +in, they agreed that as set up it would not work, and Mr. Sorrels and +the assistant airport director were able to get some extra space from +a couple of companies nearby there, and it was able to be worked out, +still really not enough room but it was adequate. + +Mr. STERN. Ultimate responsibility for determining those +arrangements--whether those arrangements are adequate is with the Air +Force, is that right? + +Mr. LAWSON. I don't really believe I understand your question. Would +you make it again please? + +Mr. STERN. You were concerned that the arrangements were not adequate. + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes. + +Mr. STERN. But you had to have the Air Force recommendation to +straighten things out with the local authorities? + +Mr. LAWSON. Well, I know the size of the planes because I have the +dimensions of them that I take with me on a trip, and other things, and +also from past experience. However, they make measurements and they +know their own FAA rules, Air Force rules as to how close you can park +jet planes to one another, what the turning radiuses are and so forth, +so I was certain that the room that we had been provided wasn't enough, +but I was also quite certain that when the Air Force got there, they +would bear me out, which was true. + +Mr. STERN. If the Air Force is satisfied with the arrangements though, +is that the end of it? + +Mr. LAWSON. Only for certain things. They would say if they definitely +had enough room to park, how they would be parked, how they would +come in, how they would go out and so forth. But again final security +responsibility would be up to us. If it is an area where you can't +possibly fit the press area in, the motorcade can't line up, the people +can't come out without creating a lot of confusion so that you can't +tell what is going on, then it delves into security, because the more +confusion you have the worse off you are security-wise. + +Mr. STERN. I think we might touch briefly on press arrangements. +Will you tell us, if you know, how the final arrangements for the +President's visit were announced, and particularly the motorcade route. + +Mr. LAWSON. I know from reading in the paper how it was announced but +I do not know who announced it. I believe it appeared in the Tuesday +morning paper. That would have been the 19th I believe. There was quite +a bit of speculation before that perhaps the motorcade would go here +and perhaps the motorcade would go there, but I believe that the one +that was finally used was put in the paper on Tuesday morning, the 19th +from my recollection. Let me make sure that Tuesday is the 19th. + +Mr. STERN. It is the 19th. Had there been a meeting on the 18th at +which this was considered? + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes, sir; there was a meeting late in the afternoon of +the 18th, in a private club in Dallas that I arrived at late. The +meeting was called primarily as I understand it because of the various +political groups that wanted certain things, and what Washington +wanted, and there were various problems to work out as to who got +tickets, who sat at the head table, who rode in what cars and so forth. +And the local host committee had designated a certain individual to be +their representative there, and then these other groups also had people +represented. Mr. Puterbaugh, for example, the liaison man that went +with me from Washington, was there. And I had just come from going over +the route with the police earlier that afternoon, and I told them as a +point of information that this was the route as we had it now, unless +it was changed later. + +Representative FORD. The following morning---- + +Mr. LAWSON. The following morning. + +Representative FORD. It was announced in the newspapers? + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes, sir. + +Mr. DULLES. It was Tuesday morning, isn't it the 19th. + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes, sir; Tuesday morning. + +Mr. STERN. Is this a normal amount of advance publicity for this kind +of motorcade, regarding the actual route? + +Mr. LAWSON. Well, it depends on how much notice you have that the +President is going there. It was announced this morning that he is +taking a trip tomorrow on Appalachian poverty, so we sent agents out +this morning. Naturally even if they wanted to publicize the motorcade +route they wouldn't be able to do so in this instance. But on other +occasions it had been announced sooner than that or about as soon in +various areas; yes, sir. + +Mr. STERN. Did you set up the areas at which the press would be located +at Love Field and at the Trade Mart? + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes, sir; I did, with the approval of Mr. Hawkes from the +White House staff, when he made a trip a little bit later. Time was of +the essence. Sometimes we do it all when they do not send out someone +to represent the press office from the White House, and sometimes they +do it. In this case, because telephone lines, power lines, various +engineering data would have to be disseminated and fixed up, we had to +know where the press areas were going to be before Mr. Hawkes was able +to come. + +So I told them that I would set it up in the belief that I knew what +they usually wanted from the White House press office, but that he +would have the power to overrule me, and I requested assistance of a +local TV technician as to the angles and what not that the cameramen +would like. + +Mr. DULLES. May I ask one question there. Do you know whether any +consideration is now being given to withhold the announcement of the +actual route to be followed by the Presidential party until say the +morning that the trip is actually taken? + +Mr. LAWSON. Does this go into the realm of what we were talking about +before as to what we are going to do in the future? + +Mr. SMITH. It might. Do you suppose, sir, that that is one of the +things that---- + +Mr. DULLES. One has to do it in time so that those who want it could +get it, but it seems to me that say if the party was going to move here +about noon, now if the morning papers gave that that would give people +plenty of time to get to the positions they wanted, but wouldn't give a +prospective assassin very much time to prepare. + +Mr. SMITH. Sir, I don't know what the answer to that question is, but +the question arises as to whether this isn't in that area where, you +know, we are sort of deferring because of the sensitive nature of it. I +don't really know what the answer is, and I don't know whether it is +sensitive or not. Apparently Mr. Lawson thinks that it might be. + +Mr. LAWSON. No, just from your previous things, I can give you an +off-the-record answer and you can tell me if it is. + +Representative FORD. Why don't we make the same arrangement on this as +we had on the previous. Why don't you state for the record what you +know and then we will have the same arrangement in this case as we had +in the other. + +Mr. SMITH. Sir, I don't want to quibble but that was sort of an +after the fact arrangement in the sense that that it came out in the +testimony there after the fact. I was a little bit concerned about it. + +I am not sure we would want to make this arrangement on questions and +then reserving on the handling of them, because that isn't completely +in accord with what I understand to be the present arrangement with the +Chief Justice. + +Representative FORD. I suggest we do it this way then. Mr. Lawson now +shouldn't answer but I suggest that Mr. Stern in the questions that are +being prepared, for which answers will be given, that this question be +included. + +Mr. DULLES. That is entirely satisfactory to me. + +Mr. SMITH. I am sure you are aware we have no desire to withhold any +information whatsoever. It is just a question of procedure here. + +Representative FORD. This question is among those that are to be asked +in this interrogatory. Then the issue can be raised at that time. + +(Discussion off the record.) + +Mr. STERN. Mr. Chairman, if you have questions to ask, or Mr. Dulles, +about the advance preparation up to the time of November 22, I think +this would be an appropriate time to cover it. + +Representative FORD. Do you have any, Mr. Dulles? + +Mr. DULLES. I don't think of any at the moment; no. It has been very +well covered. + +Representative FORD. Mr. Lawson. I would like to clear up in my own +mind some details. You were notified November 4 that you had this +assignment for the Dallas trip. + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes, sir. + +Representative FORD. Who actually notified you? + +Mr. LAWSON. Mr. Boring called me. He is assistant agent in charge of +the White House detail, one of two. + +Representative FORD. That was November 4? + +Mr. LAWSON. November 4; yes, sir. + +Representative FORD. Do you recall the time of day? + +Mr. LAWSON. I believe it was late in the afternoon. + +Representative FORD. What did you do next after being notified? + +Mr. LAWSON. He told me that there wouldn't be any information available +of any consequence until about the 8th. So I still had my regular +duties and I was working. + +Representative FORD. What was the first thing you did officially in +reference to the Dallas trip? + +Mr. LAWSON. I went to Mr. Behn's office and called to Mr. Kellerman on +the 8th of November, and got the information that they had up to that +time, the proposed itinerary for the Texas trip, the time my airplane +left, the name of some contacts and so forth, and then after that, +went to the Protective Research Section, picked up this paraphernalia, +called the Dallas office that I was coming, and so forth. + +Mr. DULLES. Were you advised that this information should be kept +secret or is that just understood, when you were first given the +information about your assignments? That was kept entirely secret? + +Mr. LAWSON. Well, I wasn't advised that it should be kept secret. + +Mr. DULLES. But you never would give out this information. + +Mr. LAWSON. No, sir. + +Mr. DULLES. Until it is actually published. + +Mr. LAWSON. That is right. I believe it was published before that +though, however, anyway. + +Mr. DULLES. It was published that the President was going to Texas +before you went? + +Mr. LAWSON. That is my recollection, but it is in the newspapers. + +Mr. DULLES. Do you remember the date of that? Don't delay on this +account. Go right ahead. + +Representative FORD. Approximately how many such trips had you handled +prior to this one? + +Mr. LAWSON. I had assisted on some with a more experienced agent, and I +had had a few of my own responsibility with people assisting me. I had +assisted in Berlin. + +Representative FORD. Will you speak a little louder please? + +Mr. LAWSON. I had assisted in West Berlin in June. I had assisted +in Cincinnati on one of the congressional campaign trips in October +before they discontinued because of Cuba. I assisted in Albuquerque, +N. Mex., on one of his AEC trips. My responsibility, where I had the +responsibility myself, had been Cherry Point, N.C.; Billings, Mont.; +Little Rock, Ark. + +The Billings one was in September of 1963, and the Little Rock stop +was in October, the month before the assassination. Those were my two +responsibilities. I assisted in San Diego. That was my first assist. +Then I have had other assists and responsibilities here in Washington, +fund-raising dinners or speeches, lunches. + +Representative FORD. I gather then you had the principal responsibility +in five? + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes, sir. + +Representative FORD. Or thereabouts? + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes, sir. + +Representative FORD. In each of those cases was the procedure the same +as far as PRS is concerned? + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes, sir. + +Representative FORD. You would go to the PRS and get a list of the +names of individuals and this other equipment? + +Mr. LAWSON. That is correct. + +Representative FORD. Now in the five or thereabout times that you did +this in the past, what was your experience with PRS? + +Mr. LAWSON. I was told in Buffalo, N.Y., of a couple individuals, a +couple of nuisance-type individuals more than actual threats. Also +told that there were a couple of individuals that came up after I had +left Washington on the Little Rock advance. Subsequent to the time +that I left, they notified the field office that things were under +investigation. + +Representative FORD. But only in the one instance, Buffalo, were you +actually given the names of a threat, prior to your departure? + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes; I believe that is so. The other ones were subsequent +to that time. + +Representative FORD. And in the case of Little Rock you subsequently +received---- + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes. + +Representative FORD. A name or names? + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes, sir; and also in Buffalo there were some phone calls +to the office that there was a threat involved. + +Representative FORD. In the case of Buffalo you had a name or two +before you went? + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes, sir. + +Representative FORD. But in the other cases where you had the +responsibility? + +Mr. LAWSON. Nothing. + +Representative FORD. The PRS gave you nothing? + +Mr. LAWSON. That is right. + +Representative FORD. Do you know from your own knowledge, conversation +with others who have similar responsibilities, whether PRS normally had +names to give to the agent in charge? + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes; there have been occasions when that has happened, and +they are constantly sending over things in Washington, for example. If +we are just going out to the Sheraton for a dinner, you always call +up and say is there anything particular right now that we should know +about, a recent escapee or anything like that that we might not know +of yet. They put out lookout notices, send us a notification of people +who have lost their White House passes, etc. + +Representative FORD. Now, when you actually went to Dallas, who in the +Secret Service was under your jurisdiction, or what individual did you +work with down there in the Secret Service? + +Mr. LAWSON. I worked with Mr. Sorrels. He wouldn't really be under +my jurisdiction because he was the local agent in charge, and he had +various agents, also. On the day of the event his agents would be under +my jurisdiction, and also his, because he is normally their boss. + +Representative FORD. Howlett; what is his responsibility? + +Mr. LAWSON. He is an agent of the Dallas office. + +Representative FORD. Responsible to Mr. Sorrels? + +Mr. LAWSON. To Mr. Sorrels; yes, sir. + +Representative FORD. You got to Dallas when? + +Mr. LAWSON. The evening; Tuesday evening, the 12th. + +Representative FORD. When did you make the decision to investigate this +group of extremists down there? + +Mr. LAWSON. I heard that there were films available, I believe, on +Wednesday, or Thursday. I believe it was Wednesday. + +Representative FORD. That would be November 13? + +Mr. LAWSON. The 13th; yes, sir. And I kept it in mind so that I could +talk to the local office about that. I asked individuals in the local +office, Mr. Sorrels and also Special Agent Howlett, if they had any +knowledge, if they had done any informant-type work, if they had any +knowledge of anything that was going to go on that we might not know in +PRS, because PRS would only know of definite trips by the President. +But they might know of something else that might occur. And also at +another time I talked to Special Agent Howlett and asked him if he +would view the films of this. + +Representative FORD. You arrived there on the 12th, Tuesday? + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes, sir. + +Representative FORD. You met with Sorrels when? + +Mr. LAWSON. On Wednesday morning. + +Representative FORD. Wednesday morning? + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes, sir. + +Representative FORD. Did you bring up, or did he bring up, the problem +of so-called extremist groups? + +Mr. LAWSON. I believe I brought them up, but I am not sure I brought +them up that morning. It was sometime later. + +Representative FORD. Sometime that day? + +Mr. LAWSON. It was that day or the next day that we talked about it. We +talked about these extremist groups off and on, of course, all the time +that I was there. + +Representative FORD. Did you limit it to so-called rightwing groups, +or did you have a broader view than that, about groups that might be a +problem on this trip? + +Mr. LAWSON. I believe that I specifically talked about the rightwing +groups; yes. + +Representative FORD. Did you ever have any responsibility for a trip to +New York at any time? + +Mr. LAWSON. No; I did not. I just assisted in one, the World's Fair +opening yesterday, but at that time I had not. + +Representative FORD. This would have to be hypothetical under the +circumstances, but if in the time prior to November 22 you had the +responsibility of a Presidential trip to a community where you knew +the Fair Play for Cuba Committee was active, would you have taken any +special interest in that group? + +Mr. LAWSON. I don't know. If at that time I had ever heard that they +were particularly, might be any threat to the President, a particular +group, if I knew that there was a particular group that advocated the +killing of the President, yes. If it was just a political group of +one kind or another, no, I probably wouldn't unless I had definite +information. + +Representative FORD. Did you have any evidence that the groups you +investigated in Dallas had any program or interest in killing the +President? + +Mr. LAWSON. No; I did not. + +Representative FORD. You had this investigation made of this group in +Dallas because of the Stevenson incident? + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes, sir; I didn't have the investigation made, because I +don't think I would be in the position to have it made. Mr. Sorrels +or PRS or something like that could have. I asked, since we knew that +there were these individuals, and an incident had occurred in the past; +although no threat to the President was known, perhaps we had better at +least try to find out if they were going to do anything, which is what +I did. + +Representative FORD. When you go on with responsibility to a particular +community, do you normally inquire of groups of one kind or another +that have a reputation for political activity of one sort or another? + +Mr. LAWSON. Not for just political activity; no, sir. + +Representative FORD. I meant political activity in the broader sense; +not one political party versus another, but political extremist groups. + +Mr. LAWSON. No, sir; usually, if there is going to be any picketing, an +extremist group or something like that, it will come from the police +sources or another Federal source. They will tell us that they have +heard that certain individuals are going to hang signs from a window as +we go by, or demonstrate, or something like that. + +Representative FORD. Did you ask the Dallas police or any other local +authorities if they knew of any individuals or groups that might be a +threat to the President? + +Mr. LAWSON. I knew that Special Agent Howlett had been in contact with +them, both about the informants and going over to view the films. I did +not, except when I saw this one piece of literature, and asked them if +they knew anything about it. + +Representative FORD. Did Special Agent Howlett report to you of +what contacts he had made with the Dallas police or other local +law-enforcement authorities on this point? + +Mr. LAWSON. In generalities, yes, sir. He told me that he had seen an +informant outside of the city of Dallas, and that this informant had +been active in some of the movements; that he had quit because he was +afraid, but to his knowledge there was nothing going to occur. + +Representative FORD. Do you when you have this responsibility rely on +somebody else to ask the local people, or do you ask the questions +yourself of any groups that they know of or any individuals that they +know of locally? + +Mr. LAWSON. I believe it would depend on the circumstances. In this +case I knew that Special Agent Howlett was in contact with them. At no +time--you usually ask the police if they know of anything that is going +to occur, but, as I said, just regular political groups, unless I know +that they have anything to do with the President, I have never done so. + +Mr. DULLES. Would that include the Fair Play for Cuba Committee or +Communist groups or extreme rightist groups? + +Mr. LAWSON. It would have up until that time; yes, sir. + +Representative FORD. Certainly the Fair Play for Cuba Committee was one +that took violent exception to this country's policies, and they were +active in a number of communities, including New York, as I recall. It +is my recollection that the President, prior to the assassination, had +been to New York at a time that this organization was active. What I am +trying to find out is, if the PRS doesn't provide you with information +about an individual or an organization, is it your responsibility to +actually make extra checks locally, based on your own knowledge or your +own experience? + +Mr. LAWSON. Well, I believe it would be my responsibility if I knew of +any organization that did advocate the killing or the harming of the +President. + +Representative FORD. There was no specific information that you had in +this case that the so-called rightwing extremist groups---- + +Mr. LAWSON. That is right. + +Representative FORD. Had that in mind? + +Mr. LAWSON. That is right; that is correct. It was also my +understanding that, if anything was known about some of these other +groups going to plan anything to embarrass the President or hurt +the President, we would be notified by the people whose jurisdiction +it is to look into those matters or who might have a little bit more +knowledge about them than the Secret Service. + +Representative FORD. When you got to Dallas, did you personally check +with the local FBI office about any individuals or any groups? + +Mr. LAWSON. No, sir; I did not. All the liaison either would be handled +from the local SAC's office or through Washington. + +Representative FORD. That would be between some Secret Service +office---- + +Mr. LAWSON. Either Mr. Sorrel's office and the local FBI office or from +our office to the FBI headquarters in Washington. + +Representative FORD. In the ordinary course of events that information +would be given to you? + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes, sir. + +Representative FORD. In this case there was none? + +Mr. LAWSON. I did find out that the police had sent over a couple of +copies of these pamphlets, but that is the only information that I had +of any liaison locally between the two. + +Mr. DULLES. Are you referring to Commission Exhibit No. 770? + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes, sir; I am. + +Mr. DULLES. Do you know what action was taken with respect to this +pamphlet by the Dallas police? + +Mr. LAWSON. No; I do not, subsequent to that time. + +Mr. DULLES. How long before the President's visit to Dallas was this +brought to your attention; do you remember? + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes sir; Thursday afternoon. + +Mr. DULLES. Thursday afternoon; Thursday before the Friday? + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes, sir. + +Representative FORD. In this preliminary report dated November 19, +which is Commission Exhibit 767, I notice there is no information in +here about this extra effort that was made down there over and above +the PRS. + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes, sir. + +Representative FORD. Is the format for this laid out in advance? + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes, sir; it is. + +Representative FORD. Do they give you an opportunity to add anything to +it if you want to or feel you should? + +Mr. LAWSON. It could be; yes; I am sure it could. + +Representative FORD. Was there any reason why you didn't indicate in +this preliminary report what you had done in this regard? + +Mr. LAWSON. No; that belongs in our PRS section of the report. If this +had occurred in September or October, and this report as it is here +now, the final report had been sent in early, that would have been in +there. + +Representative FORD. I don't understand that. + +Mr. LAWSON. Approximately a month before the Dallas trip, we changed +the reports, if there was time, of course, on all these. In Washington, +D.C., for an on-the-record movement we have a report made up like this +final one, only it isn't called final. It is a survey report, and it +has everything in the introduction, PRS, and everything right in it, +and then a supplemental report. For our out-of-town trips they had a +preliminary survey report, and then a final survey report, so that +if the report had been done in September, let's say, that would have +been in it, because it is in the regular format under PRS. You put in +under the PRS section anything containing any untoward incident, any +information that you receive from PRS or anything that developed later. + +Representative FORD. This report I have here, final survey report, +Commission Exhibit 768, does include that information? + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes, sir; it does. + +Representative FORD. Do you know whether or not Mr. Kellerman had this +preliminary report prior to his departure for Dallas? + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes, sir; I prepared this Tuesday, late afternoon, and +Tuesday evening, the 19th, and made arrangements to have it flown by +airline to Washington, and then have an agent from the White House +detail pick it up from the airplane, which is normal procedure both on +the preliminary report, and when we use it to send the complete report +ahead of time. + +Then I called to make sure that it arrived, which it had. + +Representative FORD. This was prior to Mr. Kellerman's departure with +the President? + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes, sir; it had to be done that early because they were +gone out of Washington the day before they got to me. + +Representative FORD. Are your current regulations for preliminary +report different now than they were at this time? + +Mr. LAWSON. I believe for out-of-town trips we have a preliminary +report and a final survey report. + +Representative FORD. Is the current format any different now than it +was November 19? + +Mr. LAWSON. I don't believe so. Again, there are things that you can +add here, certain stops; you might have a motorcade list and you might +not, if there isn't any motorcade. + +Representative FORD. I believe that is all. Do you want to proceed? + +Mr. DULLES. I have one or two questions that were brought up by your +own questions. Did you have any discussion with the Dallas police about +General Walker's activities? + +Mr. LAWSON. No; I did not, but I knew that he was in this rightwing +group and that Special Agent Howlett was pursuing this. + +Mr. DULLES. Was following its activities? + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes, sir. + +Mr. DULLES. And he was one of your local---- + +Mr. LAWSON. He was the local agent. + +Mr. DULLES. Agent in Dallas. This morning when Agent Bouck testified, +he left with us some memoranda, Commission Exhibit 762, setting forth +10 cases which had been looked into by the Dallas office during the +period October 25, 1961 to October 30, 1963. + +I note that a good many of these cases are marked closed, but I +wanted to ask whether the reports of these cases were brought to your +attention either before you left or after you got to Dallas, or are you +familiar with them? + +Mr. LAWSON. I am not familiar with them, but if they are active cases, +people that---- + +Mr. DULLES. In some cases it is stated, "Investigation completed." This +particular case, CO2-34007, says: + +"Investigation completed on December 12, 1963, by the Dallas office in +Texas." + +That means that this case at least was closed after the assassination. +You don't recall that. + +This is a report from a student at the university about a subject that +made derogatory remarks against the President. You don't recall that +case having been brought to your attention? + +Mr. LAWSON. I know that Special Agent Howlett told me. I believe this +might be connected with one of those informant things outside of Dallas +that I was speaking about, but I don't know this--I know it was Texas. +Whether this is the same one or not I don't know. But I would only have +knowledge of something that was brought to their attention that the +President's life was threatened, and I was given no information that +such had occurred. + +Mr. DULLES. And so you don't recall any of these 10 or 9 other cases +here? A good many of them are noted as closed. That situation would not +be brought to your attention? + +Mr. LAWSON. No; they would not. + +Mr. DULLES. Would not? + +Mr. LAWSON. No. + +Mr. DULLES. In some cases it is noted, "Subsequent activity none." It +is stated, "Periodic checkups were not deemed necessary. Prosecution +was declined." + +This was the case of a remark made by a gentleman at a bridge party. +You don't recall that case? + +Mr. LAWSON. No, sir; I wouldn't have any occasion to know what cases +have come into PRS. + +Mr. DULLES. Even if they related to Dallas? + +Mr. LAWSON. Only if they related to Dallas, and I have been told that +these individuals were in the active file, it was an open case, and +that we should be watchful of this particular individual, but I was +given none of this information. + +Mr. DULLES. In your case when you left Washington you weren't given any +cases that you considered dangerous in the Dallas area? + +Mr. LAWSON. No, sir. + +Representative FORD. When they do give you the name and the case of an +individual such as in the instance of Buffalo, what do you get? What is +given to you, I mean? + +Mr. LAWSON. You are given the name and the number of the case, and then +there is a file in Buffalo just like there is a file in Washington, and +you can review that file there, and depending on the circumstances you +would again have the person followed, or try something to keep him away +from the President. + +Mr. DULLES. I see. You are simply given the name and the file number. + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes, sir. + +Mr. DULLES. Of the individuals? + +Mr. LAWSON. You might be given some other information, like what it +concerns, but I mean you wouldn't sit down and read the whole thing +because you could get that in the Buffalo office or wherever. + +Mr. DULLES. What would have been your normal practice so far as you can +judge if you had been informed that a man, an American had defected +to the Soviet Union and had returned to the United States and was +living in Dallas and was working in the Texas School Book Depository, +would that have been sufficient cause alone to cause you to make an +investigation or report it to the Dallas police? + +Mr. LAWSON. If I had had that information--again this is supposition. + +Mr. DULLES. I realize that. + +Mr. LAWSON. But I probably would have asked advice on it from either +the PRS section or the White House detail ahead of it; yes, sir. + +Mr. DULLES. Supplementing a point that was raised earlier, I find that +President Kennedy's visit to Texas was reported in the Dallas Morning +News as early as September 26, 1963, and the pertinent sections of this +press report--it is headed, "Kennedy to Visit Texas November 21-22," +and there is also included in the heading, "Dallas Included." The first +two paragraphs of this story reported from Jackson Hole, Wyo., that +area, where the President was then on a visit: + +"White House sources told Dallas News exclusively Wednesday night that +President Kennedy will visit Texas November 21 and 22. + +"The visit will embrace major cities of the State including Dallas." + +That is just to check on the point of the date when it was first +published. So it was published sometime before you were notified of +your assignment. + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes, sir; I was doing the Billings advance. He left +Billings to go to Jackson Hole, Wyo., and then returned the next +morning again to Billings. + +Mr. DULLES. You don't recall having heard that though? + +Mr. LAWSON. No. + +Mr. DULLES. In connection with your work with the President's party on +that trip? + +Mr. LAWSON. No. + +Representative FORD. Will you proceed, Mr. Stern? + +Mr. STERN. To conclude the advance work, Mr. Lawson, would you describe +the advance work for the Dallas visit as the same as or different from +typical advance preparations for a trip of this nature? + +Mr. LAWSON. I don't know if that is too general, but I would say that +it was quite a typical trip. + +I tried to do everything I could think of to make the advance run +smooth, and this trip work all right. + +Mr. STERN. The length of time you spent doing the advance, the contacts +you had, the time spent by other people, this was typical of this kind +of trip? + +Mr. LAWSON. Sometimes you go out earlier than other times. Actually +this was out just a little bit earlier than usual. + +An average, if you have to give an average, I would say you are out +about 7 days ahead of time. But like I say, some fellows left this +morning for a trip tomorrow. + +Mr. STERN. Now on the period up to November 22, as I said before, we +will rely substantially on what is in your memorandum. If there is +anything now that you would like to add or correct in the statements +you have made there, anything you would like to add to your testimony +so far today before this Commission, will you do so? + +Mr. LAWSON. I can't recall any. + +Mr. STERN. I would like to move then to the actual events of November +22. I show you first a two-page document marked for identification +Commission Exhibit 771. Can you identify that? + +Mr. LAWSON. I can. + +Mr. STERN. Will you tell us what it is and why it was prepared? + +Mr. LAWSON. It was a statement prepared by me on request of inspectors +in the chief's office as to my knowledge of the event of the shooting +of President Kennedy itself, and I prepared this the day after I +returned from Dallas, which was the 23d of November. + +Mr. STERN. I now show you a five-page memorandum marked for +identification Commission Exhibit 772. Could you identify that for us +and tell us how it was prepared? + +Mr. LAWSON. This is a statement that I gave about as many of my +activities, official activities concerning the President's visit the +whole day of November 22, and until I returned to Washington early on +the morning of November 23, as I could. + +Mr. STERN. Mr. Chairman, may these be admitted? + +Representative FORD. They may be. + +(The documents marked Commission Exhibits Nos. 771 and 772 for +identification were received in evidence.) + +Mr. STERN. So that 772, the memorandum prepared on December 1 would +include everything that you put in your memorandum of November 23 which +was done immediately upon your return? + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes. + +Mr. STERN. Turning to your memorandum of December 1, Commission Exhibit +772, it mentions on page 1 discussion of weather conditions and the +decision whether or not to use the bubble-top on the Presidential +automobile. Could you expand on that for us and tell us what happened? + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes, sir; it was quite rainy early in the morning of the +22d in Dallas, and I received a phone call from the Assistant Agent in +Charge Mr. Kellerman, who was in Fort Worth with the President, asking +about weather conditions in Dallas, and what they probably would be, +and discussing whether to use the bubble-top on the President's car or +not. I was told the bubble-top was to be on if it was raining, and it +was to be off if it was not raining. + +Mr. STERN. And then what happened? Did the weather clear? + +Mr. LAWSON. The weather cleared quite fast. I can't recall now. It was +approximately an hour or 45 minutes before the President was scheduled +to arrive, and we had purposely put off changing the top until the last +minute when we could find out what the weather was going to be. + +But it cleared and the weather became quite sunny all of a sudden. +Also I received a phone call from Fort Worth from Agent Hill, who was +assigned to Mrs. Kennedy, asking what the weather was and whether the +top would be on or not. I suppose that was so he could let her know +whether she had to wear a hat or something because of the weather. + +I told him that it looked like it was starting to clear, but we still +had not made up our minds whether to have the bubble-top on or off at +the point of his call. But I told him if it was raining it would be on, +and if it was clear it would be off. + +Mr. STERN. Were you involved in the final decision respecting the +bubble-top? + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes, sir; the weather was clear so I told them to have it +off. + +Mr. STERN. Then from your memorandum you visited, early on the morning +of November 22, the Trade Mart? + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes, sir. + +Mr. STERN. And checked the final arrangements there, returned to Love +Field, checked the final arrangements there? + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes. + +Mr. STERN. The President arrived. You might tell us a bit about the +reception and the President's greeting the crowd. + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes. The press plane came in. It was the first plane in, +and some agents that were on the press plane that were coming in early +were sent to their respective posts at the Trade Mart. + +The traveling press that comes with the President were shown the press +area, were shown where the plane would be, and so forth, told a little +bit about the arrangements there. + +The transportation staff and people from the White House press office +were told a little bit more in detail about what would happen at Love +Field, and the motorcade, and the press arrangements down at the Trade +Mart. + +Ordinarily you need to provide transportation to the function for the +Presidential Seal, the flags, heavy sound equipment that comes on the +press plane and all that, and it was arranged for station wagons and +trucks to take that. + +But they told me upon arrival that they had sent these direct to Fort +Worth since it was so close and that we didn't need those. Shortly +after this, the Vice President's plane arrived, and I went out to greet +it with the agent from the Vice Presidential detail, and showing people +where to go if they wanted to get in their cars, and telling them where +the President's plane would be, and making myself useful to the people +coming off the Vice Presidential plane. + +While it was stopping, the Presidential plane was landing and taxiing +over, so that they went practically directly from their plane, those +people who wanted to greet the Presidential plane, to the rear ramp, +where he would be arriving. The President's plane stopped and the +greeting committee and the Vice President and Mrs. Johnson and any of +those people on the plane that had wanted to greet the President, local +Congressmen, et cetera, were over at the President's rear ramp and then +I was at the rear ramp across from the greeting committee and the other +dignitaries when he arrived. + +He went through the greeting committee. I was on his left, the opposite +side of the greeting committee, and the other dignitaries. He walked +toward the fence. At that time I made sure that the motorcade was all +ready to go, and the drivers were in their cars, and told people that +were in the motorcade to please get in their cars because as soon as +the President was ready, and we didn't know if that would be 1 minute +or 10, and as soon as he was in the car, why they would go. + +And gave instructions for moving the press ropes out of the press area, +because of the tightness there. We had to move part of the press area +before our motorcade could drive by. And in general doing all of these +little last-minute things. + +Then went over to the fence and went along with the President, +watching the crowd and talking to a few of the agents on some of their +responsibilities, and went to look to see if the lead cars and the +other police cars were about ready to go, and saw that the President +was not yet, so went back to him, and then got him to his car and ran +for my lead car and the motorcade proceeded from the airplane. + +Mr. STERN. Is it typical that the advance agent rides in the lead car? + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes, sir. + +Mr. STERN. Why is that? + +Mr. LAWSON. I suppose for various reasons. No. 1, the Presidential +driver, although you might have given him a route or all that, he +wouldn't really be familiar probably with the streets and all that, and +this is the car that has the command police officials in it, and the +Secret Service agent that knows the most about the start. + +So in any emergency situation the Presidential car will follow that +lead car if possible unless told otherwise. It is the best place for +an agent, and also he controls the motorcade speed, and so forth, from +there. + +Mr. STERN. Was there anything unusual in the motorcade until you got to +Main and Houston? + +Mr. LAWSON. Not unusual. There were crowds along the way, sometimes +heavier than others in about the spots that it was expected to be that +way. + +Mr. STERN. What was your impression of the attitude of the crowd +generally? + +Mr. LAWSON. It looked quite friendly, not as hopping and skipping as +much as some other places, but very friendly and sometimes people just +jumped up and down and screamed and yelled. This one seemed to be a +quite friendly group by and large. + +On one occasion I noticed a sign, I can't recall what it is right +now, but it was an out-of-the-ordinary sign, a sign designed to catch +someone's attention, and I thought right then that probably it would +catch the President's attention if he was looking to the right-hand +side of the car, which he was, and he stopped there, which is not +unusual. + +Sometimes he would stop for certain groups, certain types of people +at certain places unannounced, if there was something that caught his +fancy or caught his eye, and he did there. And of course the crowd +pressed around, and the other agents got off the followup car, got +around his car. + +Mr. Kellerman got out. I was a little bit more ahead than I had been. +We back up, stopped the motor car, told everybody by radio what was +happening, the other police that we were stopped. Before I was out of +the car to give any assistance, why we were moving again. + +Mr. STERN. Was that a built-up area with high buildings or were you +still in the suburbs? + +Mr. LAWSON. No; that was a suburban-type of area, a shopping +center-type of area out away from the downtown area. + +Mr. STERN. I think perhaps now you could tell us what you observed and +what transpired from the time your car turned into Houston Street off +of Main. + +Mr. LAWSON. As I have said previously today, right around that corner I +gave this radio broadcast that we were 5 minutes away. + +Mr. STERN. Was this while you were on Houston or had you turned? + +Mr. LAWSON. We had turned the corner. We were either at the corner, I +believe we were just about at the corner when I asked the question if I +shouldn't give about a 5-minute signal now so we must have been around +the corner then when I actually finished broadcasting. It doesn't take +long. + +Mr. STERN. Around the Houston-Elm corner? + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes, sir; right in front of the Book Depository Building, +and then a little ways away from that probably by the time I had +finished broadcasting. + +I noticed a few people along the right-hand side I can recall now, and +more people on the right-hand side than out in the center strip median +which is there, a grassy center strip. There weren't many people on the +left at all. + +I recall thinking we are coming to an overpass now, so I glanced up to +see if it was clear, the way most of them had been, the way all of them +had been up until that time on the way downtown, and it was not. There +was a small group, between 5 and 10 that looked like workmen. I got the +impression, whether it was wrong or not I don't know, that they were +railroad workers. They had that type of dress on. + +And I was looking for the officer who should have been there, had been +requested to be there, and I noticed him just a little bit later, that +he was there, and I made a kind of motion through the windshield trying +to get his attention to move the people from over our path the way it +should have been. + +But to my knowledge I never got his attention, and I have said in one +of these statements that we were under the bridge, and I have said in +another one that we were just approaching this overpass when I heard +the shot. I really do not know which one is so, because it was so +close, but we were about at the bridge when I heard the first report. + +Mr. STERN. Now just to finish up with the people on the overpass, were +they in a crowd together, or spread out? + +Mr. LAWSON. They were spread out 1 or 2 deep, and as I say, between +5 and 10 of them to my knowledge, and I noticed the police officer +standing behind them about in the middle of the group. + +Mr. STERN. And as far as you can remember now, in a position to observe +all of them? Were they in close enough a group? + +Mr. LAWSON. Oh, yes; observed them from the back. + +Mr. STERN. Observed them from the back. Did you notice any unusual +movement? + +Mr. LAWSON. I did not. + +Mr. STERN. Did you know whether the policeman saw your signal or +acknowledged it? + +Mr. LAWSON. I didn't have any acknowledgment of it, and I don't know if +he saw the signal or not. At least the people didn't move, They still +stayed there in the middle. + +Mr. STERN. Were you able to see the sides of the overpass, apart from +the area directly over the lane you were traveling in? Could you +observe more? + +Mr. LAWSON. I am sure I could have, but I can only recall the people. +My immediate problem was right up there on the bridge, and I was +concentrating right there. I don't recall anything on either side of +the embankments. + +Mr. STERN. Or any people? + +Mr. LAWSON. No, sir; I do not recall any. + +Mr. STERN. Just this group? + +Mr. LAWSON. This group up on the bridge. + +Mr. DULLES. Could I ask one question there. I think you testified just +now that your car was very close to the overpass. + +Mr. LAWSON. I believe it was. + +Mr. DULLES. And yet your car was only--well, how many feet ahead of the +President's car was your car at that time, roughly? + +Mr. LAWSON. I am not sure because I wasn't looking back right at that +time at the President's car. I was looking at the bridge because of the +people up on the bridge. + +Mr. DULLES. What was the normal distance? + +Mr. LAWSON. I think it was a little further ahead than it had been in +the motorcade, because when I looked back we were further ahead. + +(Discussion off the record.) + +Mr. STERN. Then what happened? + +Mr. LAWSON. I heard this very loud report which at first, flashing +through my mind did not say rifle shot to me. It sounded different than +a rifle shot. It sounded louder and more of a bang rather than a crack. + +My first impression was firecracker or bomb or something like that. I +can recall spinning around and looking back, and seeing people over on +the grassy median area kind of running around and dropping down, which +would be this area in here. + +Mr. DULLES. I might just add the witness is now referring to an aerial +photograph. + +Mr. STERN. Indicating the area between Elm Street and Main Street, the +grassy area between the two streets. + +Did you observe anything on the grass strip to the right of Elm Street? + +Mr. LAWSON. No; I didn't, and it is my impression that my car was in +this direction, so that when I looked back, that is why I saw this +particular area here and not things over here that we had actually, +see, started this curve so that when I looked back I was looking this +way. + +Mr. STERN. You were looking to the grass strip? + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes, sir. + +Mr. STERN. In between Elm and Main and not to the grass strip across +Elm Street? + +Mr. LAWSON. That is correct. + +Mr. STERN. North of Elm Street. + +Mr. DULLES. The curve you referred to is the curve to the right. + +Mr. LAWSON. It curves to the right just as it starts at the underpass, +and continues to the right. + +Representative FORD. Why did you look back? Is that the direction of +sound? + +Mr. LAWSON. The direction of the sound and the direction of the +President. + +Representative FORD. Are you sure that the sound you heard came from +the rear and not from the front? + +Mr. LAWSON. I am positive that it came from the rear, and then I spun +back that way to see what had occurred back there. + +Mr. DULLES. Could you tell at all whether the sound came from above you? + +Mr. LAWSON. No; I could not. It was quite a general loud bang, an +echoing-type bang. + +Representative FORD. At the time of the sound you were within 15 or 20 +feet of the overpass approximately? + +Mr. LAWSON. I was quite close to the overpass, yes, sir; but I don't +know exactly how close. + +Representative FORD. You are sure that the sound didn't come from the +overpass? + +Mr. LAWSON. I am in my own mind that it didn't. It came from behind +me. Then I heard two more sharp reports, the second two were closer +together than the first. There was one report, and a pause, then two +more reports closer together, two and three were closer together than +one and two. + +Mr. STERN. What else did you observe when you looked back? + +Representative FORD. May I ask a question here. Had you turned around +by the time the second and third shots had been fired? + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes; I had. + +Representative FORD. Did you get an impression from where they came? + +Mr. LAWSON. Again just behind me is the only impression I got, but in +relation to behind me, where I do not know. + +Representative FORD. Certainly not in front of you? + +Mr. LAWSON. No. + +Mr. STERN. You were in a closed car? + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes; I was. The windows were open. + +Mr. STERN. And you were on the right-hand side in the front? + +Mr. LAWSON. The right-hand side; yes, sir. + +Mr. DULLES. Could you see the President's car when you looked back? + +Mr. LAWSON. Not that first time. As I looked back I looked right +straight and saw the grassy median. Then the second and third shots, +reports, I noticed the President's car back there, but I also noticed +right after the reports an agent standing up with an automatic weapon +in his hand, and the first thing that flashed through my mind, this was +the only weapon I had seen, was that he had fired because this was the +only weapon I had seen up to that time. + +The events after that are a little bit jumbled, but I recall seeing +Agent Hill on the rear of the President's car receiving a radio message +that we should proceed to the nearest hospital. The nearest hospital +was a continuation of our route. + +Mr. STERN. Did you know that or were you told that? + +Mr. LAWSON. I knew that. Let me make a correction. I don't know if it +was the nearest hospital, but I knew that it would be the fastest one +that we could get to under the circumstances of where we were going +under this freeway. + +Mr. STERN. Did you know as part of your preparation or did you merely +observe it in the arrangements you were making? + +Mr. LAWSON. I had observed this from all the times I had passed the +hospital going over the route; yes, sir. + +Mr. STERN. But it is not ordinarily a part of your advance work, or is +it, to locate hospitals? + +Mr. LAWSON. This is not a part of our report, but quite often in my +own report in other times I have listed hospitals and so forth, bed +facilities in some of my other reports. I did not in this case, but I +had noted this hospital. + +Mr. STERN. But it is something you pay attention to yourself? + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes, sir; it is. Again we depend upon the police knowing +the city even better naturally than the advance agent to get us to a +hospital depending where we are or anything like that, that would occur. + +Mr. DULLES. What was the lead car doing at this time? + +Mr. LAWSON. The car that I was in, sir? + +Mr. DULLES. I thought you were in the second car. + +Mr. STERN. The pilot car. + +Mr. DULLES. The pilot car, not the lead car. + +Mr. LAWSON. The pilot car was up ahead of us, so appeared other things +I recall noting a police officer pulled up in a motorcycle alongside of +us, and mentioned that the President had been hit. + +When the Presidential car leaped ahead, although there was quite a +distance, not quite a distance but there was some distance between the +two cars, they came up on us quite fast before we were actually able to +get in motion. They seemed to have a more rapid acceleration than we +did. + +Mr. DULLES. Did they actually pass you? + +Mr. LAWSON. No, sir; they never did. We stayed ahead of them. The route +was clear to the Trade Mart anyway, which was part of the route that we +used to get to the hospital. + +And then from the Trade Mart on, the route was going to be policed +after we arrived at the Trade Mart, so that on the route from the Trade +Mart to the Parkland Hospital, which isn't very far, we had to do some +stopping of cars and holding our hands out the windows and blowing the +sirens and the horns to get through, but we made it in pretty good time. + +I also asked Chief Curry to notify, to have the hospital notified that +we were on the way. I heard Chief Curry broadcast to some units to +converge on the area of the incident down by where it happened. I don't +recall how he phrased it, so that they would know to go to the Texas +Book Depository area. He told them to converge on a certain area, and +that is what it turned out to be. + +When we arrived at the hospital, as our car pulled up and was still +moving, I jumped out and a couple of the motorcycle policemen that had +arrived there ahead of us, I asked them to keep any crowd back, any +press people back, etc., as I went running in the building. + +I was looking for the stretchers that might be coming our way, and +didn't notice any at first until I looked quite a ways down the +corridor and saw two stretchers being pushed my way, and I ran down, +turned around, put one hand on each one and then as they pushed and I +pulled, we ran outside. + +The stretchers had to be placed in tandem because of the ambulance area +and Governor Connally being ahead of President Kennedy was placed on +the first one and taken immediately away. President Kennedy was placed +on the second one by myself and some other individuals, and we went +into the emergency room area and were shown into a particular emergency +room. + +(Discussion off the record.) + +Mr. STERN. Mr. Lawson, your memorandum is quite complete on the events +from arrival at the hospital to your return to Love Field. If there is +anything you would like to add to that, please do so, or to anything +you have told us from the departure from Love Field to the arrival at +Parkland Hospital. + +Mr. LAWSON. I can't recall anything. + +Mr. STERN. I would like then to cover with you just a few points on +your opportunities to observe Lee Harvey Oswald following his arrest. +As I understand it, you returned to the Dallas Police Headquarters +with Chief Curry and other police officials after he was informed that +a suspect has been arrested, and arrived at the police headquarters +somewhere between 3:30 and 3:45; is that correct? + +Mr. LAWSON. I believe the Presidential plane took off at 2:40 +something, 2:47, so that I didn't leave Love Field until after that. It +was probably at least 10 minutes after that that we left. + +We made certain that the agents had all arrived back from the various +places that they were to return to Washington, and that the White House +staff, none of them had been left any place, and that the Air Force II +was going to pick up any stragglers. The press was going to depart on a +press plane, and so forth, so it was probably a little after 3 o'clock +before we left. + +I recall that it was very bad traffic in the downtown area. We were +bumper to bumper and didn't move a few times because apparently the +chief thought everybody was converging on the downtown area to see +this, plus all the people who had been there when it happened and just +stayed there. I arrived sometime quite late. + +Mr. DULLES. You were still with Chief Curry? + +Mr. LAWSON. I was. I was told by Chief Rowley rather than to come back +to remain in Dallas. It was quite late in the afternoon we arrived at +police headquarters. + +Mr. STERN. What were the conditions at police headquarters when you +arrived? + +Mr. LAWSON. Quite a bit was happening. I got the impression they had +squads of detectives doing all kinds of things, people working on the +Presidential assassination, people working on the Tippit killing. I +know that they had squads of men going out doing various things and +coming back, and it was quite hard just to keep abreast of things +that were breaking as to what each group was finding out as it was +happening, and quite often we were way behind. + +Mr. STERN. What about the appearance of the press and television +reporters and cameramen at that time? + +Mr. LAWSON. At least by 6 or 7 o'clock they were quite in evidence up +and down the corridors, cameras on the tripods, the sound equipment, +people with still cameras, motion picture-type hand cameras, all kinds +of people with tape recorders, and they were trying to interview +people, anybody that belonged in police headquarters that might know +anything about Oswald---- + +Mr. STERN. Can you estimate how many reporters? + +Mr. LAWSON. There were quite a few. The corridors, up and down the +corridors towards the chief's office to the right of the elevator, +around the elevator landing and down the corridors to the left of +the elevator towards the homicide area were quite packed. You had to +literally fight your way through the people to get up and down the +corridor. + +Representative FORD. Did you stay with Chief Curry most of the time? + +Mr. LAWSON. No, sir; I was in various rooms and with various people for +the rest of the evening. I saw Chief Curry quite often that evening. + +Mr. DULLES. Who was in command at that time of the Secret Service +detachment in giving the orders and coordinating the Secret Service men? + +Mr. LAWSON. Sorrels. My advance as such, was over, and I was just +another Secret Service agent. + +Mr. DULLES. He was in command? + +Mr. LAWSON. Sorrels would be in command of any Secret Service activity. + +Mr. DULLES. Subject of course to orders from Washington; I realize that. + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes, sir; and we understood that Inspector Kelley, on one +of our frequent phone conversations with Washington, we were told +that Inspector Kelley, one of our inspectors, was being sent out to +coordinate the Secret Service investigation and to be the overall +commander of the Secret Service out there, and he did arrive at +approximately 11 o'clock that evening and was met by an agent. + +Mr. DULLES. Does the Secret Service have a facility for commandeering, +getting airplanes when it needs them fast? + +Mr. LAWSON. In certain instances, sir, I believe we use the Air Force +and the MATS people for advance trips, or if the Presidential airplanes +are full and they still need agents to go some place, why they will put +on another airplane for us. Sometimes we use Air Force transportation, +sometimes commercial. + +Mr. DULLES. You have adequate facilities, have you, to get around in +time of emergency like this, quickly? + +Mr. LAWSON. I wouldn't be in a position to answer that, sir. + +Mr. DULLES. Chief Rowley would probably be the one. + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes, sir. + +Mr. STERN. When did you first observe Lee Harvey Oswald, Mr. Lawson? + +Mr. LAWSON. It was early in the evening of November 22. He had been in +police headquarters for a little while at least before I first saw him, +and they had already interrogated him as I understand it, and various +detectives, police officials, and Mr. Sorrels and a couple other agents +and myself saw Lee Harvey Oswald when he was brought in for Mr. Sorrels +to talk to at Mr. Sorrels' request. + +Mr. STERN. Did you interrogate him? + +Mr. LAWSON. No, sir; I did not. + +Mr. STERN. Did Mr. Sorrels handle the interrogation alone? + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes, sir; that particular one. + +Mr. STERN. What were the questions and answers as best you can recall? + +Mr. LAWSON. He asked information as to name. + +Mr. DULLES. Who is "he" now? + +Mr. LAWSON. Mr. Sorrels in asking the questions already had some +background on Mr. Oswald before he started questioning Mr. Oswald. The +detectives or other individuals had told them what they knew up to +this point about Oswald, his name, that he had been out of the country +previous to this time to Russia, and a few other things. It was known +at the particular time, perhaps 6 or 7 o'clock. + +Mr. STERN. I take it you had phoned his name to your headquarters in +Washington as soon as you knew Oswald's name? + +Mr. LAWSON. I didn't. Perhaps Mr. Sorrels did. + +Mr. STERN. Did your office advise you whether they knew anything about +Oswald or had found out anything about Oswald? + +Mr. LAWSON. Not me personally. + +Mr. STERN. That you know of? + +Mr. LAWSON. Not me personally. + +Mr. STERN. Were any other questions asked? + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes; I recall Mr. Sorrels asking if he had been out--where +he had been living, where he had been employed over the last years, and +other information Mr. Sorrels already knew about. + +Representative FORD. What was his attitude? What was the attitude of +Oswald during this period? + +Mr. LAWSON. Oswald just answered the questions as asked to him. He +didn't volunteer any information. He sat there quite stoically, not +much of an expression on his face. + +Mr. DULLES. Quite what? + +Mr. LAWSON. Stoically. + +Mr. DULLES. Stoical? + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes, sir. + +Representative FORD. Was he belligerent? + +Mr. LAWSON. No, sir; he didn't seem to be belligerent at all. + +Representative FORD. Did he resent the interrogation? + +Mr. LAWSON. I didn't get the impression that it was a great resentment. +He just answered the questions as they were asked of him. + +Mr. DULLES. Did he answer all the questions? + +Mr. LAWSON. I believe he did. + +Mr. DULLES. These were questions that Mr. Sorrels put to him? + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes; of course, Mr. Sorrels, I don't believe at that time, +as I remember it, didn't ask him everything that we knew about him. + +Representative FORD. Was there a transcript kept of this interrogation? + +Mr. LAWSON. I don't know. + +Mr. STERN. Do you recall any other questions that were asked? + +Mr. LAWSON. I don't. At this time they were just general-type questions. + +Mr. STERN. What was his physical condition? + +Mr. DULLES. Could I ask one question there? The question wasn't asked +him at this time, at least while you were present, whether he was or +was not guilty of the attack on the President? + +Mr. LAWSON. This I do not recall. During this I recall I was called out +for a phone call a couple of times. We were given information from Mr. +Max Phillips, who was in our PRS section, and I believe it was during +this that someone, an agent, was wanted on the phone, and I went out +and answered this, and they gave us some information on people that it +might have been--a case that wasn't Oswald. + +Mr. STERN. What was his physical condition? + +Mr. LAWSON. He was quite, well, unkempt looking, and I recall that he +had a few bruises on his face. + +Mr. STERN. A few bruises? + +Mr. LAWSON. I believe over an eye, a bruise or two. I can recall that +he had a bruise over an eye or on a cheekbone, or someplace on his +face, in looking back. And had a shirt and a pair of pants on. He +wasn't very tidy looking, a little unkempt in his appearance. + +Mr. STERN. Was he handcuffed, do you recall? + +Mr. LAWSON. I don't recall. I know I saw him handcuffed around police +headquarters quite a bit, but during this interrogation I don't +remember if he was handcuffed or not. + +Representative FORD. How long did this interrogation go on? + +Mr. LAWSON. This was not long. + +Representative FORD. Five minutes? + +Mr. LAWSON. Five to ten minutes at the most; yes, sir. + +Mr. STERN. Then what happened? Did Mr. Sorrels finish? + +Mr. DULLES. May I ask one other question there? Was there an +interrogation just conducted by Mr. Sorrels, or were there others in on +it, the police or the FBI? + +Mr. LAWSON. I don't know if there were FBI agents there. There were +other plainclothesmen there, and a few uniformed officers. + +Mr. DULLES. Mr. Sorrels conducted the investigation? + +Mr. LAWSON. Mr. Sorrels was asking these particular questions, +general-type questions, and when he finished the police took him back +to another area. + +Mr. STERN. When did you next see Oswald? + +Mr. LAWSON. I recall seeing him in another room in homicide +headquarters with a couple of plainclothes people and their talking to +him. I saw him later in the evening, perhaps 9:30, 10 o'clock, when he +was brought down to a showup room, because we had information that a +gentleman had seen someone at a window, and so-- + +Mr. STERN. Do you know who that was, the witness? + +Mr. LAWSON. I do not know; no, sir. + +Mr. STERN. Could it have been someone named Brennan? + +Mr. LAWSON. The name doesn't mean anything to me. Mr. Sorrels had sent +an agent out to bring him down to police headquarters to talk to him, +and he informed us he had seen someone in the window, but he had also +seen Lee Oswald on television in the meantime, and he didn't know of +how much value he would be. + +Mr. STERN. Did he say anything about whether he thought---- + +Mr. LAWSON. He could not say yes or no, whether Oswald was the +individual or not. + +Mr. STERN. Did you notice any irregularity in the way the showup was +conducted? + +Mr. LAWSON. No, sir. + +Mr. STERN. Did it seem like a normal one to you, the size of the people? + +Mr. LAWSON. I didn't notice any irregularity. + +Mr. STERN. And their dress? + +Representative FORD. Had Oswald had any additional physical damage done? + +Mr. LAWSON. No, sir. + +Representative FORD. The last time you saw him? + +Mr. LAWSON. No; he had not. That was not the last time I saw him, +however. Then I later, approximately 11:30, or around midnight, it +was announced that there would be a press conference again down in +the showup room, and Inspector Kelley had arrived by that time, not +too long before that, and Inspector Kelley and I and another agent or +two went down to this press conference where it was just completely +packed. Everyone couldn't get in the room, the cameramen, reporters, +broadcasters, and so forth. Upon a signal---- + +Mr. DULLES. Who conducted that meeting? + +Mr. LAWSON. I believe it was the assistant district attorney and Chief +Curry and perhaps Captain Fritz. We were just there watching. + +Mr. STERN. Tell us more about what---- + +Mr. LAWSON. He was brought in through the crowd and through a side door +there, through the corridors, brought in, and I believe the chief and +the district attorney each gave statements, and Oswald was asked a few +questions then by the press, but I don't recall of it except that he +was whisked out again fairly rapidly after that. + +Mr. STERN. Do you remember what any of the questions were and his +responses? + +Mr. LAWSON. No, I don't. + +Mr. STERN. How many people were in this room? + +Mr. LAWSON. It was overflowing. You could hardly hear because everyone +was shouting questions. That is why I don't remember what the specific +questions were and what his responses were. + +Mr. STERN. Do you have any impression why this interview was conducted? + +Mr. LAWSON. No; I do not. + +Mr. STERN. Do you recall anything else that was said by the eyewitness +that Mr. Sorrels had arranged to be brought in for the showup, anything +else that he said while he was standing talking to you or Mr. Sorrels +or while Oswald and others were on the---- + +Mr. LAWSON. No; I don't. + +Mr. STERN. Then shortly after this showup, or shortly after this +interview in the showup room, you left for Washington, I take it? + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes; there had been quite a bit of discussion during the +evening as to what evidence they had up to this time, the rifle, +clothing, et cetera, would be brought to Washington to the FBI lab to +be worked on, or whether the police would keep it in their custody for +a little while longer for their investigation, and there was quite a +bit of discussion by various people all evening long. + +And when it was finally decided it would be released by the Dallas +police, the rifle and other evidence to return to Washington, Inspector +Kelley told me to return on the special plane that was flying the +evidence and the accompanying FBI agent back to Washington. + +Mr. DULLES. Was the evidence turned over to you or the FBI? + +Mr. LAWSON. To the FBI, sir. I just returned on the plane. + +Mr. STERN. Was there at one point a reluctance on the part of the +Dallas police to release the evidence? + +Mr. LAWSON. Yes, sir. They felt, from what I overheard, they felt they +might be able to get an identification of the rifle from one of the +local gunshops. There were various leads that they wanted to follow out +on that rifle that evening and the next day. I believe there was some +talk that they couldn't locate some of the gunshop owners, and some of +the other things they wanted to do. So they wished to keep this rifle +for a day or so and then release it. + +Mr. STERN. I am told this has been covered with other witnesses, so +there is no need to pursue it. I have nothing further. + +Representative FORD. How long was this interview where Oswald was +present? + +Mr. LAWSON. The press interview, sir? + +Representative FORD. How long was he before the press? + +Mr. LAWSON. I would say 5 minutes at the most. + +Representative FORD. I have no other questions. + +Mr. DULLES. I have no other questions. + +Representative FORD. Is that all, Mr. Stern? + +Mr. STERN. Yes, sir. + +Representative FORD. Thank you very much, Mr. Lawson, you have been +very helpful. + +Mr. DULLES. We appreciate it very much. + +(Whereupon, at 5:35 p.m., the President's Commission recessed.) + + + + +_Thursday, April 30, 1964_ + +TESTIMONY OF ALWYN COLE + +The President's Commission met at 9:25 a.m. on April 30, 1964, at 200 +Maryland Avenue NE., Washington, D.C. + +Present were Chief Justice Earl Warren, Chairman; Senator John Sherman +Cooper, Representative Gerald R. Ford, and John J. McCloy, members. + +Also present were J. Lee Rankin, general counsel; and Melvin Aron +Eisenberg, assistant counsel. + + +The CHAIRMAN. The Commission will be in order. + +The purpose, Mr. Cole, of today's hearing is to take the testimony +of Mr. James C. Cadigan and yourself. Mr. Cadigan is a questioned +documents expert of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and as we +all know, you are a questioned documents expert of the Department of +the Treasury. We desire your testimony for technical assistance to +the Commission in connection with the papers used in this hearing +concerning the assassination. + +Mr. COLE. I understand. + +The CHAIRMAN. Would you raise your right hand and be sworn, please? + +Do you solemnly swear the testimony you are about to give before this +Commission shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the +truth, so help you God? + +Mr. COLE. I do. + +The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Eisenberg, you may conduct the examination. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cole, could you state your full name, please? + +Mr. COLE. That is Alwyn Cole. + +The CHAIRMAN. I am obliged to spend the morning with the Court. We are +hearing arguments today and when I leave, in a short time, Congressman +Ford will preside at the meeting and conduct it. + +Mr. EISENBERG. What is your position, Mr. Cole? + +Mr. COLE. I am employed as examiner of questioned documents with the +U.S. Treasury Department. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Can you state your specific duties in this position? + +Mr. COLE. I am required to examine any document in which the Treasury +Department is interested when a question arises about the genuineness +of the document or the identity of any of its parts. A good deal of +this work includes the identification of handwriting. + +Mr. EISENBERG. From what sources is work referred to your laboratory, +Mr. Cole? + +Mr. COLE. From the several divisions of the Office of the Treasury +of the United States, and from the various Bureaus of the Treasury +Department, including the enforcement agencies: Secret Service, +narcotics, customs, internal revenue service. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cole, can you tell us how you prepared yourself to +carry on this work of questioned documents examination? + +Mr. COLE. I served an apprenticeship of 6 years under Mr. Burt Farrar +from 1929 to 1935. Mr. Farrar at that time was the document examiner +for the Treasury Department, and at the time of my association with him +he had had over 40 years of experience in the work. + +Under Mr. Farrar's tutelage I studied the leading textbooks on +the subject of questioned documents, which includes handwriting +identification, and I received from him cases for practice examination +of progressively increasing difficulty, made these examinations, +prepared reports for his review, and also during this period I had +assignments to other Government laboratories, those of the Bureau +of Engraving and Printing and the Government Printing Office, and I +had close association with other technical workers in the government +service. + +I succeeded Mr. Farrar in 1935, and I have had daily practical contact +with questioned problems from 1929 to the present date. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cole, are you a member of any associations of +persons engaged in questioned documents examination? + +Mr. COLE. Yes, sir; I am. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Could you state those positions? + +Mr. COLE. I am a member of the American Society of Questioned Document +Examiners, of the International Association for Identification, and of +the American Academy of Forensic Science. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Do you give instructions to others in this work, Mr. +Cole? + +Mr. COLE. I do. I am an instructor at the Treasury Department Law +Enforcement Officer Training School. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Have you had occasion to testify in Federal or other +courts? + +Mr. COLE. Yes, sir; I have, many times. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, I ask that this witness be permitted to +give expert testimony on the subject of questioned documents. + +The CHAIRMAN. The witness is qualified. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cole, I now show you a photograph of an envelope and +a purchase order. The envelope is addressed to Klein's, in Chicago, +from one "A. Hidell," and the purchase order, which is included in the +photograph, is an order also addressed to Klein's from "A. Hidell," and +I ask you whether you have examined this photograph. + +Mr. COLE. I have. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, may I have this admitted into evidence as +Commission Exhibit 773? + +The CHAIRMAN. It may be admitted. + +(Commission Exhibit No. 773 was marked and received in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. For the record, this photograph was produced from a roll +of microfilm in the possession of Klein's, a Chicago firm which sells +weapons of various types, and which sold the assassination weapon. + +Now, Mr. Cole, I am going to hand you a group of documents which I will +identify for the record. + +The first is an application form to Cosmos Shipping Co., Inc., signed +Lee H. Oswald, and containing handprinting and cursive writing. Have +you examined that document, Mr. Cole? + +Mr. COLE. Yes, sir. + +Mr. EISENBERG. May I have this admitted as Commission Exhibit 774, Mr. +Chairman? + +The CHAIRMAN. It may be admitted. + +(Commission Exhibit No. 774 was marked and received in evidence.) + +The CHAIRMAN. I wonder if it might not be better to put the tab on the +document itself because someone in handling it might take it out of the +envelope. + +(Discussion off the record.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. The second document is a letter addressed to the +American Embassy, entitled "Affidavit of Support," and signed Lee H. +Oswald. + +Mr. COLE. I have examined this document. + +Mr. EISENBERG. I would like that admitted as 775, Mr. Chairman. + +The CHAIRMAN. It may be admitted. + +(Commission Exhibit No. 775 was marked and received in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. The third is a group of checks made payable to the order +of Lee H. Oswald, and the company listed on the top of the check is +Jaggars-Chiles-Stovall, Inc. These checks are endorsed on the back "Lee +H. Oswald," and I ask you whether you have examined these documents? + +Mr. COLE. I have examined these documents. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, may these be admitted as 776? + +The CHAIRMAN. They may be admitted. + +(Commission Exhibit 776 was marked and received in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. Here I would like to mark the envelope. + +The fourth item is a library card for the New Orleans Parish, or the +Orleans Parish, and the signature is Lee H. Oswald. + +Mr. COLE. I have examined this document. + +Mr. EISENBERG. May I have this admitted as 777? + +The CHAIRMAN. It may be admitted. + +(Commission Exhibit No. 777 was marked and received in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. The next item consists of photographs of two letters to +the Department of State, both concerning payments on loans, repayments +of loans, and both signed "Lee H. Oswald," and I ask whether you have +examined these documents? + +Mr. COLE. I have examined these photographs. + +Mr. EISENBERG. May these be admitted as 778? + +The CHAIRMAN. They may be admitted. + +(Commission Exhibit No. 778 was marked and received in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. Next are two pages of writing on lined and holed paper +entitled "The Communist Party of the United States Has Betrayed +Itself!" and numbered "1" and "2," with some discoloration. Mr. Cole, +have you examined those? + +Mr. COLE. I have examined these. The discoloration mentioned was on the +documents when I first saw them. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, may these be admitted as 779? + +The CHAIRMAN. Admitted. + +(Commission Exhibit No. 779 was marked and received in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. Next is a file entitled "Oswald, Lee Harvey, +USMC"--which stands for Marine Corps--serial number or file number +1653230, and then another number appears, 8812, and this has various +writing, certain of which are signed by Lee H. Oswald, together with +letters to Lee H. Oswald, and I ask you if you have examined this file, +Mr. Cole? + +Mr. COLE. Yes; I have. + +Mr. EISENBERG. May this be admitted as 780, Mr. Chairman? + +The CHAIRMAN. It may be admitted. + +(Commission Exhibit No. 780 was marked and received in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. Next is a passport application signed "Lee H. Oswald," +dated in the upper right "Passport Issued June 25, 1963," and there are +other dates which appear--principally June 24, 1963--in other portions +of the application. Mr. Cole, have you examined that? + +Mr. COLE. I have examined this document. + +Mr. EISENBERG. May I have this admitted as 781, Mr. Chairman? + +The CHAIRMAN. It may be admitted. + +(Commission Exhibit No. 781 was marked, and received into evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. Next is a letter entitled "Dear Sirs: This is in +regard to my wife's file" and so forth, addressed apparently to the +Immigration and Naturalization Offices in San Antonio, Tex., signed +"Lee H. Oswald," together with another such letter addressed to +the same--addressed to Dallas, Tex., the Office of Immigration and +Naturalization, Dallas, Tex., signed "Lee H. Oswald," and a third +letter to Room 1402, Rio Grande Building, 251 North Field Street. + +These letters, all signed "Lee H. Oswald", and all having to do with +aspects of immigration and naturalization, are entitled or numbered on +the backs respectively 00645, dated July 5, 00146, dated--that is July +5, 1962, in the first--00146, dated July---- + +Mr. COLE. I believe it is 6. + +Mr. EISENBERG. July 6, 1962, and 010156, dated July 10, 1962. Have you +examined these three documents? + +Mr. COLE. I have. + +Mr. EISENBERG. May these be admitted as 782A, 782B, and 782C, Mr. +Chairman? + +The CHAIRMAN. They may be admitted under those numbers. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And finally, an item consisting of two subitems, one +a short note signed "Lee H. Oswald" and beginning, "Please enroll +me as an associate member at $2.00," relating to the ACLU, and the +second item being an application to the American Civil Liberties Union +national office, "Please enroll me as a new member of the ACLU," name +printed "Lee H. Oswald," and I ask you whether you have examined these +two items. + +Mr. COLE. I have. + +Mr. EISENBERG. May these be admitted under the common caption 783? + +The CHAIRMAN. They may be admitted. + +(Commission Exhibits Nos. 782A, 782B, 782C, and 783 were marked and +received in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, Mr. Cole, have you compared the documents 774-783, +all signed "Lee H. Oswald," with the document 773, the photograph of a +purchase order to Klein's Sporting Goods, for purposes of determining +whether the author of the documents 774-783 also authored the document +773? + +Mr. COLE. Yes, sir; I have. + +Mr. EISENBERG. What is your conclusion? + +Mr. COLE. It is my conclusion that the author of the standard writing +bearing the exhibit numbers which you just related---- + +Mr. EISENBERG. 774-783? + +Mr. COLE. 774-783, is the author of the handwriting on Commission +Exhibit 773. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, you referred to the term "standard writing," Mr. +Cole. Can you explain that term? + +Mr. COLE. I used these as the standard writing, as a basis for +comparison. + +Mr. EISENBERG. "These" referring to 774-783? + +Mr. COLE. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Those standards would be what you would refer to, +therefore, what might also be referred to as "known" items? + +Mr. COLE. Yes, sir. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And the Document 773 is the "questioned" item? + +Mr. COLE. Yes, sir. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now for the record, in the future I will refer +collectively to 774-783 as the standards. + +The CHAIRMAN. They were all written by the same person? + +Mr. COLE. Yes, Your Honor. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cole, were these the only standards or potential +standards from which you had to draw, or were a larger group of +potential standards furnished to you? + +Mr. COLE. I saw a larger group of papers of potential standards. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Can you state the circumstances under which this larger +group was given to you? + +Mr. COLE. I came to your office and reviewed a very large group of +papers, and I pointed out what I would regard as a cross section or +representative sample from that larger group of papers. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And can you explain the basis on which you took the +actual standards 774-783, that is, on which you selected those +documents from the larger possible group of documents which might have +served as standards? + +Mr. COLE. Well, two bases: One, that the writing is fairly clear and +legible; most of these documents are not stained or mutilated in any +way; all the writing can be seen clearly. And, two, I think that this +group of papers gives a complete, reasonably complete record of the +writing habits of the author. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cole, continuing on these standards for a moment, +have you examined other questioned documents besides Commission 773 at +my request? + +Mr. COLE. I have. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Do the standards which you selected, that is, items 774 +through 783, in your opinion provide a sufficient basis for comparison +of the other questioned documents which you also examined? + +Mr. COLE. They do provide a satisfactory basis for comparison. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Are they sufficiently close in time, both to 773 and to +the other questioned documents which you have examined? + +Mr. COLE. Yes, sir. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Does handwriting change over the course of time, Mr. +Cole? + +Mr. COLE. Handwriting does change over the course of time, but usually +fairly large periods are involved, 5 or 10 years or such. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Is there any variation in the writing instruments which +were used to produce the various standards? + +Mr. COLE. Yes; I think a variety of instruments were used. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Does this affect your ability to use the standards +as against the questioned documents or as against those questioned +documents produced with other writing instruments? + +Mr. COLE. It does not adversely affect my ability to make a comparison. + +Mr. EISENBERG. That is, you are able to compare a document produced by +a ballpoint pen with a document produced by a fountain pen and vice +versa? + +Mr. COLE. Yes, sir. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Do the standards show both cursive writing and +handprinting? + +Mr. COLE. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Can you explain meaning of the term "cursive writing"? + +Mr. COLE. Cursive means connected writing, as the term is used, with +a running connected hand, whereas handprinting refers to the separate +writing of letters without the connection of letters and usually +involves a somewhat different style for the formation of letters, that +is Roman capital letters or the lower case letters. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Cursive writing then is the type of writing which we +normally use, which connects--in which the letters are connected, the +type which is taught in schools? + +Mr. COLE. Yes, sir. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cole, some of the standards which are in the group +774 to 783 are photographs rather than originals. + +Mr. COLE. That is correct. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Does a photograph in your opinion provide a sufficient +standard on which to base a conclusion as to a questioned document? + +Mr. COLE. Well, I believe these particular photographs are satisfactory +for that purpose. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Would you draw a conclusion as to the origin of a +questioned document if your only standard was a photograph? + +Mr. COLE. If the photographs were comparable to the photographs we have +in this case; yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cole, you examined the standards in their entirety, +did you? + +Mr. COLE. I did. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And you have stated in answer to an earlier question +they were all prepared by the same person, as I understood it? + +Mr. COLE. Yes, sir. + +Representative FORD. What is unique about these photographs that gives +you this certainty or---- + +Mr. COLE. Well, I did not mean to indicate they are of a specially good +quality, but I had in mind the possible existence of other photographs +which would be much poorer and would not provide a satisfactory +basis. I think that on these photographs I can see everything that is +necessary to see to appreciate writing habit. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, when you say the standards were all written by +one person, that is with the exception of initials put on by law +enforcement officers and the like? + +Mr. COLE. That is correct. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, Mr. Cole, returning to 773, the questioned +document, can you tell the Commission how you formed the conclusion +that it was prepared by the author of the standards, that is, what +steps you followed in your examination and comparison, what things you +considered, what instruments or equipment you used, and so forth? + +Mr. COLE. I made first a careful study of the writing on Commission +Exhibit 773 without reference to the standard writing, in an effort to +determine whether or not this writing contained what I would regard as +a basis for identification, contained a record of writing habit, and as +that--as a result of that part of my examination, I concluded that this +is a natural handwriting. By that I mean that it was made at a fair +speed, that it doesn't show any evidence of an unnatural movement, poor +line quality, tremor, waver, retouching, or the like. I regard it as +being made in a fluent and fairly rapid manner which would record the +normal writing habits of the person who made it. + +I then made a separate examination of the standards, of all of the +standard writings, to determine whether that record gave a record of +writing habit which could be used for identification purposes, and +I concluded that it, too, was a natural handwriting and gave a good +record of writing habit. + +I then brought the standard writings together with the questioned +writing for a detailed and orderly comparison, considering details of +letter forms, proportion, pen pressure, letter connections, and other +details of handwriting habit, and as a part of my examination I made +photographs of the standard writings and brought certain parts of them +together on a chart for greater convenience in comparing the standards +with the questioned writing. + +The CHAIRMAN. Gentlemen, I think it will be necessary for me to leave +now, Congressman Ford, you will preside, will you, please? I appreciate +it. + +(Discussion off the record.) + +(At this point, the Chief Justice left the hearing room.) + +Representative FORD. Proceed. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cole, you mentioned that the writing in both the +questioned document, 773, and the standard seem to be produced at a +natural speed. + +Mr. COLE. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. How do you determine that any document is produced at a +natural speed? + +Mr. COLE. Because that conforms to a large number of other specimens +that I have examined over a period of years which I knew to be normal +writing. Specifically, it agrees with respect to the quality of the +line, which is reasonably good in this handwriting and which I would +expect to be quite poor in an unnatural specimen, one that had been +made at an abnormally reduced writing speed. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Can you expand further on what you mean by "quality of +the line"? + +Mr. COLE. Well, quality of line is--refers to the sharpness of the +edges of lines, to the absence of tremor, waver, patching, retouching, +and similar defects. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cole, could you explain the basis on which you +were able to make an identification of a questioned writing as being +authored by the person who wrote a standard writing? + +Mr. COLE. This is based upon the principle that every handwriting is +distinctive, that since the mental and physical equipment for producing +handwriting is different in every individual, each person produces +his own distinctive writing habits. Of course, everyone learns to +write in the beginning by an endeavor to repeat ideal letter forms, +but practically no one is able to reproduce these forms exactly. Even +though a person might have some initial success during the active +period of instruction, he soon departs from these and develops his own +habits. It may be said that habit in handwriting is that which makes +handwriting possible. Habit is that which makes handwriting efficient. +If it were not for the development of habit, one would he obliged to +draw or sketch. + +Some habit would be included even in those efforts. But the production +of handwriting rapidly and fluently always involves a recording of +personal writing habit. This has been confirmed by observation of +a very large number of specimens over a long period of time, and +it has further been demonstrated by, on my part, having a formal +responsibility for rendering decisions about the identification of +handwriting based upon an agreement of handwriting habit in situations +where there would be a rigorous testing of the correctness of these +decisions by field investigators, for example, of the law-enforcement +agencies, and a demonstration that these results were confirmed by +other evidence. + +This is the basis for identification of handwriting. + +Mr. EISENBERG. As I understand it, you mean you would make a +preliminary identification of a suspect on the basis of handwriting +and it has been your experience that field investigation confirms that +determination with additional evidence? + +Mr. COLE. This is not what I would call "a preliminary identification." +This would be a formal presentation and formal report to other persons +who are interested in the problem, and the investigation would be +continued from that point. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cole, is handprinting as well as cursive writing +unique to every individual? + +Mr. COLE. Well, I would say much of it is. Not all of it. Handprinting +doesn't always give the same amount of information about writing habit +as does cursive writing. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Are you always able to identify the author of a writing +if you have a questioned document and a standard document? + +Mr. COLE. No, sir; not always. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And can you expand on that? + +Mr. COLE. Well, some handwriting doesn't include enough distinctive +features, or in some cases there may not be enough of it to give a +complete enough record of handwriting habits to be certain that you +have a basis for identification. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Do you need a sufficient basis in both the questioned +and the standard? + +Mr. COLE. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Do the standards that you have selected provide a +sufficient basis for making identification? + +Mr. COLE. They do. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Without going into every questioned document separately, +do the questioned documents which you have reviewed at my request each +individually provide a sufficient basis for comparison? + +Mr. COLE. Yes, sir. + +Representative FORD. Is there a difference of opinion in your +profession as to how much or how little you need for this purpose? + +Mr. COLE. Yes; I think it would vary from one worker to another, +depending upon his experience in the work. + +It sometimes happens that a person with limited experience may go +to either one extreme or to the other. He may sometimes be rather +reckless. Other times he may be extremely cautious. + +Representative FORD. But the decision you have made in this case would +be what other experts, in your opinion, would agree to? + +Mr. COLE. I would say others with whom I am familiar, with whom I have +worked and talked to, corresponded with over the years. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cole, can you characterize the skill of the author +of the standards and Exhibit 773? + +Mr. COLE. I would say it is an average skill. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Are some of the standards prepared more skillfully than +others? + +Mr. COLE. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Can you account for that at all? + +Mr. COLE. I think there is a natural range of the use of skill in +handwriting, possibly depending upon the purpose or the physical +surroundings for producing handwriting or the writing instruments. +When the conditions for producing handwriting are the best, and one's +purpose is a perfectly free expression of his handwriting habit, then +he may produce a better handwriting than when conditions are poor, such +as an awkward writing position or poor writing tools. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cole, you mentioned earlier that you had prepared +some photographs or charts---- + +Mr. COLE. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Showing the standards or portions thereof? + +Mr. COLE. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Could you produce those charts? + +Mr. COLE. Yes, sir. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, Mr. Cole, you have produced here three large +charts, each entitled "Standard Writing" and bearing the designations +"A," "B," and "C" in the upper left-hand corners. Can you tell us +precisely what is reflected on these charts A, B, and C? + +Mr. COLE. These charts show excerpts from the standard writings, +sometimes showing a portion of a line, other times showing a single +word or a block of writing from the standard exhibits. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Were these charts, which are in the form of photographic +reproductions, prepared by you or under your supervision, Mr. Cole? + +Mr. COLE. They were. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Are they true and accurate reproductions of the portions +of the standard writings they purport to reproduce? + +Mr. COLE. They are. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, may these be admitted as 784A, B, and C? + +Representative FORD. They may be admitted. + +(Commission Exhibits Nos. 784A, B, and C were marked and received in +evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cole, have you prepared a photograph of Exhibit 773? + +Mr. COLE. I have. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Will you produce that photograph, please? Was that +photograph 773 made by you or under your supervision? + +Mr. COLE. Yes, sir. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And is it a true and accurate reproduction of 773? + +Mr. COLE. Yes, it is. + +Mr. EISENBERG. May this be admitted as 785, Mr. Chairman? + +Representative FORD. It may be. + +(Commission Exhibit No. 785 was marked and received in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, the quality of 785, the reproduction, seems to +be somewhat brighter or whiter than 773. Can you explain that? The +contrast seems sharper. + +Mr. COLE. Yes, that was purposely done in an effort to improve the +legibility of the handwriting shown on 773. It simply involves the +technique of developing the negative and making the print. It doesn't +add to or take anything away from 773. + +Representative FORD. It doesn't change the quality of the handwriting? + +Mr. COLE. No, sir. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cole, could you please explain by reference to +785 and 784A, and B, and C, why you concluded that the author of the +standards reproduced in part on 784A, B, and C was also the author of +785? + +Mr. COLE. There is an agreement in details of the formation of letters +which I think are distinctive to this writer. + +In other words, it involves unusual departures from the conventional or +copybook method of forming letters. One example is the capital letter +"A" on 785 in the name "A. Hidell." The stroke on the left side of that +capital is first a down stroke, which is almost exactly retracted by an +upstroke. + +In other words, this is more than necessary to give the bare outline of +the letter, and this extra stroke is a characteristic of the standard +writing, and it may be observed in a number of places on the charts A, +B, and C. One place where it may be observed is on chart "C," item 8 in +the capital "A" in "Orleans." We have a downstroke on the left side of +the letter which is almost exactly retracted by the upstroke. + +Mr. EISENBERG. This downstroke starts just above the left side of the +bar across the "A," is that the downstroke you are referring to? + +Mr. COLE. Yes, that is correct. + +Representative FORD. Would that also be true in chart C, item 4, in the +"A" in "Harvey"? + +Mr. COLE. Yes. As a matter of fact, virtually every "A," capital "A" +produced in the standard writing has that feature. There are some few +that lack it, but it occurs often enough to show that it is a habit of +this writer, and it corresponds with the "A" shown on 785. + +Now, not all features of this writing are regarded as being useful +for identification. Some of the more simplified forms naturally have +less individuality. That would be true of the capital letter "H" in +"Hidell." While I don't see any significant difference, neither does +the letter have any identifying feature. + +When we pass over to the letter "i" though, in "Hidell," we see a +feature which is distinctive, and that is the emphasis on the first +stroke of the letter, the elongation of the approach stroke. Here again +is something which the writer does as a matter of habit, it is not an +essential feature for producing a legible "i." And we also have the +circumstance that most small letter "i's" show an increase in forehand +slant. Both of these features, the emphasis of an approach stroke and +the increase in forehand slant, are found in the standard writing. + +Representative FORD. Would you explain in lay terms what you mean by +"an increase in forehand slant"? + +Mr. COLE. A slant to the right. + +One place where that may be observed in the letter "i" is on chart A, +item 8, in the word "it." Another place where rather an exaggerated +effect of the elongation of the approach stroke may be observed is on +chart A, item 3, in the "t" of the "the." Of course, this requires a +similar movement as that used in producing the letter "i," and this +elongation of the approach stroke agrees with the effect found on 785. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cole, in chart A, item 8, the word "in" appears. Do +you see the same elongated approach stroke in that word? + +Mr. COLE. It is not elongated, but it is made somewhat with extra +pressure. We also have an instance of extra pressure on "i"--there +is a very small bulb of ink which indicates an extra pressure on the +beginning stroke. I might point that out as being a feature of the +approach stroke shown in the letter "t" on chart A, item 3. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Proceed. + +Mr. COLE. Now, I won't mention each and every letter in this writing. +When I pass over a letter, the meaning is that at that particular +point I don't find anything distinctive with respect to writing habit, +although at the same time I do not find any significant difference. + +I now move to the combination of "l," the double "l's" in "Hidell" in +785. Here we observe that the second "l" is somewhat larger than the +first, and we find from time to time in the standard writing where +there are a pair of "l's" that the second is larger than the first, one +example is chart A, item 5, the word "filled." + +In the capital letter "B" of the word "Box" on 785, still in the upper +left corner, we observe that the upper lobe of the "B," that is, the +closed circular form near the top of the letter, is somewhat smaller +than the lower lobe. These proportions I observed in the standard +writing, one item is found on chart A, item 9, "B" of "Board." + +In the capital "D" of "Dallas" on 785, the relationship of the capital +loop, I mean the looped form at the top of that capital letter, is +similar to that relationship which we found in "D's" of the standard +writing, one item being on chart B, item 2, in the abbreviation +"Dept.," and in that same item 2 the capital "D" of "D.C." along the +bottom line. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cole, on chart A-6 there is another initial "D." +Would you say that bears the same conformation? + +Mr. COLE. Yes; it is similar, although the loop is not complete. The +aspect of the cap loop, I would say, would be the same if the loop had +been completed. It is not as complete there as it is in other examples. + +In the word "Dallas," the terminal "s," still referring to 785, is +modified from the conventional or copybook method of making that letter +by being flattened out, forced far over on its side. In other words, +it has an extreme forehand slant rather than standing up in a more +vertical position which we would find in a copybook. The same is true +of the terminal "s" in the word "Texas" in that area. Now this, too, is +a habit found in the standard writings, one good example being chart B +at the end of item 3, the "s" of the word "this." + +In the word "Texas" a very distinctive method of forming the letter "x" +is observed. Now, this involves first the production, passing directly +from the letter "e" first the production of a point or cusp, and then +an underhand movement similar to that which would be required for the +letter "u," then with the pencil on the paper another point or cusp +is produced. The word is finished with the letters "as," and then the +cross bar is made in such a manner that it runs along the side of the +second cusp. In other words, the basic part of the "x" form, that is, +the part which is connected to the other writings, is somewhat in the +shape of a shallow "u." May I demonstrate that on a pad here? + +Mr. EISENBERG. Please, Mr. Cole. + +Mr. COLE. I have just drawn here an "x" diagraming the form observed on +785 which shows its production of a shallow "u" shape, with the cross +bar striking across the second point of that "u" shaped form. This, I +say, is highly distinctive, and it is found in the standard writing in +several places. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Pardon me. Mr. Chairman, may I introduce that diagram as +786? + +Representative FORD. It may be admitted. + +(Commission Exhibit No. 786 was marked and received in evidence.) + +Mr. COLE. This distinctive formation of the "x" is observed on chart B, +item 4, in the word "Texas," also in the same chart B, item 13, in the +word "Texas," and also item 12 on the same chart. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cole, did you say there was no pen lift after +finishing the second cusp, until the letters "as" are added? + +Mr. COLE. That is correct. + +Mr. EISENBERG. So that the "x" is not crossed, so to speak, until the +entire word is correct. + +Mr. COLE. That is correct. + +Mr. EISENBERG. How distinctive would you regard this form as being? + +Mr. COLE. Well, I regard it as highly unusual and carrying a good deal +of weight for identification purposes, because it is a wide departure +from the copybook method or conventional method of making the letter, +and it involves the addition of a part rather than an omission which +might come from carelessness. + +Still considering Exhibit 785 and inspecting the word "Air" of "Air +mail," just under the stamp, I find a correspondence in the letter +forms with the standard writing. Chart B, item 5, where the same word +is reproduced, "Air." One distinctive feature there is the simplified +method of making the shoulder of the letter "r." Where the copybook or +conventional form would show first a point at the top of the "r" and +then the production of a rounded shoulder, this omits the point, form +and develops immediately into a rapidly sloping or curving down slope. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Will you illustrate the copybook form on your chart +paper, Mr. Cole? + +Mr. COLE. The conventional or copybook form of this "r" would be +approximately in this manner: Cusp at the top, broad shoulder on the +right side. + +Mr. EISENBERG. May I have that admitted as 787, Mr. Chairman, the +copybook form of the "r"? + +Representative FORD. It may be admitted. + +(Commission Exhibit No. 787 was marked and received in evidence.) + +Mr. COLE. The letter "m" in "mail" in 785, with respect to the +unusually broad spread of the arches of that letter, corresponds with +the letter "m" on chart B, item 6, top line, in the word "me," where we +have a similar spreading of the width of the arches of the "m." + +The capital "K" in the word "Klein's" on 785 compares favorably with +"K's" in the standard writing, chart A, items 13 and 14. + +Again, this word "Klein's" demonstrates a habit on 785 of a somewhat +greater forehand slant for the letter "i," that is, as contrasted with +the slant observed for the letter "e," and it also shows this tendency +to flatten out or run the letter "s" along the writing lines, rather +than giving it a more vertical position, and this has already been +observed in the standard writing. The entire word "Dept." that is, the +abbreviation "Dept," on 785, compares favorably with that word as shown +on chart B, item 2, that is the same abbreviation, "Dept." + +I will mention specifically two details of the letter "p." One is that +it lacks an upper extension, which is a part shown in most copybook +forms. In other words, there is no part of the staff--which, of course, +is connected to the lower extension--which extends above the body of +that letter, and that is true both as between the questioned "p" on +785 and that shown on chart B, item 2, in the abbreviation of "Dept." +Another feature is the failure to bring the body in to a point where it +touches the staff, and this is a frequent feature in the "p's" in the +standard writing. Now, on chart B, not only in the abbreviation of the +word "Dept." in item 2, but moving down to consideration of item 3 and +the word "receipt," we observe a similar effect in the letter "p." + +In the letter "t," a distinctive feature is the abruptness of ending +that letter just before it reaches the writing line, which would differ +from other letters, which touch the writing line, and many of which +have a rising terminal stroke. In the questioned writing on 785 in "t" +of "Dept," and also in the "t" in the abbreviation of "street" in the +line below, we have just such a thing in the letter "t" which is shown +from time to time in the standard writing--one example being chart A, +item 13 in the abbreviation of "street." We have the same effect on +chart A, item 8, in the word "it." + +In the word "Washington" on 785, one distinctive feature is the curved +staff of the letter "g." In other words, there is a continuous curve +from the apex of the "g" down to the bottom of the lower extension, and +this method of treating a "g" is repeated in the standard writing, one +example being chart A, item 2, in the word "obligations." + +Mr. EISENBERG. Would that also be true in chart B, item 10, in the word +"Washington"? + +Mr. COLE. Yes, sir; a very good example of it. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cole, that item B-10 is spelled differently from the +standard, from the questioned document, rather. Does that--what is your +opinion as to that variation in spelling? + +Mr. COLE. There are a number of misspellings in the standard writings, +and sometimes in the standard you will find words repeated in a correct +spelling and at other times with an incorrect spelling. In other words, +there is a variation in that respect. I think it comes partly from +carelessness, not essentially from lack of knowledge of how to spell +the word. + +Representative FORD. These variations would be in the same letter or +the same document? + +Mr. COLE. Yes; sometimes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Actually there is an example of that in B-2, where +Washington is spelled incorrectly? + +Mr. COLE. That is correct. Now, in the combination of letters "cago" +just below the word "Washington" on 785, we also have a repetition of +this curved right side of the letter "g" found also in the standard +writing, and another feature worth noticing there is the closing of +the letter "o" rather far back on the upper left side of the letter. +This is distinctive because many writers are reluctant to make +leftward strokes, since the normal movement of handwriting is from +left to right, and this I would say represents a writing habit in the +questioned writing which is also repeated in the standard in a number +of places. Chart B, in the abbreviation "no," of item 10, that is, the +second segment of item 10, and also in the zero, item 11, you see a +similar method of closing that circular form far back on the left side +of the letter. + +Representative FORD. That would appear also in B-13 in the word "to"? + +Mr. COLE. Yes, sir. + +Representative FORD. Is there a difference in B-15 "you"? + +Mr. COLE. Yes, sir; there is, but we are dealing with a terminal form +in the questioned writing. In other words, the opportunities for +expressing this particular habit is present in terminal forms and not +medial forms, the forms inside a word. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Do you find generally or often that a writer's terminal +forms or beginning forms will differ from the forms inside of the--the +letters inside of the word? + +Mr. COLE. Yes; in that it gives a different opportunity for expression +of writing habit. + +Mr. EISENBERG. So is this an unusual--is this unusual, then that the +terminal form should be different? + +Mr. COLE. No; not at all. + +I invite attention to the exaggerated length of the comma following the +figure "6" on 785. This is repeated in the standard writing on chart +B, item 2, the comma following the word "chief." Also on chart B the +commas in items 1 and 9, following the word "Dallas." The double "l's" +of the abbreviation "Ill" on 785, again show the habit of making the +second "l" somewhat larger than the first, which was previously pointed +out as corresponding to the standard writing on chart A, item 5 in the +word "filled." + +The form of the capital letter "I" of "Ill" on 785 compares favorably +with that form as on on chart B, items 3 and 4 where we have the +personal pronoun "I." Now, moving now to the writing which is a part +of the order form bearing the name "Klein's" on this same Exhibit 785, +I will draw attention to the method of making the dollar sign before +the amount "19.95." In the copybook or conventional method of making +this particular sign the "=S=" shape is usually fairly prominent. In +other words, the crossbars are usually subordinated to the "=S=" shape. +Here we observe a very heavy pressure and exaggerated length and wide +spacing of those crossbars, which almost obliterate the "=S=" shaped +part of the dollar sign. This is shown in the standard writing chart B, +item 6, second line, the dollar sign preceding "$2." + +On this order form the figure "5" of the amount "$19.95" shows +an exaggerated length of the final stroke of the "5," I mean the +approximately horizontal stroke across the top of the letter. That same +habit was previously observed in the "5" of the combination "2915" at +the upper left of 785. Now, this method of--excuse me, let me mention +one more example of that letter "5" on 785. On the order form, the +figure "5" of the post office box number "2915" shows the same feature. +Moving now to the standard writing, we find that treatment of the +letter "5," of the figure "5," on chart B, item 7, in the combination +of figures "6225." It is also shown on chart B, item 1, in the +combination of figures "2915," and again in the same position, item 9 +of chart B. + +In the name "A. Hidell," I observe that we have a capital "H" and we +have capital forms of the "l's" but the remainder of the name uses +lower case letters, "ide" as lower case letters. + +Mr. EISENBERG. This is in the order blank again? + +Mr. COLE. Yes, sir. This habit of using a combination of capital and +small letters is a habit in the standard writing. One example would +be chart C, item 6, where various words show a similar mixture. For +example, in the name "Oswald" we have capital forms for "O," "S," "W," +and "A," but a lower case letter for the "l" and "d." Dropping down to +the word "Mercedes," we have capital forms for "M," "R," "C," and "S," +but in that same word the letters "e" and "d" have lower case forms. +And this mixture of capitals and small letters, as I say is found +frequently in the standard writing. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Well, is a mixture like that infrequent--apart from the +particular letters which you use as small or large letters? + +Mr. COLE. Well, I would say it is a part of this man's handwriting +habit to make such mixtures. Another person who might mix capital +and lower case forms might perhaps select different letters for that +purpose. In other words, I think in this writing we find that very +frequently as to the letter "i" and the letter "e." + +Mr. EISENBERG. Is the fact of mixture itself significant? + +Mr. COLE. Yes; it is a part of his writing habit. + +Mr. EISENBERG. How highly individualistic is the fact of mixture to +this person's writing? + +Mr. COLE. I regard it as having a fair weight. I wouldn't classify it +with the very considerable weight we give to that distorted form of the +"x" but I think it is just one more point for consideration with all of +the other similarities. + +A similar mixture is found in the word "Texas." Again referring to the +order form of 785, we have all capital letters except the letter "e," +and then moving over to the standard writing, see the word "Texas" on +chart C, item 1, the use of capital letters except as to the "e" form. + +Representative FORD. The same would be true, I gather, on C-7 in the +use of "e" in the word "Texas"? + +Mr. COLE. Yes, sir. This combination of agreement in the details of +forms of letters, proportions, and other features between the writing +on Commission Exhibit 785 and various parts of the standard writing +constitute the basis for my opinion that the writings are in the hand +of the same person. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cole, in many cases you have either pointed to, or +it can be noted, that there are differences or variations within the +writing of the standards or in the writing of the questioned documents. +Is this unusual? + +Mr. COLE. No; as a matter of fact, it is usual to find variations +in handwriting, and, of course, that is demonstrated by the various +standard writing that we have here, where you find the same combination +of letters they are not identical with a photographic sameness, but +they have a range of variation. I would say that no part of the +questioned writing that we have considered on 785 would go outside of +that normal range of variation which is true in the standards. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did you find any differences between 785--or 773, of +which 785 is a reproduction--and the standards? + +Mr. COLE. I don't find anything that I would regard as a significant +difference, but, of course, there are points where there is not a +perfect identity. For example, in the combination of letters "Ill." an +abbreviation for Illinois, while we don't have that same abbreviation +in the standards, we have got the full name written out on chart B, +item 5, and item 14. We have a smooth curved connection between the "I" +and the following "l" in those particular parts of the standard, but +there is an angular connection on 785 between the same letters. That is +a difference or variation, but I don't regard it as necessarily being a +significant one. It could be merely an accidental feature, a momentary +hesitation on 785 before proceeding into the making of the "l." + +Mr. EISENBERG. Why don't you conclude on the basis of that difference +that the questioned document was written by a different author than the +standard documents? + +Mr. COLE. Because it is not nearly enough to raise such a question. +There would be required for an opinion that this was made by some other +person, a similar body of differences corresponding to the similarities +that I have talked about. In other words, if in fact this was in the +handwriting of some other person, I would expect to be able to make +about the same demonstration with respect to differences as I have +already made with regard to similarity. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Would you need to find as many differences as +similarities in order to say there was a different author involved in +the questioned and standard? + +Mr. COLE. No; depending upon the character of the differences. A fairly +small number would prevent a conclusion of identity or show the hand of +some other person, if they were really distinctive differences. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cole, did you find any evidence in 773 that the +author attempted to disguise his handwriting? + +Mr. COLE. Were you referring to 785? + +Mr. EISENBERG. 785 is a reproduction of 773. You can use 785 to answer +the question, yes. + +Mr. COLE. There is one faint suggestion of that possibility. It doesn't +permit a conclusion that that was the purpose. But I refer to the use +of a lower case "t" in the word "texas" in the return address in the +upper left corner. Since this writer demonstrates a good knowledge +about the formation of capital letters, it is possible that the choice +to make a lower case "t" was a deliberate one, and it could have been +at that particular point for the purpose of disguise. But I say if that +was his purpose, it certainly was not maintained, and would be a very +faint effort toward disguise. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cole, do you consider it unusual for a person to use +an alias without attempting to disguise his handwriting? + +Mr. COLE. No; I would not. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Have you had any experience along those lines? + +Mr. COLE. Yes; I have observed a number of aliases where there is no +particular effort to disguise. + +Mr. EISENBERG. In your capacity as questioned document examiner of +the Treasury Department, do you receive for examination checks, the +endorsements on which have been forged? + +Mr. COLE. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And on any occasion does the endorsement, the forged +endorsement, does the forged endorsement indicate that no effort, no +attempt has been made to disguise the endorsements? + +Mr. COLE. That is a rather frequent condition, that the spurious +endorsement is made without an attempt to conceal or disguise writing +habit or to imitate the writing of any other person. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cole, do you know on the basis of your experience +whether individuals ever resort to handprinting as an attempt at +disguise? + +Mr. COLE. Yes; it is a rather frequent method of disguise. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, you testified earlier that handprinting can be +identified as to author? + +Mr. COLE. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Is this common knowledge, that is to say---- + +Mr. COLE. It is common knowledge among document examiners. I don't +think it is common knowledge among others. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Might a layman attempt to disguise his handwriting +simply by resorting to undisguised handprinting? + +Mr. COLE. Yes; he might. + +Mr. EISENBERG. What are the usual evidences of disguise, by the way, +Mr. Cole? + +Mr. COLE. Well, in cursive handwriting the usual evidences of disguise +involve some unnaturalness, such as a reduction of writing speed, and +other distortions such as writing very large, with an exaggerated +freedom, where parts of letters of various words are run together; such +as an exaggerated length of lower extensions and upward extensions +which tends to intermingle forms and make it difficult to see the +details of them; or writing very small, in almost microscopic size +where, again, the width of a pen stroke itself tends to conceal +details of handwriting; alterations of slant, such as a person who +normally writes a forehand slant or slanting to the right, changing to +a vertical or a backhand slant. Most efforts at disguise are not well +planned. They usually involve a determination to alter the writing +along one particular line such as writing very large, very small, or a +change in the slant. Other features are the simplification of letter +forms. For example, a person attempting to conceal a writing habit may +feel that his writing habit is revealed mostly by capital letters so +you might have him using printed forms for capitals, but cursive forms +for most other letters. + +Representative FORD. Can you tell the difference between a right-handed +and a left-handed person by either cursive or capital letters? + +Mr. COLE. No, sir; not definitely. Left-handed writers tend to write +more vertically, and for that particular left-hand writer who holds +his hand above the writing line, this gives a reversal of the pressure +on what would ordinarily be regarded as upstrokes and downstrokes, and +when you see that reversal this is an indication of left-hand writing. +But it is only when you have that special circumstance that you get +that signal about it. + +Representative FORD. Is there anything in any of the writings that +you have analyzed of Lee Harvey Oswald of an indication that he was +left-handed? + +Mr. COLE. Well, I wouldn't say that I could make a determination of +whether he was left-handed or right-handed. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cole, in your expert work do you draw a distinction +between a spurious and a forged document? + +Mr. COLE. Well, I think of the word "forgery" as having that legal +connotation of malice or intent. The production of a false writing with +an intention to deceive or defraud somebody else. Spurious writing +means a false writing. + +Mr. EISENBERG. That is, a writing produced by one hand calculated to +look as if it had been produced by another? + +Mr. COLE. Well, not necessarily, that situation that you just discussed +would involve simulation of the person's, another person's writing. But +the word "spurious" could refer to a false writing, the writing of the +name of one person by another who had no particular right to do it. +But, of course, if the element of an intent to defraud is not there, I +suppose in a legal sense it is not forgery. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, what are the elements which you look for to see +whether a person, A, has attempted to reproduce the handwriting of +another person, B, with intent to deceive or otherwise? + +Mr. COLE. Two categories of differences. One, defects of line +quality, by which is meant tremor, waver, patching, retouching, and +noncontinuous lines, pen lifts in awkward and unusual places. And the +other class of differences is details of the forms of letters, by which +I mean that when the person attempting to simulate another writing +concentrates upon the reproduction of one detail, he is likely not to +see other details. He may, for example, be able to imitate the gross +form of a letter but he may get proportions wrong or letter connections +wrong. + +Mr. EISENBERG. What is the probability that person A could imitate the +handwriting of person B without leaving a telltale trace in one of +these two categories? + +Mr. COLE. I think it is only a very remote possibility. But I would add +to that the need for having a fairly extensive specimen of writing. +Of course the possibility of a successful simulation is better with +smaller specimens of writing. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, did you find any evidence in either category that +a person had attempted to simulate the writing of the author of the +standards in this case in producing either 773 or any of the other +questioned documents which you examined? + +Mr. COLE. No; I did not find such indications. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And you feel, did you say, there would be only a remote +probability that in the absence of such indication such a simulation +could exist? + +Mr. COLE. Yes, sir. + +Mr. EISENBERG. When you say remote, could you put this in terms of +figures? + +Mr. COLE. I would say there is no reasonable possibility of it, and I +will put it this way: That from my study of these documents, there is +no particular element or elements of the handwriting that I can point +to and say this could be evidence of simulation. + +Mr. EISENBERG. You mentioned before that you need to have a sufficient +amount of writing to make that type of determination. Do you feel that +the questioned documents provided a sufficient amount of writing for +that? + +Mr. COLE. They do. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Is that individually or collectively? + +Mr. COLE. Individually. + +Representative FORD. All of the illustrations on 784 A, B, and C are +taken from Commission exhibits---- + +Mr. EISENBERG. 774-783. + +Representative FORD. Collectively? + +Mr. COLE. Yes, sir. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Carrying that question forward, on what basis did you +select excerpts from 774 to 783 to reproduce 784 A, B, and C? + +Mr. COLE. The chief effort was to collect together in a fairly small +space items that were appropriate for comparison through repetition of +the same material, and in doing that there was kept in mind the general +purpose of giving a good representative cross section of all of the +writing habit illustrated in the standard writings. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Well, that anticipates my next question, which is, +whether this is a representative cross section or was selected in +order to reproduce those particular characteristics you find in the +questioned documents. + +Mr. COLE. I think it is a representative cross section, and I say a +part of the effort was to bring here some letters and combinations for +convenience of comparison. It was in no way an effort to substitute +these charts for the originals. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Your actual examination was made on the basis of the +originals or the charts, Mr. Cole? + +Mr. COLE. Yes; all of the--the chief examination was made upon the +basis of the originals and all parts of the originals, not limited to +the parts shown in the charts. + +Mr. EISENBERG. These charts are only for demonstrative purposes, making +your testimony easier to follow, is that correct? + +Mr. COLE. Yes, sir. + +Mr. EISENBERG. You discussed briefly, Mr. Cole, or perhaps more than +briefly, the use of a photograph as a standard. Now, in the case +of 773, a photograph is used as a questioned document, or rather a +questioned document consists of a photograph. Are the comments you +made on the use of a photograph as a standard applicable to the use +of a photograph as a questioned document, that is, can you make a +determination on the handwriting in a photograph? + +Mr. COLE. With these photographs I think a satisfactory determination +can be made. I would not necessarily include all photographs. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Yes? + +Mr. COLE. Because there is a widely varying quality in photographs. + +Mr. EISENBERG. When you say these photographs, do you include the other +photographs included among the questioned documents you have examined +at my request? + +Mr. COLE. Yes, sir. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cole, I now hand you an item consisting of a U.S. +postal money order in the amount of $21.45, payable to Klein's Sporting +Goods, from "A. Hidell, P.O. Box 2915, Dallas, Texas." For the record I +will state that this money order was included with the purchase order +in Exhibit 773 which has just been identified, and was intended and +used as payment for the weapon shipped in response to the purchase +order, 773. I ask you, Mr. Cole, whether you have examined this money +order for the purpose of determining whether it was prepared by the +author of the standards? + +Mr. COLE. Yes, sir. + +Mr. EISENBERG. What was your conclusion, Mr. Cole? + +Mr. COLE. It is my conclusion that the handwriting on this money order +is in the hand of the person who executed the standard writing. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, may I have this money order admitted as +788? + +Representative FORD. It may be admitted. + +(The document was marked as Commission Exhibit No. 788, and was +received in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. Have you prepared a photograph of that Exhibit 788, the +money order? + +Mr. COLE. Yes; I have. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And you have produced that photograph for me just now, +Mr. Cole? + +Mr. COLE. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Was this prepared by you or under your supervision? + +Mr. COLE. Yes, sir. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Is it an accurate photograph of 788? + +Mr. COLE. It is. + +Mr. EISENBERG. May this be admitted as 789, Mr. Chairman? + +Representative FORD. It may be admitted. + +(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 789, and +received in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cole, before you discuss your conclusion, the +handwriting on 788 seems to have a slight blur in some parts. Could you +explain that in any way? + +Mr. COLE. Yes; it is my view that this document has been in contact +with moisture which affected the ink of the handwriting. Such contact +might have been through an effort to develop fingerprints. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Was it or is it discolored at this point at all, do you +think? + +Mr. COLE. There are only two small areas of discoloration on this +document, one of them being along the upper edge just above the figure +"9," and the other along the right edge just opposite the figure "5." +This indicates to me that at one time this document was more deeply +stained but has been cleared up by some chemical bleach. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Was it in the same condition when you examined it as it +is now? + +Mr. COLE. It was. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cole, would you explain by use of charts 784 A, B, +and C, and the photograph 789, why you conclude 788 was prepared by the +author of the standards in this case? + +Mr. COLE. On the photograph, 789, I invite attention to the capital +"K" of "Klein's," which compares favorably in form to the "K's" of +exhibit--of chart A, items 13 and 14, with the exception of a larger +circle at the center of that "K" on the right side of 789, which is not +reproduced in the standards, but it is my belief that this writer might +well produce such a circular form when a letter is somewhat larger and +more freely made. + +Mr. EISENBERG. On what do you base that belief, Mr. Cole? + +Mr. COLE. That that would be a normal result of greater freedom and a +larger writing, it would produce a circular form rather than an angle. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Is this based upon your experience with questioned +documents and making analyses? + +Mr. COLE. Yes, sir; now, in that---- + +Mr. EISENBERG. Excuse me 1 second. Just to elaborate on that. Do I take +it that your experience is such that you have found you can predict +forms of letters based upon the samples you have before you, predict +forms which may be used in other samples by the same author? + +Mr. COLE. Well, within certain narrow limits. That is, having +information about the range of variation in the body of standard +writing, it is reasonable to make a small allowance for the production +of forms not actually illustrated there, as long as they are consistent +with the forms that are actually available for examination. In other +words, I would regard it as a consistent thing in this writing to +occasionally produce a circle at the center portion of a letter "K"; it +does not, in my opinion, represent a difference of writing habit. + +Now, in that same word we observe a habit heretofore mentioned of +increasing the amount of forehand slant, in the letter "i"--that is in +"Klein's" of the photograph 789--which has previously been observed +in the standard writing. Several examples have been pointed out. For +the present, I will mention the one on chart A, item 1 in the word +"obligations," the second letter "i" there shows an increased forehand +slant. The same is true of the "i" of the word "firm" on the same line. + +The combination of letters in the word "sporting," that is, the +combination "port," are illustrated in the standard writing, chart A, +item 2 in the word "support," item 3 in the word "port," in item 4 in +the word "transportation," and here we find very close agreement in +all details of those letter forms. With respect to the letter "p," +the absence of an under extension, that is, the absence of any part +rising above the arched part of the letter on the writing line, and the +circumstance that the body of the letter or arch, as it is shown here +on the photograph 789, is not brought all the way into the staff, it is +made almost as a pure arch form with no movement in here towards the +staff, which is the same movement we have here on chart A, item 3 in +the word "port," repeated also on item 4, and in the two "p's" of item +2. Now, there is a distinctive method of making the connection between +the letters "o" and "r," by drawing a very straight line, horizontal +line almost exactly paralleling the base of the word across from the +letter "o" to the "r" on the photograph 789, and this movement is also +repeated on chart A, items 3 and 4, in the combination letters "or" +also in item 2 in the same combination of letters. + +This writing demonstrates the habit in the figure "5" of a considerable +exaggeration of the final stroke of the letter, or the cap stroke, a +horizontal stroke at the top of the letter observed on the photograph +789, and shown in several places in the standard writing, some of which +have already been mentioned, one being on chart C, item 7, and on chart +B, items 1 and 9, the figure "5." + +Also in this writing, we find that highly distinctive "x" form in the +word "Texas," involving the production of a shallow =U=-shaped form +with the crossbar passing across the second point of that =U=-shaped +form for the word "Texas." This is the basis for my conclusion that the +questioned writing on the money order is in the hand of the author of +the standard writing. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cole, I now hand you Commission Exhibit 135, which, +for the record, consists of the purchase order to Seaport Traders from +"A. Hidell" for the revolver which was used in the murder of Officer +Tippit. + +Mr. Cole, have you examined Commission Exhibit 135 to determine whether +it was produced by the author of the standards in this case? + +Mr. COLE. I have. + +Mr. EISENBERG. What is your conclusion? + +Mr. COLE. It is my conclusion that this handwriting is in the hand of +the person who produced the standard writing. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Have you taken a photograph of 135? + +Mr. COLE. Yes, sir; I have. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Would you produce that, please? + +Was this photograph prepared by you or under your supervision? + +Mr. COLE. Yes, sir. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Is it an accurate reproduction of 135? + +Mr. COLE. It is. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, may I have that admitted as 790? + +Representative FORD. It may be admitted. + +(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 790, and +received in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cole, could you explain your reasons for your +conclusion by reference to the charts 784 A, B, and C, and to the +photograph, 790? + +Mr. COLE. On the photograph 790 I invite attention to the first line +of handprinting, which has a long horizontal line drawn through it. +Toward the ends of that line there is an amount which appears to read +"$1.35," and I draw attention to the form of the dollar sign, which +sign has already been mentioned in other writing, and here we find that +same feature of subordinating the =S= part of the dollar sign to the +crossbars, the crossbars being, or the verticals being made in such a +way as to practically obliterate the =S=-shaped part. There, again, +that is a feature of writing habit of the author of the writing on 790 +which corresponds with the habit in the standard writing shown on chart +B, item 6, second line, in the amount "$2.00." + +Next, I draw your attention, in the approximate area as that just +discussed on 790 there, to the amount "29.95." Now, with respect to the +form of the figure "2" we observe a rounded cap or top to the letter +and a rather prominent loop to the base, and it is observed that the +leftward extension of the cap of the letter is considerably short of +the amount of leftward motion across the base. This corresponds to the +form and placement of parts as shown in the standard writing chart B, +item 1, in the combination "2915." + +In that same amount, on the photograph 790, again we observe the +exaggerated length of the cap of the figure "5" which corresponds to +the standard writing, chart B, item 1, the figure "5" there. + +The dollar sign which was previously described is repeated in the +amount "$10.00" on the left side of the photograph 790, and I believe +that the treatment of the verticals there is the same, that is, +an unusually heavy pressure, but it appears that the pen was not +delivering a normal quantity of ink at that point. Nevertheless, there +is this same effect of almost obliterating the =S=-shaped part of the +dollar sign. + +Now, moving on down to the bottom part of the photograph 790, and +considering first the form of the "B" in the word "Box" on the address +line, here again we observe that tendency of a fairly small upper lobe +relative to the size of the lower lobe of the "B," and this is repeated +in the standard writing, one place being chart B, item 1, in the "B" of +"Box." + +The word "DALLAS" on the photograph 790 shows capital "L's" which have +a compound curve across the base: that is, instead of a simplified form +of letter, where there would be a simple straight line across the base, +we have first a rising stroke and then a stroke that curves downward +towards the writing line. This compound curve across the base of "L's" +is repeated in the standard writing, chart B, item 1 and 9, in the same +word "DALLAS." + +Again, on the photograph 790, the second letter "A" in "DALLAS" +illustrates a habit previously mentioned of using a downstroke to begin +the left side of the "A," which stroke is almost exactly traced, and +this too is repeated in the standard, chart B, item 1, the second "A" +of "DALLAS." Opposite the printed word "State" on photograph 790, the +word "Texas" again shows this mixture of capital forms and lower-case +forms, specifically the use of a lower case "e" in combination with +capital letters, which is true in the standard writing, chart B, items +1 and 9, in the word "Texas." + +This constitutes my reasons for believing that the questioned writing +shown in the photograph 790 is in the hand of the author of the +standard writing. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cole, there seems to be a very varying amount of +blackness or color in the ink on Commission Exhibit 135, which is shown +up in your photograph. Do you have any explanation for that? + +Mr. COLE. I think the pen was not functioning properly, that very heavy +pressure was used on the document to bring the ink down from the pen, +and we can see that the writer is reacting to this, for example, in the +word "Box" on the address line, where you have only a moderate quantity +of ink and then as you move along to the figures "2915" you observe +that heavier pressure is used. In other words, it is my view that the +writer observed that the pen was tending to fail, and that he increased +pressure in order to persuade more ink to come down from the pen. + +Mr. EISENBERG. There also seems to be a doubling of lines in some +parts, such as the "J" in "A. J. Hidell," and the upper area also of +"A. J. Hidell." + +Mr. COLE. Yes; that could very well be for the same reasons, because if +you move to the upper part of this exhibit there are other places where +the pen almost failed. You have strokes that have a shallow center with +ink only on the outside borders of strokes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cole, can you make out the writing which is printed +in and then crossed out in this exhibit? + +Mr. COLE. Well, a part of it. + +Just below the printed word "Snubbie" there appears to be a line of +writing which says, "1 AMMO," if that is "A-M-M-O"--the second "M" is +somewhat indistinct. And then there is parenthesis, BOX of 25, close +parenthesis, dollar mark, 1.35. Then just below that there is a line of +writing, the first word of which I cannot make out, that is, I cannot +make any intelligible word of it, but the second word appears to be +"holster." In other words, the word "holster" would lie just above the +words "total price" and then there follows some figures which appear to +be "1.95." + +Representative FORD. Is it your judgment on this exhibit that at the +point where the applicant is required to give his age that it is "23" +or "28"? + +Mr. COLE. I would read that as "28." + +Mr. EISENBERG. Can you make out the date which is next to that age, Mr. +Cole? + +Mr. COLE. Well, I read the first part of the date as 1/27, and I am +unable to read the last figure, which is through a part of the very +heavy dotted line. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Do there seem to be one or two figures? + +Mr. COLE. It looks like a single figure there following a diagonal. + +(Discussion off the record.) + +Representative FORD. Back on the record. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cole, I now hand you an item consisting of part of +an application for a post office box, dated "box opened October 9, +1962," and also dated in the lower right "October 9, 1962," with the +signature "Lee H. Oswald" and I ask you whether you have examined that +item? + +Mr. COLE. Yes, sir; I have. + +Mr. EISENBERG. May I have that admitted as 791, Mr. Chairman? + +Representative FORD. It may be admitted. + +(Commission Exhibit No. 791 was marked and received in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. Have you compared it with the standards in this case, +Mr. Cole? + +Mr. COLE. I have. + +Mr. EISENBERG. What is your conclusion? + +Mr. COLE. It is my conclusion that the handprinted name "Lee H. +Oswald," the address "3519 Fairmore Ave.," and the signature "Lee H. +Oswald" on this document are in the hand of the person who executed the +standard writing. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Have you prepared a photograph of 791? + +Mr. COLE. Yes, sir; I have. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Can you produce that? + +Thank you. Is this photograph which you have handed me an accurate +reproduction prepared by you or under your supervision? + +Mr. COLE. Yes, sir; it is. + +Mr. EISENBERG. May I have this admitted as 792? + +Representative FORD. It may be admitted. + +(Commission Exhibit No. 792 was marked and received in evidence.) + +Representative FORD. Continue. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Before we go any further, what is your conclusion +concerning the words "Dallas, Texas" appearing after "Fairmore Ave."? + +Mr. COLE. It is my conclusion that that wording is not in the writing +of the author of the standard writing. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And that in "2915"? + +Mr. COLE. That is not in the handwriting of the author of the standards. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Do you have any idea who inserted that? + +Mr. COLE. No, sir; I don't but I think in the handling of this kind of +material it happens from time to time that a postal clerk may complete +a document. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, with reference to 792 and 784 A, B, and C, could +you explain the reasons for concluding that 791 is in the handwriting +of the author of the standards as to those portions which you have +designated as being in the handwriting of the author of the standards? + +Mr. COLE. In the printed name at the upper left of the photograph 792 +the capital "L" of "Lee" shows a compound curve across the base, which +has previously been mentioned as a handwriting habit found in the +standards, one example being on chart B, item 9, another example on +chart C, item 4. + +The name "Oswald" shows the use of capital forms except for the letters +"ld." This particular use of a mixture of capitals and lower-case forms +is found on chart C, item 1, at the top line where the final forms "l" +and "d" are lower case forms. + +I will mention also the particular writing movement used for +constructing the letter "d," referring to the photograph 792. There is +first a moderately long downstroke, and then without lifting the pen +there is a rising movement which at the same time moves towards the +left to complete the body of the letter. This method of construction +is also observed in the standards, chart C, item 1, top line, in the +"d" of "Oswald." Since there is a slightly more open effect at the base +in this standard "d," the method of construction can be seen clearly, +but it was made in the same way in the photograph, as shown by the +photograph 792. + +In the word "Fairmore," it is observed that on the photograph 792 there +is a tendency to reduce the size of the small letter "i" and, of +course, this is again an example of the use of the lower case form in +combination with the capitals. The size relationship and the particular +mixture of this form with capitals is shown in the standard writing +chart C, item 5, in the word "deportations" and in the word "diet," +also in item 9 in the word "curtailment." + +The word "Fairmore" also shows the use of a lower case "e" in +combination with capital letters, which has been observed frequently +in several parts of the standard writing, one example not mentioned +heretofore is item 3 of chart C in the word "discharge." + +The signature "Lee H. Oswald" along the lower line shown by the +photograph 792 compares favorably in all details with the signatures in +the name of "Lee H. Oswald" in several standard charts, being on chart +A, item 15; on chart B, again item 15; also on chart B, item No. 1; and +on chart C, item 6, the next to the last line. Now, one distinctive +feature of this signature is the writing movement employed in the +combination of letters capital "O" and the "s" following, where the +"s" form is rather blurred or corrupted. It does not give a complete +capital "s" form, but instead the upper part of the "s" is represented +only by a line which is approximately horizontal, sinking downwards to +the base of the "s," and then a looped form at the base. + +Mr. EISENBERG. You said a capital "s" form; did you mean that? + +Mr. COLE. No; I meant that it is not a complete "s" form. It is +somewhat slurred or blurred with respect to a true "s" form. This +particular method of slurring the form is clearly illustrated on chart +B, item 1, in the name "Oswald" and is also shown on chart B, item 15, +in the name "Oswald." + +(At this point Senator Cooper entered the hearing room.) + +Mr. COLE [continuing]. In the signature shown by the photograph 792, in +the capital "L," we observe with regard to the base loop, this would +be the lower half of the letter, we see a vertical aspect of that base +loop. Now, in a more conventional or, say, a copybook form of a letter +"L" you would find the base loop with a horizontal aspect, that is, +stretched out along the writing line. Here we find a vertical aspect of +that part, which is reproduced in the standard writing on chart A, item +15. + +That last reference was to the base loop of the capital "L" of the +signature "Lee H. Oswald" as shown by the photograph 792 as compared +with chart A, item 15. + +Now on the photograph 792, we observe that between the two upright +strokes of the letter "H" there is a very thin diagonal line of +joining. This is repeated in the standard writing, chart B, item 1, top +line. Now, again in this "H" as shown on 792 we see this more or less +vertical aspect of the treatment of a looped formation near the base of +the right side of the letter "H," that is, instead of moving fully to +the left to give a normal cross bar, there is only a base loop there +which, I say, is made in a vertical direction. This is repeated in the +standard writing, chart A, item 15, in the middle initial "H." + +The "w" of "Oswald" shown by the photograph 792 is characterized by a +rather full rounding across the base of the letter, and this degree of +roundness is shown in the standard writing, chart B, item 15. There is +a horizontal stroke which constitutes the letter connection between +"w" and "a" shown by the photograph 792, and this method of making a +connection is repeated in the standards, chart B, item 15. + +Mr. EISENBERG. You say "w" and "a"? + +Mr. COLE. "w" and "a". + +The size relationship between the letter "l" and the letter "d" as +shown by the photograph 792 is the same as that found on chart A, item +15. The relationship of the body of the "d"--by which I mean that part +which would ordinarily rest on the writing line, and in a conventional +form would be more or less circular--and the upper extension is also +similar as between the photograph 792 and chart A, item 15. In other +words, there is practically no roundness of the body. Again, we have +got an emphasis of the more or less vertical strokes for what should be +a rounded portion for the body. + +This constitutes my reasons for believing that the questioned writing +as shown by the photograph 792 is in the hand of the person who +executed the standard writing. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Any further questions on this application? + +Representative FORD. No questions. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cole. I now hand you an item consisting of a +change-of-address card addressed to the "Postmaster, Dallas, Texas," +dated May 12, 1963, relating to Post Office Box 2915 in Dallas, +Tex., setting forth a new address at Magazine Street, New Orleans, +and signed "Lee H. Oswald," and I ask you if you have examined that +change-of-address card? + +Mr. COLE. Yes, I have. + +Mr. EISENBERG. May this be admitted as 793, Mr. Chairman? + +Representative FORD. It may be admitted. + +(Commission Exhibit No. 793 was marked and received in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. Have you compared that change-of-address card, 793, with +the standards in this case? + +Mr. COLE. Yes, sir; I have. + +Mr. EISENBERG. What is your conclusion? + +Mr. COLE. It is my conclusion that the author of the writing on Exhibit +793 is the same person who executed the standard writings. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did you prepare a photograph of 793? + +Mr. COLE. I did. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Can you produce that? + +Is this an accurate photograph, an accurate reproduction, of 793, +prepared by you or under your supervision? + +Mr. COLE. Yes, it is. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, may this be admitted as 794? + +Representative FORD. It may be admitted. + +(Commission Exhibit No. 794 was marked and received in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. By reference to the photograph 794 and reference to your +charts 784 A, B, and C, could you discuss the reasons which led you to +your conclusion concerning this change-of-address card? + +Mr. COLE. Handwriting habits shown by this exhibit, and I am looking +now at the photograph 794, have been mentioned heretofore. If it is +agreeable, I will simply review these in a body before proceeding to +the standard writing. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, is that agreeable? + +Representative FORD. You may proceed. + +Mr. COLE. On line 1, shown by the photograph 794, the use of a lower +case "l" and "d" in combination with capital letters, the compound +curve across the base of the "L" in "Lee," the exaggerated length of +the comma between the two names; below, in the word "BOX," the somewhat +larger upper lobe of the capital "B"--excuse me, the somewhat smaller +upper lobe of the capital "B" as contrasted with the larger lobe of +that letter; in the "O" of "BOX" the connection or the closing of the +"O" fairly high on the left side instead of towards the center or the +right side, the same habit being also illustrated in the "O" in the +combination "P.O."; the form of the "2" with the rather prominent base +loop; the exaggerated length of the cap of the figure "5"; in the +word "Dallas," the compound curve across the base of the "L"s; the +circumstance that the "A" begins with a down stroke which is almost +exactly retraced; the circumstance that the word "Texas" includes a +lower case "e"; the use of the small letter "i" in combination with +capital letters in the word "Magazine"; and similar features to those +just described in the word "New Orleans." + +Now, all of these things on the charts Exhibit A, B, and C + +Mr. EISENBERG. I don't think you need to point to them in detail, since +you have already pointed to those items. + +Mr. COLE. Yes. + +I also find a substantial agreement in details of the signature, "Lee +H. Oswald," as shown by the photograph 794, and signatures shown in the +standard writing, with particular regard to the signature of chart C, +item 6, next to the last line. + +This constitutes my reasons for believing that the writing on +Commission Exhibit 793 is in the hand of the person who made the +standard writing. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cole, there seems to be a double line in several of +these letters on the reverse side of this change-of-address card, such +as the "D" in "DALLAS," the "e" in "Texas" and so forth. Can you give +any explanation for that? + +Mr. COLE. Well, I think the double line is more evident in the address +"4907 Magazine Street, New Orleans, La." + +Mr. EISENBERG. Yes? + +Mr. COLE. And a possible reason is that the writer was dissatisfied +with the width of the line as shown on the two lines above. While I +regard it as having a fair legibility, the only explanation I can +see is that for this particular document the writer wanted a heavier +writing and, of course, one way to get it is to go over it again. + +A thing of this kind can also be related to a writer's knowledge of the +functioning of a certain pen. + +If he knows that the pen he is using usually gives a heavier line, and +for a particular writing he sees a thinner line, he may then make some +modification in his handling of the pen and get the kind of line he +wants. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Is this similar to the retouching you mentioned earlier +as being an evidence of forgery? + +Mr. COLE. I would say no, since it is done in such an apparently +spontaneous and confident manner. There is not the slightest evidence +that any effort was made to conceal the presence of this retracing. +I think I should say that generally the person producing a false or +spurious writing does retouching in order to correct some imperfection +of a letter, that is, he criticizes his work as he goes along and if he +encounters a part which he thinks is incorrect with respect to form, he +may then retouch it in order to correct it. It would be very unusual in +any false or spurious writing to see any extensive retracing. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Any further questions on this card? + +Representative FORD. No further questions. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cole, I now hand you an item which appears to be a +selective service system notice of classification with the name "Alek +James Hidell" printed and the same signature, and a photograph which +appears to be the photograph of Lee Harvey Oswald--and I state for the +record that this item was obtained from the wallet of Lee Harvey Oswald +following his apprehension after the assassination and the murder of +Officer Tippit--and I ask you whether you have examined that item? + +Mr. COLE. I have. + +Mr. EISENBERG. May that be admitted as 795, Mr. Chairman? + +Representative FORD. It may be admitted. + +(Commission Exhibit No. 795 was marked and received in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. When did you first examine that item, Mr. Cole? + +Mr. COLE. May I refer to a note? + +Mr. EISENBERG. Yes, certainly. + +Mr. COLE. I first saw that item on December 6, 1963. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did you make an examination at that time? + +Mr. COLE. I did. + +Mr. EISENBERG. At whose request was that? + +Mr. COLE. At the request of the Chief, U.S. Secret Service. + +Mr. EISENBERG. What was your conclusion at that time? + +Mr. COLE. It was my conclusion that that is not an original document +but that it is in fact a photographic reproduction of some original +document. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did you draw any conclusions as to how the reproduction +might have been prepared? + +Mr. COLE. Yes; it was my conclusion that a photograph was made of some +original document, and that the resulting film negative was retouched +for the purpose of blocking out certain parts, and by that I mean that +the person processing a negative in this way would take an opaque +compound and where you had clear areas of the negative, the negative, +of course, showing clear areas where there was black on the original, +that he would cover up this clear area of the negative so that in a +resulting print nothing would come through. This would be a way of +eliminating information which was actually on the original document. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Such as the name of the person to whom the document had +been issued? + +Mr. COLE. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Draft board and so forth? + +Mr. COLE. Yes; then a print would be made of that retouched negative, +and this, I believe, is such a print. + +Mr. EISENBERG. There is information on this item consisting of the name +"Alek James Hidell," a selective service number, and so forth. Could +you draw any conclusion as to how this information had been put into +the item if the card was prepared in this way? + +Senator COOPER. What information, do you mean the name? + +Mr. EISENBERG. Yes; the name "Alek James Hidell," the selective service +number, the date of mailing, the signature of the member or clerk +of local board, color of eyes, and so forth, all of the information +appearing in print or color on the card. + +Mr. COLE. That information was typed directly onto the photographic +print which is Exhibit---- + +Mr. EISENBERG. That is 795? + +Mr. COLE. 795. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Does this item consist of one or two photographic +prints, Mr. Cole? + +Mr. COLE. There are two photographic prints, one for the front and one +for the back, and they are pasted together. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Is it on ordinary photographic paper? + +Mr. COLE. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Is there evidence that more than one typewriter had been +used in inserting the signature---- + +Mr. COLE. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Excuse me, the name, and some of the other information +which I have referred to? + +Mr. COLE. Yes, at least two typewriters were used. This may be seen +clearly by the record of the selective service number, which includes a +fairly light typewriting and then a heavier typewriting. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Have you produced a photograph of Exhibit 795 or have +you taken a photograph rather? + +Mr. COLE. Yes, I have. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Would you produce that? + +Mr. COLE. Yes, sir. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Thank you. Was this photograph prepared by you or under +your supervision? + +Mr. COLE. Yes, sir. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Is it a true and accurate reproduction of 795? + +Mr. COLE. It is. + +Mr. EISENBERG. May this be admitted as 796? + +Representative FORD. It may be admitted. + +(Commission Exhibit No. 796 was marked and received in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. This is the front of 795, is it, Mr. Cole? + +Mr. COLE. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Have you also taken a photograph of the rear, the +reverse side? + +Mr. COLE. Yes, sir; I have. + +Mr. EISENBERG. This was prepared by you or under your supervision? + +Mr. COLE. Yes, sir. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Is it a true and accurate photograph? + +Mr. COLE. Yes, sir. + +Mr. EISENBERG. May this be admitted as Exhibit 797? + +Representative FORD. It may be admitted. + +(Commission Exhibit No. 797 was marked and received in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. Do you have extra copies of that? + +Mr. COLE. I am sorry; I do not. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Could you hold these photographs so that the Commission +can see them, and illustrate your point concerning the use of more than +one typewriter? + +Mr. COLE. The selective service number shows typewriting which has a +fairly light deposit of ink from the ribbon. It also shows typewriting +with a somewhat heavier deposit. Now, there is a clear difference in +the design of the figure "4" which shows that two different typewriters +were used. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Can you think of any reason why that might have been +done, why two different typewriters were used? + +Mr. COLE. Well, here again the typewriter shown by the typewriter +impression has a rather poor legibility and it is my theory that a +person producing typing of such limited legibility might well move the +job over to another typewriter having a more heavily inked ribbon. +I might say also that it is quite difficult to type on this glossy +photographic paper. The ink won't come down from the ribbon nearly as +well on such a surface as it does on ordinary bond paper. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, you have also reproduced the back, the reverse +side, of 795 in your photograph 797. Is the typewriting on the back, +illustrated in 797, that contained in the light-impression typewriter +shown on the front, or the heavy-impression typewriter? + +Mr. COLE. The lighter impression. + +Mr. EISENBERG. You can tell that how, Mr. Cole? + +Mr. COLE. Well, it is illustrated, first of all, by the extremely small +deposit of ink, and second by the circumstance that we can see the same +design of figure "4" in a part of the address between this frame, which +is the design of the figure "4" of the lighter typewriting on the face +of the document. + +Senator COOPER. Could I ask you, is it correct that the typewriter +which you say was used, which gave a light impression, the "4" is +closed at the apex? + +Mr. COLE. That is correct. + +Senator COOPER. And the heavier typewriter which was used which +produced the "4," the "4" is open at the apex? + +Mr. COLE. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Carrying that question forward, the reverse side shows +the "4" closed at the apex, does it not? + +Mr. COLE. Yes, sir. + +Mr. EISENBERG. There seems to be some erasure under the name "Alek +James Hidell" which is typewritten in the front side, as well as a +faint letter or two. Did you draw any conclusions as to that material? + +Mr. COLE. Well, in this area there is also in addition to typewriting +already mentioned, there is evidence of a rather sharp indentation of +typewritten material, which could result from the blow of a typewriter +key against this paper without the interposition of any ribbon at all. +Most typewriters have an adjustment called "stencil" whereby you can +prevent the ribbon from coming up in front of the type bar, and there +is a complete line of indentations along there which reads "Alek James +Hidell," and one very interesting feature is that just to the left of +the indented name "Alek" there is a capital letter "O." + +I don't say at that particular point there was any completion of a name +following the letter "O" but we do have this clear indentation of the +letter "O." + +Mr. EISENBERG. Have you prepared a photograph which brings out those +details a little more clearly than in the original, 795? + +Mr. COLE. Yes, sir; I have. This photograph was made by a very low +angle of illumination, a raking light across the document which shows +up the indentations. + +Mr. EISENBERG. This was prepared by you and under your supervision? + +Mr. COLE. Yes, sir. + +Mr. EISENBERG. It is a true and accurate reproduction of 795? + +Mr. COLE. It is. + +Mr. EISENBERG. May this be admitted as 798? + +Representative FORD. It may be admitted. + +(Commission Exhibit 798 was marked and received in evidence.) + +Senator COOPER. Could I ask a question? You referred to an indentation +representing the letter "O." Could you point that out and indicate the +exhibit upon which you identified the letter "O"? + +Mr. COLE. Here. I point to an area approximately two typewriter spaces +on the left of the visible letter "A" of "Alek." + +Senator COOPER. On Commission Exhibit 795? + +Mr. COLE. Yes; correct. + +Senator COOPER. Were you able to determine whether that indentation +representing "O" was made by a typewriter or does it represent a letter +which was still visible from the original card of selective service +classification? + +Mr. COLE. That is a typewritten letter "O," sir. I think that nothing +is visible on that line from the original. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Referring to your photograph, 798, there seems to +be--the word "James" seems to be printed more than once, as does the +name "Hidell," in stencil. Is that your observation, Mr. Cole, also? + +Mr. COLE. Yes; that is true. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Is there any other material that was printed in stencil, +on the stencil setting, of the typewriter? + +Mr. COLE. Yes; there is a writing of the serial number which is also in +stencil form. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Anything else? We are referring now just to the front of +the card. + +Mr. COLE. Yes. The date of mailing also shows an indentation. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Can you think of any reason why the use of the +typewriter on stencil may have been done? + +Mr. COLE. I can mention reasons that I have observed on other documents +which might apply to this one, and that would be an effort on the part +of the operator of the machine to find a correct place for beginning +typewriting, but I am obliged to say that on those other examples I +have never seen such extensive stenciled writing. I would say that a +single letter should give a person a pretty good idea of the position +for beginning writing, and it should not be necessary to write out this +material in full. + +Now another theory for applying indentations to this type of material +might be, say, previous experience with trying to write on a glossy +surface, and knowing that you don't get enough ink from a ribbon on +such a surface and possibly an intention to apply a rather sharp +indentation and later fill that in with pigment. I am a little doubtful +if it would be successful but one might attempt to try it, because +various kinds of printing are made in that way, first by producing an +indent, and then working a pigment down into the indentation. I would +say on this particular document, I don't see there was any evidence +that the preparer of the document went through with any such plan. + +Representative FORD. For the record, I do have to leave to attend the +House session, and Senator Cooper, will you preside as chairman? + +Senator COOPER. Yes; I will be glad to do so. + +(At this point Representative Ford departed the hearing room.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. Referring to your photograph 798 again, the word "James" +in "Alek James Hidell" seems to have been printed twice, as you +stated before, and the second time it seems to have started--at least +twice--and the second time it seems to start after the first "James" +has stopped. Is that your observation? + +Mr. COLE. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Referring back to your theories or the possible theories +you mentioned as explanations of the printing by stencil, would the +placement of the two "James" on the upper line indicate whether or not +either of those theories might be applicable? + +Mr. COLE. Well, of course, the repetition of these names is somewhat +opposed to the theory that a person might prefer to ink it in later. +But, of course, it is possible that he could not see it very well, and +that he might think he could make a selection of either one or the +other for inking in. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Does the word "James" appear to have been stenciled more +than twice? + +Mr. GORE. Well, there is some overlapping or superimposition of +indentations in the first record of the indented name "James." It could +have been as many as three times in the stencil operation. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, Mr. Cole, have you produced a photograph of the +reverse side of the selective-service card---- + +Mr. COLE. I have. + +Mr. EISENBERG. That is, 795? + +Mr. COLE. I have. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And was this taken by you or under your supervision? + +Mr. COLE. Yes, sir. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And is it a true and accurate photograph of 795? + +Mr. COLE. Yes, sir. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, may this be admitted as 799? + +Senator COOPER. It will be admitted. + +(The document referred to, previously marked as Commission Exhibit 799, +was received in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. This is an additional photograph of the reverse side of +795? + +Mr. COLE. That is correct. The one last mentioned was also made with a +very low angle of illumination raking the light across the document. + +Mr. EISENBERG. The "one last mentioned" being 797 or 798? + +Mr. COLE. 799 was made with the low-angle illumination to bring out the +indentation. + +Mr. EISENBERG. That is as opposed to 797, which is the reverse side of +the photograph introduced as 795? + +Mr. COLE. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And that had a normal illumination? + +Ir COLE. Yes., correct. + +Mr. EISENBERG. By use of this 799 photograph, could you read to us what +was stenciled, insofar as possible? + +Mr. COLE. Opposite "Color of Eyes" there is discernible the indented +typewritten letters "CT." This is just to the left of the visible +letters "GR." Then opposite the "Color of Hair" there is an indentation +of the word in capital letters "BROWN." Just above the visible "9" for +the inch figures of height, there is a second indented "9." Opposite +the word 'weight" there is a small letter "i" as an indentation. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Is "i" the lower case of the figure in the typewriter +which produces "1" in upper case? + +Mr. COLE. No; it is the lower case "l" which is used for the "1" on +most typewriters. In the frame above the wording "Local Board Stamp" +there is visible typewriting and indentations but I think this is +probably all one typewriting act, the ink coming down from the ribbon +only in a rather irregular fashion. Just outside the frame on the right +side there is an indentation of the abbreviation "ST." + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cole, did you have occasion to examine these cards +at a subsequent time--this card, I am sorry, the Selective Service +notice of classification, or spurious Selective Service classification, +795? + +Mr. COLE. Yes, sir; I did. + +Mr. EISENBERG. At that time did you examine the negatives which I now +hand to you? + +Mr. COLE. I did. + +Mr. EISENBERG. For the record, these are a set of negatives which +were found at one of the premises inhabited by Lee Harvey Oswald. Mr. +Chairman, may I have them admitted as 800? I would like these negatives +which Mr. Cole examined and which were found in one of the residences +of Lee Harvey Oswald to be received as 800. + +Senator COOPER. It is so ordered. + +(The negatives referred to were marked as Commission Exhibit 800 and +received in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did you also examine this card which I now hand +you, which for the record is a Selective Service System notice of +classification in the name of Lee Harvey Oswald, found in the wallet of +Lee Harvey Oswald following his apprehension after the assassination +and the murder of Officer Tippit? + +Mr. COLE. I did examine this card. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, may this card, which is Oswald's actual +Selective Service System notice of classification, be admitted as 801? + +Senator COOPER. So ordered. + +(The document referred to was marked as Commission Exhibit 801, and was +received in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now what did your examination of the negatives and the +card show, in relation to your earlier examination, conducted simply of +the Exhibit 795? + +Mr. COLE. May I say something off the record. + +(Discussion off the record.) + +Senator COOPER. Back on the record. + +Would you please state on the record your reasons for making your prior +answer to the question of counsel? + +Mr. COLE. I have some question whether this is actually the card which +I had previously examined, although I am sure I did examine a Selective +Service card, and it will take just a moment of close examination of +this one to determine that, and I would suggest that if there are any +other Selective Service cards available belonging to this group or +grouped with this card that I should see them at the same time. + +Senator COOPER. Your statement is then that you just desired to +examine---- + +Mr. COLE. Yes, sir. + +Senator COOPER. This card and any other Selective Service card that may +be available? + +Mr. COLE. Yes, sir. + +Senator COOPER. I suggest that the Commission recess for a sufficient +time to permit the witness to examine the Selective Service card. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Before that recess, let me introduce another card +relating to the Selective Service System, which is the registration +certificate of Lee Harvey Oswald. Did you examine--did you examine +this registration certificate, Mr. Cole? And perhaps you can now, +Mr. Reporter, note a recess while he examines both the registration +certificate and the Selective Service System notice of classification. + +Senator COOPER. So ordered. + +(Short recess.) + +Mr. COLE. Yes, sir; I did examine this registration certificate. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did you examine the Selective Service System notice of +classification? + +Mr. COLE. Yes, sir; I did. I did examine the notice of classification. + +Mr. EISENBERG. That is 801. May I have the registration certificate +admitted as 802? + +Senator COOPER. Let it be admitted. + +(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit 802, and was +received in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. This was also found in the wallet of Oswald following +his apprehension. Now, on the basis of your examination of these cards +and the negatives, did you find yourself reinforced in your earlier +conclusion, Mr. Cole? + +Mr. COLE. I did. This confirmed my earlier conclusion which was formed +at a time I had only the photographic prints. Exhibit---- + +Mr. EISENBERG. No. 795, together with photographs thereof, is that what +you are referring to now? + +Mr. COLE. That is correct; yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Can you discuss the negatives, Exhibit 800, that you +referred to in your examination? + +Mr. COLE. Yes; there are two negatives which are of Selective Service +System notice of classification. Both of these negatives show extensive +retouching, sometimes called opaquing, for the purpose of preventing +certain material which appeared on an original from printing on a +photographic print. The two negatives are apparently related to +a single original. One of them has a somewhat greater amount of +retouching than the other. It is my view that the second negative, +that is, the one showing the smallest amount of retouching, was +probably made from a photographic print of the first one. In other +words, the retouching operation has involved two steps which resulted +in the production of two separate negatives. A possible reason for +the second step was that on the negative showing the most extensive +retouching there is still some material remaining from the original +document, namely the lower extensions of two letters "f" which pass +through certain wording at the right side of the document, reading +"local board," and another word reading "violation." Now on the second +negative of the pair a successful operation in touching out those +particular parts was accomplished. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Do you believe that the second negative was prepared +from the first, or they were prepared separately from the Selective +Service card itself? + +Mr. COLE. I believe that the second negative was prepared from a +photographic print of the first one. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, for ease of discussion, I would like to +take out the "first negative" from Exhibit 800 and give it a separate +number, 803, if I may. Is that all right, Mr. Chairman? + +Senator COOPER. Yes. + +(The negative referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 803, and +was received in evidence.) + +Mr. COLE. The negative I hand you now is the one I referred to as the +first negative, and the one having the most extensive retouching or +opaquing. + +Mr. EISENBERG. That is the one with the portion of the signature +appearing over the word "violation"? + +Mr. COLE. That is right. A portion which has not been retouched out of +the negative. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And does that same portion appear in the original of +Oswald's card, 801? + +Mr. COLE. It does. + +Senator COOPER. Is that a part of the record? + +Mr. EISENBERG. Yes, sir. Now, there is a good deal of red material +on the reverse side of this "first negative." That is the opaquing +material, is it? + +Mr. COLE. Correct. + +Mr. EISENBERG. I would like to make the "second negative" referred to +804, Mr. Chairman. + +Senator COOPER. Very well. You want that made a part of the record? + +Mr. EISENBERG. Yes, sir. + +Senator COOPER. Let it be made a part of the record. + +(The negative referred to, marked Commission Exhibit 804, was received +in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. We are extracting that from 800 for ease of discussion. + +Now, Mr. Cole, I call your attention to the fact that the words +appearing on the face of the original 801, the printed material +beginning "The law requires you, subject to heavy penalty for +violation, to carry this notice in addition to your Registration +Certificate," and going on for two full paragraphs of small or ordinary +Roman lower and upper case, and ending in solid caps "FOR ADVICE, SEE +YOUR GOVERNMENT APPEAL AGENT," this language in the original spreads +across the bottom of the card from left to right, starting slightly to +the right of the dotted line running up and down the card and marked +"registrant must sign here," and extending quite close to the right +margin. + +Does it appear in the same fashion, approximately, on the "first +negative," which is Exhibit 803? + +Mr. COLE. Yes; but, of course, this negative includes a section along +the left side which is not shown on the original. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Which is actually a blank section, is that correct? + +Mr. COLE. Correct. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Is the negative slightly enlarged, apart from that blank +section? + +Mr. COLE. I think it is the same size. + +Mr. EISENBERG. I call your attention to the "second negative," which +is Exhibit 804, and this same language, "The law requires you," and so +forth, until "FOR ADVICE, SEE YOUR GOVERNMENT APPEAL AGENT" appears in +a much smaller compass, that is to say it starts substantially to the +right of the margin or the signature line and is separated from the +signature line by another dotted line. + +Mr. COLE. That is correct. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And does that correspond to the forged card, 795? + +Mr. COLE. It does. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Has that created a space on the forged card which does +not exist on the original? + +Mr. COLE. That is correct. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And is that the space into which the photograph has been +inserted on the forged card? + +Mr. COLE. Yes, sir. + +Mr. EISENBERG. I call your attention to a small strip of negative which +appears to bear this language, and I ask you whether you believe that +this negative might have been used in the preparation of the forged +card? + +Mr. COLE. Yes, sir; I believe this negative was used for producing the +forged card which is a photographic print. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, may that be made 805? + +Senator COOPER. Let 805 be made a part of the record. + +(The negative referred to was marked and received in evidence as +Commission Exhibit No. 805.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. In your opinion, can you account for the reduction in +size of that printing, "The law requires you" and so forth? + +Mr. COLE. Well, it would seem that it had to be reduced in size to +accomplish the obvious purpose on the card, Exhibit 795, of providing +extra space for a photograph. + +Mr. EISENBERG. How would that be done? + +Mr. COLE. This can be done photographically. When a photographic camera +is set up to take a picture of a document you have a considerable range +for making either enlargements or reductions on the negative. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Is this whole process one which requires a great deal +of skill, and when I say "whole process" I refer to the re-creation of +a new card by use of opaquing material and the reduction in size of a +portion of the text on the original card? + +Mr. COLE. No; I wouldn't say that it requires a great skill. I would +say an elementary knowledge of photography, especially the photographic +techniques used in a printing plant, would be enough for such a purpose. + +Senator COOPER. On that point, would it require study to learn to make, +to exercise these techniques, either from a textbook or information +from someone else or by observation of the practice? + +Mr. COLE. I think observation and association with other people, or +being in a place where such techniques were going along in the normal +operation of a photographic laboratory or printing plant, would be +enough. A person wouldn't have to consult a text. As a matter of fact, +similar things are done for normal printing operations. + +Senator COOPER. That is the question I wanted to ask. Would this type +of technique in an average shop or plant be normal? + +Mr. COLE. Oh, yes. + +Senator COOPER. Would it require much practice on the part of an +individual before such technique could be successfully accomplished? + +Mr. COLE. No; I would say a moderate amount of practice. + +Senator COOPER. How much, would you say? How many times would a person +have to, if it is possible to say, practice this kind of a technique +before he could do it reasonably well? + +Mr. COLE. On a trial-and-error basis. I would say that a half dozen +attempts on a trial and error basis of going through such an operation, +perhaps making an error, finding how to correct it, doing it again, +achieving more success, would certainly be enough. + +Senator COOPER. You would say then, assuming that Lee Oswald made these +changes, that he would have had to practice them several times before +he could have successfully made the changes which were indicated by the +exhibits that have been introduced? + +Mr. COLE. Well, sir; I would say he would not necessarily have to +practice on this particular document, but if he had some practice, he +or any other person, had had some practice in normal operation, similar +operations in a printing plant, then he could accomplish this result. + +Senator COOPER. Would these changes have required the assistance at the +time of another person---- + +Mr. COLE. I think not. + +Senator COOPER. Or could they be accomplished by one person? + +Mr. COLE. One person could easily do it. + +Senator COOPER. Thank you. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now on these questions which Senator Cooper has been +asking, I ask you to refer back to Exhibit 800, consisting of a group +of other negatives not related to the selective-service card, and ask +you whether those negatives bear any evidence of opaquing and similar +techniques as were used in the creation of Exhibit 795? + +Mr. COLE. They do. All of them show evidence of opaquing, that is, +touching out certain information, letting other information come +through. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Do you think this might have constituted sufficient +practice to produce the 795 result? + +Mr. COLE. Yes; I think so. + +Senator COOPER. Would it have been necessary for a person making these +changes to have had for his use any kind of special equipment, or what +kind of equipment would be required to make these changes? + +Mr. COLE. Well, sir; in a printing plant there are usually what +they call light tables, a table with a transparent surface with a +light under it, which are used for making up, for assembling various +materials to be included in a single plate. But that wouldn't be +essential. A person could take a negative ready for retouching right to +the window there, place it against the window and touch out material in +that manner. + +Senator COOPER. My question really goes to this point: Would it have +been necessary for a person who made these changes to have done the +work in a shop or printing plant or could it be done outside of a +printing shop? + +Mr. COLE. It would not have to be done in a printing shop. It could be +done easily in this room or any ordinary living accommodations. + +Senator COOPER. That is all. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Would you need, Mr. Cole, in your belief, the type of +equipment you are likely to find in a printing plant, or could this be +done with home equipment? + +Mr. COLE. I would say it could be done with home equipment, but I think +it is unlikely with respect to the actual preparation of the negative +that one would get a successful result from home equipment. I believe +that for the preparation of the negative, that is, apart from the +retouching operation, that one would need a very accurate camera such +as are found in photographic laboratories and printing plants. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Could the opaquing have been done off the printing +premises? + +Mr. COLE. Yes; the opaquing could be done almost anywhere, in any +ordinary living accommodation, needing only a source of light to pass +through the negative, the liquid opaquing material, and a small brush. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cole, if you were going to prepare a forged +Selective Service System notice of classification, and if you did not +have access to blanks of the Selective Service System itself, how would +you go about preparing such a forgery? + +Mr. COLE. I would use a method similar to that already described here +with one modification; namely, that in preparing the original negative, +I would make an enlargement directly on the negative, then go through +the opaquing operation, and in making the final print I would reduce it +back to original size. That would produce a somewhat better quality of +print, and it gives somewhat more freedom in the opaquing operation, +that is, in working with a larger negative there is not as much danger +of running the opaque into some material that you want to save, and we +see on these negatives there are a few places where the person doing +the opaquing has actually permitted this material to run into a part +that should be saved on the original. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Would you use the same type of photographic paper? + +Mr. COLE. I would not. I would use a dull-surfaced paper which would +look more like an original document. + +Mr. EISENBERG. When you said that the person who produced the +negatives let his opaque run into areas which he wanted to save, what +areas are you referring to, what type of areas? + +Mr. COLE. Well, areas where there is needed a sharp outline of a box +which is to receive some printed information, and this, of course, is +a very thin line, and it is very difficult to control this liquid on +the negative. There are some places where it has run into the line and +apparently it was necessary to make some strengthening or correction of +that line later. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did you see evidence of correction of the line? + +Mr. COLE. Yes; on Commission Exhibit 795 the boxes for selective +service number apparently have been strengthened somewhat. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now referring to Commission Exhibit 801, which is the +actual card, do the numbers overlap or extend to the borders of the +margin at all? + +Mr. COLE. There is one figure in particular which runs right along the +line of the box. This is the first box on the left, and the figures are +"41" and the "1" lies directly over the line on the right side of the +box. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And does the "4" in "41" and the "3" in "39" overlap the +boxes? + +Mr. COLE. They do. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Would that practically necessitate a correction of the +boxes? + +Mr. COLE. Yes; it would, in order to repair the line. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cole, I hand you an item entitled "Certificate of +Service Armed Forces of the United States," reading "This is to certify +that Alek James Hidell" and so forth, and "Period of Active Duty"--on +the reverse side now--"October 1, 1958" to a date which is blurred, and +I ask you whether you have examined this item? + +Mr. COLE. I have. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, may this be admitted as 806? + +Senator COOPER. Let the exhibit be admitted. + +(The document referred to was marked as Commission Exhibit No. 806, and +received in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. When did you first examine this item, Mr. Cole? + +Mr. COLE. That was also examined in December of 1963, December 6, 1963. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Together with the selective service system notice of +classification? + +Mr. COLE. Yes, sir. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And did you have any negatives at that time, or the +original? + +Mr. COLE. I did not. + +Mr. EISENBERG. What was your conclusion at that time, based solely upon +the examination of 806? + +Mr. COLE. It was my conclusion that 806 is actually a photographic +print from a photographic negative. It is not an original document. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And on what did you base this conclusion? + +Mr. COLE. My familiarity with the appearance of photographic paper +primarily. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did you prepare photographs at that time, Mr. Cole? + +Mr. COLE. I did. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Could you produce those? These photographs are of the +front and reverse, respectively, of Commission Exhibit 806? + +Mr. COLE. Yes, sir. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And these were prepared by you or under your supervision? + +Mr. COLE. Yes, sir. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And they are accurate photographs of 806? + +Mr. COLE. They are. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, may I have these admitted as 807 and 808, +respectively. + +Senator COOPER. The exhibits will be admitted to the record. + +(The photographs referred to were marked as Commission Exhibits Nos. +807 and 808, respectively, and were received in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. 807 will be the front and 808 will be the reverse. Mr. +Cole, could you attempt to decipher the typewriting on the reverse side +as shown in the photograph 808? + +Mr. COLE. The typewriting reads "October 13 1958," and on the second +line there is some confusion of the typewriting, in other words, +there is more than one typing operation on the line reading "To." One +of these typing operations reads "October 12, 1961." One of the other +typing operations on the line for "To," as determined by a previous +examination under the microscope, shows an indent of "23 October 1959." + +Mr. EISENBERG. Do you believe that was--yes, go ahead. + +Mr. COLE. Also on the line reading "From" there is an indentation of +another typewriter operation which reads "24 October 1957." + +Mr. EISENBERG. Do you believe those indentations were caused by a +typewriter set at stencil? + +Mr. COLE. Yes; without the interposition of a ribbon between the type +bar and the paper. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did you take photographs with side light, as you had in +the case of the selective service card, to attempt to bring out these +stencil marks? + +Mr. COLE. I did. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Could you produce those photographs? You are handing me +a photograph of the front side of the certificate of service, and is +this a photograph which you took? + +Mr. COLE. It is. + +Mr. EISENBERG. An accurate reproduction of the Exhibit 806? + +Mr. COLE. Yes, sir. + +Mr. EISENBERG. May I have this admitted as 809, Mr. Chairman? + +Senator COOPER. Let this exhibit be made a part of the record. + +(The photograph referred to previously marked as Commission Exhibit No. +809, was received in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. You have also given me a photograph of the reverse side +of 806? + +Mr. COLE. Yes, sir. + +Mr. EISENBERG. This was taken by you or under your supervision? + +Mr. COLE. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And is it an accurate photograph of the reverse of 806? + +Mr. COLE. It is. + +Mr. EISENBERG. May the photograph of the reverse be admitted as Exhibit +810? + +Senator COOPER. Exhibit 810 will be admitted as part of the record. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Could you show us what you found in the way of +indentations caused by stencils, by referring to these Exhibits 809 and +810? + +Mr. COLE. 809 shows the face of the exhibit and in addition to the +clearly visible typewriting of the name "Alek James Hidell," there is a +repetition of this name somewhat below the visible typewriting in the +form of typewritten indentations. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Is this similar to the typewritten indentations found in +the selective service card, 795? + +Mr. COLE. Yes; they are. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Do you believe that the name "Alek James Hidell" was +stenciled once or more than once? + +Mr. COLE. More than once, at least twice, I would say. + +Mr. EISENBERG. What is the relative position of the two stenciling +operations? + +Mr. COLE. They were somewhat below, about one-half to three-quarters of +the height of a typewritten character below, the visible typewriting. + +Mr. EISENBERG. What is the relationship to each other? + +Mr. COLE. They are offset about one-quarter to one-half the height of a +typewritten character. + +Mr. EISENBERG. From each other? + +Mr. COLE. That is right, vertically. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Is it accurate to say then that there is a progression +upward as comparing the typewritten name and the two stenciled +operations, or at least that the three are set in step, so that each +one is below the next impression? + +Mr. COLE. That is correct, with the visible typewriting having the +better position relative to the reproduction of the printed matter. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Can you think of the reason why this might have been, +why this operation might have been performed in this manner, Mr. Cole? + +Mr. COLE. Yes. It could easily result from some difficulty of finding +the correct place for typewriting the name on the card. The lowermost +indentation would have been an incorrect position since it was run +into a part of the reproduction of the printed matter. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, I refer back to 798, which is a highlight +photograph of the selective service card, and ask you whether the +stenciled material in 798 appears above the line on which the +typewritten material--first name, middle name, and last name--should +appear? + +Mr. COLE. Yes; somewhat above. + +Mr. EISENBERG. In light of that, do you think it is possible that the +individual who prepared this card used the stencil to determine at what +point the typewriting would be placed so that it was in the correct +position in relationship to the line above which it belonged? + +Mr. COLE. That is a definite possibility and, of course, he might also +have been concerned about the position for the reproduced printed +matter--"First name," "Middle name," "Last name." + +Mr. EISENBERG. Bringing your attention back once more to 795, the +Selective Service System card, was the reverse side of that card +prepared in your opinion from Commission 802, which is the reverse side +of the registration certificate? I also call your attention to 801 for +comparision, that is, the original of the selective service card. + +Mr. COLE. Yes, sir. The reverse of the photographic identification +card, Commission Exhibit 795, could be a photographic reproduction of +the reverse of Commission Exhibit 802, with the performance of certain +opaquing operations. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Looking at the reverse side of the two cards, 802 and +801, does the reverse side of the card 801 have any information for +identifying characteristics of the individual bearing the card? + +Mr. COLE. It does not. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And what about the reverse side of 802? + +Mr. COLE. The reverse side of 802 provides space for a personal +description, color of eyes, color of hair, complexion, height, and +weight. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did you find among the negatives in 800 a negative which +might have been used or was used to prepare the reverse side of the +selective service card, 795, the spurious card? + +Mr. COLE. Yes; I did. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, may I have this negative classified +separately as 811 for purpose of ready identification? + +Senator COOPER. Let it be so classified, and admitted as part of the +record. + +(The document referred to, was marked as Commission Exhibit No. 811 and +received in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did you find a negative which might have been used for +the preparation of the certificate of service, that is 806? + +Mr. COLE. Yes; I did, for both face and back. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Were these negatives in your opinion used as the +negatives for that purpose? + +Mr. COLE. Yes, sir. In my opinion, these are the very negatives +that were used for producing the photographic print representing a +certificate of service. + +Mr. EISENBERG. May these be subclassified as or separately classified +as 812, Mr. Chairman, and introduced as 812? + +Senator COOPER. Let the document be designated as 812 and admitted as +part of the record. + +(The item referred to, was marked as Commission Exhibit No. 812 and +received in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did you reach the same conclusion, by the way, as to +the negative 811, that is, that it was definitely the negative used to +produce the reverse side of 795? + +Mr. COLE. I did. This is the very negative to produce the reverse side +of 795. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Returning to 795, there are two signatures which appear +in 795 in ink, is that correct? + +Mr. COLE. Yes, sir. + +Mr. EISENBERG. That is, the signature over the caption "Member or clerk +of local board," and the signature over the caption "Registrant must +sign here"? + +Mr. COLE. Yes, sir. + +Mr. EISENBERG. The second signature reads "Alek J. Hidell"? + +Mr. COLE. Yes, sir. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Could you read the first signature? + +Mr. COLE. The first signature appears to be the name "Goodhoffer," but +that is partly an estimate. In other words, it is not possible to read +this in a clear manner. That is a possible spelling of the name but not +necessarily the only spelling. + +(At this point, there was a short recess, and Mr. McCloy entered the +hearing room.) + +Senator COOPER. I am now called to the Senate. Mr. John McCloy will act +as Chairman. + +(At this point Senator Cooper departed the hearing room and there was a +further recess.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. How does that compare with the signature on the original +card, Exhibit 801? + +Mr. COLE. It is not the same name and, of course, not in the same +handwriting. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, did you compare the two signatures on Exhibit 795 +with the standards in this case to determine whether the signatures +have been written by the person who produced the standards? + +Mr. COLE. I did compare the signatures on 795 with the standard writing. + +Mr. EISENBERG. What was your conclusion, Mr. Cole? + +Mr. COLE. With respect to the signature above "Member or clerk of local +board," I have not formed any conclusion about authorship. With regard +to the writing "Alek J. Hidell," it is my opinion that the author of +the standard writing is the author of that name. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And referring to the charts of the standards which you +prepared, and referring to the photograph of 795, could you explain the +reasons for this conclusion? + +Mr. COLE. Would you want any copy of this? + +Mr. EISENBERG. Yes; if you have a copy. + +Mr. COLE. The capital letter "A" of the name "Alek" on 795 is +reproduced in the standard writing on chart B, item 6, in the general +conformation of the several lower case "a's" in that area. I refer +to it as a capital "A" because it begins the name, but actually with +respect to size and formation it is closely similar to the lower case +"a's" of item 6. Now the similarity is largely in the method that the +staff is made, the way it pulls away from the oral body of the letter +with only a moderate rate of retracing along the right side. That +detail, as I say, is found both in the "A" on 795, and in the several +"a's" of item 6. There are three in a row there, each beginning a line +of writing. + +The letter "k" of the name "Alek" compares favorably with the "k's" +of the standard writing, chart A, items 13 and 14. With regard to the +middle initial "J" there is not a cursive "J" that is, as distinguished +from a printed "J"--shown on the charts of standard writing. But the +movement required for producing a "J" is similar to that required for +producing the capital letter "I," and we observe a similarity as to +movement with respect to the "J" of 795 as compared with the "I" of +chart B, item 3. + +One characteristic of the capital letter "H" of "Hidell" on 795 is the +method of making that formation which stands for the crossbar. Now +this is the closed part along the lower half of the right side of the +letter, which would represent the crossbar of the letter. This is the +general movement used in a number of the signatures of Lee H. Oswald. +One good example is that on chart B, item 15, the middle initial "H". +Another feature of that "H" is the connection to the following letter +by an approximately horizontal stroke passing from the finish of the +crossbar of the "H" across to the "i," and we observe a similar method +of connection, although not with the same letter, on chart A, items +10 and 11, where the "o" is connected by a straight line, almost +horizontal projection of the crossbar, from the "H" to the "o". + +The letter "i" again shows a feature, which has previously been +mentioned in the standard writing, of an increase of forehand slant, +that is a slant to the right with respect to that letter as compared +to other letters. This feature is shown in a number of places in +the standard writing, one good example being on chart B, item 10, +the second "i"--which is there because of a misspelling of the word +"Washington" that is spelled, the last few letters, "tion"--and there +we observe that rather extreme increase of the forehand slant of the +letter "i". + +The letter "d" of "Hidell" compares favorably with the "d's" of the +standard writing on chart A, item 5, in the word "discharge," and on +the same chart, item 6 in the word "regards." + +The final "l's" show a perceptible increase of pressure on the +downstrokes, which is also found in the standard writing, chart B, item +6, top line, the word "enroll." This shows a somewhat more extreme +increase in pressure on downstroke, but I regard it basically as the +same habit. This particular part also shows a very abrupt terminal +stroke for the letter "l" as between 795 and compared with the final +or last stroke of the "l" on chart B in the last stroke in the word +"enrolled." + +These constitute my reasons for believing that the author of the +standard writing is the author of the signature "Alek J. Hidell" on +Exhibit 795. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now concerning the other signature, Mr. Cole, are +you unable to or--can you state why you are unable to arrive at a +conclusion? + +Mr. COLE. Well, partly because of the limited writing we have for +comparison. The last part of the name is practically illegible, and the +letters are so confused that I believe they do not accurately record +writing habit. I would regard it as being a rather unnatural writing. +Now there is fair legibility in the letters of the first name, and +they do have a moderate rate or amount of similarity to the standard +writing, but since it is only a few letters, I think there is not a +basis for a conclusion. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Is the signature inconsistent with the writing of the +standards? + +Mr. COLE. No; I wouldn't say there was any--there is certainly no basis +for eliminating the author of the standards as being the author of that +signature. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Does there appear to be any attempt at disguise in this +signature? + +Mr. COLE. Well, I wouldn't regard it. If there is such an attempt, it +is not, it seems to me, not a matter of deliberation or trying hard at +it, but only a matter of being extremely careless in the last part of +that signature. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Is illegibility sometimes used as a method of disguise? + +Mr. COLE. Yes, sir; it is. + +Mr. McCLOY. May I ask some questions about this? + +Mr. COLE. Yes. + +Mr. McCLOY. If that word is "Good," that first word on the Exhibit 796, +is it---- + +Mr. EISENBERG. 795, and the photograph is 796. + +Mr. McCLOY. 795. If that letter "G" is compared with the capital letter +"G" on the standard chart B-5, "Glenview," would you say there is any +similarity between the two? + +Mr. COLE. Yes; there is, with respect to the size of the upper loop +which is on the left side of the letter, and the approximate horizontal +motion in passing from that loop over to the right side of the letter. + +Mr. McCLOY. We have it again in 14 of that same chart? + +Mr. COLE. Yes, sir. + +Mr. McCLOY. The "J" which seems to follow the word "Good," however, +does not seem to comport with the "J" on the signature "Alek J. Hidell" +does it? + +Mr. COLE. No; but, of course, you are getting there to the area where +the rather serious corruption or illegibility of forms begins. I think +one could say that from the fair legibility of the first name, and +the very poor legibility of the last name, that this is a deliberate +effort. In other words, you have got a demonstration of the ability of +the writer to produce a legible writing and, therefore, to devolve into +this very illegible effort could be intentional. + +Mr. McCLOY. I noticed when you compared the "J" in "Alek J. Hidell" +with the standard "I," such as the one on chart B-3, there was a +definite similarity, but I notice on chart A, No. 7, there is an "I," +a capital "I" presumably, which apparently doesn't have the same +conformation as the "J" in the Commission Exhibit 795. Would you agree +with that? + +Mr. COLE. Yes; that is true, but I think in studying these forms we +ought to consider all available "I's," and there would be some others, +such as the one on B-4 and one in B-6. It shows a fair range of +variation, especially with regard to finishing the lower part of that +letter. Now, I would judge the one on B-3 to be definitely a part of +his writing habit, because it gives the impression of having been made +with a considerable amount of freedom. Generally, a larger form is made +more freely, more naturally, than a smaller form. + +Mr. McCLOY. I see. + +Mr. COLE. And you see you have got sort of a cramped effect across the +base of the "I" in A-7. + +Mr. McCLOY. What I am getting at is, you don't suggest that all these +"I's" and all these "J's" exactly conform, but you are talking in terms +of similarities that turn up in certain of them that you believe are +significant? + +Mr. COLE. Yes, sir. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cole, I now hand you an item consisting of a +yellowish card entitled "International Certificates of Vaccination as +approved by The World Health Organization," and so forth, PHS Form +731, and reading in part, "This is to certify that Lee Oswald, whose +signature follows" and with the signature, "Lee H. Oswald," date of +birth and so forth, "has on the date indicated been vaccinated or +revaccinated against smallpox," with a date appearing in a rubber-stamp +printing, what appears to be rubber-stamp printing, "June 8, 1963," +and a rubber-stamp signature of "Dr. A. J. Hideel, P.O. Box 30016, +New Orleans, La.," with some type of stamp on the right side next to +the name, and a signature "A. J. Hidell" over the name; and I ask you +whether you have examined this item? + +Mr. COLE. I have. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, may this be admitted as Commission Exhibit +813? + +Mr. McCLOY. It may be admitted. + +(The document referred to was marked as Commission Exhibit No. 813, and +received in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, I also will show you Commission Exhibit 115, which +consists of a Warrior rubber stamping kit which has already been +introduced in evidence in connection with testimony of Marina Oswald, +and which was found at one of Oswald's residences, and ask you whether +you have examined this Commission Exhibit 115? + +Mr. COLE. Yes, sir; I have. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did you attempt to determine whether the signatures "Lee +H. Oswald" and "A. J. Hideel" on Commission Exhibit 813 were prepared +by the author of the standards? + +Mr. COLE. Yes, sir; I did. + +Mr. EISENBERG. What was your conclusion? + +Mr. COLE. It is my conclusion that the author of the standard writing +is the author of the writing you just described. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did you attempt to determine whether the apparent +rubber-stamp printing had been produced by use of the Warrior kit, +Exhibit 115? + +Mr. COLE. I did. + +Mr. EISENBERG. What was your conclusion? + +Mr. COLE. It is my conclusion that the kit could have been used for +producing the rubber-stamp printing on--Exhibit 813 is it? + +Mr. EISENBERG. Yes. + +Did you prepare a photograph of 813, Mr. Cole? + +Mr. COLE. Yes; I did. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Will you produce that photograph? You have produced two +photographs, one of which shows the outside or exterior portion of 813, +and the other one shows the interior portion? + +Mr. COLE. Correct; yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did you take each of these photographs? + +Mr. COLE. I did. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And are they accurate reproductions of the Exhibit 813? + +Mr. COLE. They are. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Approximately what enlargements are these, by the way? + +Mr. COLE. About 1-1/2 diameters. + +Mr. EISENBERG. These are what size photographs? + +Mr. COLE. Eight by ten. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, may these two photographs be admitted as +814 and 815? + +Mr. McCLOY. They may be. + +(The photographs referred to were marked as Commission Exhibits Nos. +814 and 815, and received in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. 814 will be exterior part of 813, and 815 will be the +interior. + +Now, the exterior portion of 813 also shows some handprinting "Lee H. +Oswald" which came out in this photograph--in 814--a little clearer. +Did you identify that handwriting, Mr. Cole---- + +Mr. COLE. I did. + +Mr. EISENBERG. As being--what was your conclusion? + +Mr. COLE. It is my conclusion that that handprinting is in the hand of +the person who made the standard specimens. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now by reference to those photographs, 814 and 815, and +by reference to your charts of the standards, could you explain the +reasons for your conclusion on the handwriting and handprinting? + +Mr. COLE. With respect to the signature, "Lee H. Oswald," as shown +by the photograph 815, this compares favorably with other sample +signatures that I have examined, some of which are shown on the charts, +namely chart A, item 15; chart B, item 15; and chart C, item 6, second +line from the bottom. There is, I think, a closer comparison with +certain other standard signatures of "Lee H. Oswald" which I have +examined, as appearing on the reverse of certain checks. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And those are in evidence, are they, as one of the +standards, Mr. Cole? + +Mr. COLE. Yes, sir. + +Mr. EISENBERG. That was described in the record when you introduced it? + +Mr. COLE. Yes; the signatures as endorsements on these several checks +show what might be described as an exaggerated freedom and carelessness +in the execution of this signature. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Excuse me, was that 776, that exhibit consisting of the +checks? + +Mr. COLE. Yes, sir; the signatures and endorsements of the checks in +Exhibit 776 show some variation with respect to the care and formation +of letters. There are a few endorsements in that group which show a +greatly exaggerated freedom or a carelessness in execution. These +signatures appear on, especially on, check numbers 2408 and 2506 of +this exhibit, and they compare quite favorably in detail with the +signature shown by the photograph, Commission Exhibit 815. + +Now with regard to the writing of the name "A. J. Hideel" we observed +in the combination of letters "Hi" that that letter is joined by means +of a projection of a crossbar into the letter "i"; that in the letter +"e," which is separated from the preceding "d," there is a very high +placement of the loop, that is, instead of beginning at the writing +line, the loop of the letter begins about halfway up on the staff, +and this is a form that is very familiar in the standard writing, +particularly in the handprinted forms. For example, on chart C, item 3, +the final "e" in the word "discharge" shows a similar effect. Also on +chart C, item 6, the second line, in the name "Mercedes" we have got +two "e's" that show a similar effect. + +The final "l" shows this perceptible increase of pressure on the +downstroke, and a very abrupt terminal stroke also, which had been +previously mentioned as being a characteristic of chart B, item 6, in +the word "enroll." + +Now with regard to the handprinting as shown by Commission photograph +Exhibit 814, and considering particularly the name "Oswald," we have a +detailed agreement in every feature of letter forms there, and I will +direct attention especially to the use of the lowercase "l" and "d" +as associated with the capital or uppercase forms of the other four +letters of the name, and I will also mention the method of forming the +"d," considering first one of the standards where it can be seen more +clearly. On chart C, item 6, the first line, final "d" of "Oswald" +shows first a fairly long downstroke, then a stroke rising from the +end of that downstroke moving upwards and to the left to form the body +of the letter, and this method of formation is also used in the "d" of +"Oswald" as shown by the photograph Exhibit 814. + +On the next line below there is faintly visible the name "Orleans" and +I will direct attention to the base of the "l," which shows a rather +deep compound curve. That is, here again, instead of having a simple +horizontal line to represent the base of that printed letter, there is +a fairly deep curve which is found in the standard writing in several +places, one example being chart C, item 4. + +This word also illustrates the tendency to mix lowercase forms with +capitals in the case of the use of the lowercase "e" in "Orleans," and +that, of course, is repeated many places in the standard writing, a +good place being chart C, item 6, the word "Mercedes." These are the +reasons for my belief that the author of the standard writing is the +author of the handwriting on---- + +Mr. EISENBERG. 813? + +Mr. COLE. 813. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, the handwriting and handprinting on 813 is all +extremely dim. Do you have any explanation for that? + +Mr. COLE. There is evidence that this document has been treated with +chemicals, probably for the purpose of developing for fingerprints. +Such chemicals are ordinarily included in solvents which dissolve +ink, and some bleach out ink. I think that is the reason for the poor +legibility of this ink writing. At one time, I think, it probably had a +pretty good legibility. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Was this the condition of the item when you examined it? + +Mr. COLE. Yes; it was. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, you stated that the apparent rubber-stamp printing +could have been produced by the Warrior rubber kit, 115. First let me +ask you, is this actually rubber-stamp printing? + +Mr. COLE. Yes; I believe it is. + +Mr. EISENBERG. That is, the printing on the vaccination certificate. +When you say it could have been produced by the print in Exhibit 115, +could you elaborate as to your findings on that point? + +Mr. COLE. Yes; in considering that question, I made an impression +from the stamp, from the type setup in a stamp which is a part of +this kit at the present time. Now the typing as set up reads "L. H. +Oswald, 4907 Magazine St., New Orleans, La.," and, of course, that text +repeats some of the letters, a good many of the letters, which are +in the rubber-stamp impression "Doctor A. J. Hideel, P.O. Box 30016, +New Orleans, La.," and I made a careful comparison of these letters +as taken from the stamped impression with what is shown on 813, and I +found that they agree perfectly as to measurements of the type faces, +and they agree as to the design of letters. Therefore, I would say that +the rubber-stamp type faces from this particular kit could have been +used to produce that rubber-stamp impression on 813. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Could you produce the two cards which you used to record +the impression of the 115 rubber-stamp kit? + +Mr. COLE. Yes, sir; the second card is an impression from the date +stamp which is a part of this kit, and that too agrees along the same +lines with respect to measurements of the letters and the designs of +the letters. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, may these two cards be admitted as +Commission Exhibit 816? + +Mr. McCLOY. They may be admitted. + +(The cards referred to were marked as Commission Exhibit No. 816 and +received in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. Are there microscopic characteristics on rubber-stamp +printing sufficient to make positive identifications? + +Mr. COLE. I don't regard any to be present in this particular stamp. +But while the type faces could not be regarded as perfect, I don't know +of any way to determine whether the imperfections belong only to this +kit or whether they would be true of all Warrior rubber-stamp kits. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did you notice any imperfections? + +Mr. COLE. Well, I did not actually catalog any imperfections, but in +looking at the type I had the general impression that it is not a +perfect impression, certainly not as perfect as you would get from +metal type in a regular printing operation. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, you stamped an impression other than the one +contained on the card 813. Could you explain the reasons for that? + +Mr. COLE. I stamped the material which was already set up in type. +Since it repeated a good deal of the material, enough for examination, +I did not want on my own volition to tear down the stamps that were in +this in order to set up other type. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did you examine the stamp impression appearing on the +right-hand side of the interior of the Document 813? + +Mr. COLE. I did. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did you come to any conclusion as to that stamp? + +Mr. COLE. Yes; this stamp includes wording which reads in reverse, +and there is a double stamping of the wording, and the text is "BRUSH +IN CAN" the three words, "BRUSH IN CAN." The word "BRUSH" extends in +approximately a semicircle across the upper part of the stamp and the +words "IN CAN" in a semicircle across the lower part. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Can you think of any explanation of why those words +should appear? + +Mr. COLE. Yes; a possible explanation is that the object used to make +the stamped impression was the top of some container of a solvent or +cleaning fluid with raised lettering, and that the top of this can was +pressed against a stamped pad, and then pressed against this document. + +Mr. EISENBERG. What would the object be? + +Mr. COLE. Well, I think it is very common to see rubber-stamped +impressions on documents of this particular character. They are so +commonplace, I think that it is probably a habit or custom among most +people not to read them. They may be regarded as giving a document an +official appearance. That may be the purpose of getting some sort of +stamp onto the document. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Why do the letters appear in reverse, Mr. Cole? + +Mr. COLE. Well, they would naturally appear in reverse. If they read +correctly in raised letters as the top of some container, if it was +intended that they be read correctly there, then they would naturally +be in reverse from the stamped impression. Of course, you will observe +that in this Warrior stamping kit the material set up in the rubber +stamp there is in reverse, which produces correct reading and writing +from an impression. There is one more feature of this particular stamp +I think ought to be mentioned. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Yes, please. + +Mr. COLE. There is toward the center of that stamp a rectangle of a +deposit of ink in a certain pattern, sort of a spotty mottled pattern +of ink, and this corresponds to the pattern of the blank parts of the +date stamp. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Which date stamp is that? + +Mr. COLE. The Warrior stamping kit includes a dating stamp, and on the +adjustable bands are certain blank areas. Now, the pattern on those +blank areas is similar to the pattern which we have in this rectangle +of the stamp just discussed. + +Mr. McCLOY. May I ask, this Post Office Box 30016, is that---- + +Mr. EISENBERG. Yes; that corresponds---- + +Mr. McCLOY. Does it correspond to the one he used in New Orleans? + +Mr. EISENBERG. I am about to introduce an exhibit which shows Post +Office Box 30061, that is, the last two figures reversed, and I imagine +his spelling accounts for that. + +Mr. Cole, I now show you an item consisting of a part of an application +for Post Office Box 30061 in New Orleans, dated June 11, 1963, with a +postmark, signed "L. H. Oswald," and in the part of the box captioned +"Names of persons entitled to receive mail through box" and so forth, +the words are written "A. J. Hidell, Marina Oswald," and I ask you +whether you have examined that item? + +Mr. COLE. I have. + +Mr. EISENBERG. May I have this item admitted, Mr. Chairman, as 817? + +Mr. McCLOY. Let it be admitted. + +(The item referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 817, and +received in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did you compare this with the standards to determine +who wrote the writing on that exhibit, or more accurately, whether the +printing and writing was produced by the same person who produced the +printing and writing on the standards? + +Mr. COLE. I did. + +Mr. EISENBERG. What was your conclusion? + +Mr. COLE. It is my conclusion that the author of the standard writing +is the author of the writing on Commission Exhibit 817. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did you take a photograph of Commission 817? + +Mr. COLE. I did. + +Mr. EISENBERG. This was taken by you or under your supervision? + +Mr. COLE. Yes, sir. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And it is a true and accurate reproduction of 817? + +Mr. COLE. It is. + +Mr. EISENBERG. This is an 8 by 10 photograph. Mr. Chairman, may this be +admitted as 818? + +Mr. McCLOY. It may be admitted. + +(Commission Exhibit No. 818 was marked and received in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. By reference to this photograph and by reference to your +charts of standards, Mr. Cole, can you explain to us how you came to +this conclusion? + +Mr. COLE. Yes, sir; with respect to the handprinting of the name "A. J. +Hidell," I direct attention to the formation of the letter "d" in the +same manner as that previously described in the standard writing, chart +C, item 6, first line--a close correspondence as to the construction, +writing movement, in forming those letters. + +The letter "e" compares favorably not only as to form but the +circumstance that here again the lowercase letter is mixed in with +capital letters. Of course, that applies to the three letters "ide" +associated with the other capital letter of that name, and that is a +habit shown in many places in the standard writing. + +The "L's" have the compound curve across the base, which has previously +been observed in the standard writing. + +In the name "Marina," the form of the capital letter "M" compares +closely with the capital letter "M" shown on chart C, item 6, second +line, the name "Mercedes." + +That same name shows the form of letter "A" with the retraced stroke on +the left side which exists in many places in the standard writing. + +The name "Oswald" again shows this mixture of uppercase and lowercase +letters, namely the circumstance that the "l" and "d" are lower-case +forms, whereas the previous, the other four letters are upper case. + +The signature "L. H. Oswald," agrees with other signatures that I have +examined, some of which are shown on the charts, chart A, item 15, +chart B, item 15, and chart C, item 6, next to the last line, a close +correspondence in all details, except that there is some confusion or +overriding in the second letter of the last name in the area of the +"s," which may be only an accidental imperfection in that particular +area. Otherwise, there is a fairly clear showing of all the letters, +and they agree with the standards. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Does that "s" that you refer to appear to be two "s's," +one printed and one written? + +Mr. COLE. Yes; it could be that. They are somewhat intertwined there, +and we have got this name just following an instance of making +handprinting, so that could be an explanation of it. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Next, I show you a photograph of a card reading "Fair +Play for Cuba Committee. New Orleans Chapter, L. H. Oswald," signature, +"L. H. Oswald," dated June 15, 1963, signed "Chapter President--A. J. +Hidell," and I ask you whether you have examined that photograph? + +Mr. COLE. I have. + +Mr. EISENBERG. May this be admitted as 819, Mr. Chairman? + +Mr. McCLOY. It may be admitted. + +(Commission Exhibit No. 819 was marked and received in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. For the record, this is a photograph of a card that was +found in Oswald's wallet at the time of his apprehension. + +I now show you a card, a paper card, which appears to be the same as +Exhibit 819, except that there is no visible marking where the words +"Chapter"--where the signature "Chapter President--A. J. Hidell" is +written on Exhibit 819, and the card is seriously discolored with a +dark brown discoloration, and I ask you whether you have examined this +card I now hand you? + +Mr. COLE. I have. + +Mr. EISENBERG. May I have that admitted as 820, Mr. Chairman? + +Mr. McCLOY. It may be admitted. + +(Commission Exhibit No. 820 was marked and received in evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. In your opinion, is 819 a photograph of the card, 820? + +Mr. COLE. Yes; it is. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Can you account in any way for the discoloration of the +card 820? + +Mr. COLE. The discoloration is characteristic of that which has +previously been observed as resulting from treating a document with a +solution of silver nitrate. Such treatment is sometimes done in the +hope of developing latent fingerprints, and this treatment could be, +and probably is, the explanation for the elimination of a line of +writing on the line for signature above the title "Chapter President." + +Mr. EISENBERG. Were you able to make out whether any writing had +appeared in the space which is now blank on Exhibit 820, making +provision for the---- + +Mr. COLE. Yes; it is---- + +Mr. EISENBERG. Excuse me, making provision for the chapter president's +signature? + +Mr. COLE. Yes; there is barely enough showing to indicate that there +was a line of writing there at one time. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Could you tell whether it was the same as the signature +"A. J. Hidell"? + +Mr. COLE. It conforms generally to the signature "A. J. Hidell," that +is, the form shown by the photograph, Exhibit 819. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Have you taken a photograph of 819? + +Mr. COLE. Yes, sir; I am sorry, sir; I do not have that photograph with +me. + +Mr. EISENBERG. All right. + +Do you want to take a look at this, Mr. McCloy? + +Did you compare the signatures "Lee Oswald" and "A. J. Hidell" on +819 to determine whether they had been written by the author of the +standards? + +Mr. COLE. Yes, sir; may I look at that photograph? Yes, sir; I did. + +Mr. EISENBERG. What was your conclusion as to the signature of Lee H. +Oswald? + +Mr. COLE. It is my opinion that the author of the standard writing is +the author of the signature "Lee H. Oswald" on Exhibit 819. + +Mr. EISENBERG. What was your conclusion as to the signature "A. J. +Hidell"? + +Mr. COLE. I find no basis in the standard writing for identification of +the author of such standard writing as the author of the name "A. J. +Hidell" as shown by 819. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Do you think that the author of the standard writing +might have produced that signature in a disguised hand? + +Mr. COLE. I think that is highly improbable, because this does +not appear to be a disguised hand. It looks like a fairly natural +handwriting. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And that is based upon the items which you enumerated +earlier which indicated the presence of a natural handwriting, such as +speed and so forth? + +Mr. COLE. Yes. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Do you think that, apart from the naturalness of the +writing, the signature "A. J. Hidell" was within Oswald's abilities as +a penman? + +Mr. COLE. It appears to be somewhat beyond his ability. I would say +taking into account his general level of writing skill as shown by the +standards, I would say this represents a somewhat higher writing skill. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Off the record. + +(Discussion off the record.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. On the record. + +Mr. COLE. I now hand you a yellow sheet of paper, which has already +been introduced into evidence as Commission Exhibit No. 110, and +for the record I will state that this consists of an interlinear +translation from Russian into English. The Russian script on this +document has been identified as being that of George Bouhe an +acquaintance of the Oswald's, and the English script as being that +of Marina Oswald. Marina herself identified this as her handwriting, +and she stated that Bouhe was teaching her English by writing out the +Russian and having her translate into English. As far as I know this +is the only standard we have of Marina's handwriting in the Latin +alphabet. Mr. Cole. I ask you whether you have examined Commission +Exhibit 110? + +Mr. COLE. I have. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Have you attempted to compare the signature "A. J. +Hidell" on Commission Exhibit 819 with the Latin or English printing, +or writing rather, in Exhibit 110, to determine whether they were both +written by the same person? + +Mr. COLE. I have. + +Mr. EISENBERG. And what is your conclusion? + +Mr. COLE. My conclusion is that the author of the writing in the +Latin alphabet on Exhibit 110 is a possible author of the name "A. J. +Hidell" on 819, but I do not offer that as a definite conclusion. I say +"possible author" because I observed a similarity in the particular +parts where close comparison is possible, namely, with respect to the +lowercase letter "d," of which one example is found in the word "day" +on the left side of the lower one-third of Exhibit 110. The similarity +consists in the degree of roundness of the body of the letter, and the +fairly short and thin loop or the upper extension of the letter "d," +plus a similarity with respect to the terminal stroke of that letter, +the circumstance that it is not joined continuously with the letter +following. + +Another similarity is observed in the double "l's" of the word +"especially," which is on the last line at the right side of 110, and +here we have a similarity with respect to the proportion of the height +of those letters relative to other small letters. + +There is no opportunity for making a more extensive comparison between +the name "A. J. Hidell" on 819 with this standard writing. And on +that basis I would say only that the author of the standard could be +regarded as a possible author of the questioned signature. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cole, would the production of Cyrillic writing, that +is writing in the Russian language, be useful to you in evaluating the +signature on 819? + +Mr. COLE. I believe not. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Can you explain that? + +Mr. COLE. Well, ordinarily a person who--I might say this, that the +construction in writing one alphabet and the other would be completely +different--that one would develop habits along different lines. It +could not be expected that there would be a close translation of habits +from one alphabet into another. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Is enough writing present in 819 so that you believe you +could make a definite identification if you had a sufficient standard +on which to base your comparison? + +Mr. COLE. Yes; I think so. + +Mr. EISENBERG. If we obtained a greater standard, that is, a more +voluminous standard, of the handwriting of Marina Oswald or other +persons, would you undertake to make the examination and to submit your +result, either in the form of testimony or by written communication to +us, Mr. Cole? + +Mr. COLE. Yes; I would be quite willing to. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, may we state on the record that the +Commission is requesting Mr. Cole to do this, if we can obtain a better +standard, and that we will attempt to obtain such a standard? + +Mr. McCLOY. Very well. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cole, referring to 110 again for a moment, can you +characterize the degree of skill with which the writing is produced, +that is the English or Latin alphabet present on 110? + +Mr. COLE. I would say it is an average degree of skill, fairly good +based upon the perfection of letter forms, regularity of proportions, +speed of writing--I would say fairly good. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Would it require much practice in the use of the Latin +alphabet to attain the degree of skill evidenced in 110? + +Mr. COLE. Well, it would certainly take some practice. It is not the +writing of a novice in forming these particular letters. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Can you expand a little on what you mean by "some +practice"? A week's practice, or a month's practice, or a year's +practice? + +Mr. COLE. Of course, this depends on how intensive the practice is, but +I would certainly say more than a week's practice. + +Mr. McCLOY. Mr. Cole, have you examined the Russian script, have you +attempted to make anything out of such Russian script as we have of +Marina Oswald, have you seen standard forms? + +Mr. COLE. No, sir; I have not. + +Mr. McCLOY. Might it not be helpful to look at some of that to see +whether there is anything you can make out of that that would help you +in the---- + +Mr. COLE. I am inclined to doubt it, but I would be quite willing to +take a look at it. + +Mr. McCLOY. I can understand your reasons for doubting it but there may +be something that we have here--we have here, have we not? + +Mr. EISENBERG. Yes, we do. + +Mr. McCLOY. A very substantial number, quantities of Marina's writing +in Russian, and it may be that there is something you can glean from +that if you would look at it perhaps before you go. + +Mr. EISENBERG. I will make arrangements for Mr. Cole to see that +writing, Mr. Chairman. + +Any further question on this Fair Play for Cuba Committee card? + +Mr. McCLOY. No, I don't think so. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Finally then, Mr. Cole, I show you an item consisting +of a letter on a yellow piece of stationery, apparently torn from +a legal-size pad, addressed to Leslie Welding Co. from "Lee H. +Oswald"--signed "Lee H. Oswald"--and with an address handprinted, and +reading "Dear Sir, this is to explain that I have moved permanently to +Dallas, Texas, where I have found other employment," and so forth, and +I ask you whether you have examined that item? + +Mr. COLE. I have. + +Mr. EISENBERG. May that be admitted as 826, Mr. Chairman? + +Mr. McCLOY. It may be admitted. + +(The item referred to was marked 826, and received into evidence.) + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did you attempt to compare this item with the standards +to determine whether it had been produced by the author of the +standards? + +Mr. COLE. I did. + +Mr. EISENBERG. What was your conclusion? + +Mr. COLE. It is my conclusion that the author of the standard writing +is the author of the writing shown by Exhibit 826. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Can you briefly give us some of the reasons for that +conclusion? + +Mr. COLE. Yes; there is an agreement in a great many details between +this letter, 826, some of which I think are more significant than +others. + +One of the really highly significant points is the formation of the +letter "x" in the word "Texas" which has already been mentioned in +connection with other exhibits. Now, this word appears on 826, on the +second---- + +Mr. EISENBERG. Excuse me. That exhibit should be, have been, 820A. +Let's refer to it from now on as 820A. + +(The item referred to was renumbered.) + +Mr. COLE. The exhibit just mentioned is understood to be 820A, and the +word "Texas" appears on the second line of the body of the letter. The +method of forming this "x" is first to construct a =U=-like form, that +is, a form having two cusps with a shallow curve connecting the two, +and then to make the crossbar in such a manner that it comes very close +to the second cusp. This is a very unusual variation of the letter "x," +and it appears in the standard writing--also in the word "Texas"--in +several places, chart B, items 4, 12, and 13. + +The writing shows the tendency to exaggerate certain approach strokes +or initial strokes of letters. In the body of Exhibit 821 this is +evident in the letter "i" of "is," which is the second word of the +first line, and moving along that same first line we have the same +effect for the first stroke of the "t" of "to" and the "t" of "that." +Then moving down to the second paragraph, third word, the same effect +is shown, and this is illustrated in the standard writing in two +places, one good example being chart A, item 1, the word "to," the same +chart, item 3, the word "the." + +The construction of the small letter "p" has been mentioned heretofore, +has been characterized by an absence of an upper extension, that is, +no extension that passes above the height of the body of the letter, +and the body of the letter is made in the form of an arch, rather +than a circle closed against the staff. This is shown in the words +"presently" and "employ," which are in the last line of writing of this +exhibit, and this is repeated in the standard writing as shown by chart +A, item 2, the word "support," item 3, the word "port" and the word +"transportation." + +There is a very close agreement in all details of the signature of Lee +H. Oswald on this letter with the several examples of the signatures +shown on these charts, chart A, item 15, chart B, item 15, and chart C, +item 6, second to the last line. + +The word "Texas," including this highly significant "x," is repeated as +the last word on this letter. + +These constitute some of my reasons for believing that Exhibit 820A is +in the handwriting of the author of the standard writing. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Now, to recapitulate then, all the standards which you +have examined and which were put in evidence, and all of the questioned +documents which you have examined and which were put in evidence, are +in the handwriting of the same person, with the exceptions you have +noted, such as "A. J. Hidell" on the penultimate exhibit, the FPCC card? + +Mr. COLE. Yes, sir. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cole, did you have any information concerning any +identifications or nonidentifications of handwriting made by any other +Federal agency in this matter? + +Mr. COLE. No, sir. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Did you have any other information whatsoever concerning +identification or nonidentification by anyone in this matter? + +Mr. COLE. No, sir. + +Mr. EISENBERG. Do you at this point have any such information? + +Mr. COLE. No, sir. + +Mr. EISENBERG. That completes my examination, Mr. McCloy. + +Mr. McCLOY. Off the record. + +(Discussion off the record.) + +Mr. McCLOY. Commission Exhibit 776 is a series of checks which have +been endorsed by Oswald, some in lead pencil and some in ink. Some of +those endorsements seem to be, rather the handwriting seems to be, +very irregular, loose, malformed, certain other ones very clear and +quite regular, and in comparison with other standards of Oswald's I +find some difficulty in conforming the signatures on certain of these +endorsements to those standards. I wonder if you would look at these +and tell me whether you have any comments in regard to the comments I +have made about this--about these checks? The first two or three there +seem to exemplify what I am talking about. + +Mr. COLE. In my opinion the endorsements on these checks show a +moderately wide range of writing habit, and they also show variations +which may be due to an attitude about the act of writing, and I am +thinking especially of the more distorted signatures, such as that +appearing on No. 2408; and by attitude I mean that a person might find +the act of writing very inconvenient or distasteful or might actually +be experiencing some strong emotion at the particular time. + +Mr. McCLOY. Could it be, might I interrupt, could it be that he was +writing while he was in movement here, while he was in an automobile or +some jolting vehicle? + +Mr. COLE. Well, that can affect handwriting, of course, but I believe +it is unlikely, because the first letter of his name is well formed. +The first letter of "Lee" on this endorsement of 2408 shows as much +skill and control as any of the better signatures. + +Mr. McCLOY. You think maybe something irritated him in between? + +Mr. COLE. That is a possibility. I think most people find the act of +writing, especially writing a signature, a pleasant thing to do. I +think that is one reason why people develop a somewhat higher skill. + +Mr. McCLOY. It depends on whether it is an endorsement of a check or a +drawing of the check. + +Mr. COLE. That could make a difference. + +Mr. McCLOY. Well, thank you very much. + +Mr. COLE. Yes, sir. + +(Whereupon, at 2:30 p.m., the President's Commission recessed.) + + + + +_Tuesday, May 5, 1964_ + +TESTIMONY OF JOHN W. FAIN, JOHN LESTER QUIGLEY, AND JAMES PATRICK +HOSTY, JR. + +The President's Commission met at 9:25 a.m. on May 5, 1964, at 200 +Maryland Avenue NE., Washington, D.C. + +Present were Chief Justice Earl Warren, Chairman; Senator John Sherman +Cooper, Representative Gerald R. Ford, John J. McCloy, and Allen W. +Dulles, members. + +Also present were J. Lee Rankin, general counsel; David W. Belin, +assistant counsel; Wesley J. Liebeler, assistant counsel; Norman +Redlich, assistant counsel; Samuel A. Stern, assistant counsel; Howard +P. Willens, assistant counsel; Charles Murray, observer; and Leon +Jaworski, special counsel to the attorney general of Texas. + + +TESTIMONY OF JOHN W. FAIN + +The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Fain, the purpose of today's hearing is to take the +testimony of members of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, including +yourself, who interviewed Lee Harvey Oswald or other important +witnesses, before and after the assassination, and concerning the +assassination of President Kennedy, both before and after. + +We will also take the testimony today of Mr. Belmont, one of your +superiors. Would you please rise, Mr. Fain, and raise your right hand +and be sworn. You solemnly swear the testimony you are about to give +before this Commission will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing +but the truth, so help you God? + +Mr. FAIN. I do, sir. + +The CHAIRMAN. Will you be seated, please. + +Mr. Stern will conduct the examination. Mr. Stern. + +Mr. STERN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. Fain, would you state your full name for the record, please. + +Mr. FAIN. John Wythe Fain. + +Mr. STERN. And your address? + +Mr. FAIN. 12711 Pebblebrook, Houston 24, Tex. + +Mr. STERN. What is your education, Mr. Fain, at the college level? + +Mr. FAIN. After graduation from Weatherford High School in 1926, I +entered Weatherford Junior College at Weatherford, Tex., which I +finished in 2 years in 1928. After teaching school for about 4 years, I +entered the University of Texas, in the summer of 1933. I finished my +prelaw work, and in 1936, the spring of that year, I received my LL.B. +degree in law from the University of Texas. + +Mr. STERN. Are you a member of the bar, Mr. Fain? + +Mr. FAIN. I am a member of the Texas State Bar. + +Mr. STERN. Can you summarize briefly your employment experience after +receiving your law degree and before joining the Federal Bureau of +Investigation? + +Mr. FAIN. I will have to go back just a little bit there. In 1932 I +ran for the office of representative in the State Legislature from +Weatherford, Tex., my home city in Parker County, my home county, and +served two terms, no opposition on the second term, and then I did not +seek reelection at the end of the second term. I chose to go on and +get my law degree at the University of Texas. Then, in 1937 I became +employed. Robert B. Anderson, whom I suppose you know---- + +The CHAIRMAN. Former Secretary of the Treasury. + +Mr. FAIN. Former Secretary of the Treasury, yes; he and I were good +friends, and it happened, that he was in the adjoining county of +Johnson, which touched my county, Parker. I had met him in Weatherford +Junior College, and we were in the same debating society at Weatherford +Junior College, and I served in the Texas State Legislature with him, I +sat in some of his law classes at the University of Texas, and then he +was instrumental in giving me or getting me appointed to, a position as +district supervisor of the Texas Unemployment Compensation Commission. +It is now known as the Texas Employment Commission. + +I was in charge of investigations of claims for unemployment insurance, +and I served in that capacity at Waco, Tex., until on September 8 of +1942 I entered the FBI. Of course, I made my application prior to +that. I served in the Federal Bureau of Investigation as a law-trained +special agent until October 29 of 1962, upon which date I retired +voluntarily. + +Mr. STERN. Can you describe briefly your experience in the FBI. + +Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir. After finishing my training session here at the +seat of government. I believe that lasted 12 weeks at that time, I +took my practical experience here for a couple of weeks, and then was +assigned to the Chicago, Ill., field office, where I remained for a +period of approximately 4 months. I received a transfer to Oklahoma +City, where I was 3 weeks, and then they stationed me at Tulsa, +Okla., as a resident agent, where I remained approximately a year. I +then was transferred to San Francisco, Calif., where I remained for +approximately 2 years; and in December of 1945 I was transferred to +Dallas, Tex., where I remained for approximately 5 years in the head +office there, division office in Dallas, and then I was sent to Fort +Worth in 1949 as a resident agent of the FBI, and remained there until +I voluntarily retired on October 29, 1962. + +Mr. STERN. Now, would you describe the relationship between the Fort +Worth office and the Dallas office. + +Mr. STERN. Well, the Dallas office is the headquarters city to which +I was originally assigned and, of course, in that area distances are +rather great between the cities, so we have what is known as resident +agencies, there being at that time 10 agents in the Fort Worth office. + +(At this point in the proceedings Mr. McCloy entered the hearing room.) + +And we had agents, of course, at Lubbock and Amarillo and Wichita +Falls, Sherman, Harris, and the other cities in order for economy +reasons, to save travel. It would be a rather expensive operation to go +from Dallas to those other areas. + +Mr. STERN. Mr. Fain, did you specialize in any particular area of FBI +work or were your assignments general? + +Mr. FAIN. My assignments were comparatively general up until, I would +say, about 1951, at which time I specialized mostly in security +matters. Most of my investigations after 1951 were security-type +investigations. + +Mr. STERN. This is true---- + +Mr. FAIN. However, I did handle--excuse me, I did continue to +handle--other types of investigations, too. + +Mr. STERN. This is true until your retirement? + +Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. STERN. Were you in charge of the investigation of Lee Harvey Oswald +until the time of your retirement? + +Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; up until the time we closed the case--I don't +recall the exact date, it can be verified from the report--but, I think +we closed the case, following his interview on August 26. + +Mr. STERN. Well to the extent---- + +Mr. FAIN. I want to correct that. It was August 14. + +Mr. STERN. We will get to that, Mr. Fain. But to the extent the case +was being investigated during your tenure, were you in charge of the +case? + +Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; the case was assigned to me. + +Mr. STERN. Fine. That is all I want right now. + +Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. STERN. How many other cases on an average would you be in charge of +during this period from 1960 until retirement? + +Mr. FAIN. From 1960 until the time of retirement? + +Mr. STERN. Yes. + +Mr. FAIN. I don't have any exact figure on that, but I suppose I would +have 45 to 50 cases. + +Mr. STERN. At anytime? + +Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. STERN. Mr. Fain, I show you a seven-page mimeographed report marked +"Report of John W. Fain," dated May 12, 1960. Can you identify that +report? + +(Marked for identification No. 821.) + +Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; this is my report. + +Mr. STERN. Were you responsible for preparing this entire report, Mr. +Fain? + +Mr. FAIN. Yes; I was. + +Mr. STERN. Have you reviewed the report in preparation for your +testimony today? + +Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. STERN. Is the report correct? + +Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. STERN. Is there anything you want to correct in the report? + +Mr. FAIN. No, sir. + +Mr. STERN. Is it complete in covering the events described? + +Mr. FAIN. It is. + +Mr. STERN. So that you have no additions or corrections? + +Mr. FAIN. No additions or corrections. + +Mr. STERN. Let me ask you, first, Mr. Fain, about a couple of +symbols that appear on the first page of the report. The report is +characterized as "Internal Security R." What does the "R" mean? + +Mr. FAIN. It stands for "Russia." + +Mr. STERN. At the end of the synopsis on the first page are the letters +"RUC." Can you tell us what that means? + +Mr. FAIN. That is a symbol to save typing and stenographic effort +and so forth. It is known to all agents, and it means "Referred Upon +Completion," "RUC," "Referred Upon Completion," to the office of origin +actually. In other words, it indicates that the investigation there +at that point where it was conducted has been completed and we are +referring it back. + +Mr. STERN. To an office which had prime responsibility? + +Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; in this case I suppose it was the Bureau in +Washington. I see the Bureau file number up there at the top. + +Mr. STERN. I see. Do you recall, Mr. Fain, how you were assigned +to investigate this matter which is entitled in this report "Funds +Transmitted to Resident of Russia"? + +Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir. + +We received a communication, or rather the Dallas office did, from +Bureau to the effect that there was an indication that application had +been made by Mrs. Oswald, Marguerite C. Oswald, for a draft, purchase +transfer of funds, to be sent to Lee Harvey Oswald over in Russia, and +I was given the assignment to contact her and find out all I could +about the circumstances. + +Mr. STERN. Concerning the transfer of funds? + +Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; you will notice that the title in this case is +"Funds Transmitted to Residents of Russia," that was the type of +inquiry. + +Mr. STERN. To your recollection, had you ever before this time heard +the name "Lee Harvey Oswald" or any other member of the Oswald family? + +Mr. FAIN. Well, I believe--let's see, April 27, 1960, I talked to +Robert Lee in an effort to locate his mother. + +Mr. STERN. By this time, Mr. Fain, I mean the time covered by your +report, not the date of the report. + +Mr. FAIN. Just what I read in the newspapers about his having gone over +into Russia. The papers played it up. + +Mr. STERN. Did you have any official responsibility in connection with +Lee Harvey Oswald before the time covered by this report? + +Mr. FAIN. No, sir; no, I did not. + +Mr. STERN. On page 2 of the report--is this a record of an interview +that you held, Mr. Fain? + +Mr. FAIN. It is. It is a record of the interview that I conducted. + +Mr. STERN. Is this a form normally used for reporting interviews? + +Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. STERN. What is your practice or what was your practice, while an +FBI agent, in making interviews? Would you make notes of the interview +as you interviewed a subject? + +Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. STERN. Are you familiar with any shorthand method? + +Mr. FAIN. I had a course in shorthand and, of course, still know some +of the symbols and, at that time, did use it, mixed it up with my other +English as I wrote it. I did use it. + +Mr. STERN. Can you tell from this report when you made the interview? + +Mr. FAIN. I interviewed Robert Lee Oswald, who was the brother, older +brother, of Lee Harvey Oswald, the subject of this case, on April 27, +1960, at Fort Worth, Tex. + +Mr. STERN. Can you tell the Commission where that appears from your +report? + +Mr. FAIN. The date of the interview? + +(At this point in the proceedings, Representative Ford entered the +hearing room.) + +Mr. STERN. Yes. + +Mr. FAIN. The date of the interview is located on the lower left-hand +corner, and also the place of the interview. + +Mr. STERN. When did you transcribe--or, first, how would you do that +normally? + +Mr. FAIN. Well, I dictated this on May 2, 1960. It evidently was +transcribed by the stenographer, as noted, on the upper right-hand +corner--this is a little dim--but it looks like May 6, 1960. This is a +very old copy. + +Mr. STERN. You would dictate this to a secretary, Mr. Fain? + +Mr. FAIN. Some of it I dictated on the dictaphone, some of it I would +do by rough draft and send by mail to Dallas, and if I happened to be +in Dallas, I would dictate to the stenographer. + +Mr. STERN. Would you ordinarily preserve your rough notes of the +interview after you dictated your report? + +Mr. FAIN. Not after it gets in this form, because this contains all the +information in the notes we have. In other words, we put everything +right in. Now this is supposed to be an exact transcript of the +information. It is not a recording of the information. I don't mean to +leave that impression. + +Mr. STERN. And you would normally destroy your notes? + +Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; unless there was some--there would be no reason +to keep my notes, once I put all the information I was assured was in +here. Once that is true I destroyed them. + +Mr. STERN. I think these reports largely speak for themselves, Mr. +Fain, but I would like to ask you a few details to clarify statements +in the report. + +On page 3 in the report of your interview of Mrs. Marguerite Oswald, +you say in the second line, "She volunteered for interview." What does +that mean in this connection? + +Mr. FAIN. You will notice that on the lower left-hand corner it +indicates I talked to her on the 28th, April 28, which was the day +after I talked to her son Robert Lee, and evidently he had gotten in +touch with her on the same afternoon that I talked to him or that +night. Anyway she knocked on the door the next day and wanted to talk +to me; and she came in voluntarily. I believe Robert told me that he +would get in touch with her. He gave me her address, at least, and I +was going to send out a lead to have her interviewed down there, but +she came in to talk to me, voluntarily. + +Mr. STERN. Would you look at page 4 of your report, Mr. Fain, the +fourth full paragraph from the top of the page, the paragraph that +begins, "Mrs. Oswald stated," and the last sentence of that paragraph +reads, "Mrs. Oswald stated that she would not have been surprised to +learn that Lee had gone to, say, South America or Cuba, but that it +had never entered her mind that he might go to Russia or might try to +become a citizen there." As far as you can remember, is that accurately +what she said? + +Mr. FAIN. Yes; that is as she said, I put it down. She seemed very much +upset that he had gone to Russia. + +Mr. STERN. Did she explain that to you? + +Mr. FAIN. None other than this. In other words, she said she wouldn't +have been surprised that he had gone to, say, South America or Cuba, +she was taken aback by learning he had gone to Russia. You see, he had +told her he was going over to New Orleans to go to work over there, +and she was apparently very surprised that he had taken this boat to +Europe, to Russia. + +Mr. STERN. Mr. Fain, in your report of your interview with Mrs. +Marguerite Oswald, you quote several letters and refer to other +specific bits of information. How did you get that so accurately? + +Mr. FAIN. She had all of those in her purse. She had all those +clippings that had appeared in the paper, and she had quite a stack of +them there, and I got the information out of those at the time. + +Mr. STERN. She displayed them to you and let you copy them? + +Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; she displayed them to me, that is right. + +The CHAIRMAN. Gentlemen, are there any other questions any of you would +like to ask Mr. Fain? He has stated that everything he knows concerning +this matter is contained in his written report. + +Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; that is correct. + +Representative FORD. May I ask a question? + +The CHAIRMAN. Yes, indeed. + +Representative FORD. Is it the practice of the Bureau to check with +relatives of those who defect or make an attempt to defect to the +Soviet Union? + +Mr. FAIN. Well, I was--my primary motive here was--trying to locate +her. I wanted to talk to her. If I had been able to talk to her, the +mother, I probably wouldn't have contacted Robert. But he was the only +one that I could locate there that knew anything about it, about where +she might be, so I, in the course of things, interviewed him to try to +find out what I could find out from him. + +Representative FORD. I am more concerned about the overall policy. +Whenever an individual makes an attempt to defect or does defect, is +it the policy of the FBI to subsequently interview relatives of the +individual who tried or did defect? + +Mr. FAIN. Mr. Ford, I am unable to answer that because I am not versed +in overall policy, and I am sorry. I am not trying to avoid your +question, but I just actually don't know. + +Representative FORM. What prompted you then in your capacity to +interview---- + +Mr. FAIN. Robert? + +Representative FORD. Either Robert or Mrs. Oswald? + +Mr. FAIN. Well, I was instructed to get in touch with her and find out +what the situation was. The only way I could get the information was to +talk to her, and I talked to Robert only in connection with my attempts +to locate her. + +Representative FORD. But your instructions came from whom? + +Mr. FAIN. I don't have the memorandum or communication that came in +here in connection with this, but it came from the Bureau, I am sure, +through the Dallas office. + +Representative FORD. And you were working out of Dallas? + +Mr. FAIN. Right. My supervisor over in Dallas, no doubt, either called +me or else very likely he wrote an assignment and mailed it to me in +Fort Worth. + +Representative FORD. Your assignment was really to check with the +mother, both, or all? + +Mr. FAIN. Actually, I don't recall how the assignment was worded, I +really don't. I haven't seen it for over a year and a half, and I just +don't recall exactly how that came. + +Representative FORD. But the only reason for such an interview was the +fact that the son had gone to Russia and either defected or attempted +to do so; was that the basis of the investigation? + +Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir. We wanted to find out the circumstances and about +these funds and any information we could ascertain and, of course, it +is always important in this type of case to find out whether or not +any of these--especially intelligence agents or anyone like that might +contact these people and try to get information from them. We try to +get these people to let us know if anything like that happens. + +Representative FORD. That was really the purpose of the interview or +investigation you conducted? + +Mr. FAIN. Let me see if I can find out. In this paragraph 4 there is an +indication---- + +Representative FORD. Paragraph 4 on what page? + +Mr. FAIN. Paragraph 4 on page 2. "He stated he had no contact in any +manner or form with any individual known to him to be a Soviet official +or affiliated in any way with Soviet establishments. He also advised +that as far as he knows neither his mother or other members of his +family had had any contact whatsoever with Soviet officials or with +Soviet establishments." + +I explained to him the jurisdiction of the FBI, that the FBI had +jurisdiction in internal security matters in the United States, and +Robert told me that he would immediately contact the FBI in the event +he was contacted by Soviet officials. Then I also asked him, as is +contained in that final paragraph on the same page, "Oswald stated +that neither he nor his mother as far as he knew had been requested +to furnish any items of personal identification to Lee Oswald in +Russia. He said he would immediately contact the FBI in the event any +information like that came to his attention." + +Representative FORD. These were the only interviews you had with either +one of them? + +Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; at that time, yes, sir. + +Senator COOPER. Can I ask a question? + +Mr. McCLOY. Did you have one at any other time? + +Mr. FAIN. These were the first interviews. We will get to those later. +Do you want to go into those? + +Mr. McCLOY. Never mind. We will get to those in due course. But wasn't +the touch-off on this investigation the fact that a transfer order +or an attempted remittance was being sent to Oswald in Russia by his +mother? + +Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. McCLOY. That was the thing that prompted the inquiry, wasn't it? + +Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; that is right. + +The CHAIRMAN. Senator. + +Senator COOPER. Yes. + +Did Mrs. Oswald give you any reason for her statement she would not +have been surprised if Lee Oswald had gone to Cuba or some South +American country? Did she explain that statement? + +Mr. FAIN. No; she didn't. She just--of course, she was all upset and +bothered by his having gone to Russia, and she expressed great surprise +that he had gone to Russia, and she said just casually or during the +course of the conversation she wouldn't have been surprised for him to +have gone, say, to South America or to Cuba, but to go to Russia, she +was totally surprised and taken aback. + +Senator COOPER. She didn't give you any reason why she would not have +been surprised---- + +Mr. FAIN. No; she didn't go into that. + +Senator COOPER. Whether he had said anything about Cuba or South +America. + +The CHAIRMAN. All right, Mr. Fain. Do you have other questions? + +Mr. STERN. I have other questions for him. I thought we might break it +up in the order of his reports. + +The CHAIRMAN. Go right ahead. + +Mr. STERN. One last question at this stage, Mr. Fain: Did Mrs. Oswald +indicate to you in any way that she thought Lee Harvey Oswald had gone +to Russia in any capacity other than as a private citizen? + +Mr. FAIN. No; she did not. She apparently didn't know why he had gone +at all. She was surprised he had gone in the first place. + +Mr. STERN. She did not suggest in any way that he might have been an +agent of the United States or serving United States interests in Russia? + +Mr. FAIN. I think she did remark something about she believed he was a +secret agent. Maybe she was clutching at anything---- + +Mr. STERN. She did? Is that covered in that report? + +Mr. FAIN. In one of these reports I believe it is. + +Mr. STERN. I am talking about this one, as of this time. + +Mr. FAIN. No; I believe that came in something else. She told evidently +the State Department in Washington, D.C. + +Mr. STERN. Yes. + +Mr. FAIN. That is where that came from. + +Mr. STERN. I am asking whether she suggested this to you at the time of +your interview of Mrs. Oswald on April 28, 1960. + +Mr. FAIN. No; I don't recall anything of that. I have confused that. + +Mr. STERN. Mr. Chairman, may we have the report admitted into evidence? + +The CHAIRMAN. It may be and it will take the next number. + +Mr. STERN. That was marked for identification 821. + +The CHAIRMAN. All right. No. 821 may be admitted. + +(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 821 for +identification, and received in evidence.) + +Mr. STERN. Mr. Fain, I show you a report of 11 pages dated July 3, +1961, entitled "Lee Harvey Oswald." Can you identify this report for +us, and we will number it for identification No. 822. + +Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; this is my report. It is dated July 3 of 1961. + +Mr. STERN. Have you reviewed this report recently in preparation for +your testimony today? + +Mr. FAIN. I have. + +Mr. STERN. Is the report complete in all respects of the subject matter +it covers? + +Mr. FAIN. Yes; it is. + +Mr. STERN. Is it accurate in all respects of the subject matter it +covers? + +Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. STERN. Is there any addition or correction you would like to make +to the report as it stands now? + +Mr. FAIN. No, sir. + +Mr. STERN. The report shows on the cover page, Mr. Fain, that a copy +was sent to the Office of Naval Intelligence in New Orleans, La. Can +you tell us why that was done? + +Mr. FAIN. Well, this investigation at this time was under internal +security category R, and you will notice that predicated on information +received by a communication of January 11, 1961, from District +Intelligence Office, Naval District, New Orleans, La., advising that +Oswald, who had attempted to defect in Russia in October 1959, and +who was a member of the U.S. Marine Corps Reserve had been given an +undesirable discharge from the U.S. Marine Corps Reserve on August 17, +1960. + +Mr. STERN. When you say the investigation was predicated on this +information, what precisely do you mean? + +Mr. FAIN. That was the reason that this report was initiated from that +incoming communication from New Orleans. + +Mr. STERN. And how did this information come to you? Was it sent to you +directly, if you know, from the New Orleans Naval District or did it +come from FBI---- + +Mr. FAIN. It would have come through Dallas, the headquarters division +office in Dallas. + +Mr. STERN. But so far as you know was it sent from New Orleans to +Dallas or from New Orleans to FBI headquarters in Washington and then +disseminated to Dallas? + +Mr. FAIN. I expect it came directly to the Dallas office. It could have +been, the office there might have gotten a copy of it, might have +gotten the original, and this might have been a copy. I just don't +recall. + +Mr. STERN. Were you instructed to make this investigation or did you +initiate it yourself on the strength of this information from the naval +district in New Orleans? + +Mr. FAIN. There again I believe that the supervisor in Dallas asked +that this case be--or did reopen it and asked for a background +investigation. It looks like this is a background type of investigation +on the individual Lee Harvey Oswald. + +Mr. STERN. When you say "reopen," Mr. Fain, does that mean there was a +case opened previously on Lee Oswald? + +Mr. FAIN. No; I used the wrong term. I confused it with this report. +This looks a different type of investigation, this "Funds Transmitted +to Residents of Russia." + +Mr. STERN. That was not an investigation of Lee Harvey Oswald as such? + +Mr. FAIN. That is right. + +Mr. STERN. This was actually the first report concerning the individual? + +Mr. FAIN. That is correct. + +Mr. STERN. So that did this represent the opening of a case on Lee +Harvey Oswald, Mr. Fain? + +Mr. FAIN. Yes; it did. + +Mr. STERN. And as far as you know, there was no earlier investigation +of Lee Harvey Oswald as such; is that correct? + +Mr. FAIN. I believe that is correct. + +Mr. STERN. I am just asking you of your own knowledge. + +Mr. FAIN. That is right. + +Mr. STERN. You say this was a background investigation. What do you +mean by that, Mr. Fain? + +Mr. FAIN. Well, we always ascertain his correct name and aliases, and +residences, where he previously lived, his employment, his citizenship +status, his nationality background, his education, his military record, +whether or not he had any relatives, close relatives, in the Armed +Forces; and we get a physical description of him, identification +record, and where possible we always get a photograph; and his mother +furnished a copy of the photograph to us on April 28, 1960. + +Mr. STERN. On the first page of the report, the initial "C" appears +after the synopsis. What does that mean, Mr. Fain? + +Mr. FAIN. That means closed. + +Mr. STERN. What does that indicate to you in terms of the investigation? + +Mr. FAIN. Well, it indicated that we obtained the information +concerning this person, to identify him, as to who he was, something +about him, about his background; it appearing there was no further need +for investigation at that time, we closed the case. + +Mr. STERN. Your report indicates at page 8 that the files of the office +of naval intelligence in Louisiana were checked. Was that done at your +request, if you recall? Did you check those files? + +Mr. FAIN. I did not. That would have been checked in the New Orleans +division. + +Mr. STERN. Would this have been done at your request or on the +instructions of someone else? + +Mr. FAIN. I am of the opinion that that information probably came along +with the other information or subsequent to the other information on +which this case was predicated. I don't recall asking them to make any +check like that. + +Mr. STERN. The first paragraph on page 1 reads a little differently. It +says, "Information received by communication from the Naval District," +and on page 8 you refer to a check of the files of Naval Intelligence. + +Mr. FAIN. It sounds like a check was made, and they had made some +information available to us, and I incorporated it in this report. + +Mr. STERN. "They" is--who do you mean by "they"? + +Mr. FAIN. The New Orleans Division of the FBI. + +Mr. STERN. Of the FBI? + +Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. STERN. But the first indication on page 1, when you refer to +information received by communication from the District Intelligence +Office, does that seem to indicate a check was made by the FBI office +in New Orleans or this information was delivered by the Office of Naval +Intelligence voluntarily, without request? + +Mr. FAIN. I don't recall ever dictating a request. It could have +happened, but you must remember it has been over a year and a half +since I referred to these things. And---- + +Mr. STERN. Sure. + +Mr. FAIN. That just sounds like it is a communication we received from +there, and that we opened the case based on that information. That +would be my opinion now. + +Mr. STERN. But you don't know why they would have been sending you that +information? + +Mr. FAIN. That can be ascertained. + +Mr. STERN. Yes. We, perhaps, can find out from other witnesses if you +don't remember, and if you don't know, just tell us that. + +Mr. FAIN. I do not know; I don't recall that. + +Mr. STERN. All right. On page 10, the top paragraph, in reference to a +review of the files of the passport office of the Department of State, +again do you recall whether this was done at your request by someone +else? + +Mr. FAIN. No, sir; I do not. It could have been requested by letter out +of the Dallas office or it might have been that it was made up here at +seat of Government. + +Mr. STERN. But in any event did you check these files at the State +Department? + +Mr. FAIN. I did not. + +Mr. STERN. The passport office? + +Mr. FAIN. No. My investigative jurisdiction was the Fort Worth area and +vicinity. + +Mr. STERN. Again would you summarize your recollection of the purpose +and direction of the investigation at this stage, at the time covered +by this report. What do you recall to have been the purpose and +direction of the investigation? + +Mr. FAIN. At this particular point it seems we were looking at this +individual, opened the case to find out who he was and see if he was +any kind of an internal threat, a threat to the internal security of +our country. + +Mr. STERN. What was your evaluation of that question as a result of +your investigation? + +Mr. FAIN. At that time we--there was nothing appearing that he was +of any potential danger to the security of--I was trying to find out +whether or not, you will notice on page 9 there the last paragraph, +to see whether or not he was a member of the Communist Party in Fort +Worth, and my check of our confidential sources showed that there +was no knowledge available, no information available, that he was a +member of the Communist Party. That was supposed primarily my immediate +objective, to find out whether or not he was connected with the +Communist Party there in Fort Worth, in addition to the developing of +the background information on him. + +Mr. STERN. And this entered into your evaluation at the time, the fact +that he was not a member of the Communist Party? + +Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; there was no indication that he was a member of the +Communist Party in Fort Worth. + +Mr. STERN. Was it also relevant to your evaluation that he was +apparently living in Russia at the time? + +Mr. FAIN. I beg your pardon? + +Mr. STERN. Was it also relevant to your conclusion about his not being +a threat to the internal security of the United States that at the time +he was apparently living in Russia, at the time covered by this report? + +Mr. FAIN. Well, certainly we were going to keep track of him from then +on, naturally, if he is over there. + +The CHAIRMAN. Gentlemen, any questions? Mr. McCloy. + +Mr. McCLOY. On the top of page 10, Mr. Chief Justice, this report +refers to the review on May 9, 1961, of the files of the passport +office. Who did make that review if you didn't make it? + +Mr. FAIN. Someone, some employee of the FBI here at the seat of +Government. + +Mr. McCLOY. How did you know it was made? + +Mr. FAIN. How did I know it was made? + +Mr. McCLOY. Yes. + +Mr. FAIN. The communication concerning the results of the check were +sent by mail back to Dallas, and then my supervisor sent it to me at +Fort Worth. + +Mr. McCLOY. That is how it came to be embodied in your report? + +Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; and I covered it in my report. + +Mr. McCLOY. I see. Have we got a copy of that? Do we have that review, +the report of that review? + +Mr. STERN. We will receive testimony concerning it from the Assistant +to the Director of the Bureau. + +Mr. McCLOY. Will we be able to examine the person who examined Mrs. +Oswald and to whom apparently she said that she thought he was a secret +agent, that Oswald was a secret agent? + +Mr. STERN. I am sure we can arrange that. That would have been someone +in the State Department. + +Mr. McCLOY. That is right. But you don't know anything except what is +stated in the report here? + +Mr. FAIN. That is correct, as a result of a communication from this +office to Dallas. + +Mr. McCLOY. No further reasons that you recall in that report as to why +she thought he was a secret agent or he might have been a secret agent? + +Mr. FAIN. No, sir; I am sure I copied it from that report just like it +was there. She expressed the thought that, perhaps, her son had gone to +the Soviet Union as a secret agent, and the State Department was not +doing enough to help him. + +Mr. McCLOY. All right. + +The CHAIRMAN. Congressman Ford. + +Representative FORD. No questions. + +The CHAIRMAN. Senator Cooper. + +Senator COOPER. Again I ask you, on page 6, the second paragraph, it +states, "Mrs. Oswald also stated the subject had mentioned something +about his desire to travel and said something also about the fact that +he might go to Cuba." Do you remember whether or not she talked to you +about that? + +Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; that was the information that she gave me on April +28. If you will notice from the first paragraph on April 28, 1960, +Mrs. Marguerite Oswald stated that was a repeat, in other words, of +the information that actually was contained in this first report we +mentioned a while ago. + +Senator COOPER. On page 8 she stated she had not been requested to +furnish any items of personal identification of the subject in Russia. +What is meant by that "personal identification"? + +Mr. FAIN. Well, in these espionage cases we wanted to be sure that +they hadn't been contacted by the Soviet intelligence agencies for any +purpose or any reason at all. We didn't know whether maybe he went +over there and maybe they had gotten in touch with his parents or his +relatives and demanded any information about him to verify who he was, +and so forth. + +Mr. McCLOY. Could you remember the photograph that Mrs. Oswald +presented to you of Lee Oswald? + +Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; I don't remember the details right now, but I +believe it was a photograph of him in the service. + +Mr. McCLOY. So far as you can recollect it was in uniform? + +Mr. FAIN. I just don't recall the facts. + +Mr. McCLOY. You don't recall that he was carrying any weapons? + +Mr. FAIN. He was not. I am sure he was not carrying any weapons. I +don't believe, I am certain--I don't believe--he was in uniform at all. +I think it was a picture of him. The picture, as I recall it, was not a +recent picture. It was 3 or 4 years old. + +Mr. McCLOY. All right. + +(At this point in the proceedings, Senator Cooper leaves the hearing +room.) + +The CHAIRMAN. Very well, Mr. Stern, you may continue with the next +item. + +Mr. STERN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. May we admit Exhibit 822 for +identification at this time? + +The CHAIRMAN. It may be admitted under that number. + +(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 822 for +identification and received in evidence.) + +Mr. STERN. Mr. Fain, I show you Commission Exhibit No. 823 for +identification, a report of 15 pages dated July 10, 1962. Can you +identify this report for the Commission? + +Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; this is my report dated July 10, 1962. + +Mr. STERN. Have you reviewed this report in preparation for your +testimony today? + +Mr. FAIN. I have. + +Mr. STERN. Is it correct in all respects concerning the material +covered? + +Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. STERN. Is there anything you would like to add to any of the data +set forth there? + +Mr. FAIN. No, sir; I believe not. + +Mr. STERN. It carries on page 1 after the synopsis the symbol "P." What +does that mean, Mr. Fain? + +Mr. FAIN. Pending, a pending case. + +Mr. STERN. Now, the case was closed, I believe you told us, as of the +time of your last report which was Commission No. 822. Can you tell +us how this report, this Exhibit 823 for identification, came to be +prepared, and how the investigation reflected in this report came to be +held? + +Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; there began to appear various items of information +that this subject, Lee Oswald, was preparing or was desiring to come +back to the United States, and---- + +Mr. STERN. How did you learn this, Mr. Fain? + +Mr. FAIN. Well, the various communications which I received or +which our office there received, and various checks that the State +Department---- + +Mr. STERN. Excuse me, by your office there what do you mean, Dallas? + +Mr. FAIN. The communications would come over to me from Dallas from my +supervisor. + +Mr. STERN. Yes. + +Mr. FAIN. And he would get the communications from the seat of +Government. + +Mr. STERN. "The seat of Government" is the way you refer in the Bureau +to the Federal Bureau of Investigation? + +Mr. FAIN. The Federal Bureau of Investigation or it might have come +from the Washington field office here. + +Mr. STERN. So the seat of Government can mean any communication +from Washington, either from your field office here or from your +headquarters? + +Mr. FAIN. That is the way I have been referring to it as seat of +Government. + +Mr. STERN. I see. All right. Please continue telling us how this +investigation was carried out. + +Mr. FAIN. I was given the assignment to contact his folks, Mrs. Oswald, +his mother, and---- + +Mr. STERN. By whom, if you recall, Mr. Fain? Was this an assignment +that came from FBI headquarters or from---- + +Mr. FAIN. This incidentally, this communication, we got dated September +1, 1961, from the Washington field office. You see the seat of +Government is the main headquarters, in D.C. + +Then we have a field office there, Washington field office, that we +refer to as WFO, which is an office similar to the Dallas division or +the Buffalo division or other divisions, a working division that goes +out and conducts investigations in the area. I was given the assignment +to contact Mrs. Oswald, the mother, and to find out any information +that she might have. They had been cooperative, and I wanted to see +what the situation was, and especially when this boy was coming home. +We wanted to interview him and stay on top of the situation, and in +that connection I contacted Robert Lee Oswald again because she wasn't +in town, I couldn't locate her. + +Mr. STERN. Where in your report is that stated? + +Mr. FAIN. On page 4. He gave me her address, said she had gone to +a ranch around Vernon, Tex., in the western area and our agent at +Wichita Falls made contact with her. That is set out in the middle of +the page--the results of of the contact. + +Mr. STERN. That was at what time? + +Mr. FAIN. On October 13 "Mrs. Marguerite Oswald, 1808 Eagle Street, +Apartment No. 3, Vernon, Texas, advised that about 2 months previously +she had received from her son," and so forth. + +Mr. STERN. It took this period of time from your interview in +September---- + +Mr. FAIN. September 18. + +Mr. STERN. To locate Mrs. Oswald? + +Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir. That is about 3 weeks, isn't it? + +Mr. STERN. Yes. + +Mr. FAIN. I think, my recollection is, he had difficulty locating her +in that sparsely settled western country. I think he had to go to +several different towns and finally located her. + +Mr. STERN. So that the interview of Mrs. Oswald reflected at the bottom +of page 4 was the interview conducted by another agent at your request; +is that right? + +Mr. FAIN. That is at the request of the Dallas office, that is right. + +The CHAIRMAN. May I interrupt a moment, gentlemen? I have a commitment +at the Smithsonian Institution for about 45 minutes, and so I will +be obliged to leave at this time. Congressman Ford, will you preside +during my absence, and if you should be obliged to leave for your +congressional duties, leave it in charge of Mr. McCloy to do it. I +expect to be back in three-quarters of an hour. + +(At this point in the proceedings, the Chairman leaves the hearing +room.) + +Representative FORD [presiding]. Will you proceed, please, Mr. Stern. + +Mr. STERN. Yes, sir. Was your interview with Robert Lee Oswald at your +instance or did he volunteer? + +Mr. FAIN. I located him for interview and tried to locate his mother +and, incidentally, in that connection he was very cooperative, and +I obtained all the information that he had that I could, and he +volunteered a lot of this information. + +Mr. STERN. Had you previously asked him to let you know if he had +received any communication from his brother? + +Mr. FAIN. I had asked him to be sure to let us know in case--I told him +we wanted to talk to him when he came back. + +Mr. STERN. You told him you wanted to know when Lee Harvey Oswald was +coming back, but not whether he had any specific communication? + +Mr. FAIN. We specifically wanted him to let us know if he had any +contact with Soviet intelligence agents, anything like that, anything +that he thought might not look right, to be sure and let us know. + +Mr. STERN. Then on page 8 it says that "Mrs. Robert Oswald promised to +advise upon his arrival." Were you---- + +Mr. FAIN. That was the wife of Robert. + +Mr. STERN. Yes. Did you interview Mrs. Oswald, Mrs. Robert Oswald? + +Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; yes, I did. + +Mr. STERN. What was the occasion for that interview, Mr. Fain? + +Mr. FAIN. Well, to be sure and have someone let us know when this boy +Lee arrived back in town. + +Mr. STERN. You were willing to rely on her advice? + +Mr. FAIN. We had no reason not to. They had been very cooperative, both +Mrs. Oswald and Robert Oswald. Robert is an older brother of Lee. I +think he was about 2 years older than Lee. + +Mr. STERN. Did Mrs. Robert Oswald advise you voluntarily that she had +received this postcard from Lee Harvey Oswald or did this come up when +you stopped by? That is at the bottom of page 7. + +Mr. FAIN. Yes; I believe she volunteered that. She had said or I might +have asked her if she had any word from Lee. I don't recall now just +how the conversation came up, but she said she had received a postal +card from him on or about May 15, and it had been dated April 10. + +Mr. STERN. When did you finally learn that he had arrived in Fort +Worth, Mr. Fain? + +Mr. FAIN. Let's see, that was on, it must have been, the morning of the +26th, June 26. + +Mr. STERN. How did you learn this information? + +Mr. FAIN. They hadn't let me know, and I began to think it was time for +checking on this thing. + +Mr. STERN. And by "they" you mean---- + +Mr. FAIN. Robert had not let me know, and Mrs. Oswald had not let me +know, so I thought I had better make an independent check, and so I +inquired of them, and she told me that he and his wife and child had +arrived in Fort Worth on June 14, and I asked her, "Why hadn't you let +me know about it?" And she said, "Well, actually the whole family had +been so harassed and that he just didn't feel like letting his face be +shown outside of the house." In other words, he was afraid that the +newspapers would come and harass him again, I guess. + +Mr. STERN. Were there newspaper stories about his arrival, do you +recall? + +Mr. FAIN. There were some that appeared in the paper which I have set +out on page 8 and page 9. Yes; I refer to them on page 8 where they +report his having gone to Russia. + +Mr. STERN. Had these come to your attention before June 26? + +Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; yes, sir. I kept up with these and was careful to +clip them and put them in the file. + +Mr. STERN. So that is it true that you knew before June 26 that he had +returned? + +Mr. FAIN. No; I didn't know until that morning. I had no way of knowing +that. There were some verifying communications which I set out on page +10 showing when he actually came in; page 10, you will notice, shows +a check of records again back here showing when he actually left over +there and when he arrived here. He arrived in New York City June 13 and +then took a plane to Dallas, where he arrived on the 14th. + +Mr. STERN. Yes; I thought I had understood you to say that the +newspapers reflected his arrival in Fort Worth. + +Mr. FAIN. No; they were over there on pages 8 and 9. June 8, 1962, in +the Fort Worth Star Telegram, daily newspaper of Fort Worth, there +appeared a photograph of the subject, Lee Oswald, and the headline +"Ex-Marine Reported On Way Back From Russia." + +Mr. STERN. But there was no news story actually reporting his arrival? + +Mr. FAIN. No; he was staying in, apparently that was the reason, I +guess he didn't want to get out because he was afraid he would be +harassed by the neighbors or somebody and, at least, that is what Mrs. +Oswald said. He just---- + +Mr. STERN. The harassment by newspaper reporters you referred to, +probably did not mean reporters at the time of his arrival in Fort +Worth. + +Mr. FAIN. Well, she was--I suppose she indicated or she said that he +just hadn't gotten out of the house. In other words, he came in there +on the 14th and apparently, according to her story, he didn't show his +face outside that house. + +Mr. STERN. Then what did you do when you learned he had arrived? + +Mr. FAIN. Well, I told her I would like to talk to him, he was there, +and I made arrangements for him to come to the office and he said he +could make it by 1 o'clock. I requested B. Tom Carter, my senior agent, +to assist if he would me in interviewing Oswald, who came in about 10 +minutes before 1. He came in the office like he said he would, and we +talked to him on June 26, 1962. + +Mr. STERN. Before you interview any subject, Mr. Fain, do you have a +practice of giving him any cautionary statement, any warning? + +Mr. FAIN. It was always my policy, and I am sure I did in this case, +to tell them this substantially, that, "You don't have to furnish us +any information. Any information you furnish can be used against you in +court, and you have a right to consult with an attorney before giving +us any information or statements." + +Mr. STERN. Can you actually recall that you said this to Oswald? + +Mr. FAIN. I don't recall specifically, but I know it was my religious +practice to do it because we are always instructed to do that. + +Mr. STERN. Fine. + +Was the interview with Mr. Oswald recorded mechanically in any way? + +Mr. FAIN. It was not. + +Mr. STERN. How did you record what he was telling you, in your usual +fashion? + +Mr. FAIN. I was sitting behind the desk. He came up and sat down in +front of the desk, and Mr. Carter was sitting to my left. We explained +to him, we wanted to talk to him. I took the notes, and from my notes I +dictated this, which we call an FD-302. + +Mr. STERN. This is your memorandum and not Agent Carter's? + +Mr. FAIN. That is right; I was more familiar with the case. I took the +notes and did the dictation. + +Mr. STERN. And the dictation was when? + +Mr. FAIN. July 2, 1962; transcribed July 6, 1962. + +Mr. STERN. These dates appear where? + +Mr. FAIN. The date of dictation is shown on the lower right-hand +corner; date of interview at the left, and date of transcription or +typing was on July 6, upper right-hand corner. + +Mr. STERN. What was Lee Harvey Oswald's demeanor in the course of this +interview? + +Mr. FAIN. He was tense, kind of drawn up, and rigid. He is a wiry +little fellow, kind of waspy. + +Mr. STERN. Did he answer all of your questions? + +Mr. FAIN. No; he didn't. As indicated there in the fourth paragraph, +he was a little insolent in his answers. He was the type of individual +who apparently doesn't want to give out information about himself, and +we asked him why he had made this trip to Russia, and he looked like +it got under his skin, and I noticed he got white around the lips and +tensed up, and I understood it to be a show of a temper, and in a show +of temper he stated he did not care to relive the past. He didn't want +to go into that at all. + +We asked him, I think I asked him, in various ways, three or four +times, trying to ascertain just what the situation was, and he finally +stated, that Soviet officials had asked him upon his arrival why he had +come to Russia, and he told us, "I came because I wanted to." That is +what he said he told the Soviet People, "I came because I wanted to," +and he said, he told them, "I came over here to see the country." That +is the kind of answers he gave. + +Mr. STERN. Do you remember any other details of this interview that +you haven't set forth here? I can't stress too greatly that we are +interested in any detail, any fragment of this interview that you +recall that isn't set forth here, any elaboration you want to make. + +Mr. FAIN. No---- + +Mr. STERN. Why don't you read it through carefully now and, as you go +through, add to it in any way that you wish to, tell us anything else +that you remember, any small detail that occurs to you. I don't mean +read it out loud, read it to yourself. + +Mr. FAIN. I see. + +Our primary objective at this time was to ascertain whether or not the +Soviets had demanded anything of him in letting him get out of the +country and permitting his wife to come along with him, and you will +notice down there in paragraph 12---- + +Mr. STERN. Page 12. + +Mr. FAIN. Excuse me, page 12, paragraph 4 of page 12, he stated that +the Soviets made it very difficult for him to obtain permission for his +wife to leave Russia, and that the process of obtaining permission for +her to leave was a long, difficult course requiring much paper work. +But he was just referring there to the length of time, and he denied +that they had attempted to get anything from him or demand anything +from him; and he denied that they had ever sought information from him +of detriment to our country. + +I don't recall anything, anything in addition to what is set out here. + +Mr. McCLOY. No suggestion that he was a secret agent? + +Mr. FAIN. No, sir. + +Mr. McCLOY. He had made no such suggestion to you as to that? + +Mr. FAIN. No, sir. + +Mr. McCLOY. Did you ever have any suspicion that he might have been? + +Mr. FAIN. That he may have been rewarded by the Russians and asked +to do something or certain things about him? Well, an FBI agent is +naturally suspicious, of course, of anything like that. Of course, he +denied it. He denied that they demanded anything of him. + +Mr. McCLOY. And you never had any indication that he was a secret agent +of any other country? + +Mr. FAIN. No, no. + +Mr. McCLOY. Including the United States? + +Mr. FAIN. You mean that he might have gone over there and seek out +information for us? + +Mr. McCLOY. Yes. + +Mr. FAIN. No, sir; no, sir; nothing like that. + +Representative FORD. At the time you had this interview with Oswald, +did you have the information, for example, that appears on the first +page of Commission No. 823 under the heading "Details"? + +Mr. FAIN. This information there was furnished by the Office of Naval +Intelligence. I didn't check the records on that. That came in by +communication. Does that answer the question, Mr. Ford? + +Representative FORD. What I was inquiring about was did you have this +information available to you at the time you interviewed him on July 13 +or 14---- + +Mr. STERN. June 26. + +Representative FORD. June 26? + +Mr. FAIN. June 26; yes, sir. I am sure I did, because that is on March +20. I read they had sent it. + +Representative FORD. In other words, you undoubtedly had---- + +Mr. FAIN. I had access to anything in our files there pertaining to +this case. + +Representative FORD. You had information. For example, you were +familiar with the statement in a report that, and I quote, "Subject +allegedly told the embassy he had advised unnamed Soviet officials +that as a former Marine radar operator he would make available to them +information about his Marine Corps specialty when he became a Soviet +citizen." + +Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; that was an allegation that was made over there. +As I recall that was obtained in a check at the embassy, United States +Embassy. + +(At this point in the proceedings, Mr. Dulles enters the hearing room.) + +Representative FORD. Did you make any inquiry as to whether or not +that was an accurate statement alleged to have been made by him to an +embassy official? + +Mr. FAIN. Mr. Carter and I asked him, all about those things. Of +course, he denied it. + +Representative FORD. Did he make any specific denial of that, as you +recall? + +Mr. FAIN. Yes; we asked him if he had been asked about anything +concerning his specialty while in the Marine Corps and I think he said +no, that he had not. + +Representative FORD. What confuses me is, one, that he denied this to +you, but then he apparently at some prior time had told the Embassy +that he had advised unnamed Soviet officials that as a former Marine +radar operator he would make available to them information about his +Marine Corps specialty when he became a Soviet citizen. + +Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; we were aware of that, that statement. He denied +it, and he also denied that he had ever denounced his United States +citizenship, and he denied to Mr. Carter and me that he had ever +applied for Soviet citizenship specifically. + +Mr. STERN. Was it your practice, Mr. Fain, to review the files on a +subject before you interviewed him? + +Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. STERN. Can you recall whether you did that in this case? + +Mr. FAIN. I certainly did, yes, sir; there were so many details and +so many allegations you had to study it long hours to get the thing +further in mind. + +Mr. STERN. But you think you did that before you interviewed Oswald? + +Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. STERN. In view of the purpose of the investigation, the interest +that you had, what was your overall evaluation of Oswald as a result of +this interview? + +Mr. FAIN. Well, that was--of course, that would be calling for my +opinion, and we are interested only in getting facts on this case, +facts, and all I could say is that he seemed tense. + +Mr. DULLES. He seemed tense? + +Mr. FAIN. Tense, yes, sir; and drawn up. I don't know whether he was +just scared or what his situation was, but he was--he exhibited an +arrogant attitude, arrogant, cold, and inclined to be just a little +insolent. + +Mr. STERN. When he did tell you something would you tend to believe +that he was telling you the truth or not? Did you form an impression of +his veracity? + +Mr. FAIN. Well the information we had was that he had applied to +renounce his citizenship, and he had applied for Soviet citizenship, +and yet he denied that. It was just a flat denial and I had no way of +knowing whether he was telling the truth or not. It is a thing that you +cannot always tell. We got answers from him as set out here. He would +give you some kind of answer. + +Mr. STERN. Who was your immediate superior on a case like this, not his +name, but describe his function. + +Mr. FAIN. He was on the desk in Dallas, and all of these +investigations, all of my work, went across his desk. He would make the +assignments also. + +Mr. STERN. Tell the Commission what you mean by "the desk," please. + +Mr. FAIN. The supervisory desk in the Dallas office that handled +security-type matters, and this report would go across his desk, and +the assignments that would come to me would be made by him. + +Mr. STERN. Did you discuss the Oswald case with your desk supervisor at +this time, upon the completion of this interview? + +Mr. FAIN. I don't recall specifically talking to him at this time. If I +had been over there in the next few days I imagine I would have talked +to him or did talk to him. You see, I was in Fort Worth. + +Mr. STERN. Yes. + +Mr. FAIN. And normally I would dictate my reports, and they would go by +mail to Dallas and, of course, we were in telephonic contact, any time +anything came up of any problem nature. + +Mr. STERN. Would you have discussed the case with your supervisor if +you thought that there was a particular and immediate problem? + +Mr. FAIN. Oh, certainly; yes, sir. + +Mr. STERN. Did you think that there was a particular and immediate +problem following your interview? + +Mr. FAIN. Well, I didn't feel satisfied because of his answers there as +to why he went to Russia. He was evasive, and that was the reason I set +out a lead to have him reinterviewed. + +Mr. STERN. What do you mean by that, Mr. Fain? + +Mr. FAIN. To talk to him again. You see, at this time he had just come +to town and he was out there at his brother's place. He had a wife +and a little 4-month-old baby that he had brought from Russia, and +he didn't have any established place to live, and I can see how the +newspapers may have harrassed him, and it might have been, very likely +was, that he didn't want to show himself out of the house, but I felt +under the circumstances he ought to be talked to again, he ought to be +interviewed in detail about these same things and, consequently, I did +set out a lead. + +Mr. STERN. What does that mean in terms of your procedures? + +Mr. FAIN. In my report I just suggested that he be reinterviewed. + +Mr. STERN. Is that in this report? + +Mr. FAIN. That might have been my transmittal--no, it doesn't show +here. It is probably on the transmittal to the chief of the Dallas +office. + +Mr. STERN. A recommendation that he be---- + +Mr. FAIN. A recommendation, yes, that he be reinterviewed because I +wasn't thoroughly satisfied with some of the answers he gave. + +Mr. DULLES. I wonder, Mr. Chairman, whether we should not have that +transmittal letter; it seems to be pertinent to the case. + +Representative FORD. I think it would be helpful in light of the +testimony, Mr. Fain. + +Mr. FAIN. It was a lead sheet, what we call a lead, and I recall that +on that I suggested that the records of Immigration and Naturalization +Service be checked and incorporated, and also that he be reinterviewed. +Those were the two things I remember specifically having put in the +report. + +Representative FORD. That would be a cover to Commission No. 823? + +Mr. FAIN. A lead sheet; yes, sir. + +Mr. STERN. We are going to have the testimony, gentlemen, of Mr. Alan +Belmont, the third-ranking official of the Bureau, who can testify +from an overall Bureau viewpoint on the way this case was handled and +be able to respond to questions of that sort, what was in the internal +memoranda, transmittal documents, and things of that sort. + +Mr. DULLES. That is satisfactory. + +Mr. STERN. Anything else at all, Mr. Fain, that you can tell us about +this interview that we haven't covered already? + +Mr. FAIN. No, sir; I put it all on this 302. + +Mr. STERN. Mr. Chairman, may we have admitted Commission Exhibit 823 +for identification? + +Representative FORD. It will be so admitted. + +(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 823 for +identification and received in evidence.) + +Mr. STERN. Mr. Fain, I show you a report marked Commission No. 824 for +identification, an eight-page report dated August 30, 1962. Can you +identify this report? + +Mr. DULLES. Off the record. + +(Discussion off the record.) + +Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; this is my report of August 30, 1962. It is a +closing report, a report that records the result of an investigation +pursuant to the lead I set out in this other report, referring to the +reinterviewing. + +Mr. STERN. This followed your other report by some 7 weeks? + +Mr. FAIN. Yes. I talked to him the last time June 26, 1962, and this +interview was conducted August 16, 1962. + +Mr. STERN. And the early report was dated July 10, 1962. + +Mr. McCLOY. July 10, 1962. + +Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; and this report August 30. + +Mr. STERN. August 30. + +Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. STERN. Have you reviewed this report recently, Mr. Fain? + +Mr. FAIN. I have. + +Mr. STERN. In preparation for your testimony today? + +Mr. FAIN. I have. + +Mr. STERN. Is there any statement in it you would like to correct? + +Mr. FAIN. No, sir. + +Mr. STERN. Any information you would like to add to the data that are +set forth? + +Mr. FAIN. No, sir. + +Mr. STERN. What was the occasion for the investigative work reported in +this document, Mr. Fain? + +Mr. FAIN. You will recall that I had set out a lead to reinterview +him. I felt that he had just gotten back, from Russia on the previous +interview, and that he might have been upset naturally, and a +reinterview might be more productive. He might feel now settled down, +so I set about to locate him and to talk to him again. + +Mr. STERN. How did you locate him, Mr. Fain? + +Mr. FAIN. On August 14 I contacted Robert again, Robert L. Oswald, the +older brother, at 7313 Davenport, and he told me that Lee Harvey had +moved, that he didn't have his house number, but he was on Mercedes +Street, west of Montgomery Ward & Co., just off Seventh Street. + +Mr. STERN. In Fort Worth? + +Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; in Fort Worth. And then I went there. He gave me +the name of the street, and I went there and made some inquiries, and +finally ascertained from an adjoining neighbor, just east of Lee's +house--these were little duplex apartments--and she told me, yes, there +is a Mr. Oswald who just moved in next door a few days ago. + +Then on August---- + +Mr. DULLES. Could I ask, did she seem to know him at all well? + +Mr. FAIN. No; she didn't, she hadn't met them, but she just said some +people had moved in, and that was enough for me. Robert had told me, +had indicated pretty much where it was, and the fact is he gave me +pretty good directions as to where to go. As a matter of fact, he had +been down there himself in the apartment apparently, but he just didn't +have the house number. + +Mr. STERN. What did you do after you located the house, Mr. Fain? + +Mr. FAIN. After I located the house on the 15th, and I made +arrangements to have another agent and I go out there and reinterview +him. I didn't want to go to his house. I didn't want to contact his +wife. I knew from the background we had conducted that she could not +speak English. She could speak Russian only, and I didn't know any +Russian, so it wouldn't have been any point in my contacting her and +upsetting her. + +So this agent and I in an automobile took up a surveillance at the end +of the street out of sight of the house and away from the house, and +waited until he came from work. + +We observed him toward the end of the day, and I suppose it must have +been around 5:30, something like that, in the late afternoon, walking +down the street, and we then moved up in front of his house. + +Of course, I knew him and he knew me from a previous interview, and I +spoke to him, "Hi, Lee. How are you?" I said, "Would you mind talking +with us just a few minutes?" So he got in the back seat. I remained +in the front seat. Arnold J. Brown, the other agent, was in the back +seat with him, and we talked with him there, and the results of the +interview are set out here on page 4. + +Mr. STERN. Was it your normal practice to conduct an interview in teams? + +Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. STERN. This interview you conducted with Agent Brown, and your +previous interview you conducted with Agent Carter, I believe? + +Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; Agent Carter was with me on the first one, and +Arnold Brown was on the second one. + +Mr. STERN. Why is that, Mr. Fain? + +Mr. FAIN. Well, in case something comes up in these important interview +cases which might have some evidentiary value, we like to have two +agents present. + +Mr. STERN. Is your general rule always to have two agents when you +interview any subject? + +Mr. FAIN. Subject, particularly if it is something other than routine; +yes, sir. + +Mr. STERN. This, as far as you were concerned, was something other than +routine? + +Mr. FAIN. In internal security cases, in a case of this magnitude and +this importance, we would always have two agents present. + +Mr. STERN. When you say a case of this magnitude and a case of this +importance, what do you have in mind? + +Mr. FAIN. Well, this man had been to Russia, and we wanted to try to +find out whether he had been recruited by the Russians to do a job +against the United states. + +Mr. STERN. So this, in relation to your other cases, was an important +case? + +Mr. FAIN. It was important. + +Mr. DULLES. Do you often conduct interviews in a car or was this rather +unusual? + +Mr. FAIN. We felt that in this case we could get his cooperation better +if we could show to him that we weren't trying to embarrass him. I +explained to him that afternoon, "We didn't contact you at your place +of employment; we didn't want to embarrass you before your employer," +and didn't want to upset his wife and, therefore, I hadn't bothered his +wife, and we just felt if we talked to him there in the car informally, +he would better cooperate with us. + +Mr. DULLES. It wasn't because he showed reluctance to have you go in +the house or didn't invite you or anything of that kind? + +Mr. FAIN. Oh, no; no. Actually he invited us in when we stopped him. He +said, "Won't you come in the house?" And I said, "Well, we will just +talk here. We will be alone to ourselves and we will be informal, and +just fine." So he got in the car with Agent Brown. + +Mr. McCLOY. Was he actually less truculent than he had been before? + +Mr. FAIN. Yes; he had actually settled down. He had gotten a job at +Leslie Machine Shop, and he wasn't as tense. He seemed to talk more +freely with us. + +Mr. McCLOY. He indicated that he had been or his wife had been in +constant communication with the Soviet Embassy here? + +Mr. FAIN. Well, he told me on the previous interview that he would have +to get in touch with the Russian Embassy and let them know that his +wife was in this country, and to let them know his address, and I asked +him if he had done that, and he said he had in this second interview. +He said he would have to contact them. The way he termed it, his +phraseology was, that the Soviet law was that a person in her position +coming over here, a citizen from Russia, must notify the Soviet Embassy +of her current address, and he said that should be done periodically. + +Mr. STERN. Did you discuss his discharge from the Marine Corps? + +Mr. FAIN. We actually went over substantially everything we had asked +him before. + +Mr. STERN. Did he seem concerned about that? + +Mr. FAIN. The fact that he had been given the unfavorable discharge? I +believe now, I don't recall just exactly whether I asked him right at +that time whether there had been any disposition of that, and maybe I +did. + +Mr. STERN. The third paragraph on page 4 refers to that, and I just +wondered if you could say more about it. + +Mr. FAIN. Yes; he just advised about the matter of having been given +an undesirable discharge had not been reviewed. We did ask him that +because he brought it up and mentioned it before. + +Mr. STERN. Did he seem---- + +Mr. FAIN. He didn't know when it would be heard at that time. He said +he didn't know when it would be heard. + +Mr. STERN. Did he seem angry about it, the status? + +Mr. FAIN. No; just answered it and didn't seem ruffled. + +Mr. STERN. At any point in the course of the interview did he display +anger or irritation? + +Mr. FAIN. The only point he did, was when we asked him again why +he went to the Soviet Union in the first place, and I didn't like +his answer there. That is set out on the bottom of page 5. He still +declined to answer questions as to why he went to the Soviet Union in +the first instance. He said he considered it nobody's business why he +wanted to go to the Soviet Union. Finally he stated he went over to +Russia for his own personal reasons. He said it was a personal matter +to him. He said, "I went and I came back." He said "It was something +that I did." So he just bowed his neck and apparently wasn't going to +tell anything further at all on that point. + +Mr. DULLES. Could I ask a question? On the bottom of the earlier page, +page 1, where it stated that Oswald was interviewed when he first +arrived at the Soviet Union, and he stated he was interviewed when he +was about to leave by representatives of the MVD, he was quite clear +about the MVD and not the KGB? + +Mr. FAIN. That is right; he indicated the MVD. + +Mr. DULLES. And he clearly said MVD? + +Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; he described it as being--handling criminal matters +among the population generally, is the way he described it. + +Mr. DULLES. That might be. That is really the Ministry of the Interior, +and the KGB is the secret security services, which has been sometimes +controlling and sometimes has been under the Ministry of the Interior. + +Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; he indicated to us just the ordinary way. In other +words, I gathered from him that the police interviewed him when he came +in, and also he said the police interviewed him when he left. But he +said he made no deals with them or with any intelligence agents of the +Soviet system. + +Representative FORD. On page 2, Mr. Fain, are written two words. One is +"Texas," is that, and another is "Noloc."' + +Mr. FAIN. I have no knowledge of who put that on or how that came +there. I guess that looks like maybe "Texas" up there at the top. + +Representative FORD. Would the second be "no location." Is that an +abbreviation for that? + +Mr. FAIN. That probably has reference to somebody's notation. It may +have been on the desk over there; no location for the uncle, no city +stated for his location. + +Representative FORD. Would that be something added by someone other +than yourself? + +Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; I did not make that notation. I have no knowledge +as to who did. It was made in Dallas. + +Mr. STERN. Mr. Fain, apart from the question of why he went to the +Soviet Union in the first place, was he reluctant to answer any other +questions that you put to him? + +Mr. FAIN. As I recall it, he answered the other questions fairly +readily, and he appeared to be a lot more relaxed than he was the first +time. + +Mr. STERN. Throughout the interview? + +Mr. FAIN. With the exception of this, he kind of bowed up there, and +said, it was a personal matter as to why he went over there. He said +he came and he went back. Just a little bit insolent. He said it was +nobody's business. + +Mr. STERN. How long did this interview last, Mr. Fain? + +Mr. FAIN. I don't recall exactly, but I expect we talked to him about +an hour, maybe an hour and 15 minutes, something like that. + +Mr. STERN. How does that compare with the length of time of your first +interview with him in your office? + +Mr. FAIN. As I recall, the first interview, and again I don't recall +it exactly, but I was of the opinion we talked to him for maybe an +hour and a half, and maybe 2 hours. It was close to 2 hours because +we couldn't cover all the questions in a lesser period of time. We +approached the things in different ways and from different angles, and +to see if he wouldn't give us the information. + +Mr. STERN. Would you read over these three pages of your memorandum +of the interview, pages 4, 5, and 6 of the report, and see if there +is anything you would like to add or clarify, any detail that occurs +to you now that you didn't cover there, any flavor or color of the +interview that you wouldn't ordinarily put in your report that you can +tell us about? + +Mr. FAIN. All right, sir; it is in there. It is indicated in the last +paragraph. + +Mr. STERN. On what page? + +Mr. FAIN. Page 6. Really there is no point in repeating, but he did +play down during the entire interview--he seemed to be just a little +bit derisive of our questions, and hesitated to bring out whether or +not the Soviet intelligence officials might have been interested in him +or might have contacted him, and he downgraded or played that down. +He just didn't think he was that important; in other words, that they +would want to contact him. + +Mr. DULLES. How was he on that point, was he strong on that point, did +he press that point? + +Mr. FAIN. No; there wasn't anything remarkable about that different +from the other. He saw no reason why the Soviets would want to contact +him. He didn't feel like he was of any importance to them. He said that +he would cooperate with us and report to us any information that would +come to his attention. + +Mr. DULLES. On the bottom of--excuse me. + +Mr. FAIN. That is all right; I was through. + +Mr. DULLES. On the bottom of page 1 of your report, page 4 of the +exhibit, it is indicated that this report was made by Special Agent +Arnold J. Brown and by you. Do you recall who dictated the report? + +Mr. FAIN. I did. + +Mr. DULLES. And was it concurred in by Special Agent Arnold J. Brown? + +Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. DULLES. He saw it? + +Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. DULLES. He concurred in it? + +Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; he saw the dictated, the finished document and +initialed it. + +Representative FORD. What kind of covering letter did you send with +this to the Dallas office, if any? + +Mr. FAIN. There would be none because this is closed. In other words, +there didn't seem to be any evidence that he had a potential for +violence or anything like that, and we just closed the case, and this +went over there very likely without any transmittal. + +Mr. DULLES. Where is there an indication here that the case was closed? + +Mr. FAIN. "C." This letter "C" under the synopsis is a symbol we use +just to save typing time, it stands for closed. + +Representative FORD. Who makes that determination? + +Mr. FAIN. As to whether the ease would be closed or not? + +Representative FORD. Yes. + +Mr. FAIN. It was my determination and my recommendation it be closed. +Of course, the report goes to the supervisor's desk in the Dallas +office, and if he concurs he lets it go on through, and if he declines +he would send it back for additional investigation or other action, +whatever he deemed appropriate. + +Mr. DULLES. Was there a written recommendation that this case be closed +other than this? + +Mr. FAIN. No; other than this, no. + +Mr. DULLES. That "C" is all? + +Mr. FAIN. Yes. + +Representative FORD. Is that "C" put on by you? + +Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; in my dictation. + +Representative FORD. In your dictation? + +Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; to show the case closed. + +Mr. DULLES. Did you get any approval or disapproval of that, or, if it +is not disapproved, you consider it conclusive? + +Mr. FAIN. Well, if it is going to be disapproved, I would hear probably +the third day, or if he wanted to get on the telephone and call me to +do something additional that he thought ought to be done, then I would +be told to do some additional work on it. + +Representative FORD. What is the significance of the third day? Is this +the usual time or what? + +Mr. FAIN. No; I was just thinking about the mail time. You get a +communication out, for instance, if I mailed this report it would get +there the next day, and they would review it and then they would mail +it out and I would get it the third day. + +Representative FORD. Just the communication time. + +Mr. FAIN. That is right; that is right. + +Mr. DULLES. Did you get any comment back at all on this report from +headquarters? + +Mr. FAIN. No; I did not. + +Mr. STERN. Would you elaborate, Mr. Fain, about your conclusions on +this case and your evaluation of Oswald the man as of the time of your +second interview. What led you to your recommendation? + +Mr. FAIN. An evaluation as to what? + +Mr. STERN. From the viewpoint of the investigation you were conducting. +You told us how you felt about him on the first interview, and you felt +a further interview would be necessary. + +Mr. FAIN. Well, I felt in the second interview he was more relaxed, and +I felt he answered the questions more readily and with less evasion. + +However, he still didn't seem to want to go into the reasons why +he went over there in the first place, and why he wouldn't do it. +Evidently he had his own reasons for giving those answers. I don't know +whether he just wanted to be--maybe he was just inherently insolent, +and that is just typical of his personality is all I could figure out. + +Mr. STERN. Will you tell us again the purpose of your investigation, +what you were after. + +Mr. FAIN. The purpose of this investigation was to determine whether +or not he had been contacted by the Soviet intelligence agencies, +whether he had been given an assignment or not, whether they had made +any deal with him, and whether, as a demand, for permitting his wife +to accompany him--you see, for a long time, they told him he couldn't +take her apparently, and there was quite a period that he was waiting +to get her, and he refused to come back to the United States unless +his wife came back with him. We wanted to find out whether or not the +Soviets had demanded anything of him in return for letting her come on +over. + +Mr. STERN. As to that, had you formed a conclusion, after the second +interview? + +Mr. FAIN. As to--on that point? + +Mr. STERN. Yes. + +Mr. FAIN. Well he answered it and said, "No." He played it down all the +way through. In other words, that was the main purpose we were talking +to him, was to try to ascertain that point. He downgraded it all the +way through, and belittled himself. He said, "I was not that important." + +Mr. STERN. Was your recommendation that this case be closed, a +recommendation that indicates that you had reached a conclusion on the +question of your investigation? + +Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; even though he was arrogant and cold, from his +answers, I couldn't see any potential for danger or violence at that +point. + +Mr. DULLES. Did Special Agent Arnold J. Brown concur in your decision +with regard to marking the case "C," closed? + +Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; I remarked to him we were just going to close it, +and he saw the finished report and initialed the report. + +Mr. DULLES. He saw that conclusion and concurred in it? + +Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. STERN. In terms of your FBI procedures, what is the difference +between marking a case closed or marking it pending? + +Mr. FAIN. Well, if it is a pending case, there is additional work to be +done on it. + +Mr. STERN. Specific additional work? + +Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; specific leads to be done on the case. + +Mr. STERN. And closed means that there are no such specific leads, is +that right? + +Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; that is right; it is closed. + +Mr. STERN. But does that mean that the case is in dead storage +somewhere? + +Mr. FAIN. Not forever; no. If there is any reason for reopening it, it +could be reopened the next day if necessary or the next 3 days or any +time. But this assignment had been completed. He had been interviewed. +That was the purpose of this contact, to interview him, and set forth +the results of re-interview, and that was all that was to be done. + +Mr. STERN. Are cases frequently reopened? + +Mr. FAIN. Cases are reopened constantly. If there is any reason for +reopening it, it certainly would be reopened. + +Mr. STERN. Is it fair to say then that in this kind of situation, +"closed" is really a shorthand for "no further work to be done at this +time"? + +Mr. FAIN. Correct, correct. + +Mr. DULLES. Off the record. + +(Discussion off the record.) + +Mr. McCLOY. What is the date of this last report here? + +Mr. FAIN. The date of this was August 30, 1962. + +Mr. McCLOY. August 30, 1962. + +Mr. STERN. Mr. Fain, do you recall discussing Lee Harvey Oswald with +his brother Robert Oswald about this time? + +Mr. FAIN. Discussing his brother with him? + +Mr. STERN. Did you ever talk to Robert Oswald about any of your +conclusions regarding Lee Harvey Oswald? + +Mr. FAIN. Certainly not. I contacted him on August 14, but that was for +the purpose of locating his brother for interview. + +Mr. STERN. Is it possible that you might have said to him at some +point, "I have interviewed your brother and I don't think he presents a +problem," or "I do"? I don't suppose you would say that. + +Mr. FAIN. Positively not. I never made that statement to him at any +time. + +Mr. STERN. This would be contrary to your operations? + +Mr. FAIN. That would call for a conclusion, and we wouldn't discuss a +matter like that with anyone, especially a relative. + +Mr. STERN. With any unofficial person? + +Mr. FAIN. Official--that is right. Of course with my supervisor and +some official who is entitled to it, but I certainly did not talk to +Robert Oswald about anything like that. + +Mr. STERN. Do you have any indication from your interviews with Lee +Harvey Oswald or from anything else you knew about him, from your +investigation, that he was dangerous or potentially violent? + +Mr. FAIN. No, sir; no, sir; if there had been any indication that he +was potentially dangerous or violent or had a potential for violence, +we certainly wouldn't have closed it. + +Mr. McCLOY. You felt he constituted no security risk to the United +States? + +Mr. FAIN. Well, we couldn't prove that he was a member of the Communist +Party in Fort Worth; had no report that he was a member of the party. + +Mr. McCLOY. Quite apart from the party, from party membership, was it +your conclusion that he was--he did not constitute a security risk? + +Mr. FAIN. I couldn't see any potential for violence. + +Mr. McCLOY. I am not talking about potential for violence. I am +talking about security risk. You know what I mean by that. You are an +experienced security officer. + +Mr. FAIN. Well, I am suspicious of any Communist, obviously, and I +think any Communist is a threat because I think they are atheistic, +materialistic; I don't think they know what the truth is, and from that +standpoint I would think he is--but he wasn't, we couldn't say. The +checks we made were to the effect that he was not a Communist, was not +a member of the Communist Party. + +Mr. McCLOY. Was not a member of the Communist Party. + +Mr. FAIN. But he went to Russia. Of course, we couldn't get him to tell +us why he went. We tried on two occasions. He said it was personal +with him. He wanted to go over there the first time, and in that first +interview he said, "I don't care to relive the past." + +Mr. McCLOY. I understand that. But if you had doubts about his +security, about his loyalty to the United States, or put it the other +way, or if you think he might have been a security risk to the United +States, should you have closed this case? + +Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; we would have closed it because there was no reason +to keep it open. We had the information. We reinterviewed him, no +potential for violence appearing. + +Mr. McCLOY. That isn't the test, is it, whether he can be capable of +intrigue or he can be capable of espionage without violence. He could +be a security risk without violence, couldn't he? + +Mr. FAIN. Well, that might be, of course. Of course--if we knew then +what did happen, was going to happen, we certainly wouldn't---- + +Mr. McCLOY. I am not talking about hindsight. I am talking about as +of that time whether in your judgment this man was no longer, in your +judgment, to be considered as a security risk to the United States. I +am not trying to place any blame or criticism here. I am just trying to +get the state of your mind as of the date of that report, whether that +included your belief that he was not a security risk. + +Mr. FAIN. Well, we like to let our reports stand for themselves, in +other words on the situation, the answers given. In answer to your +question, I would have been rather satisfied if he would have told me +why he went over there and if he weren't so evasive. + +Mr. McCLOY. You got an impression he was evasive and he was not telling +you the truth? + +Mr. FAIN. Well, he was inclined to be haughty and arrogant, and even +though he was insolent, and that could have been, of course, a part of +his personality makeup, that type of individual. + +Mr. McCLOY. Let me ask you this: If you had felt in spite of his +answers that he was a security risk, would it have been incumbent upon +you to report to your superiors that he was, and that you thought he +ought to be continued under surveillance? + +Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; if he would have met the qualifications we +considered that he had been a security risk, and had a potential for +any violence or dangerousness, why, we certainly would have stayed on +him. + +Mr. DULLES. And you would not have marked the report as closed, the +case as closed. + +Mr. FAIN. Well, I closed it because my investigation was completed. +The assignment was to interview him and the case at the end of the +interview with the information we obtained the case was closed. The man +had found a job, he was working, he was living in this duplex with his +wife, and he was not a member of the Communist Party. Of course, it +was true he had been to Russia. He denied any contacts with a Soviet +intelligence agent. He denied that he had any contacts. We considered +all the facts and circumstances and closed the case, and that is what I +did. + +Mr. McCLOY. If you had not come to that, would you have put in another +lead for another interview? + +Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. McCLOY. Would it have been incumbent upon you to recommend to your +superiors that he be continued under surveillance? + +Mr. FAIN. I could have recommended that he be reinterviewed but I +frankly didn't see any point in doing that. + +Mr. McCLOY. I understand that. But assuming you did find some +derogatory information, or some facts that made you fear that he was +a security risk beyond a recommendation for further interviews, what +would be your province to do? Would it be your province to recommend +surveillance? + +Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; if there had been some facts there to indicate that +he was---- + +Mr. McCLOY. A potential danger? + +Mr. FAIN. A potential danger to the security of the United States, and +for instance if we had found that he was a member of the Communist +Party and meeting with them, made some contact with them, I certainly +would have stayed right on it. + +Mr. McCLOY. You would have recommended that he be kept under +surveillance then? + +Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. McCLOY. That is all I am getting at. + +Representative FORD. Are you through, John? + +Mr. McCLOY. Yes. + +Representative FORD. On the top page of Commission Exhibit 824 it says, +and I quote, "Oswald and wife unknown to confidential informant." Did +you make that check? + +Mr. FAIN. I did. I checked with the confidential security informants +that we had there, and they said this man was not known to be a member +of the party, and the party had not discussed him for membership +purposes or anything like that. + +Representative FORD. Do you have in this area, or did you have at that +time in this area reliable confidential informants? + +Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; yes, sir. Excellent informants. + +Representative FORD. During your experience in Fort Worth or otherwise, +did you ever have a case similar to the Oswald case, a defector who had +returned to the United States? + +Mr. FAIN. No, sir. + +Representative FORD. This was your only one? + +Mr. FAIN. I had read in the newspapers about them occurring in various +areas in the United States but this was the first one I had handled. + +Representative FORD. This was the only one of a similar nature that you +handled? + +Mr. FAIN. I believe there were some cases back there too. We did handle +one or two of those where the man in the service had made some kind of +a remark, and we had interviewed him when he returned. I remember two +or three of those cases when he returned to this country. + +We contacted him to ascertain what his employment was, what his status +was, what his present residence was, what his present attitude was, +and whether or not he would report to us if he were contacted under +auspicious circumstances abroad or otherwise. We worked on several of +those, that type of case. + +Representative FORD. Your contacts with these confidential informants, +were they prior to or subsequent to this interview with Oswald? + +Mr. FAIN. This was subsequent. This was the day following. I had also +previously interviewed them. + +Representative FORD. I think there was a somewhat similar statement in +one of your other reports. + +Mr. FAIN. I believe in the other report, yes, sir. + +(At this point, Chief Justice Warren entered the hearing room) + +Mr. DULLES. Do you recall any other instances where you have marked a +case closed where headquarters has come back and suggested that it not +be closed and that further investigation be made? + +Mr. FAIN. Right now, I can't specifically recall any instances, but it +has been done, and if the supervisor felt additional work should be +done we would have no hesitancy in doing it. + +Mr. STERN. Mr. Fain, your recommendation about closing a case is +checked by how many supervisors that you know? + +Mr. FAIN. One on the security desk there before it goes on here to the +seat of Government. + +Mr. STERN. This is one on the security desk in Dallas? + +Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. STERN. Then what happens? + +Mr. FAIN. Then the report goes on into Washington here, to the FBI. + +Mr. STERN. As far as you know is it checked again here? + +Mr. FAIN. Oh, yes. + +Mr. STERN. And by whom or by what kind of official? + +Mr. FAIN. Well, they have a desk up here that has that function, too, +you see. I don't know just, Mr. Belmont can probably answer that better +than I can because I am not familiar at all with the workings of it up +here. But I know they are rigidly checked and rechecked. + +Mr. STERN. Now, at the time you filed this report, in view of the fact +that you didn't see, as you testified, any further work to be done at +this time---- + +Mr. FAIN. That is right. + +Mr. STERN. Could you have put the case in any other status besides +"Closed"? Is there any other administrative procedure that might have +been available to you under the circumstances where you had nothing +further, no further work to recommend at the time? + +Mr. FAIN. Any other status? I could have put it, of course, in a +pending status and set out some leads. + +Mr. STERN. No, no; assuming you didn't see any further work to be done, +any further leads at that time, under your administrative practices? + +Mr. FAIN. No; if the work has been completed, we put the recommendation +that it be closed and as I say, of course, that is no ironbound thing, +to keep it from being reopened. It can be reopened any time, any of +these security cases, the very next day, if necessary or the next 5 +days or the next month, anything comes in on it or we get any specific +reason for reopening it, it certainly is reopened. + +Representative FORD. A few minutes ago I asked you a question about +checking with confidential informants. Did this check involve only +confidential informants in Fort Worth as far as the Communist Party was +concerned, or would it have a broader check? + +Mr. FAIN. These were the confidential informants available to me in +Fort Worth only. + +Representative FORD. Would there be a different set of informants in +Dallas? + +Mr. FAIN. Yes; they had informants, I suppose, one or two from the area +there, but we certainly had two when I considered to be excellent right +in Fort Worth and I am sure they had good access. + +Representative FORD. But would such a check of informants at Fort Worth +necessarily mean there couldn't have been some relationship Oswald had +with the Communist Party in Dallas, for example? + +Mr. FAIN. Well, these in Fort Worth are familiar with some of the +activity in Dallas, too. + +Representative FORD. There would be a connection between your +informants in Fort Worth---- + +Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir. + +Representative FORD. And those that might exist in Dallas? + +Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir. I contacted these on several occasions, on two +occasions that I remember, and, I felt, if this man was a member of the +Communist Party they would know about it. + +Representative FORD. When one of the Secret Service agents went down +to Dallas prior to the assassination in his preparation for the visit +of the President he checked through informants in certain right-wing +elements in Dallas to see whether or not there was to be any violence +at the time of the President's visit. There have been allegations to +the effect that Oswald was in some way connected with such alleged +right-wing organizations. Did you have any knowledge of that? + +Mr. FAIN. No, sir; no, sir. + +Representative FORD. Did you have any reason to check it? + +Mr. FAIN. No; all the information that I had and as these reports will +reflect, he was along the lines of Marxist, Communist, if anything, and +I don't think you will find any indication that he was on the other. + +Representative FORD. You had no information that he was in any way +whatsoever connected with the alleged right-wing organizations? + +Mr. FAIN. That is right. That is right, I did not. + +Mr. McCLOY. Did any Secret Service people get in contact with you prior +to the visit of the President, or did you get in contact with them? + +Mr. FAIN. No, sir. You see, I retired from the FBI October 29 of 1962. +The President was down there November 22, of 1963. + +Mr. McCLOY. I forgot. + +Mr. DULLES. That was how long, I didn't catch the date, how long before +the assassination attempt? + +Mr. FAIN. I retired October 29 of 1962, and the assassination---- + +Mr. DULLES. The year before, about? + +Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. DULLES. A little over a year. + +Mr. FAIN. The assassination occurred in November of 1963, isn't that +correct? + +Representative FORD. Are you still living in the Dallas-Fort Worth area? + +Mr. FAIN. No, sir; I am at Houston. I moved to Houston and retired on +the 28th and went to Houston on November 1 of 1962. + +Representative FORD. What is your present occupation? + +Mr. FAIN. I am office manager and in charge of accounts receivable for +my brother who is an orthopedic surgeon in Houston. + +Representative FORD. You no longer have any connection with the +Government? + +Mr. FAIN. No, sir; I do not. The Bureau has been mighty good to me. I +have enjoyed my tenure of service. + +Mr. STERN. Mr. Fain, was there any procedure that you went through upon +your retirement in turning over cases, cases you had worked on whether +they were in closed status or pending cases? Did you discuss the cases +with an agent who was taking them over? + +Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. STERN. Was a closed case discussed in that fashion? + +Mr. FAIN. Yes, in general, in other words---- + +Mr. STERN. Do you recall discussing the Oswald case with another agent? + +Mr. FAIN. Not specifically, no; I do not. + +Mr. STERN. But you do think you would have in connection with the +procedures you followed upon your retirement? + +Mr. FAIN. Maybe not. We might not, since this case was closed, I doubt +very much that we discussed it. + +Mr. STERN. You have no recollection of it? + +Mr. FAIN. At least I have no recollection of having discussed it with +him. + +Mr. STERN. May we have this report, Mr. Chairman, which has been marked +for identification 824, admitted? + +Representative FORD. It may be admitted. + +(The document referred to, previously marked as Commission Exhibit No. +824 for identification, was received in evidence.) + +Mr. STERN. Mr. Fain, I show you a document, a letter from Director +Hoover with attachments, which has been marked for identification +Commission No. 825. Would you turn to the last two pages and can you +tell us what the last two pages constitute? + +Mr. FAIN. The last two pages constitute an affidavit which I gave to +the Houston office of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. + +Mr. STERN. Did you make it at the Houston office? + +Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir. + +Mr. STERN. What was the occasion of your making this affidavit? + +Mr. FAIN. I was contacted by Mr. Ed Dalrymple, special agent of the +FBI, and he explained to me that he would like to talk to me about +this matter. He said he had had an inquiry concerning whether or not +I had ever paid this man, Lee Oswald, any money for any information +and he asked me if I would be willing to give an affidavit and I said +I certainly would be glad to. I came down to the office and gave this +affidavit to him on January 29, 1964. + +Mr. STERN. Is there anything you would like to add to this affidavit or +any correction you would like to make in it at this time? + +Mr. FAIN. No, sir; I do not. + +Mr. STERN. When you talk about an informant, does that term mean to you +only someone who receives money for information? + +Mr. FAIN. No, they have an informant that would furnish information +without compensation. Informant in the generally accepted term is +anyone who would furnish information to the FBI. + +Mr. STERN. When you say no effort was made to recruit Lee Harvey +Oswald's services in any capacity on behalf of the FBI or any other +Government agency, you mean for compensation or otherwise? + +Mr. FAIN. Oh, yes. That was my understanding for the reason of this +affidavit was whether or not I had ever paid him or offered to pay +him any money, remuneration or compensation for any information and +certainly there had been no effort to recruit him along that line at +all and no payment had ever been made to him. + +Mr. STERN. Would you consider then the same question but without the +element of compensation: Had you ever made any effort to recruit his +services without compensation? + +Mr. FAIN. Well, we, of course, interviewed him a couple of times and +asked him for information and told him that if he were ever contacted +by any Soviet individuals or under any suspicious circumstances to be +sure and let us know about it. + +Mr. STERN. Did you ever ask him to do anything more than that for you? + +Mr. FAIN. No, sir. + +Mr. STERN. Did you ever ask him to try to become a member of any group +for you? + +Mr. FAIN. No, sir; no, sir. + +Mr. DULLES. Did he agree to supply the information? + +Mr. FAIN. He promised to; yes, sir. + +Mr. DULLES. In case he should be approached? + +Mr. FAIN. He said he would cooperate with us. + +Mr. STERN. The last paragraph of your affidavit describes his attitude +as arrogant and hostile. Did you say that on the basis of both +interviews with him? + +Mr. FAIN. Predominantly as a result of the first, and frankly as I said +a while ago, he was and continued to be evasive as to his reason for +ever having gone over there, and I consider that uncooperative. + +Mr. STERN. But did you feel he was arrogant and hostile at the time of +the second interview? + +Mr. FAIN. Not so much as he was the first. I would say he was more so, +more arrogant and hostile at the first interview. + +Mr. STERN. If there are no other questions in this area, I have just +one other point I would like to cover with Mr. Fain, and that is what +were your instructions, Mr. Fain, as a special agent of the FBI, with +regard to referring to the Secret Service information bearing upon +the protection of the President, not in this case but as a general +proposition? + +Mr. FAIN. As a general proposition, if there was any information +coming to our attention, express or implied, or any implication that +the President might be in danger or anyone had made a threat of that +character, we would always refer it to the Secret Service, that was +made clear to us from the very beginning of my service. + +Mr. STERN. In your 20 years of service as a special agent did you ever +have any occasion to refer information to the Secret Service? + +Mr. FAIN. I don't remember any specific instances but I am sure there +have been a few occasions where I have turned over some information +like that and I have run several investigations out as to who this +individual was and as to what he was, and so forth. + +But any indication of, a threat or otherwise I would have contacted +my supervisor--it happened at Fort Worth at that time we didn't have +a representative of Secret Service, it was covered out of Dallas, but +if there had been anything like that, any indication of potential for +violence or any threats I would have called my Dallas office and they +would have in turn advised the Secret Service. + +Mr. STERN. Did you see any reason to refer Lee Harvey Oswald to the +Secret Service? + +Mr. FAIN. No, sir; no, sir. I didn't see any potential for violence at +that time; no, sir. + +Mr. STERN. Did he ever mention the President or the Presidency or---- + +Mr. FAIN. No, sir. + +Mr. STERN. Or any elected official to you? + +Mr. FAIN. No, sir. + +Mr. STERN. Governor Connally? + +Mr. FAIN. No, sir. + +Mr. DULLES. Would the memoranda of these conversations be put in a file +that was in any way special as to of doubtful character or suspicious +character so that it might be referred to later under that category? + +Mr. FAIN. They constantly review these, as I understand it, these +matters. + +Mr. DULLES. Who is "they"? + +Mr. FAIN. The supervisory desk over there constantly is going over +these matters, and if there is any--they check the files to see if +anything has come in on it that would look like it ought to be reopened. + +Mr. DULLES. But there was no mark on this file to indicate that this +was a case that might have some pending interest from the point of view +of security? + +Mr. FAIN. No, sir; not that I am aware of. + +Mr. STERN. Is there anything you would like to add to anything you have +told the Commission this morning, Mr. Fain? + +Mr. FAIN. I believe not. I don't recall anything additionally. + +Mr. DULLES. Did you card all these files so that--and was there a card +in your files under the name of Lee Harvey Oswald? + +Mr. FAIN. Not in my files, but when it goes to Dallas they index all +those. + +Mr. DULLES. They do that in Dallas? + +Mr. FAIN. Yes, sir; and the seat of Government. + +Mr. DULLES. And there was a card on Lee Harvey Oswald, a special card, +in addition to a file in the office? + +Mr. FAIN. I am sure there was, there might have been an index. + +Mr. DULLES. But you didn't know that yourself? + +Mr. FAIN. No, sir; but we didn't maintain one in Dallas--in Fort Worth. + +Mr. STERN. That is all. + +The CHAIRMAN (presiding). Well, Mr. Fain, thank you very much, sir, for +your courtesy and your help to us. We appreciate it. Sorry to disturb +you in your retirement. + +(At this point Senator Cooper entered the hearing room.) + +(At this point Representative Ford left the hearing room.) + + +TESTIMONY OF JOHN LESTER QUIGLEY + +The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Quigley, this session of the Commission is for +the purpose of hearing the testimony of certain members of the FBI +concerning interviews they had with Lee Oswald, and we understand that +you had one with him. + +Mr. QUIGLEY. Yes, sir; I did. + +The CHAIRMAN. And we want to have you discuss that with us. Would you +please rise and raise your right hand and be sworn. Do you solemnly +swear the testimony you are about to give before this Commission shall +be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you +God? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. I do, sir. + +The CHAIRMAN. Be seated, please. Mr. Stern will conduct the examination. + +Mr. STERN. Would you state your full name for the record, Mr. Quigley? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. John Lester Quigley. + +Mr. STERN. Your address? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. No. 4, Cromwell Place, New Orleans, La. + +Mr. STERN. Have you a law degree, Mr. Quigley? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. I do, sir. + +Mr. STERN. From what institution? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. Columbus University, Washington. + +Mr. STERN. Are you a member of the bar? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. No; I am not, sir. + +Mr. STERN. Upon receiving your law degree, did you join the FBI? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. I was in the FBI at the time I was going to law school. + +Mr. STERN. And when did you join the FBI? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. July 7, 1936. + +Mr. STERN. And you have been a member of the FBI since then? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. That is correct. + +Mr. STERN. To the present time. What was your assignment in 1963? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. General assignment, investigative assignment. + +Mr. STERN. In what office? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. New Orleans division, at New Orleans, La. + +Mr. STERN. How long had you been in the New Orleans office? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. Since February of 1959. + +Mr. STERN. Mr. Quigley, I show you a document which has been marked +Commission No. 826 for identification. Can you identify this document +for us, please? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. Yes; I can identify it. This is the October 31, 1963, +investigative report of Special Agent Milton R. Kaack, who was at that +time assigned to the New Orleans division, with regard to Lee Harvey +Oswald. + +Mr. STERN. Are you responsible for any portion of this report, Mr. +Quigley? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. Yes; I am, sir. + +Mr. STERN. What portion? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. I direct your attention to page 6 of this report, pages 6 +through 10, which reflect the result of an interview which I had with +Lee Harvey Oswald on August 10, 1963, at New Orleans, La. + +Mr. STERN. Are you responsible for any other portion of the report, Mr. +Quigley? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. I am confident I am not but may I just look at it for a +moment. No, sir; I am not. + +Mr. STERN. Can you identify the entire report from your official duties? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. Yes. I have seen this, a copy of this report, in our files +at New Orleans. + +Mr. STERN. Have you reviewed this report recently in preparation for +your testimony before the Commission? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. Yes; I have. + +Mr. STERN. Turning now to page 6 of the report, can you tell us from +this memorandum when you interviewed Lee Harvey Oswald? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. Yes; I interviewed him at the first district station, New +Orleans Police Department, on August 10, 1963. + +Mr. STERN. How did you come to interview Mr. Oswald? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. Lt. Francis L. Martello, platoon commander at the first +district, New Orleans Police Station, called our office and advised +that he wished an agent to stop by there since there was a prisoner who +desired to speak with an agent. + +As a result of this telephone call, I proceeded to the first district. + +Mr. STERN. Did you receive the telephone call? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. No, sir; I did not. + +Mr. DULLES. By agent, did he mean agent of the FBI? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. Yes, sir; yes, sir. + +Mr. STERN. You were assigned by someone in your office to take this +assignment? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. That is right. This was on a Saturday, which we operate on +a skeleton staff. We do not have a full staff on a Saturday. + +Mr. STERN. Were you accompanied by any other agent of the FBI in making +this interview? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. I was not. + +Mr. STERN. Is that normal, under your procedures? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. I would say yes. Agents operate independently unless there +is a specific reason for more than one agent to be present. + +Mr. STERN. As far as you knew here there was no such reason? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. There was no reason. + +Mr. STERN. Did you know whom you were going to interview, by name? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. I did not, sir. + +Mr. STERN. Just an individual who was---- + +Mr. QUIGLEY. An individual, that is correct. + +Mr. STERN. Had you any knowledge of an organization called Fair Play +for Cuba Committee's activities in New Orleans before this interview? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. I had knowledge that there was such an organization in +existence in the United States. I had no knowledge of any activities of +such an organization in the city of New Orleans, La. + +Mr. STERN. Did you know of its existence in the United States as part +of your official work? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. Overall knowledge of Bureau operations; yes, sir. + +Mr. STERN. Were you working on any particular investigation involving +this Committee at the time? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. No, sir; I was not. + +Mr. STERN. Will you tell us what occurred first when you came to the +police station? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. At the time I arrived at the police station, Lieutenant +Martello directed me to the commanding officer's office, where there +was laid out on the table a number of different pamphlets, throwaways, +relating to the Fair Play for Cuba Committee, which he advised me had +been removed by the New Orleans Police Department from Oswald the +previous day, August 9, at the time of his arrest, for disturbing the +peace on Canal Street. + +I reviewed, generally looked over, the material to see what it was. I +was not familiar with any of this material. While I was doing this, he +had not at this point identified who the individual was other than the +person had been arrested the previous day; while I was looking over the +material, the jailer brought in an individual who was then introduced +to me by Lieutenant Martello as Harvey Lee Oswald. I then identified +myself by credentials to Lee Harvey Oswald. + +Mr. STERN. You said Harvey Lee Oswald. + +Mr. QUIGLEY. I beg your pardon. + +Mr. STERN. You meant Lee Harvey Oswald? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. Yes; Lee Harvey Oswald. + +Mr. STERN. Did his name mean anything to you at that time? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. No, sir; it did not. + +Mr. STERN. In these documents that you were given to look at by the +New Orleans Police was there a handwritten list of names, addresses, +telephone numbers--anything of that sort. + +Mr, QUIGLEY. No, sir; there was not. + +Mr. STERN. Have you subsequently learned of such a list in connection +with your duties? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. Yes; I have. + +Mr. STERN. Have you been told why that list wasn't furnished to you at +the time of your interview? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. Yes; I have. On November 29, 1963, I went to the first +district station in New Orleans Police Department to confer with +Lieutenant Martello. At this time he informed me that on November 23, +1963, a representative of the Secret Service had contacted him about +3 o'clock in the morning, told him that he was conducting an official +investigation with regard to the assassination of the President, and +desired to talk to him. + +Arrangements were made the following or that same day, to meet at the +first district station. At approximately 3 o'clock the Secret Service +representative met there. At this time, Lieutenant Martello went to +his files, removed from the files the evidence that had been taken +from Oswald on August 9, 1963. In going through these documents, he +noted this piece of paper that had what appeared to him to be foreign +writing, he felt that it probably was Russian but he did not know. He +turned this over to the Secret Service. + +He related to me that at the time he had questioned Oswald on August +10, 1963, prior to the time that he had called the FBI office, that he +had gone through items in Oswald's wallet, which is a normal procedure +for the police to do, for background identification, and so forth, +and among the items in his wallet was this piece of paper, and in +the discussion that pursued, apparently this particular document and +a small photograph of Oswald inadvertently became involved with the +evidence that was being handled in the case at the time, and the file +was then put away, and it was not gone back into, as I understand it, +until this interview of the 23d, when he discovered this document. + +Mr. DULLES. And the photograph? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. DULLES. In addition to the writing was among these other papers? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. STERN. Did you make notes of your interview? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. Yes; I did, sir. + +Mr. STERN. Do you practice shorthand or any speedwriting? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. No, sir; I do not. + +Mr. STERN. How soon after the interview did you record the interview +formally? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. Five days. + +Mr. STERN. Did you dictate or draft it yourself? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. I dictated from my notes. + +Mr. STERN. Did you retain the notes? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. No, sir; I did not. + +Mr. STERN. Is it your usual practice to destroy notes once you have +dictated a memorandum? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. It is the usual practice to destroy your notes after the +completed work has been returned to you for proofing to make certain +that the information is accurate, then you do destroy them. + +(Discussion off the record.) + +Mr. STERN. Mr. Quigley, I show you a one-page document marked for +identification with the number 827. Can you identify that document? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. Yes; I can identify this document. + +Mr. STERN. What is it, please? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. This is a copy of a document that was turned over to me +by Lt. Francis L. Martello of the New Orleans Police Department, on +November 29, 1963. He informed me that at the time he interviewed +Oswald on August 10, 1963, Oswald had on his person a piece of paper +which was removed from his wallet which contained some foreign writing +as well as some English, that the piece of paper inadvertently became +involved in the evidence in the case with reference to the disturbing +of the peace. And subsequently on November 29, 1963, he found this +original document that had been taken from Oswald among the items of +evidence at the first district police station. He then turned the +original of this document over to Secret Service representative, Mr. +Adrian Vial, who was assigned to the Secret Service office at New +Orleans. + +Prior to turning the original document over to Mr. Vial, Lieutenant +Martello made a copy in his own handwriting of the document that +was turned over to Mr. Vial. This is the copy of the document that +Lieutenant Martello made and which was turned over to me on November +29, 1963. + +Mr. STERN. And you have just supplied that document to the Commission? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. I have. + +Mr. STERN. You mentioned that Lieutenant Martello said that there was +a photograph among these papers of Lee Harvey Oswald. Did you see the +photograph? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. No; I did not. + +Mr. STERN. Do you know what he did--did he tell you what he had done +with the photograph? + +Mr QUIGLEY. He did not, sir. + +Mr. STERN. Did he tell you anything about the photograph, tell you what +it was a photograph of? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. He remarked in his report that it appeared to be a +passport photograph. + +Mr. STERN. Of Lee Harvey Oswald? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. Of Lee Harvey Oswald. + +Mr. STERN. Turning now to the first page of your report, Mr. Quigley, +in the third paragraph you show that you were told that Mrs. Oswald's +maiden name was Prossa. From your practice, would you have taken that +name down, asked the person being interviewed to spell it for you? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. I certainly would have. + +Mr. STERN. If you were relying on your ear, would you indicate that? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. I would never take a name phonetically. + +Mr. STERN. So you believe---- + +Mr. QUIGLEY. I would request an accurate spelling. + +Mr. STERN. You believe that he spelled the name to you? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. I am positive he did, sir. + +Mr. STERN. This way. Have you reviewed this memorandum of your +interview? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. Yes; I have, sir. + +Mr. STERN. Is there anything you would like to add to it now---- + +Mr. QUIGLEY. No, sir. + +Mr. STERN. Any detail that you omitted that you now think of? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. No, sir. + +Mr. DULLES. Are you quite sure he said to you that about 4 months ago +he and his wife Marina Oswald, named Prossa, whom he met and married in +Fort Worth, moved to New Orleans? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. Well, these are not his direct words, sir. This is the +substance of what he told me; yes. This is accurate. This is my own +phraseology. + +Mr. DULLES. I understand. + +Mr. McCLOY. One other thing. I have to leave shortly to go to lunch, +but on page 7 of this report you described these membership cards. + +Mr. QUIGLEY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. McCLOY. Did he have the membership cards in his possession at that +time? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. Yes, sir; he did, sir. + +Mr. McCLOY. You saw them? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. Yes, sir; I did, sir. I think the last you will notice, in +that last sentence he had in his possession both cards and exhibited +both of them. + +Mr. McCLOY. Right. One of them was, at least one of them, was signed A. +Hidell? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. Yes, sir; that is correct. + +Mr. McCLOY. Do we have those cards? + +Mr. STERN. I believe we do. I do not have them here. + +Mr. McCLOY. But it is important to have them because the name Hidell +was in the handwriting--but these are membership cards purporting to be +membership cards in the Fair Play for Cuba organization. + +Would you be able to identify these cards if you saw them, Mr. Quigley, +as the ones that were shown in Oswald's possession exhibited to you? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. I don't believe I could truthfully say if you showed me a +card, these two cards now that those were the identical ones. + +From the description and the data that I have recorded I could say they +were similar. + +Mr. McCLOY. All right. + +Mr. QUIGLEY. I don't just feel I could identify them. Bear this in +mind, sir; this material was evidence as far as the New Orleans Police +Department was concerned at the time, we couldn't take this material. + +Mr. McCLOY. I understand. + +Mr. DULLES. Did you say that some of it was turned over to the Secret +Service? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. No, sir; not to my knowledge. + +Mr. DULLES. Not this material? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. Not to my knowledge, sir. + +Mr. STERN. Did Oswald answer all the questions you put to him in the +course of your interview? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. I am sorry. + +Mr. STERN. Did Oswald answer all the questions you put to him in the +course of your interview? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. No; he did not answer all of them. + +Mr. STERN. Do you recall the nature of the questions he didn't want to +answer or he evaded? + +(At this point Mr. McCloy left the hearing room.) + +Mr. QUIGLEY. When I began asking him specific details with respect to +his activities in the Fair Play for Cuba Committee in New Orleans as +to where meetings were held, who was involved, what occurred, he was +reticent to furnish information, reluctant and actually as far as I was +concerned, was completely evasive on them. + +Mr. STERN. Did he tell you why he had requested the interview? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. No; he did not, sir. + +Mr. STERN. Did you form any impression as to why he had requested the +interview? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. Well, he was in police custody at the time, involved in a +disturbing of the peace charge, was becoming involved in a fight with +three Cubans on the street in the distribution of Fair Play for Cuba +literature. I felt that he was probably making a self-serving statement +in attempting to explain to me why he was distributing this literature, +and for no other reason, and when I got to questioning him further then +he felt that his purpose had been served and he wouldn't say anything +further. + +Mr. STERN. Why do you think it might have been important for him to +explain to you what he was doing---- + +Mr. QUIGLEY. Well---- + +Mr. STERN. Or to an FBI agent? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. Well, he is in custody--this I cannot answer you. You +ask me what I thought, this is what my feeling was on the matter. His +actual motive, I really wouldn't have any idea. + +Mr. STERN. Is there any possibility that he was trying to give the New +Orleans police the idea that he was working for or with the FBI? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. Not to my knowledge, sir; no. + +Mr. STERN. None of his conduct went in that direction? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. No; he certainly, to my knowledge, never advised the New +Orleans police of this. As a matter of fact, he, during the course of +the interview with Lieutenant Martello, made a flat statement that he +would like to talk to an FBI agent, which is not an unusual situation. +Frequently persons who are in custody of local authorities would like +to talk to the FBI. + +The CHAIRMAN. Is that so? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. That is true, sir. Many times people don't really +understand what the FBI jurisdiction is. They feel we handle a +multitude of things which we don't. We are happy to talk with them, we +record the information, and if we can be of assistance, we are, and if +we cannot be of assistance we tell them we cannot and we explain to +them why we can't be of assistance. + +The CHAIRMAN. Did he ask you to be of any assistance to him? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. No, sir; he did not. + +Mr. STERN. Mr. Quigley, did you believe he was telling you the truth in +all respects? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. No; I did not, sir. + +Mr. STERN. In what respect did you think he was not telling the truth? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. Well, as I stated before, when--I accepted basic +information that he furnished to me regarding background, about what +occurred at the time of his arrest. Then when I began questioning him +as to who A. J. Hidell was, who the members of the Fair Play for Cuba +Committee were in New Orleans, where they held their meetings, what +literature he read, which he claimed he had been receiving from the +Fair Play for Cuba Committee, he was noncommittal or wouldn't discuss +it. + +At one point of the interview he told me that he had held one of the +Fair Play for Cuba Committee meetings at his home. I asked him, "Well, +how did you get in touch with the other people?" "Well, I don't care to +discuss that." "Who were the persons at the meeting?" "I don't know." +"Did you know any names at all?" "Yes. They were introduced to me by +first names only." "What were their first names?" "I cannot remember." +So it was apparent to me that he was not certainly going to furnish +anything that he had made his statement, why I did not know. But when I +pressed him for details he declined to furnish anything. + +Another one, for example, I asked him about A. J. Hidell, obviously you +can see why I would have been interested in this. "Well, Mr. Hidell had +a telephone." "What was Mr. Hidell's telephone number?" "Mr. Hidell's +telephone has been disconnected." "What was the number?" "I can't +remember." This was the end of it, so this is the basis for my thinking. + +Mr. STERN. Yes. + +Mr. QUIGLEY. One more thing I would like to add that might help clarify +it, as to why I felt it was a self-serving statement is that he told me +that he was distributing these throwaways for the Fair Play for Cuba +Committee because of a patriotic duty, as a patriotic American citizen. +This I felt was certainly, in his opinion, a self-serving statement. + +Mr. STERN. Did he elaborate on that? Did he tell you in what respect +he thought he was performing a patriotic duty by distributing this +pamphlet? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. No; not in so many words, but he did explain that he +felt that the goal and theme of the Fair Play for Cuba Committee was +that it was his patriotic duty to bring to the attention of as many +people as he could, the fact that the United States should not attack +Cuba at the time or interfere into their political affairs, and that +by spreading what he considered the philosophy of the Fair Play for +Cuba Committee, that the American people would better understand the +internal conditions there, and the American people should be given an +opportunity to go to Cuba and let them make their own mind up as to +what the situation was as of that time rather than just merely reading +it in the newspaper. + +Senator COOPER. I have a question I would like to ask. You have just +stated that Oswald told you something about his own purposes and also +the objectives of this Fair Play for Cuba Committee. Did he make any +comment on the policy of the United States toward Cuba? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. No, sir; he did not. + +Senator COOPER. Did he say---- + +Mr. QUIGLEY. To my recollection. + +Senator COOPER. Did he say anything affirmatively opposing or stating +what the policy of the United States was and to be opposed to it? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. I have no recollection of that, sir. + +Senator COOPER. Did he mention any official of the United States as +opposing his policy? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. No, sir; he did not. + +Senator COOPER. The President of the United States, President Kennedy? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. No, sir; everything that he told me I recorded in my +notes, so everything that I have here in this document is what he told +me. Now bear this in mind when it was apparent to me that he was not +giving me information that, I didn't continue for hours and hours--I +did not know who this individual was at the time, so I felt that I +had adequate background for the time being. If we wished to pursue it +further, at least we had a basis to talk to him. + +Mr. STERN. Your report does not indicate, Mr. Quigley, specifically +that you believed some of the information he told you was not true? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. That is correct. + +Mr. STERN. Tell us why that is. + +Mr. QUIGLEY. Well, I feel that a person reviewing the document can draw +their own conclusions that the information that he has furnished is not +complete, is inaccurate, that he is obviously withholding information, +plus the fact that, as a matter of policy, we do not express +conclusions or personal opinions. We are a factfinding agency. We allow +the facts to speak for themselves. + +Mr. STERN. Would you look at page 10 of the report, the biographical +data on Lee Harvey Oswald. At "place of birth" you have entered "New +Orleans, Louisiana," but then put in parentheses, "at the time of +arrest Oswald claimed he was from Cuba." + +Mr. QUIGLEY. That is correct. + +Mr. STERN. This is not in your report as such, there is no statement, +no recorded note of anything he told you about where he was born. How +did that come up and what did he say? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. Following my interview with Oswald, I, of course, spoke +with Lieutenant Martello, and I made an observation that this Oswald +was a New Orleans boy. I couldn't remember that yesterday, that he was +a New Orleans boy, and Lieutenant Martello said, "Well, that isn't +what he told the officers at the time of arrest. He said he was born +in Cuba," and this is why I recorded this. We frequently have persons +who are arrested in various places in the county, and furnish record +different dates, places of birth, and we always record any variations +of what we feel is the truth, so our record will be complete on such a +situation. + +Mr. STERN. Did Lieutenant Martello tell you anything else at the time +you learned this? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. No, sir; we didn't discuss it further. + +Mr. STERN. What was Lee Harvey Oswald's demeanor during the interview, +his attitude, his cooperativeness? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. He was receptive at the time I was questioning him about +his general background, such as employment, "where have you been, +what have you done," he told me he was unemployed at the time. He had +previously worked for William Riley Coffee Co. there in New Orleans +and he had been honorably discharged out of the service; that he had +moved to Fort Worth after he had gotten out of the service and married, +there were no problems involved here. But when I began questioning him +with regard to his activities in the Fair Play for Cuba Committee, +then he became reticent, reluctant to furnish information, and in some +instances refused to furnish any information. + +Mr. STERN. Was he antagonistic, hostile? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. He was antagonistic to some extent, not overly so. He +certainly was not friendly. + +Mr. STERN. How long did the interview last, to the best you can recall? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. As best I can recall approximately an hour and a half. +This would include, of course, my reviewing of the documents with him, +and so on. + +Mr. STERN. Did you get any indication that he was a dangerous +individual or that he was, potentially, a violent individual? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. Absolutely none at all. + +Mr. DULLES. What documents did you review with him? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. DULLES. The Fair Play for Cuba Committee and the Corliss Lamont +report? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. Yes, sir; and the throwaways I went over those generally +with him. + +Mr. STERN. When you concluded your interview, then what did you do? +After awhile you talked to Lieutenant Martello. What did you do after +that? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. I returned to my headquarters. + +Mr. STERN. Did you check your office---- + +Mr. QUIGLEY. I did check our files and I determined that we had an +investigation currently underway with regard to Oswald. I knew it +was assigned to an agent in the New Orleans office who sat right in +front of me. So I, on Monday morning, I discussed the fact that I had +interviewed Oswald at the first district jail on Saturday morning. + +Mr. STERN. Do you recall what you told him about the case other than +the details? Did you think Oswald was worthy of further investigation? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. Well, sir, this was not my decision. I was merely +recording the results of an interview. I had nothing to do with the +actual investigation of this particular matter. + +Mr. STERN. Did you think he was behaving rationally or irrationally? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. I would say he was acting rationally. You are speaking of +the time I interviewed him? + +Mr. STERN. Yes. + +Mr. QUIGLEY. Rationally. + +Mr. STERN. Were you concerned at all by the fact that he had requested +this interview, volunteered for it after his arrest in connection with +Fair Play for Cuba Committee activity and thereafter was misleading and +reluctant to talk to you about these activities? Didn't you think it +was strange? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. No, sir; I just thought this was a normal situation that +has occurred many times of persons in custody of the police wish to +talk to an FBI agent. We have them come to our headquarters in New +Orleans all the time to talk to us. So I didn't consider this unusual +at all. + +Mr. STERN. Would it be usual or had it occurred before that someone +would ask for an interview and then refuse to respond to your +questions. Didn't that seem strange? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. Not necessarily; not necessarily. Frequently people will +have a problem and want to talk to an FBI agent and they want to tell +them what their problem is, but then when you start probing into it +then they don't want to talk to you. I think that is just human nature. +If you are probing too deep it gets a little touchy. + +Mr. DULLES. Who was in charge of this other investigation from the FBI +office with regard to Lee Harvey Oswald that you found out about later, +was this Special Agent Milton R. Kaack? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. DULLES. Did you make your report to him, did you? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. Orally, yes; I discussed it with him. + +Mr. DULLES. When it was sent forward was it sent forward with these +documents we have in Exhibit 826 of which your report forms pages 6 +through 10? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. Yes, sir; this was prepared--that is correct--this was +then prepared and transcribed. But I had discussed the matter or +discussed the fact that I had interviewed him. + +Mr. DULLES. Was Special Agent Kaack your superior or just happened to +be in charge of this particular subject? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. No; this investigative matter was assigned to him. + +Mr. DULLES. I see. He was the one then who forwarded the report to +Washington, this report we have, Exhibit 826? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. He is the one who prepared it; yes, sir. + +Mr. DULLES. And included verbatim your memorandum in this report? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. DULLES. Pages 7 to 10. + +Mr. QUIGLEY. Yes, sir. + +The CHAIRMAN. Six to ten. + +Mr. STERN. Have you found subsequent to this interview, Mr. Quigley, +that you had any other contact with the case of Lee Harvey Oswald +before this interview? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. Yes; I discovered at the time I checked our files that on +April 18, 1961, I had, as a result of a request of the Dallas office, +checked the office of naval intelligence records at the U. S. Naval +Station at Algiers. My purpose in checking that was merely to record +what information their files contained. + +Mr. STERN. And then you would send a report to that effect to the +Dallas office? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. I sent a letter I believe in that particular case. + +Mr. STERN. Any other contact before this? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. No, sir. + +Mr. STERN. Any other contact with Lee Harvey Oswald or his case or +anything to do with his case? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. No, sir. + +Mr. STERN. After your interview in the police station but before the +assassination? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. No, sir. + +Mr. STERN. Up to the time of the assassination? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. No, sir. + +Mr. DULLES. I note this case is marked "P," which I understand is +pending. + +Mr. QUIGLEY. That means---- + +Mr. DULLES. This was an open case in the New Orleans office? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. That is correct, sir. In other words, this indicates to us +administratively that there is further investigation to be conducted, +whether it be in New Orleans or some other place in the United States +or the world, as a matter of fact. + +Mr. DULLES. You mentioned Algiers a minute ago. What Algiers is this? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. Algiers, La., sir, right across from New Orleans. + +Mr. DULLES. I don't know the geography well enough, I thought it wasn't +Algiers in Africa. + +Mr. QUIGLEY. Yes, sir. + +The CHAIRMAN. Gentlemen, I think we might as well adjourn for lunch +now. What time would you like to return? Is 2 o'clock all right with +you, or 2:30? Which would you rather have? We will be back at 2 o'clock. + +(Whereupon, at 1:05 p.m., the President's Commission recessed.) + + + + +Afternoon Session + +TESTIMONY OF JOHN LESTER QUIGLEY RESUMED + + +The President's Commission reconvened at 2:20 p.m. + +The CHAIRMAN. The Commission will be in order. Mr. Stern, you may +continue. + +Mr. STERN. Before the luncheon recess, Mr. Chief Justice, the witness, +Mr. Quigley, had identified Commission Exhibit No. 826 and afforded +the Commission this one-page document which has been marked Commission +Exhibit No. 827. He identified it as a copy furnished him by Lieutenant +Martello of the New Orleans Police Department of Lieutenant Martello's +own handwritten copy of a document in the wallet of Lee Harvey Oswald +at the time of his arrest. I think it should be admitted, if it may be, +in this form. + +The CHAIRMAN. It may be. + +(The documents heretofore marked for identification as Commission +Exhibits Nos. 826 and 827, were received in evidence.) + +Mr. STERN. Also, this morning a question was raised concerning the two +membership cards which are mentioned at page 7 of the report. + +Mr. QUIGLEY. I show you an envelope marked Commission Exhibit 828 for +identification. There is a card inside which, unfortunately, has been +badly discolored by fingerprint testing. Would you look at it and I +think if you turn it in different directions of light you may be able +to make out the typing and writing on the card. + +Mr. QUIGLEY. Yes; I can see this. + +Mr. STERN. Can you identify the card? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. I am in no position to identify this particular exhibit. + +Mr. STERN. Can you tell us anything about the information that appears +on the card? Does it compare with any other information you have about +another card? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. At the time that I interviewed Oswald in New Orleans on +August 10, 1963, I observed two Fair Play for Cuba Committee cards. +One of them was signed V. L. Lee and was dated May 28, 1963, and it +purported to be a Fair Play for Cuba Committee card showing the address +of 799 Broadway, New York 3, N. Y. In looking at this exhibit, I see +that this is a similar card as described in my report. + +Mr. STERN. Similar in what respects? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. Similar in that the identification I have just described +appears on the card in the Exhibit 828. However, I am not able to +identify the signature of any person other than V. L. Lee, and the +date I am unable to determine, although I do believe I see 5-28-63 +typewritten on the card. + +Mr. STERN. What about the color of the card? There is a portion on the +back, Mr. Quigley, which has not been discolored by the fingerprint +treatment. + +Mr. QUIGLEY. I notice this is gray in color and it is similar to a card +that was in Oswald's possession at that time which was also gray in +color. + +Mr. STERN. Mr. Chairman, may this be admitted? + +The CHAIRMAN. It may be admitted. + +(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 828 for +identification, and received in evidence.) + +The CHAIRMAN. It has been identified and has a number, has it? + +Mr. STERN. Yes; No. 828. + +The CHAIRMAN. 828 will be admitted under that number. + +(Discussion off the record.) + +Mr. STERN. Mr. Quigley, will you look, please, at Commission Exhibit +No. 825 for identification, at the fourth page from the end of that +exhibit? Can you identify that page for us? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. Yes; I can. This is an affidavit that was prepared at +the FBI office, Dallas, Tex., on February 17, 1964, which bears my +signature as well as the signature of Miss Matty Havens, the notary +public. + +Mr. STERN. What was the occasion for your making this affidavit, Mr. +Quigley? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. I was instructed to proceed to our Dallas office to +prepare such a document. This document relates to informant material. +This is the general context of it. Did you care for me to read the +document? + +Mr. STERN. No; we have it. Does informant mean to you only a person +who gives information in return for money or some other valuable +consideration, or does it have a broader meaning as far as you are +concerned? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. It would have a broader meaning as far as I was concerned. + +Mr. STERN. What would that mean when you used the word in this +affidavit? What did you mean by "informant"? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. One who furnishes information. + +Mr. STERN. For whatever reason? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. Whatever may be the reason; yes. + +Mr. STERN. And you did not, according to your affidavit, ask Mr. +Oswald---- + +Mr. QUIGLEY. I did not ask or suggest that Mr. Oswald become an +informant of the FBI nor did I offer him any money or any other +inducements to become an informant. + +Mr. STERN. Did you say anything to him at all about getting in touch +with you or the FBI again about any matter? + +Mr. QUIGLEY. I did not. + +The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Quigley, if you will, we will recall you if a +document comes just for your identification. It will only take a few +moments, I am sure. + +Thank you very much for your coming and helping us. + +Mr. QUIGLEY. Thank you very much, sir. + + +TESTIMONY OF JAMES PATRICK HOSTY, JR. + +The CHAIRMAN. Would you raise your right hand, please, and be sworn? +Do you solemnly swear the testimony you are about to give before this +Commission shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the +truth, so help you God? + +Mr. HOSTY. I do. + +The CHAIRMAN. Will you be seated, please? Mr. Stern will conduct the +examination, Mr. Hosty. + +Mr. STERN. Would you state your full name for the record? + +Mr. HOSTY. My full name is James Patrick Hosty, Jr. + +Mr. STERN. And what is your present address? + +Mr. HOSTY. 11018 Genetta Drive, Dallas, 28, Tex. + +Mr. STERN. What was your education at the college level, Mr. Hosty? + +Mr. HOSTY. I have a bachelor of science degree in business +administration from the University of Notre Dame. + +Mr. STERN. When was that granted? + +Mr. HOSTY. In 1948, June of 1948. + +Mr. STERN. When did you join the Federal Bureau of Investigation? + +Mr. HOSTY. January 21, 1952. + +Mr. STERN. Briefly, what sort of work were you employed at between 1948 +and 1952? + +Mr. HOSTY. I was first employed by the First National Bank in Chicago, +and then employed by the Beechnut Packing Co. as a salesman. + +Mr. STERN. What were your assignments in the FBI? + +Mr. HOSTY. I was first assigned to the Louisville division on general +investigation, then transferred to the Dallas division and served in +general investigation until approximately June of 1955 when I was +assigned to the internal security squad. + +Mr. STERN. When did you first arrive in the Dallas office? + +Mr. HOSTY. December 2, 1953. + +Mr. STERN. You have been in Dallas---- + +Mr. HOSTY. Ever since. + +Mr. STERN. Ever since? + +Mr. HOSTY. Correct. + +Mr. STERN. Are you familiar with the Dallas area generally? + +Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. STERN. You know the downtown locations? + +Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. STERN. The buildings and streets? + +Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. STERN. Can you tell us whether you were assigned to the case of Lee +Harvey Oswald? + +Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir; I was. + +Mr. STERN. Did you take over from Agent Fain or in some other way? + +Mr. HOSTY. No, sir; I did not take over directly. When Agent Fain +retired directly from the Bureau he had closed the case. He had a case +which we call a pending inactive case on Mrs. Marina Oswald. This case +I did take over. It was in what we call a pending inactive status, +that is, nothing was to be done for a period of 6 months. Then at the +end of the 6-month period it was then turned into a pending case and I +went out and attempted to locate Mrs. Marina Oswald for the purpose of +interviewing her. + +I might add that it is the practice of the FBI to interview immigrants +from behind the Iron Curtain on a selective basis, and she was so +selected to be one of these persons to be interviewed. + +Mr. STERN. When was this? + +Mr. HOSTY. This was March 4, 1963, when I began my inquiry as to +her present whereabouts. I determined on March 4, 1963, through the +Immigration and Naturalization Service records that she had moved +from Fort Worth to the Dallas area. She was living on a street called +Elsbeth Street in the Oak Cliff section of Dallas. + +Mr. STERN. What happened in connection with the case of Lee Harvey +Oswald? + +Mr. HOSTY. This case was closed at this time. It was closed. + +On March 11, 1963, I made inquiry at this Elsbeth address, and +determined from the landlady, I believe her name was Mrs. Tobias, that +she had just evicted Lee and Marina Oswald from her apartment building +because of their alleged fighting and his alleged drinking. They caused +a disturbance and she had asked him to leave on March 3, 1963. She +told me they had moved a short distance away. She didn't know where. +On that same date, I was able to determine from the postal authorities +that they had changed their address to 214 Neely Street, also in the +Oak Cliff section of Dallas. + +On the 14th of March, I verified that Oswalds were residing at this +address when I found the mailbox with the name of Lee and Marina Oswald +at this address, 214 Neely Street. Now, because of the alleged marital +difficulties they were having, I in my judgment decided this was not +the time to interview Mrs. Oswald, but to allow a certain cooling off +period. So I then checked Lee Oswald's file, at which time I determined +that he had a contact with the New York Daily Worker. + +Mr. STERN. How did you learn that? + +Mr. HOSTY. From our New York office. Our New York office sent a letter +through to the Dallas office. This was the first time I had seen this +letter. + +Mr. STERN. This appeared in his file? + +Mr. HOSTY. In his file; yes, sir. + +Mr. STERN. Even if the case was closed, the file would continue to +accumulate? + +Mr. HOSTY. That is correct, and they are periodically rechecked for +things of this nature. + +I noticed it, and then because of the domestic difficulty and the +fact that I knew I would be interviewing his wife in the near future, +I requested that the case be reopened. I requested the supervisor in +Dallas to reopen the case to me. + +Mr. STERN. Was that in writing or verbally? + +Mr. HOSTY. Actually, it was, it would appear in writing. I did this by +sending a letter to the Bureau, to the FBI headquarters in Washington, +setting forth the information I had developed, and then on our office +copy I made a request that this case be reopened. This is a normal +procedure that we go through when we open cases, or reopen cases. + +The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Hosty, did the letter from your New York office say +what the nature of the contact with the Daily Worker was? + +Mr. HOSTY. It said he was on the mailing list, sir, of the Daily Worker. + +The CHAIRMAN. On the mailing list? + +Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir. + +The CHAIRMAN. Proceed. + +Mr. HOSTY. Then, like I say, I made a judgment that it would be best +not to interview Mrs. Oswald at this time until there was a certain +cooling off of their domestic difficulty, because it is not wise to +interview a person of that type under a strain. + +So I set it up that I would go back and recheck in 45 days. This was +not highly urgent at the time. We had waited a period of time, and it +wouldn't hurt to wait another 45 days. When I went back to check again +in May, the middle of May, I found out that they had moved from their +Neely Street address and had left no forwarding address. + +Mr. STERN. Stop there and let's go back and cover a few details. + +Mr. HOSTY. All right, sir. + +Mr. STERN. Your recommendation to reopen the case of Lee Harvey Oswald +was made at the end of March 1963? + +Mr. HOSTY. Right; I believe the letter would be dated March 31. + +Mr. STERN. Was your recommendation accepted? + +Mr. HOSTY. Yes; and it was reopened. + +Mr. STERN. With respect to the pending inactive investigation of Marina +Oswald, had any work been done previous to the time when you thought +about interviewing her? + +Mr. HOSTY. No, sir; in a pending inactive case it is really almost in +the same status as a closed case. We do nothing on it, and it was just +a waiting period of 6 months that we had set up. + +Mr. STERN. Had that case been an active case? + +Mr. HOSTY. No, sir; it never had been. It was opened as a pending +inactive case. + +Mr. STERN. So that no work had been done? + +Mr. HOSTY. No, sir. + +Mr. STERN. Until the point in time when you were considering the +possibility of interviewing Mrs. Oswald? + +Mr. HOSTY. The only work that had been done was the work which I did +in connection with the Lee Oswald case for Mr. Fain. I checked the +immigration records on Marina Oswald and got her background, just put +her background, her name, her description, her place of birth, and that +sort of thing in the file. + +Mr. STERN. What is the difference administratively between a "pending +inactive" and a "closed" case? + +Mr. HOSTY. In a pending inactive case, any information coming into the +office would be routed to the agent, it would not be put in the file +and be missed by the agent. + +Mr. STERN. Could Lee Harvey Oswald's case have been put in a pending +inactive status rather than a closed status in 1962? + +Mr. HOSTY. I wasn't involved in that. Mr. Fain was the one. + +Mr. STERN. But as far as administrative procedures are concerned? + +Mr. HOSTY. If they had so desired, I think they could have, yes. + +Mr. STERN. There was no policy or procedure? + +Mr. HOSTY. If there was some more work to be done, if they had decided +to, say, reinterview him at, say, in 6 months, they could have. + +Mr. STERN. But it would have taken something of that sort? + +Mr. HOSTY. Yes; it would have to be some more work to be done on the +case in the opinion of the agent. + +Mr. STERN. So that pending inactive is part of pending? + +Mr. HOSTY. It is sort of midway between. + +Mr. STERN. Only the work you have decided to do is more remote? + +Mr. HOSTY. Right. + +Mr. STERN. More in the future? + +Mr. HOSTY. Right. + +Mr. STERN. You say that you were considering interviewing Marina Oswald? + +Mr. HOSTY. Right. + +Mr. STERN. Did you know that she did not speak English? + +Mr. HOSTY. Yes; I knew that. In fact, I determined that when I did the +neighborhood check on the 3d of March. + +Mrs. Tobias told me that she didn't speak a word of English and +couldn't communicate with anybody except her husband who spoke Russian. + +Mr. STERN. I show you a report of four pages, marked "Report of James +P. Hosty, Jr." + +Mr. HOSTY. Right. + +Mr. STERN. Dated 9-10-63. + +Mr. HOSTY. Right. + +Mr. STERN. And marked for identification Commission Exhibit No. 829. + +(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 829 for +identification.) + +Mr. STERN. Can you identify that report for us? + +Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir; that is my report. + +Mr. STERN. Tell us how you came to prepare this report? + +Mr. HOSTY. Well, as I told you earlier, in May I found that they had +left, Marina and Lee Oswald had apparently left the Dallas area. + +In June, I believe it was the middle of June, we received a +communication from our New Orleans office advising that one Lee Oswald, +was apparently in New Orleans, and requested information on him. They +had had previous correspondence with the Dallas office in connection +with the Lee Oswald case, as an auxiliary office, and we are aware that +we did have a case on him. They asked if this could be the same man, +and I wrote back and told them that Lee Oswald had left the Dallas +area, and for them to attempt to verify the presence of Lee Oswald and +Marina Oswald in New Orleans. + +Mr. STERN. This was at what time, Mr. Hosty? + +Mr. HOSTY. This was June 17, I believe, they notified us, and by the +time I got the letter back to them within a week or 2 it would have +been the end of June, early part of July. I sent a request back that +they verify his presence in New Orleans. They then wrote back a letter +to me, within 2 or 3 weeks. It would have been in August when it came +back, that they had verified Oswald's presence in New Orleans, and that +he was working in New Orleans. + +Now, this meant under our procedure that since Lee Oswald and Marina +Oswald were now located in the New Orleans division, they would take +control of the case. + +Mr. STERN. Would you explain briefly for the Commission the terms +"Office of Origin" and "Auxiliary Office" and how you use those terms? + +Mr. HOSTY. Office of origin is the office covering the area of the +residence of the individual under investigation. This is the office +which controls the case. Now, an auxiliary office is any other office +which has investigation in the case and assists the office of origin in +this matter. + +New Orleans had earlier been an auxiliary office. Dallas had been the +office of origin. Now, the situation was reversed, because Lee Oswald +and Marina Oswald were now in New Orleans. This had been verified. + +Mr. STERN. Would you just summarize the relevant dates from March 1963 +through August 1963 in terms of your concern and what you found out +about his movements and your communications with the New Orleans office? + +Mr. HOSTY. All right. This would be March 4 I got the address in Dallas. + +March 11 I determined that they had moved from that one address to +another address in Dallas. + +March 14 I verified that address. I sent the communication to the +Bureau and requested the case be reopened on March 25. I rechecked in +the middle part of May as to if they were still at that address in +Dallas and determined that they were gone. + +On June 17 New Orleans contacted our office, and advised that they had +information that the Oswalds were in New Orleans. Early July I wrote to +New Orleans and requested that they verify this information and let me +know. Early August they did so verify it. + +Mr. STERN. If you will look at page 2 of the report we have marked for +identification No. 829---- + +Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. STERN. The last paragraph on that page relates--well, tell us what +information that refers to. + +Mr. HOSTY. It says, "On April 21, 1963, Dallas confidential informant +T-2 advised that Lee H. Oswald of Dallas, Tex., was in contact with the +Fair Play for Cuba Committee in New York City at which time he advised +that he passed out pamphlets for the Fair Play for Cuba Committee. +According to T-2, Oswald had a placard around his neck reading, 'Hands +Off Cuba, Viva Fidel.'" + +Mr. STERN. Did you attempt to verify that information? + +Mr. HOSTY. When I got it, it was approximately 6 or 7 weeks old, past +the date it allegedly took place, and we had received no information +to the effect that anyone had been in the downtown streets of Dallas +or anywhere in Dallas with a sign around their neck saying "Hands Off +Cuba, Viva Fidel." It appeared highly unlikely to me that such an +occurrence could have happened in Dallas without having been brought to +our attention. So by the time I got it, it was, you might say, stale +information and we did not attempt to verify it. + +Mr. STERN. When you record this as something that an informant advised +about on April 21, that doesn't mean he advised you or the Dallas +office on April 21? + +Mr. HOSTY. That is right. + +Mr. STERN. Did this information come from another part of the FBI? + +Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir; it came from the New York office of the FBI. They +were advised on the 21st of April. + +Mr. STERN. But the information didn't get to you until some time after? + +Mr. HOSTY. In June, I believe. + +Mr. STERN. Did you have any information apart from this that there was +an organization active in the Dallas area called, "The Fair Play for +Cuba Committee"? + +Mr. HOSTY. No, sir; we had no information of any organization by that +name. + +Mr. STERN. Had you at this time ever heard of such an organization? + +Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir; I had. + +Mr. STERN. In what connection? + +Mr. HOSTY. The New York office had advised all offices of the FBI +to be on the alert for the possible formation of chapters of this +organization which was headquartered in New York. + +Mr. STERN. Had you investigated the Dallas area in that connection? + +Mr. HOSTY. We had checked our sources, I had and other agents assigned +to the internal security division had checked sources. We were on the +alert for it. + +Mr. STERN. And you found what? + +Mr. HOSTY. We found no evidence that there was any such organization in +Dallas. + +Mr. STERN. Have you reviewed this report marked for identification No. +829, Mr. Hosty? + +Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir; I have. + +Mr. STERN. In connection with your preparation for testimony today? + +Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. STERN. Is there any change you would like to make in anything set +forth in it? + +Mr. HOSTY. No, sir; I wish it to stand as it reads. + +Mr. STERN. Is there anything you would like to add? + +Mr. HOSTY. No, sir. + +Mr. STERN. Amplify? + +Mr. HOSTY. No, sir. + +Mr. STERN. The letters "RUC" appear on the first page after the +synopsis. + +Mr. HOSTY. Right. + +Mr. STERN. What do they mean? + +Mr. HOSTY. That stands for "Referred Upon Completion" to the office of +origin. + +Mr. STERN. What does that indicate? + +Mr. HOSTY. This indicates that as an auxiliary office we have now +completed our investigation. + +Mr. STERN. When did Dallas become an auxiliary office in connection +with this case? + +Mr. HOSTY. It became an auxiliary office upon the submission of the +proper forms to the New Orleans office in which I designated them as +office of origin. They had verified the residence and employment of Lee +Oswald in their city, so upon sending this report and the form they +automatically became office of origin. + +Representative FORD. Who makes that determination, Mr. Hosty? + +Mr. HOSTY. Well, sir; actually it is made by the person who resides in +their area, sir. When they reside in their area and work in their area +they automatically become office of origin. + +The old office of origin sends a form to the new office and advises +them, "You are now office of origin." Of course the Bureau gets a copy +of that. + +Representative FORD. Do you actually move the files or do they get +duplicates? + +Mr. HOSTY. No, sir. What we do is we review our files and see what +communications in the file they do not have copies of. Then they are +then sent the copies of any communications they don't have, so that +they have a complete file. There is nothing that they don't have. + +Representative FORD. You don't actually transfer anything from your +office? + +Mr. HOSTY. No; the file is not transferred. Individual communications +would be if they were lacking a particular communication. Now, in +this case New Orleans had previous communications. They did have some +background. It was necessary for me to give them a couple of Mr. Fain's +reports that you people have looked at earlier. I had to send those +reports to them. They hadn't gotten them. + +Mr. STERN. I think it is appropriate to have this admitted at this +time, if we may, Mr. Chairman. + +The CHAIRMAN. The document that has been numbered 829 may be admitted. + +(The document heretofore marked Commission Exhibit No. 829 for +identification was received in evidence.) + +The CHAIRMAN. I would like to ask you, Mr. Hosty, about the information +that Mrs. Tobias gave you. I am reading from it now: "Mrs. Tobias +advised they had considerable difficulty with Mr. Oswald who +apparently drank to excess and beat his wife on numerous occasions. +They had numerous complaints from the other tenants due to Oswald's +drinking and beating his wife." + +Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir. + +The CHAIRMAN. Did you investigate that to see if that was true. + +Mr. HOSTY. No, sir; I took her word for it. There was no reason for +me to press it any farther. She had apparently looked into it and had +evicted them on the basis of her feelings. I was just reporting what +she had done. + +Mr. STERN. Had you had any part of the investigation of the case of Lee +Harvey Oswald before the time covered by the report? + +Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir; I had. + +On the 12th of July 1962 on request of former Agent John Fain, I +checked the records of the Immigration and Naturalization Service in +Dallas, and got the background information on Marina Oswald, the wife +of Lee Oswald. I incorporated it into a memorandum. + +Mr. STERN. I show you Commission Exhibit No. 824 which has previously +been admitted. Can you identify any part of that? + +Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir; starting in the details here, when it says "At +Dallas the following investigation was conducted by S. A. James P. +Hosty, Jr.," this is a direct copy of my memorandum which I prepared +for Agent Fain down to and including all of page 2. + +Mr. STERN. Have you reviewed that---- + +Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. STERN. In preparation for your testimony, and have you anything you +would like to correct or add? + +Mr. HOSTY. No, sir. + +Mr. STERN. After the New Orleans office became office of origin, Mr. +Hosty, did you have any further connection with the investigation of +Lee Harvey Oswald? + +Mr. HOSTY. No, sir; not until October of 1963. + +Mr. STERN. Not until October? No mention of his name as far as you are +concerned until then? + +Mr. HOSTY. No. + +Mr. STERN. I show you a two-page document which has been marked +Commission Exhibit No. 830 for identification. + +(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 830 for +identification.) + +Can you identify this document? + +Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir. This is an insert which I prepared for a larger +report. Notice on the top the initials "JPH." Those are my initials, +showing I prepared these two pages. + +Mr. STERN. Have you looked at the larger report from which this was +taken? + +Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. STERN. Does any part of that report relate to an investigation made +before November 22, 1963? + +Mr. HOSTY. No, sir; this is the only part that relates to investigation +prior to the 22d of November 1963. + +Mr. STERN. Why was it that this was not made the subject of a separate +report? + +Mr. HOSTY. I don't know. I didn't make that decision. + +Mr. STERN. This is something you filed covering---- + +Mr. HOSTY. I was told to do it this way, and I did it. + +Mr. STERN. You said before that you had no further connection with the +case of Oswald until October 1963. + +Mr. HOSTY. That is correct. + +Mr. STERN. Would you tell us in detail what your first contact was in +October? + +Mr. HOSTY. On October 3, 1963, I received a communication from our New +Orleans office advising that Lee Oswald and his wife Marina Oswald +had left the New Orleans area a short time before. According to the +communication, Marina Oswald, who was at that time 8 months pregnant, +had left New Orleans with her small child, 2-year-old child, in a +station wagon with a Texas license plate driven by a woman who could +speak the Russian language. Lee Oswald had remained behind and then +disappeared the next day. I was requested to attempt to locate Lee and +Marina Oswald. + +Mr. STERN. Did the request come to you personally? + +Mr. HOSTY. To the Dallas office, and the case was then reopened to me. +Dallas was an auxiliary office to New Orleans, and it was reopened. I +had previously handled the case. It was reopened and assigned to me. + +Mr. STERN. And by what office? + +Mr. HOSTY. By the Dallas office, reopened the case in Dallas. + +Mr. STERN. By the supervisor? + +Mr. HOSTY. Supervisor of our squad, yes. + +Mr. STERN. And what squad is that? + +Mr. HOSTY. The internal security squad. + +Mr. STERN. What did you do on October 3 and thereafter? + +Mr. HOSTY. Well, there wasn't too much to go on, just a woman driving +a station wagon with a Texas license plate. I went to the immigration +office to check to see if they had any information, tried to determine +if we had any persons around the area, I tried to think of anyone who +spoke Russian who had a station wagon and who was a friend of Marina +Oswald's. I went to Fort Worth and checked in his old neighborhood, +Lee and Marina's old neighborhood, attempted to locate Robert Oswald, +his brother, and determined that Robert Oswald had left the Fort Worth +area, had moved to Arkansas. + +I then sent out a lead to the Little Rock office which covered the area +of Malvern, Ark., where Robert Oswald was living, and requested that he +be contacted to see if he knew where Lee Oswald was. Then I continued +checking through the Dallas and Fort Worth area attempting to determine +if the Oswalds had returned to the Dallas or Fort Worth areas. + +Mr. STERN. Was this a usual or unusual amount of effort? + +Mr. HOSTY. I would say usual amount. I went to neighborhoods where I +knew they had been, checked with relatives who had previously been +cooperative, just the usual. + +Mr. STERN. Was there any notion of urgency in locating him that you got +from the New Orleans office? + +Mr. HOSTY. No particular note of urgency. Just to let me know that he +had left and be on the alert for him. + +Mr. STERN. Did they tell you anything about what he had been doing in +New Orleans? + +Mr. HOSTY. Not at that time. + +Mr. STERN. Did you have any information apart from what you knew before +he moved to New Orleans at that time? + +Mr. HOSTY. Well, I had learned before we had referred the case to New +Orleans that he had been engaged in this Fair Play for Cuba Committee +work down in New Orleans. They had told us that. We were aware that he +was in contact with the Fair Play for Cuba Committee in New York. That +was about all at this time. + +Mr. STERN. You learned this from the New Orleans office? + +Mr. HOSTY. Right. + +Mr. STERN. What next happened in your effort to locate him? + +Mr. HOSTY. I then received a communication on the 25th of October from +the New Orleans office advising me that another agency had determined +that Lee Oswald was in contact with the Soviet Embassy in Mexico City +in the early part of October 1963. + +Mr. STERN. Did they tell you anything else? + +Mr. HOSTY. No. Just very briefly that there had been a contact. + +Mr. STERN. Did this increase your effort to find him? + +Mr. HOSTY. Very much so, yes. I became curious then. Shortly +thereafter, on the 29th of October, I received another communication +from the New Orleans office advising that they had a change of address +for Lee and Marina Oswald to 2515 West Fifth Street, Irving, Tex. + +Mr. STERN. You received that information when? + +Mr. HOSTY. On the 29th of October. + +Mr. STERN. What did you do then? + +Mr. HOSTY. Well, I went to--I checked the Dallas crisscross. +Unfortunately Irving is a suburb outside of Dallas and people +residing in Irving are not covered in the city directory, so it is +very difficult to determine who resides at a given address in Irving. +I then went out on the same date, on the 29th of October 1963, to the +neighborhood of 2515 West Fifth Street, made inquiry at 2519 West Fifth +Street, made what we call a pretext interview, and talked to a woman, +whose name at that time I didn't know, but who I now know to be Mrs. +Dorothy Roberts. + +Mr. STERN. What did Mrs. Roberts tell you? + +Mr. HOSTY. Mrs. Roberts told me that the residence of 2515 West Fifth +Street was Mrs. Ruth Paine, the wife of Michael R. Paine. They were at +this time separated. Michael was not living at that address. + +She told me that Michael Paine was employed as engineer at the Bell +Helicopter Co. in Fort Worth, Tex., that Mrs. Paine was employed on +a part-time basis as a teacher of the Russian language at St. Marks +School for Boys in Dallas, Tex. + +She further told me that there was a Russian-born and Russian-speaking +woman residing with Mrs. Paine. She told me this woman did not speak +any English, and that she had just given birth the week before that to +a new baby and she had another small child. + +This woman further advised me that the wife of this Russian-born woman, +who was an American, had visited his wife there on one occasion, but +did not reside on West Fifth Street in Irving. + +Mr. STERN. You mean husband. + +Mr. HOSTY. Husband, yes; I am sorry. I mean the husband of the Russian, +that is right. + +Mr. STERN. Did you obtain any other information? + +Mr. HOSTY. No, not at that time. That is what I determined from Mrs. +Roberts at the time. + +Mr. STERN. What did you do next? + +Mr. HOSTY. On the 31st of October, I did a credit check on Michael and +Ruth Paine for the purpose of developing further background. + +This credit check showed that Michael Paine was employed at Bell +Helicopter as an engineer, showed no employment for Mrs. Paine, just +showed her as a housewife, showed they had resided in Irving area for a +number of years, and showed a good reputation. + +I then checked the criminal records of the Irving Police Department, +Dallas County Sheriff's Office. They had no record for either Ruth +or Michael Paine. Contacted the Bell Helicopter Co. and the security +officer at Bell Helicopter, Mr. Ted Schurman, advised me that Michael +Paine was employed by them as a research engineer and he held a +security clearance. + +I then went to St. Marks School in Dallas. I had known from previous +experience this school enjoyed a good reputation and I could approach +them safely. I talked to Mr. Edward T. Oviatt, the assistant headmaster +at St. Marks School. He told me that Mrs. Paine was a satisfactory +employee, loyal to the United States, and he considered her to be +a stable individual. He stated that Mrs. Paine was employed as a +part-time teacher of the Russian language at that school, and he also +advised that in a recent conversation with Mrs. Paine she had advised +him that she had a Russian-born woman living with her. + +This woman could not speak any English. She had just given birth to a +new baby, and she had another small child. The husband of this woman +had deserted her and Mrs. Paine felt sorry for her and had taken her in. + +Mr. Oviatt went on to explain that Mrs. Paine did this for two reasons. +She wanted to improve her Russian-speaking ability by having this +person who spoke only Russian in her household. Also, he stated that +she was by nature a very kindly individual, Quaker by background, +and this was the sort of thing that she would do to help a person in +distress. + +Mr. STERN. What was the purpose of all these inquiries into the +background of Mr. and Mrs. Paine? + +Mr. HOSTY. I wanted to make sure before I approached Mrs. Paine that +she was not involved in any way with Lee Oswald, in any type of +activities which were against the best interests of the United States. + +Mr. STERN. How do you mean before you approached Mrs. Paine? + +Mr. HOSTY. Well, it was my intention since we could not determine where +Lee Oswald was, that he was obviously not at her address, that the best +way to find out would be to ask Mrs. Paine. + +Mr. STERN. And you were doing all this in connection with the original +request? + +Mr. HOSTY. Right. + +Mr. STERN. From the New Orleans Office? + +Mr. HOSTY. Right. + +Mr. STERN. And that was? + +Mr. HOSTY. To locate Lee Oswald. + +Mr. STERN. What did you do next? + +Mr. HOSTY. The next day was the 1st of November. I worked in the Fort +Worth area in the morning and on my way back from the Fort Worth area +at approximately 2:30 p.m., I stopped at the residence of Mrs. Ruth +Paine, 2515 West Fifth Street, and identified myself as a special agent +of the FBI, and asked if I could talk to her. She was very cordial and +friendly, invited me into the house. At this time, she was the only +one in the living room. Her small children were taking their naps, and +apparently Marina Oswald and her children were, also napping. + +Mr. STERN. Excuse me, Mr. Hosty. I show you Commission Exhibit No. 430, +which is a floor plan of the Paine home. + +Mr. HOSTY. Right. + +Mr. STERN. Can you show the Commission from this where you went as you +came into the house and where you talked to Mrs. Paine? + +Mr. HOSTY. This is the front door, and we talked right here in the +living room. I believe the couch was right along here. I believe I sat +here and Mrs. Paine sat here, right here in the living room. We were +the only two in the living room, to start with. + +Mr. STERN. Did you conduct this interview alone? + +Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir; I was the only agent present. + +Mr. STERN. Is that usual or unusual? + +Mr. HOSTY. It is the usual custom when we are talking to a person +who is not a subject or a hostile witness, and Mrs. Paine was not +considered a hostile witness. + +Mr. STERN. Can you show us from Exhibit 430 approximately where you +parked your car that day if you recall? + +Mr. HOSTY. I don't recall specifically. I do recall that her station +wagon was parked in the driveway. There was another car in front of the +house, and it is my recollection that I parked, perhaps, here. + +There is another house right next door here which was vacant, and I +believe I parked in front of the vacant house right next door. + +Mr. STERN. Would you put your initials where you think you parked your +car, on that exhibit, please? It was about that close to the front of +the house, you believe? + +Mr. HOSTY. Yes; it was not directly in front of the house because +there was another car. Michael Paine, apparently, had two cars, and he +kept one of them over here and he used the other one where he was now +living. He left his other car here and there was a station wagon in the +driveway. + +Representative FORD. Is Mrs. Roberts' residence on---- + +Mr. HOSTY. Mrs. Roberts' residence is over here, sir. + +Representative FORD. On the other side? + +Mr. HOSTY. Right. This is a vacant house. + +Mr. STERN. The top of that page is north. + +Mr. HOSTY. Right. This would be 2519, 2515, and probably 2511 here. + +Mr. STERN. 2511, you are indicating the east side of that diagram? + +Mr. HOSTY. East, yes. It would go east. + +Mr. STERN. 2519 the west side? + +Mr. HOSTY. West side, that is correct. + +Mr. STERN. North being the top? + +Mr. HOSTY. Right. + +Mr. STERN. Now, tell us in detail of your interview with Mrs. Paine +starting from the time you rang the doorbell. + +Mr. HOSTY. All right. As I say, when I entered the house I immediately +identified myself. I showed her my credentials, identified myself as a +special agent of the FBI, and requested to talk to her. + +She invited me into the house. + +Mr. STERN. Did she seemed surprised at your visit? + +Mr. HOSTY. No, she didn't. She was quite friendly and invited me in, +said this is the first time she had ever met an FBI agent. Very cordial. + +As I say, it is my recollection I sat here on the couch and she sat +across the room from me. + +I then told her the purpose of my visit, that I was interested in +locating the whereabouts of Lee Oswald. + +She readily admitted that Mrs. Marina Oswald and Lee Oswald's two +children were staying with her. She said that Lee Oswald was living +somewhere in Dallas. She didn't know where. She said it was in the Oak +Cliff area but she didn't have his address. + +I asked her if she knew where he worked. After a moment's hesitation, +she told me that he worked at the Texas School Book Depository near the +downtown area of Dallas. She didn't have the exact address, and it is +my recollection that we went to the phone book and looked it up, found +it to be 411 Elm Street. + +Mr. STERN. You looked it up while you were there? + +Mr. HOSTY. Yes; that is my recollection that we looked it up in her +telephone book to show it at 411 Elm Street, Dallas, Tex. + +She told me at this time that she did not know where he was living, but +she thought she could find out and she would let me know. + +Mr. STERN. Did she tell you why she thought he was living alone in +Dallas at that time? + +Mr. HOSTY. Well, she said that she did not want him at her house; that +she was willing to take Marina Oswald and the two children, but she +didn't have room for him and she didn't want him at the house. She was +willing to let him visit his wife and family, but she did not want him +residing there. + +Mr. STERN. What did she say about his visits? + +Mr. HOSTY. She remarked that he came out there periodically to visit +his wife and children on weekends. + +Mr. STERN. Did she say when she expected his next visit might be? + +Mr. HOSTY. I don't recall her stating when she expected him, no. + +Mr. STERN. Did she say anything about the possibility of his coming +later that day? + +Mr. HOSTY. No, sir. + +Mr. STERN. You say the interview started at about 2:30? + +Mr. HOSTY. Approximately 2:30; yes, sir. + +Mr. STERN. About how long did it last? + +Mr. HOSTY. At the very most 20-25 minutes. + +Mr. STERN. Were you alone with Mrs. Paine throughout this period? + +Mr. HOSTY. No; towards the conclusion of the interview, Marina Oswald, +who had apparently been napping, entered the living room. + +Mr. STERN. Had you ever met Mrs. Oswald before? + +Mr. HOSTY. Never before, no. As I had learned previously, and as Mrs. +Paine had told me, she did not speak any English, so Mrs. Paine then +told her in the Russian language who I was. I was an agent with the FBI. + +I could tell from her eyes and her expression that she became quite +alarmed, quite upset. I had had previous experience with people who +come from Communist-controlled countries that they get excited when +they see the police. They must think that we are like the Gestapo or +something like that. + +She became quite alarmed, and, like I say, I knew that she just had a +baby the week before. So I didn't want to leave her in that state, so +rather than just walking out and leaving her and not saying anything to +her, I told Mrs. Paine to relate to her in the Russian language that I +was not there for the purpose of harming her, harassing her, and that +it wasn't the job of the FBI to harm people. It was our job to protect +people. + +Mrs. Paine relayed this information. + +I assume she relayed it correctly. I don't speak Russian. + +Representative FORD. What was the reaction, if any, on the part of +Marina following that comment by Mrs. Paine? + +Mr. HOSTY. The information I had her relay? She seemed to calm down a +little bit, and when I left she was smiling. I left her in a relaxed +mood. I didn't want to leave her alarmed and upset, a woman with a new +baby. It is not the thing to do. So she apparently was smiling, happy, +and she shook hands with me as I left, I wanted to leave her in a good +frame of mind. I then left. + +Mr. STERN. Did you address any questions to Marina Oswald through Mrs. +Paine? + +Mr. HOSTY. Not questions, no. I just relayed the information to her of +this nature I just gave. + +Mr. STERN. Anything else that you said---- + +Mr. HOSTY. No, sir; that is all I can recall. + +Mr. STERN. To be translated for Marina Oswald? + +Mr. HOSTY. No. + +Mr. STERN. Anything else about your interview with Mrs. Paine? + +Mr. HOSTY. Yes; after Mrs. Paine told me that she would try to find +out where Lee Oswald was living, I then gave her my name and telephone +number. I wrote it down on a piece of paper for her. I am fairly +certain I printed it so she would be able to read it all right. I +printed my name and wrote down my office telephone number, and handed +it to Mrs. Paine. + +Mr. STERN. Did you put anything else on this piece of paper? + +Mr. HOSTY. No, sir; that was all. + +Mr. STERN. Are you quite sure about your recollection of that, or are +you telling us on the basis of your ordinary experience? Is this what +you remember of the incident? + +Mr. HOSTY. This is what I remember of it; yes, sir. + +Mr. STERN. You don't remember putting anything on this paper other than +your name? + +Mr. HOSTY. My name and telephone number. + +Mr. STERN. Office telephone? + +Mr. HOSTY. Office telephone; right. + +Mr. STERN. And no other telephone number? + +Mr. HOSTY. No, sir. + +Mr. STERN. No address? + +Mr. HOSTY. No, sir. + +Mr. STERN. License number? + +Mr. HOSTY. No, sir. + +Mr. STERN. You are quite certain that you can recall now only those two +things? + +Mr. HOSTY. Yes; I do this as a standard procedure. I do this all the +time. I will write my name out if a person says they want to contact +me. I will give them my name and telephone number, write it on a piece +of paper and give it to them. + +Representative FORD. Did you write on notepaper you had or paper +provided by Mrs. Paine, or what? + +Mr. HOSTY. It was my recollection it was on my paper. I took a piece of +paper off, tore it in half, printed my name and telephone number on it +that I gave to her. + +Mr. STERN. Do you have cards? + +Mr. HOSTY. No, sir; we don't have cards. We are not allowed to carry +cards. + +Mr. STERN. When Mrs. Paine told you that Lee Harvey Oswald was working +at the School Book Depository, did that mean anything to you? Did you +remember the building? + +Mr. HOSTY. No, sir; I knew of the building in the outskirts of the +downtown area. That is about all. I looked up the address, and I +recognized the address, but it meant nothing to me. + +Mr. STERN. Is there anything else at all that you can recall being said +on November 1? + +Mr. HOSTY. As I said earlier, I think I should bring this in, that Mrs. +Paine was a little bit reluctant to give me his place of employment at +first. She said that Lee Oswald had alleged that the FBI had had him +fired from every job he ever had. I told her this was not true, that I +had never had anyone fired from any job nor did I know of any other FBI +agents that had ever done this. + +I reassured her that I wanted to know his place of employment for the +purpose of determining whether or not he was employed in a sensitive +industry, and when I found out that he was working in a warehouse as a +laborer, I realized this was not a sensitive industry. + +Mr. STERN. You were acting for the New Orleans office at this time? + +Mr. HOSTY. At this time; yes, sir. + +Mr. STERN. In trying to locate him? + +Mr. HOSTY. Right. + +Mr. STERN. Had they asked you to try to determine what kind of work he +was doing and whether he might be in a sensitive position? + +Mr. HOSTY. Well, this is automatically considered; yes. They didn't +have to ask me. I knew I was to do that. + +Mr. DULLES. Did you clear this with the Dallas or Fort Worth office? +How do you work out that liaison? + +Mr. HOSTY. How do you mean, sir? + +Mr. DULLES. I mean with the FBI. At this time this was the territory, I +assume, of Dallas or Fort Worth. + +Mr. HOSTY. Right. Irving, Tex., is in the Dallas territory; yes, sir. + +Mr. DULLES. The Dallas territory? + +Mr. HOSTY. Right. + +Mr. DULLES. Did you clear or notify the Dallas office either before or +after? + +Mr. HOSTY. You mean after I determined this? + +Mr. DULLES. Yes. + +Mr. HOSTY. Oh, yes, sir. This occurred on the 1st. This was a Friday. I +returned to the Dallas office. I covered a couple of other leads on the +way back. I got in shortly after 5 o'clock and all our stenos had gone +home. This information has to go registered mail, and it could not go +then until Monday morning. + +Monday morning--shall I continue? + +Mr. STERN. Yes. + +Mr. HOSTY. On Monday morning, I made a pretext telephone call to the +Texas School Book Depository. I called up and asked for the personnel +department, asked if a Lee Oswald was employed there. They said yes, +he was. I said what address does he show? They said 2515 West Fifth +Street, Irving, Tex., which I knew not to be his correct address. + +I then sent a communication, airmail communication to the New Orleans +office advising them--and to the headquarters of the FBI advising +them--and then instructing the New Orleans office to make the Dallas +office the office of origin. We were now assuming control, because he +had now been verified in our division. + +Representative FORD. When you say you made several other checks on the +way to the office, did this involve---- + +Mr. HOSTY. Not in this case; other cases. I run anywhere from 25 to 40 +cases any one time. I have to work them all, fit them in as I go. + +Representative FORD. These other checks did not involve this case? + +Mr. HOSTY. No; other cases I was working on. + +Mr. STERN. Mr. Hosty, at your interview on November 1 with Mrs. Paine, +do you recall whether you asked her whether there was any telephone +number that she knew of where Lee Harvey Oswald could be reached? + +Mr. HOSTY. No, sir; I didn't ask her about a telephone number; no, sir. + +Mr. STERN. And she didn't tell you? + +Mr. HOSTY. She didn't volunteer. She told me she did not know where he +lived. + +Mr. STERN. Why don't you continue with the chronological report. + +Mr. HOSTY. As I say, then I forwarded this airmail communication. + +Mr. McCLOY. May I ask at this point, did she indicate whether there +were any belongings of Lee Oswald in the house? + +Mr. HOSTY. She did not indicate, but, of course, she did tell me his +wife and children were there, and I assumed that their personal +effects would be there. We didn't go into that. + +Mr. McCLOY. You made no search of the house? + +Mr. HOSTY. No, sir; that would have been illegal. I couldn't have done +it without his consent. There was no attempt to do that. + +Mr. STERN. Did you have any thought of interviewing Marina Oswald at +the time she came into Mrs. Paine's living room in connection with the +investigation of Marina Oswald that you had started out thinking about +in March? + +Mr. HOSTY. Yes; I could have interviewed her here, but I thought at the +time she was under a little emotional stress, this was maybe not a good +time. Also, as I said before, we have a requirement to have two agents +present when a subject is interviewed. I was alone. And, also, I wanted +to get the New Orleans office to check their files to see if there was +anything that I didn't have. For all I knew, they could have already +interviewed her. I didn't know this. So before I would proceed with +that, I wanted to make sure I had all the records, another agent, and +at a better time where I could talk in more detail with Mrs. Oswald. + +Then on the 5th of November---- + +Mr. STERN. Have you told us everything that elapsed--that occurred +between November 1 and November 5? + +Mr. HOSTY. Yes. Then on the 5th of November, I was on my way to the +Fort Worth area, and stopped at Mrs. Paine's very briefly. + +Mr. STERN. How did that happen to come about? + +Mr. HOSTY. Well, I was on my way to Fort Worth, and I did not have his +residence. I thought I would stop by. Mrs. Paine told me she would +attempt to locate where he was living. It was not too much out of my +way, so I just drove over to Mrs. Paine's. I had another agent with me +that day. + +Mr. STERN. Who was that? + +Mr. HOSTY. Agent Gary S. Wilson. Agent Wilson was a brand new agent out +of training school. And it is the custom to assign a new agent to work +with an older agent for a period of 6 weeks. They work with different +agents every day to observe what they are doing. This is the only +reason he was with me, the only reason I had another man. + +We went to the front porch. I rang the bell, talked to Mrs. Paine, at +which time she advised me that Lee Oswald had been out to visit her, +visit his wife, at her house over the weekend, but she had still not +determined where he was living in Dallas, and she also made the remark +that she considered him to be a very illogical person, that he had told +her that weekend that he was a Trotskyite Communist. Since she did not +have his address, I thanked her and left. + +Mr. STERN. Did she indicate how she felt about this description of +Trotskyite Communist that he pinned on himself? + +Mr. HOSTY. Well, she thought he was rather illogical, is the way she +put it. She was a little more amused than anything else. She thought he +was illogical, as I say, was the term she used. + +Mr. STERN. Was Marina Oswald present at all? + +Mr. HOSTY. I didn't see her. She was probably in the house, but I +didn't see her. I didn't go in the house. I just went in the front door. + +Mr. STERN. How long do you think it was? + +Mr. HOSTY. Not more than 1 or 2 minutes. Then I got in the car and left. + +Mr. STERN. Where was your car parked at that time? + +Mr. HOSTY. I believe in the same place, because here, again, this +second car of Michael Paine's was still in front of the Paine house, +and Mrs. Paine's station wagon was in the driveway. So I am fairly sure +I parked here at the same spot. + +Mr. STERN. And you are indicating the spot on Exhibit 430 where you +initialed? + +Mr. HOSTY. Right, where I parked on the first of November, to the best +of my recollection that is where I parked. + +Representative FORD. Did Agent Wilson accompany you to the door? + +Mr. HOSTY. Yes; he walked up. + +Representative FORD. And heard the conversation? + +Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir; he did. + +Mr. STERN. Did you report anything about this conversation to the New +Orleans office? + +Mr. HOSTY. No; because there was nothing new to report. I knew I was to +become the office of origin. There would be a report which I would be +preparing and I would incorporate it in my report. There was nothing +new that they didn't already know that would aid them. + +Mr. STERN. Is there anything else about this interview on November 5 +that you can tell us? + +Mr. HOSTY. No, sir; that is about all. + +Representative FORD. Was this comment by Mrs. Paine that Oswald had +said he was a Trotskyite---- + +Mr. HOSTY. Trotskyite Communist was the word she used; yes, sir. + +Representative FORD. Was that new as far as your knowledge of your file +was concerned? + +Mr. HOSTY. Well, he was a self-admitted Marxist. He had stated that +earlier. The New Orleans office had reported that. He had been on +television and made that statement in New Orleans, so this appeared to +be in keeping with his character. + +Representative FORD. The use of the word Trotskyite didn't add anything +to the previous Marxist identification? + +Mr. HOSTY. Well, of course, that is a particular type of Marxism, +Trotskyite, the followers of Leon Trotsky's particular deviation, but +this did show that he was not a member of the Communist Party USA, +follower of the Leninist-Stalinist-Khrushchev movement, but would be an +independent Marxist would be what it would show me, not tied in with +the regular Communist Party USA. + +Representative FORD. Is there anything particularly identifiable with +the Trotskyite element that might alert you to anything? + +Mr. HOSTY. Well, yes. The Socialist Workers Party is the Trotskyite +Party in the United States, and they are supposedly the key element in +the Fair Play for Cuba Committee, or were the key element in the Fair +Play for Cuba Committee. So this would tie in with the fact that he +was a member of the Fair Play for Cuba Committee, and, therefore, he +claimed to be a Trotskyite--this would follow. + +Mr. McCLOY. Do you associate with Trotskyite Communists any greater +disposition to acts of violence than the normal Communist? + +Mr. HOSTY. No, sir; no more than the others. + +Mr. McCLOY. No doctrine of policy by assassination? + +Mr. HOSTY. No, sir. + +Mr. STERN. Have you reviewed, Mr. Hosty, the document that has been +marked No. 830 for identification preliminary to your testimony today? + +Mr. HOSTY. Oh, yes; this one you gave me earlier; yes, sir. + +Mr. DULLES. I don't find a date on that. Maybe there is one there. + +Mr. HOSTY. This is an insert, sir. The date of the various information +will appear at the head of each paragraph. + +Mr. DULLES. I see. But the date of preparation is not---- + +Mr. HOSTY. The date of preparation would be some time after the 22d of +November. + +Representative FORD. What do those identification numbers at the top in +the left-hand corner mean? + +Mr. HOSTY. That is our Dallas office file number 105-1716. + +Representative FORD. Does that appear on the other documents? + +Mr. HOSTY. Wait a minute; this relates to a control file. I believe +that is the control file on Mrs. Paine, Mrs. Paine's file number. + +Mr. DULLES. I wonder if I could just interrupt. + +This is on the record. I am not quite clear, maybe because I came in +late. Are you from the Dallas or New Orleans office? + +Mr. HOSTY. I am from the Dallas division. + +Mr. DULLES. From the Dallas division? + +Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir. + +The man right before me was from the New Orleans division. I am from +the Dallas division. + +Mr. DULLES. You are from the Dallas division? + +Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir. + +Representative FORD. May I pursue this just a minute. These +identification numbers at the top in the upper left--as I understand it +now, you are saying related to Mrs. Paine's file? + +Mr. HOSTY. Right. + +Representative FORD. Now, would this, even though it was from Mrs. +Paine's file, have been in either Marina or Lee Harvey Oswald's file or +both? + +Mr. HOSTY. This did appear in the report on Lee Harvey Oswald. That was +the report of December 2, I believe was the date. That was the first +report. You probably have that overall report, don't you? + +(Discussion off the record.) + +Representative FORD. Did this material which was in Mrs. Paine's +file---- + +Mr. HOSTY. Right. + +Representative FORD. Appear in either Marina or Lee Harvey Oswald's +file prior to the assassination? + +Mr. HOSTY. Let me see. Part of it would have, this paragraph on page +11, this November 1, Mrs. Ruth Paine was interviewed. This appeared in +the communication I sent out to the New Orleans office advising them +where he was employed. + +Mr. DULLES. When was that sent? + +Mr. HOSTY. The 4th of November, sir. The rest of it was in note form. I +hadn't reduced it to writing yet. + +Representative FORD. I am still not clear what part was in Mrs. Paine's +file and what part was in Marina's file and what part was in Lee Harvey +Oswald's file prior to November 22. + +Mr. HOSTY. Prior to November 22 just--there was no file for Mrs. Paine +prior to November 22. + +Representative FORD. So this didn't appear in her file? + +Mr. HOSTY. No. + +Representative FORD. Until subsequent to---- + +Mr. HOSTY. Right. + +Representative FORD. The assassination? + +Mr. HOSTY. There was no file for Mrs. Paine until after the +assassination. + +Representative FORD. Then what part appeared in Marina's file or Lee +Harvey's file prior to November 22? + +Mr. HOSTY. Just the second paragraph of this page 11 or the second page. + +Mr. DULLES. Would this have constituted a reopening of the Lee Harvey +Oswald file, because I think we had testimony this morning that the +file had been closed. + +Mr. HOSTY. This would constitute having the New Orleans office change +origin to Dallas. At this time the file on Lee Oswald was open. We were +open as an auxiliary office. + +Mr. DULLES. In---- + +Mr. HOSTY. In Dallas. + +Mr. DULLES. In Dallas? + +Mr. HOSTY. Right, and this communication to New Orleans was a request +that we be made origin. + +Mr. STERN. I wonder if I might summarize this? + +Mr. DULLES. It is not clear to me. + +Mr. HOSTY. You missed a lot of this. + +Mr. STERN. The file was closed, sir, until March of 1963 when Mr. Hosty +decided it should be reopened on the basis of two items of information, +one of them the fact that Lee Harvey Oswald was listed as a subscriber +to the Worker newspaper. + +Mr. DULLES. This is the Dallas file you are now talking of? + +Mr. STERN. Dallas. The case was closed in the Dallas office. He +reopened it in the Dallas office. He subsequently found that Oswald had +moved, apparently permanently, to New Orleans, and had the file and the +case administratively shifted as far as his responsibility, as far as +his primary responsibility, to the New Orleans office. + +Mr. DULLES. Does that mean the papers were also shifted? + +Mr. HOSTY. No, sir; just those papers which they lacked. I reviewed +our file. I could tell what communications they had and which +communications they didn't. I then gave them all communications which I +was not certain that they had. + +Mr. DULLES. But the other communications remained in the Dallas file? + +Mr. HOSTY. Right. + +Mr. DULLES. But the Dallas file, then, was not, in a sense, reactivated +since the action had been transferred to New Orleans, is that correct? + +Mr. HOSTY. To New Orleans; right. Then in October the case was shifted +back to Dallas again. + +Mr. DULLES. At what time? + +Mr. HOSTY. Well, actually, November 4 would be our request to have the +case transferred back to Dallas office of origin. + +Mr. STERN. I think you ought to make clear, Mr. Hosty, to Mr. Dulles, +that early in October you started doing something for the New Orleans +office at their request. + +Mr. HOSTY. Yes. + +Mr. STERN. New Orleans found that they couldn't locate Lee Harvey +Oswald in New Orleans. + +Mr. DULLES. He had left in the meantime? + +Mr. HOSTY. Right. + +Mr. STERN. Yes; from their leads he seemed to have gone back into the +Dallas area, and they asked the Dallas office to see if they could +locate him. Mr. Hosty was doing this work at the end of October and the +beginning of November when he ran these interviews. Just to complete +that, Mr. Hosty, you expected, did you not, that the case would be +reassigned? + +Mr. HOSTY. Oh, yes. + +Mr. STERN. To the Dallas office? + +Mr. HOSTY. Oh, yes. This was tantamount to requesting it be shifted to +us, yes, when I sent this communication. + +Mr. STERN. And you were beginning to think in terms of the case being +your problem again? + +Mr. HOSTY. Right. + +Mr. STERN. Even though formally at the time you were only---- + +Mr. HOSTY. Auxiliary office. + +Mr. STERN. Operating on the request of the New Orleans office to try to +locate him, is that correct? + +Mr. HOSTY. That is correct. + +Mr. McCLOY. This has all been previously testified to? + +Mr. DULLES. I am sorry to have missed that. + +Mr. HOSTY. That is all right, Mr. Dulles, that is entirely all right. + +Mr. DULLES. Just one question. Are cases of this kind administratively +transferred by agreement between two offices, or does that have to go +up to Washington? + +Mr. HOSTY. Washington always gets a copy of these communications. They +know what we are doing. Actually the original is sent to Washington, +and a carbon is sent to the other field office. + +Mr. DULLES. But you can transfer it directly from one office to another? + +Mr. HOSTY. Right. + +Mr. DULLES. And just notify Washington as to the possibility of its +being transferred? + +Mr. HOSTY. Right; because he is now residing and employed in our +division. There is no more needs to be done. + +Mr. DULLES. I am clear. Thank you very much. + +Mr. STERN. I think perhaps we can just complete the line of inquiry +started by Congressman Ford. Do your records or notes show when you +first reduced to writing your notes on the interviews that began on +October 29 and the last one of which occurred on November 5? + +Mr. HOSTY. I can only say that it would have been sometime between the +22d of November and the 2d of December, because it went out in a report +on the 2d of December. + +Mr. STERN. Until then they were in the form of---- + +Mr. HOSTY. Notes. + +Mr. STERN. Raw notes? + +Mr. HOSTY. Right. + +Mr. STERN. Do you take shorthand or any other form of speedwriting? + +Mr. HOSTY. No. + +Mr. STERN. Have you preserved the notes? + +Mr. HOSTY. I don't have them with me, no; because once it is reduced to +writing then we destroy the notes. That is the procedure. + +Mr. STERN. You say you don't have them with you. Did you preserve these +notes? + +Mr. HOSTY. No; they were thrown away. + +Mr. STERN. And this is the only record now that you have---- + +Mr. HOSTY. Right. + +Mr. STERN. Of these activities? + +Mr. McCLOY. Do you have any record in your office as to when that was +put into type? Does your secretary have it? + +Mr. HOSTY. They might, sir. I think they might. I couldn't say for sure. + +Mr. McCLOY. I think you might look that up and see if you have any +record, and give it to us. + +Mr. HOSTY. All right, sir. + +Mr. STERN. But you are clear that it occurred after the assassination? + +Mr. HOSTY. Oh, yes, sir; positive. + +Mr. STERN. Is that usual, that you would---- + +Mr. HOSTY. Something of this nature, yes, sir; no reason to reduce it +to writing right away. + +Mr. STERN. It is true, isn't it, that some of this information had +already been---- + +Mr. HOSTY. Transmitted in letter form to New Orleans; right. + +Mr. DULLES. Prior to the assassination? + +Mr. HOSTY. Prior to the assassination; yes, sir. + +Representative FORD. That part on the second page? + +Mr. HOSTY. Right; this second paragraph starting, "On November 1, 1963, +Mrs. Ruth Paine"---- + +Representative FORD. What did you do, dictate that to a stenographer? + +Mr. HOSTY. Right. + +Representative FORD. And she typed it and it was sent officially? + +Mr. HOSTY. On the 4th of November, right, airmail letter to New Orleans. + +Mr. STERN. Would that be sent to your headquarters in Washington? + +Mr. HOSTY. Also. Excuse me, the original goes to headquarters in +Washington, a copy goes to New Orleans. It is addressed to the +headquarters. + +Mr. STERN. But the only information sent was the information in that +paragraph beginning "On November 1, 1963." + +Mr. McCLOY. But you had your original notes with you? + +Mr. HOSTY. Right. + +Mr. McCLOY. And still intact? + +Mr. HOSTY. Right. + +Mr. McCLOY. At the time you put this---- + +Mr. HOSTY. Because I knew I was going to get this into a report. The +next report was written, and I would put it in a report form and +destroy the notes. + +Mr. DULLES. Do we have a copy of that letter of November 4? + +Mr. HOSTY. I don't know. + +Mr. DULLES. That you sent to headquarters and to New Orleans? + +(Discussion off the record.) + +Mr. STERN. You tell us you have reviewed these two pages? + +Mr. HOSTY. Yes. + +Mr. STERN. Is there anything you would like to add? + +Mr. HOSTY. No, sir. + +Mr. STERN. Anything you would like to correct? + +Mr. HOSTY. No, sir. + +Mr. STERN. This accurately states the interviews that you covered. May +this be admitted in the record? + +The CHAIRMAN. It may be admitted, No. 830. + +(The document marked Commission Exhibit No. 830 for identification was +received in evidence.) + +Representative FORD. May I ask one question here? + +Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir. + +Representative FORD. Why in these notes that are now Commission Exhibit +830 didn't you mention the fact that Mrs. Paine had said that Oswald +was a Trotskyite Marxist? + +Mr. HOSTY. No; that is set forth down here, sir. + +Representative FORD. Yes; right. + +Mr. HOSTY. In this second to the last paragraph, the last line. + +Mr. McCLOY. May I ask you this, Mr. Hosty. In your contacts with Mrs. +Paine, did you get the impression that she was cooperative throughout? + +Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir; yes, sir. + +Mr. McCLOY. Nothing that she said seemed to be inconsistent with any +facts that you knew? + +Mr. HOSTY. No. + +Senator COOPER. May I ask a question? I believe you said that all the +papers that you had respecting Lee Harvey Oswald were supplied to the +office at New Orleans. + +Mr. HOSTY. At the time they were made origin; yes, sir. In the summer +of 1963, that is correct, all the files. + +Senator COOPER. At the time that he was engaged in---- + +Mr. HOSTY. In the Fair Play for Cuba work; yes, sir. + +Senator COOPER. What do you call it--Fair Play for Cuba? + +Mr. HOSTY. Fair Play for Cuba; yes, sir. + +Senator COOPER. Now Mr. Fain testified that he had interviewed Oswald I +think in 19---- + +Mr. HOSTY. 1962. + +Senator COOPER. 1962. + +Mr. HOSTY. That is correct. + +Senator COOPER. The year before. Mr. Quigley testified that Oswald told +him that he had married a Russian girl whose maiden name was Prossa, +and also in that file there was another statement in which Oswald had +said that he had been married, that he had married a girl in Fort +Worth. Now were all those papers available to the office in New Orleans? + +Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir. + +Senator COOPER. I suppose this would be a question of Mr. Quigley, +really, but if all those factors were known, it would appear that the +facts that Mr. Fain had secured, which showed the defection and his +marriage in Russia, and the fact that he had told someone else he was +married in Texas, that there would have been some further investigation +of it in New Orleans. + +Mr. HOSTY. Well, this would be something that Mr. Quigley would have to +answer. + +Mr. McCLOY. You had a record of inconsistent statements in there. + +Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. STERN. Continuing that line, Mr. Hosty, do you recognize Commission +Exhibit 826, I now hand you? + +Mr. HOSTY. Yes. + +Mr. STERN. That is the report of---- + +Mr. HOSTY. Milton R. Kaack. + +Mr. STERN. And it is dated? + +Mr. HOSTY. October 31, 1963. I received it on November 1. + +Mr. DULLES. Do you recall whether that inconsistent statement, that +inconsistency was picked up in New Orleans at this time, in the New +Orleans office? + +Mr. HOSTY. I don't; no, sir. You mean about---- + +Mr. DULLES. About marriage. + +Mr. HOSTY. About marriage? I picked it up when I saw it. + +Mr. DULLES. At what time was that? + +Mr. HOSTY. November 1 when we got the report. + +Mr. STERN. When you reviewed Mr. Kaack's report? + +Mr. HOSTY. Right. + +Mr. STERN. You were aware when you read that report that he had---- + +Mr. HOSTY. Lied; or was inconsistent. + +Mr. STERN. He had said in New Orleans that he had been married in Fort +Worth, married a girl named Prossa, that he had originally told the New +Orleans police that he had been born in Cuba. + +Mr. HOSTY. Yes. + +Mr. STERN. You were aware of all these inconsistencies? + +Mr. HOSTY. Right. + +Mr. STERN. What did these suggest to you in view of what you knew about +Oswald? + +Mr. HOSTY. I knew that he was not telling the truth in his interview +in New Orleans, because I had previously checked the background of his +wife and himself, and I knew that she was born in Russia and her name +was not Prossa. They were not married in Fort Worth, so I knew he was +not telling the truth. + +Mr. STERN. You knew that on November 1. + +Mr. HOSTY. Right. + +Mr. STERN. And at what time did you know of Oswald's trip to Mexico +City and his apparent appearance there at the Russian Embassy? + +Mr. HOSTY. The 25th of October. + +Mr. STERN. Had you received any---- + +Mr. McCLOY. Let's get these years right. + +Mr. HOSTY. The 25th of October 1963. + +Mr. STERN. Had you received any information about any other contacts +with Russian officials by Lee Harvey Oswald? + +Mr. HOSTY. Not at that time. + +Mr. STERN. What other information did you have at anytime about that? + +Mr. HOSTY. On November 22, after the assassination of President +Kennedy, I was advised that our Washington field office of the FBI had +determined that he, Lee Oswald, had been in contact with the Soviet +Embassy in Washington, D.C. I learned that after the assassination. + +Mr. STERN. After the assassination? + +Mr. HOSTY. Right, sir. + +Mr. STERN. Putting that aside for the moment, what was your evaluation +of Lee Harvey Oswald based on the work that you had done and the +reports that you had made, the information you gathered early in +November? + +Mr. HOSTY. Well, there were many questions to be resolved. I was quite +interested in determining the nature of his contact with the Soviet +Embassy in Mexico City. I had not resolved that on the 22d of November. +We were still waiting to resolve that. Prior to that, I mean that would +be the only thing---- + +Mr. STERN. What had you planned to do after November 5 about this case? + +Mr. HOSTY. Well, as I had previously stated, I have between 25 and +40 cases assigned to me at any one time. I had other matters to take +care of. I had now established that Lee Oswald was not employed in +a sensitive industry. I can now afford to wait until New Orleans +forwarded the necessary papers to me to show me I now had all the +information. It was then my plan to interview Marina Oswald in detail +concerning both herself and her husband's background. + +Mr. STERN. Had you planned any steps beyond that point? + +Mr. HOSTY. No. I would have to wait until I had talked to Marina to see +what I could determine, and from there I could make my plans. + +Mr. STERN. Did you take any action on this case between November 5 and +November 22? + +Mr. HOSTY. No, sir. + +Mr. STERN. I think we can then turn to the events of November 22, and +have you tell us what transpired that day, beginning with the morning. + +Mr. HOSTY. All right. The first order of business from 8:15 to +9 o'clock the special agent in charge held the regular biweekly +conference. Now we held a conference in our office every other Friday +morning. It so happened that this was the Friday morning which we would +hold this conference, at which time the agent in charge would bring +various items to our attention. Among the items he brought to our +attention was the fact that President Kennedy would be in Dallas on +that date. + +Mr. DULLES. Who was the special agent in charge? + +Mr. HOSTY. Gordon Shanklin. Gordon L. Shanklin. + +Representative FORD. How many others besides yourself were under his +jurisdiction? + +Mr. HOSTY. About 75 agents. + +Representative FORD. Seventy-five? + +Mr. HOSTY. Yes. Now only the ones at headquarters city in Dallas were +present. That would be about 40 of the agents were present at this +conference. + +Mr. Shanklin advised us, among other things, that in view of the +President's visit to Dallas, that if anyone had any indication of any +possibility of any acts of violence or any demonstrations against the +President, or Vice President, to immediately notify the Secret Service +and confirm it in writing. He had made the same statement about a week +prior at another special conference which we had held. I don't recall +the exact date. It was about a week prior. + +Mr. STERN. Did you know that there was going to be a motorcade on +November 22? + +Mr. HOSTY. I found out about 9 p.m. the night before that there was to +be a motorcade in downtown Dallas. I read it in the newspaper. That was +the first time I knew of it. + +Mr. STERN. Did you know that the motorcade would pass the School Book +Depository Building? + +Mr. HOSTY. No, sir. + +Mr. STERN. Did you know the route of the motorcade? + +Mr. HOSTY. No, sir. + +Mr. DULLES. Had there been any contact between you or the Dallas office +with the Secret Service on this point? + +Mr. HOSTY. On the motorcade route, sir? + +Mr. DULLES. Yes. + +Mr. HOSTY. No. + +Mr. DULLES. Had not been? + +Mr. HOSTY. No. + +Mr. STERN. The newspaper stories did not as far as you can recall tell +what the motorcade route would be? + +Mr. HOSTY. Yes; they did. There was a description of the motorcade +route, but as I say, I didn't bother to read it in detail. I noticed +that it was coming up Main Street. That was the only thing I was +interested in, where maybe I could watch it if I had a chance. + +Mr. STERN. So that the fact that Lee Harvey Oswald was working in the +Texas School Book Depository meant nothing---- + +Mr. HOSTY. No. + +Mr. STERN. In connection with the motorcade route? + +Mr. HOSTY. No. + +Mr. STERN. Did you think of him at all in connection with the +President's trip? + +Mr. HOSTY. No, sir. + +Representative FORD. Did you have any others among the cases that +were assigned to you that came to your attention in reference to the +President's visit? + +Mr. HOSTY. I did turn over one item of information to the Secret +Service on the 21st; yes, sir. I did bring some matters to their +attention. + +There were some scurrilous pamphlets circulated around Dallas on the +21st of November. You may have seen them. It was a poster of President +Kennedy with a front and a profile view saying, "Wanted for Treason." +I took those pamphlets over to the Secret Service office the morning +of the 21st. Then I assisted another agent in our division in giving +the Secret Service some information on an individual in Denton, Tex., +who had made some remarks about the President, and another member of my +squad had also given some information to the Secret Service the evening +of the 21st about the possibility of a demonstration at the Trade Mart +against President Kennedy, some picketing. + +Representative FORD. Do you recall to whom you gave this information? + +Mr. HOSTY. The one piece of information I gave, I gave to an Agent +Warner of the Secret Service. + +Representative FORD. That was the information about what? + +Mr. HOSTY. The pamphlets, the "Wanted for Treason" pamphlets. + +Representative FORD. Those are the only documents or contacts you +personally had? + +Mr. HOSTY. That I personally had, that is correct. + +The CHAIRMAN. Was it a pamphlet or a dodger? + +Mr. HOSTY. It was, I guess you would call it a dodger. + +The CHAIRMAN. Single sheet? + +Mr. HOSTY. Single sheet; yes, sir. + +The CHAIRMAN. A single sheet, was it not? + +Mr. HOSTY. Yes. + +The CHAIRMAN. Did you ever ascertain who put that out? + +Mr. HOSTY. No, sir; I never did. + +The CHAIRMAN. Did you ever investigate it? + +Mr. HOSTY. I didn't. + +The CHAIRMAN. Do you know whether your office did? + +Mr. HOSTY. I am not sure; no, sir. + +Mr. STERN. What next occurred on the 22d, Mr. Hosty? + +Mr. HOSTY. All right. After the conference that lasted until about 9 +a.m., I then left the office and joined an Army Intelligence agent, +and an agent of the Alcohol Tax Unit of the Treasury Department. We +had a conference concerning a case not related to Lee Oswald. This +conference lasted most of the morning until about 11:45. At 11:45 the +Army Intelligence agent and myself left, and walked over towards Main +Street. The motorcade was scheduled to pass down Main Street near our +office at approximately noon. I was now on my lunch hour, so I stood +and watched the motorcade go by at the corner of Field and Main Street +in Dallas. + +After the President passed by, I then went across the street, started +eating lunch. While I was eating my lunch, the waitress came up and +told me she had just heard a radio report that the President and the +Vice President had both been shot. I immediately stopped my lunch. + +Mr. STERN. The President and the Vice President? + +Mr. HOSTY. That was the earliest report, that the Vice President +had been shot too. These were the rumors. I then of course left the +lunchroom immediately and headed back for the office, which is only a +block away. I got back to the office. + +One of the supervisors told me to get a radio car and get out on the +street right away and I would get further instructions. I did that. I +got in the car and started out. I gave the signal that I was on the air +and I was told to proceed towards Parkland Hospital. Just as I got to +Parkland Hospital I got a call to return to the office immediately. + +Mr. STERN. Do you know why you were sent to Parkland Hospital? + +Mr. HOSTY. No. We were just told they wanted four cars to proceed to +Parkland Hospital to stand by for further orders. + +Mr. STERN. Were you told why you were ordered to return to the office? + +Mr. HOSTY. When I got back they told me they wanted me to start +reviewing our files to see if I could develop any information, any +leads at all on the possible assassin, to help out administratively in +the office. + +Mr. STERN. Did the case of Oswald come to your mind at that time? + +Mr. HOSTY. No, sir. + +Mr. STERN. As a possible---- + +Mr. HOSTY. No, sir; it was approximately 1:30 that we got the report +that a police officer had been killed in the Oak Cliff area of Dallas, +and that the police were surrounding a movie theatre where the suspect +was allegedly located. + +Shortly after 2 o'clock, we received information that this man had been +captured and taken to the Dallas Police Department. One of our agents +called from the Dallas Police Department and identified this man as Lee +Harvey Oswald. I immediately recognized the name. + +Mr. STERN. What was your reaction? + +Mr. HOSTY. Shock, complete surprise. + +Mr. STERN. Because? + +Mr. HOSTY. I had no reason prior to this time to believe that he was +capable or potentially an assassin of the President of the United +States. + +Mr. STERN. What happened next? + +Mr. HOSTY. I immediately got the file on Lee Oswald, and I determined +that on the 21st of November this change of origin from New Orleans had +arrived. It had not been routed to me as yet. It apparently arrived +on the afternoon of the 21st. I got it for the first time after the +assassination. + +Mr. STERN. That is the administrative---- + +Mr. HOSTY. Administrative form showing that I was now origin, that we +now had all the information on the case. + +Mr. STERN. Did they send any other information with that? + +Mr. HOSTY. The only other thing that they sent was a photograph of Lee +Oswald taken at the New Orleans Police Department when he was arrested +during the summer of 1963. The report of Milton Kaack of the 31st had +covered everything else. + +Mr. STERN. Just to be clear, you were not waiting for this shift of +administrative responsibility before you did anything? + +Mr. HOSTY. No; I mean if there was anything else to do, I would have +gone ahead and done it. + +Mr. DULLES. Was that action in Washington or New Orleans? + +Mr. HOSTY. New Orleans. + +Mr. STERN. Had anything else arrived at your Dallas office that you +were told about at that point? + +Mr. HOSTY. Not at that point, no; nothing had arrived then. I then took +the file to the agent in charge. + +Mr. DULLES. May I ask one point here? + +Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. DULLES. From the point of view of the administration, is the New +Orleans office over the Dallas office, or are they equal? + +Mr. HOSTY. They are equal, sir. + +Mr. DULLES. They are equal? + +Mr. HOSTY. We have 55 offices. They are all equal. + +Mr. DULLES. All equal? + +Mr. HOSTY. Right. There are no regional offices. I then took the file +to the agent in charge, told him that we had a case on Lee Harvey +Oswald. While I sat there he immediately called headquarters and +advised headquarters here in Washington, D.C., that Lee Harvey Oswald +was under arrest down at Dallas and had been observed shooting a police +officer. They had eyewitnesses to his killing of Officer Tippit. + +Mr. STERN. How do you know that? + +Mr. HOSTY. This had been given to us by one of our agents from the call +from the Dallas Police Department who had given the information. I +don't know who it was. I did not receive the call. + +I sat there and assisted the agent in charge while he talked to the +Bureau headquarters here. I knew the file. Of course he would need some +information. I would leaf through the file and get it for him so that +he could relay the pertinent information. + +Then sometime after that, the agent in charge instructed me to proceed +to the Dallas Police Department and to sit in on the interview of Lee +Oswald, which was apparently in progress at this time. Just prior to +my leaving, I was told that a communication had just come in that day +from the Washington field office advising that Lee Oswald had been in +contact with the Soviet Embassy in Washington, D.C. + +Mr. STERN. Were you told anything more about that? + +Mr. HOSTY. No; I mean this is the point I was given this information. +I then went and got a car and drove to the Dallas Police Department, +pulled my car into the basement garage of the Dallas Police Department, +parked my car. + +Mr. STERN. What were conditions like? + +Mr. HOSTY. Very chaotic. The press was swarming all over the police +station. There were television cameras being brought into the building. +Many people were running, coming and going. The place was a beehive of +activity. + +I parked the car, got out, and started in the door of the basement, at +which time I observed a Dallas police car, an unmarked car, drive in, +in which there were four detectives. The man sitting on the right-hand +side of the front seat next to the driver was a man I recognized as +Lieutenant Revill. He signaled me that he wanted to talk to me, at +which time he jumped out of the car at the head of the ramp and came +over towards me. The rest of the detectives in the car continued down +the ramp to be parked. + +We then proceeded in, Lieutenant Revill and I proceeded into the police +department and started up the stairs. Lieutenant Revill advised me +that--I might add he was in a very excited state--he advised me that he +had a hot lead, that he had just determined that the only employee from +the Texas School Book Depository who could not be accounted for was a +man named Lee. + +Now this conversation took place at approximately 3 p.m., about an +hour after Lee Harvey Oswald had been arrested by the Dallas Police +Department. I told Lieutenant Revill that Lee Harvey Oswald had been +arrested about an hour ago, that he was an employee of the Texas School +Book Depository, and that he was the man who had defected to Russia and +had returned to the United States in 1962. + +Now either Lieutenant Revill--I don't recall if he made a statement +doubting that Oswald was the one who assassinated the President, or +whether it was just a look of doubt on his face, but there was doubt +came into Lieutenant Revill's--at this time I stated to him that Lee +Oswald was the main suspect in this case. + +Now this conversation took place running up the stairs from the +basement to the third floor. At this time the level of noise was +very high. As I said, there were many press representatives, TV +representatives, curious bystanders, police officers, everybody running +all over the place. + +It was not too much unlike Grand Central Station at rush hour, maybe +like the Yankee Stadium during the world series games, quite noisy. We +got to the head of the stairs and I left Lieutenant Revill and went +into Captain Fritz' office. + +Mr. STERN. Was anyone else with you and Lieutenant Revill as you came +up the stairs, as you recall? + +Mr. HOSTY. As I say, the place was swarming with people. Just the two +of us were going up the stairs together. My conversation was with +Lieutenant Revill only. + +Mr. STERN. I now show you a document marked for identification +Commission 831, a letter dated April 27, 1964, from Director Hoover to +Mr. Rankin, the General Counsel of this Commission, having attached a +one-page copy of a newspaper article and an affidavit. Do you recognize +this letter? + +Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir; I do. + +Mr. STERN. Where have you seen it? + +Mr. HOSTY. I have seen the file copy of this letter in the FBI files. + +Mr. STERN. Do you recognize the newspaper article which is the first +attachment to this letter? + +Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir. It appeared in the Dallas Morning News on April +24, 1964, I believe. + +Mr. STERN. And the attachment after this is? + +Mr. HOSTY. My affidavit. + +Mr. STERN. Your affidavit of five pages? + +Mr. HOSTY. Of five pages, bearing my signature. + +Mr. STERN. Now tell us what the reason for your making this affidavit +was. + +Mr. HOSTY. It was to refute the story that appeared in the Dallas +Morning News on April 24, 1964, to set the record straight as to what +actually did take place in my conversation with Lieutenant Revill. + +Mr. STERN. What did that story state? + +Mr. HOSTY. It stated in substance, alleged that I was aware that Lee +Harvey Oswald was capable of assassinating the President of the United +States, but did not dream he would do it. + +Mr. STERN. Did you say that? + +Mr. HOSTY. No, sir. I want to state for the record at this time that I +unequivocally deny ever having made the statement to Lieutenant Revill +or to anyone else that, "We knew Lee Harvey Oswald was capable of +assassinating the President of the United States, we didn't dream he +would do it." + +I also want to state at this time that I made no statement to +Lieutenant Revill or to any other individual at any time that I or +anyone else in the FBI knew that Lee Harvey Oswald was capable of +assassinating the President of the United States or possessed any +potential for violence. + +Prior to the assassination of the President of the United States, I had +no information indicating violence on the part of Lee Harvey Oswald. I +wish the record to so read. + +Mr. STERN. The newspaper story also mentioned another officer of the +Dallas police force, V. J. "Jackie" Brian. + +Mr. HOSTY. I know him as Jackie Brian. + +Mr. STERN. Do you know this officer? + +Mr. HOSTY. I know him to see him. I don't know him too well. + +Mr. STERN. Do you recall whether or not he was present when you had +your conversation with Lieutenant Revill? + +Mr. HOSTY. I don't recall him being present. I was addressing my +remarks to Lieutenant Revill. + +Mr. STERN. Have you heard that there was a rumor to the effect of this +story at any time before this newspaper article appeared? + +Mr. HOSTY. About 2 weeks prior I heard a rumor, but I didn't know +exactly what the story was all about. I did hear a rumor. + +Mr. STERN. What was the tone and tenor of the rumor? + +Mr. HOSTY. That I had made some statement concerning Oswald's +assassinating the President. I wasn't clear. I was never given the +exact wording. It involved my conversation with Lieutenant Revill. + +Mr. STERN. Have you talked to Lieutenant Revill since this news story +appeared? + +Mr. HOSTY. No, sir; not since the news story appeared. + +Mr. STERN. To Chief Curry? + +Mr. HOSTY. No, sir. + +Mr. STERN. To any supervising official of the Dallas police force? + +Mr. HOSTY. No, sir. + +Mr. STERN. To any newspaper reporter for any Dallas newspaper or +otherwise? + +Mr. HOSTY. They had contacted me for comment, and I have had no comment +other than the first person who called me, I denied the story. Since +then I have had no comment on instructions from headquarters. + +Mr. STERN. Have you reviewed your affidavit in preparation for your +testimony here today? + +Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. STERN. Is there anything you would like to add to it other than +what you have already said? + +Mr. HOSTY. No, sir. I think it speaks for itself. + +Mr. STERN. Any change you would like to make in it? + +Mr. HOSTY. No, sir. + +The CHAIRMAN. Off the record. + +(Discussion off the record.) + +The CHAIRMAN. Will you put this on the record, please? + +Mr. Rankin, is there anything in the record of the Commission showing +that Lieutenant Revill made a report to his superior officers +concerning this statement that is alleged to have been made by Agent +Hosty in this newspaper article? + +Mr. RANKIN. The only thing that we have is this affidavit which you +will note is Commission Exhibit 709. + +The CHAIRMAN. Yes. + +Mr. RANKIN. And it bears the date November 22, 1963, at the top, and +is sworn to as of the 7th day of April 1964. That is what Chief Curry +testified he received from Lieutenant Revill. + +The CHAIRMAN. Has Lieutenant Revill been a witness before the +Commission or has he made a statement, a deposition of any kind? + +Mr. RANKIN. He has not been a witness before the Commission. + +Mr. REDLICH. He was talked to in Dallas. + +Mr. RANKIN. He was a deposition witness. + +The CHAIRMAN. When was that? + +Mr. RANKIN. I will have to check that. + +The CHAIRMAN. Was it before or after this affidavit? + +Mr. RANKIN. I will have to check that, Mr. Chief Justice, to be sure. + +The CHAIRMAN. Did he in that deposition state that Agent Hosty had made +such a statement to him? + +Mr. RANKIN. I haven't examined the deposition. I don't know. We have +the deposition now, but I have not examined it. + +The CHAIRMAN. Do you know, Professor Redlich? + +Mr. REDLICH. Mr. Chief Justice, I asked that question, and the +information I have is that he was not questioned about this particular +allegation. He was questioned on other matters. + +Representative FORD. Did he volunteer that information? + +The CHAIRMAN. Yes. Is it in the deposition at all? + +Mr. REDLICH. To the best of my knowledge, it is not, Mr. Chief Justice. + +Mr. McCLOY. Don't we have the deposition here? Can't we get it? + +Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Chief Justice, I would like to be sure to check that +before we have that on the record. I will report by morning, if that is +all right, and be sure of it. + +The CHAIRMAN. What was the date of this newspaper article? It isn't +dated here. + +Mr. STERN. The cover letter, Mr. Chief Justice, states that it appeared +on April 24, 1964. + +The CHAIRMAN. Do I understand that Chief Curry said that no statement +of that kind had been made by Lieutenant Revill at or about the time +the statement was supposed to have been made by Agent Hosty? + +Mr. RANKIN. I don't think his testimony was in that form, Mr. Chief +Justice. It was in the form that this was given to him and there wasn't +any indication that it was given as of the date of November 22 in his +testimony. + +The CHAIRMAN. I should like to see Lieutenant Revill's deposition. + +Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Redlich has gone out for it. + +The CHAIRMAN. We won't delay that now. We will proceed. Go right ahead, +Mr. Stern. + +Mr. STERN. What happened next? + +Mr. HOSTY. As I said, I left Lieutenant Revill. I entered the office +of Capt. Will Fritz. After a short delay, Agent James W. Bookhout and +myself entered the inner office of Capt. Will Fritz of the homicide +section, Dallas Police Department, where Lee Harvey Oswald was being +questioned. + +Mr. STERN. I show you a two-page document marked Commission No. 832 for +identification. Can you identify that? + +Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir. This is an interview form which I made for my +interview with Lee Harvey Oswald on the 22d of November 1963. It was +dictated as the form will indicate, on the 23d of November 1963. + +Mr. STERN. Let me ask you there, Mr. Hosty, about your practice in +reducing to formal form your notes of interviews. This happened the +next day? + +Mr. HOSTY. Right. + +Mr. STERN. Is that faster than usual because of the circumstances? + +Mr. HOSTY. Because of the circumstances. We have to reduce them to +writing within 5 days. + +Mr. STERN. In 5 days? + +Mr. HOSTY. Five working days. + +Mr. STERN. Did you retain the notes of this? + +Mr. HOSTY. No. After the interview is reduced to writing, I get it +back and proofread it. My notes are then destroyed because this is the +record. + +Mr. STERN. And in this particular instance did you destroy your notes +of this? + +Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. STERN. Now you say that you are required to reduce your notes of an +interview to writing within 5 working days. + +Mr. HOSTY. Right. + +Mr. STERN. Did that happen with respect to the interviews you conducted +on October 29, November 1, and November 5? + +Mr. HOSTY. To make this a little clearer, this would be an interview of +a subject, not of a witness, unless this witness has something that was +quite pertinent to the investigation. + +Routine-type matters do not have to be put on these interview forms, +but pertinent interviews would be. Now everything in this case after +the assassination was declared to be pertinent. All interviews, +regardless of how insignificant, were to be put on these forms. + +Mr. STERN. But the interviews you conducted at the beginning of +November and the end of October were not within this rule? + +Mr. HOSTY. No; because they were not an interview of the subject or +anything that contained anything of major importance. + +Mr. STERN. Do you yourself destroy the notes? + +Mr. HOSTY. Yes. + +Mr. STERN. Do you recall specifically destroying the notes of your +interview? + +Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir; in the wastebasket. + +Mr. STERN. Your interview of Oswald, on November 22, you put the notes +in the wastebasket? + +Mr. HOSTY. Right. + +Mr. STERN. Do you recall specifically what you did with the notes of +your interviews of October 29, November 1, and November 5? + +Mr. HOSTY. After I reduced them to writing, such as I did here, and I +got the form back, I proofread it, then I threw them away. + +Mr. STERN. And you testified that the notes of your end of +October--early November interviews were transcribed after November 22, +is that correct? + +Mr. HOSTY. Right. + +Mr. STERN. Were the notes destroyed after you transcribed those +interviews, also after November 22? + +Mr. HOSTY. Yes. + +Mr. STERN. Did you give any consideration to retaining the notes in +view of the turn that the case had taken? + +Mr. HOSTY. No. + +Mr. STERN. The intervening assassination? + +Mr. HOSTY. No; because this is the record and the notes would not be +as good as this record, because the notes are not written out fully as +this is. It would just be abbreviations and things of that type. + +Mr. STERN. And you received no instructions about retaining notes? + +Mr. HOSTY. No; we had no instructions. We were following the same rule +we had always followed. + +Mr. STERN. Why don't you tell us now, turning to your memorandum of the +November 22 interview of Lee Harvey Oswald, what transpired from the +time you first entered Captain Fritz' office. + +Mr. HOSTY. As this interview form will show, the interview commenced at +3:15 p.m. I am certain of that time because I checked my wristwatch, +and Agent Bookhout checked my wristwatch. We both agreed on the time, +3:15. We came in and identified ourselves as agents of the FBI. I told +Oswald my name and he reacted violently. + +Mr. STERN. How do you mean? + +Mr. HOSTY. To both Agent Bookhout and myself. He adopted an extremely +hostile attitude towards the FBI. + +Mr. STERN. Was it the FBI or the name Hosty? + +Mr. HOSTY. Both. He reacted to the fact that we were FBI, and he made +the remark to me, "Oh, so you are Hosty. I've heard about you." + +He then started to cuss at us, and so forth, and I tried to talk to him +to calm him down. The more I talked to him the worse he got, so I just +stopped talking to him, just sat back in the corner and pretty soon he +stopped his ranting and raving. + +Mr. STERN. What was he saying? Please be specific. + +Mr. HOSTY. Well, he said, "I am going to fix you FBI," and he made some +derogatory remarks about the Director and about FBI agents in general. +I don't specifically recall the exact wording he used. + +Representative FORD. Had this been the attitude that existed prior to +you and Bookhout coming into the---- + +Mr. HOSTY. Apparently not; apparently not. I couldn't say because I +wasn't in the room. We walked into the room. I immediately identified +myself, told him I was with the FBI, and was a law-enforcement officer, +and anything he said to me could be used against him. He did not have +to talk to us. + +Senator COOPER. Can you describe the tone of his voice and his manner? + +Mr. HOSTY. I beg your pardon, sir? + +Senator COOPER. Can you describe the tone of his voice? + +Mr. HOSTY. He was highly excited. He was very surly, I think would be +about the best way to describe him, very surly; and he was curt in his +answers to us, snarled at us. That would be his general attitude. + +Representative FORD. Did he use profanity? + +Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir. I can't recall any specific statements he made, +however. + +Mr. McCLOY. Did he complain that you had been abusing or harassing his +wife in anyway? + +Mr. HOSTY. He made the statement, "If you want to talk to me don't +bother my wife. Come and see me." He didn't say that I had abused his +wife in any manner, and I hadn't. He did criticize me for talking to +her. He said, "Come talk to me if you want to talk to me." + +Representative FORD. Is that why he knew your name, because of your +conversations with her? + +Mr. HOSTY. Yes; apparently. + +Mr. STERN. Had you ever seen Oswald before? + +Mr. HOSTY. Not until that time. That was the first time I had seen him. + +Senator COOPER. Can you remember what he said about the FBI +specifically? + +Mr. HOSTY. He called us gestapo, secret police, we were harassing +people. It was along that line. I don't recall the exact wording. + +Mr. STERN. Was he handcuffed at this time? + +Mr. HOSTY. He was handcuffed behind him. After he calmed down he asked +Captain Fritz if they could remove the handcuffs. Captain Fritz ordered +one of his detectives to remove them from the rear, and they handcuffed +him in front. + +Mr. STERN. This happened right after you came into the room? + +Mr. HOSTY. Shortly after we came in the room. + +Mr. STERN. Before or after his outburst? + +Mr. HOSTY. After his outburst; after he had calmed down. + +Mr. STERN. Please continue. + +Mr. HOSTY. Captain Fritz actually conducted the interview. Agent +Bookhout and myself sat back in the corner and observed. Captain Fritz +asked Oswald if he had ever owned the rifle. He denied he had ever +owned a rifle. He said that he had seen the superintendent of the +School Book Depository with a rifle in his office a couple of days +before the assassination, but that he had never had a rifle in the +building. He then told Captain Fritz that he had been to the Soviet +Union and resided there for 3 years, and he had many friends in the +Soviet Union. Captain Fritz then showed him a piece of paper which had +"Fair Play for Cuba" on it, and Oswald admitted to Captain Fritz that +he was secretary for the Fair Play for Cuba Committee in New Orleans a +few months ago. + +He told Captain Fritz that the Fair Play for Cuba Committee had its +headquarters in New York City. Captain Fritz then showed Oswald a +marksman's medal from the Marine Corps, and Oswald admitted that this +was his medal, that he had received a sharpshooter's medal while in the +Marine Corps. + +Mr. McCLOY. Was it a sharpshooter's or a marksman's? There are two +different types, you know. + +Mr. HOSTY. I believe it was a sharpshooter, sir. He then told Captain +Fritz that he had been living at 1026 North Beckley, that is in Dallas, +Tex., at 1026 North Beckley under the name O. H. Lee and not under his +true name. + +Oswald admitted that he was present in the Texas School Book Depository +Building on the 22d of November 1963, where he had been employed since +the 15th of October. Oswald told Captain Fritz that he was a laborer in +this building and had access to the entire building. It had offices on +the first and second floors with storage on third, fourth, fifth and +sixth floors. + +Oswald told Captain Fritz that he went to lunch at approximately noon +on the 22d of November, ate his lunch in the lunchroom, and had gone +and gotten a Coca Cola from the Coca Cola machine to have with his +lunch. He claimed that he was in the lunchroom at the time President +Kennedy passed the building. + +He was asked why he left the School Book Depository that day, and he +stated that in all the confusion he was certain that there would be no +more work for the rest of the day, that everybody was too upset, there +was too much confusion, so he just decided that there would be no work +for the rest of the day and so he went home. He got on a bus and went +home. He went to his residence on North Beckley, changed his clothes, +and then went to a movie. + +Captain Fritz asked him if he always carried a pistol when he went +to the movie, and he said he carried it because he felt like it. He +admitted that he did have a pistol on him at the time of his arrest, in +this theatre, in the Oak Cliff area of Dallas. He further admitted that +he had resisted arrest and had received a bump and a cut as a result +of his resisting of arrest. He then denied that he had killed Officer +Tippit or President Kennedy. + +Mr. STERN. The memorandum says, "Oswald frantically denied shooting"---- + +Mr. HOSTY. It should be emphatically, I believe, rather than +frantically. I think this probably should be "emphatically denied." + +Mr. STERN. Is this your memorandum? + +Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. STERN. It is signed or initialed both by you and by Mr. Bookhout. + +Mr. HOSTY. Right. The procedure is that when there are two agents +involved, they both must approve it, so there can be no discrepancies. + +Mr. STERN. But you dictated it. + +Mr. HOSTY. I dictated it and he read it and we both approved it. + +Mr. STERN. Have you been over it recently in preparation for your +testimony? + +Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. STERN. Is it accurate? Is there anything you would like to add to +it? + +Mr. HOSTY. I think it is correct as it stands. + +Mr. McCLOY. I didn't hear you repeating your testimony that he denied +ever having been in Mexico. + +Mr. HOSTY. Oh, yes; he was being questioned about his activities +outside of the United States, where he had been outside of the United +States. He told Captain Fritz that he had only been to Mexico to visit +at Tijuana on the border, and then he did admit having been in Russia. + +Mr. McCLOY. He only admitted to having been at Tijuana in Mexico? + +Mr. HOSTY. Right. + +Mr. McCLOY. Not to Mexico City. + +Mr. HOSTY. Not to Mexico City; that is right. + +Representative FORD. There was no recording made of this interrogation? + +Mr. HOSTY. No, sir; it was notes I took. Agent Bookhout and I took +notes, and we dictated from the notes the next day. + +Mr. STERN. Did you ask him any questions? + +Mr. HOSTY. No; like I say, he was acting in such a hostile condition +towards us that we did not. This was Captain Fritz' interview anyway. +We were just sitting in as observers. + +Mr. STERN. Did you tell Captain Fritz at this time any of the +information you had about Oswald, about his trip to Mexico, for example? + +Mr. HOSTY. No. + +Mr. STERN. About his being in touch with the Russian authorities +seeking a visa? + +Mr. HOSTY. No. + +Mr. STERN. About his previous residence in the Soviet Union? + +Mr. HOSTY. Oswald himself told Captain Fritz of this. I didn't have to. +Oswald came right out and told him. + +Mr. STERN. About the affair in New Orleans and his arrest there? + +Mr. HOSTY. No. + +Mr. STERN. Did you subsequently tell Captain Fritz? + +Mr. HOSTY. No; I didn't tell Captain Fritz; no. + +Mr. STERN. Was any of this information provided to the Dallas police as +far as you know? + +Mr. HOSTY. I provided it to Lieutenant Revill earlier, as I pointed +out. He would have been the person I would have furnished this +information to as the head of the intelligence section. He would be the +logical and correct person to give this information to. + +Mr. STERN. Was that the extent of your advice to the Dallas police? + +Mr. HOSTY. Right. + +Mr. McCLOY. Did you tell Chief Curry that you had a file? + +Mr. HOSTY. No, sir; I haven't talked to Chief Curry in several years. +Of course I don't deal with him too much on a chief level. + +Mr. STERN. Wouldn't it be difficult for Lieutenant Revill to have +gotten this information from you under the conditions that you +described, running up the stairway and the rest of it? Do you think he +heard enough of this? + +Mr. HOSTY. Well, that is true, he might not have. But you see +Oswald then proceeded to tell himself, he told the police all this +information, so there was no point in me repeating it when he himself, +Oswald, had furnished it directly to the police. + +Mr. McCLOY. But you did tell Revill that you had a file on Oswald? + +Mr. HOSTY. No; I didn't tell him I had a file; no, sir. + +Mr. McCLOY. You did not? + +Mr. HOSTY. Just as I related here in the affidavit. + +The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Hosty, I think the answer to this question is +implicit in your testimony, but I would just like to ask it directly. +Did you or anyone in the FBI to your knowledge for compensation or in +any manner whatsoever use Oswald as an informant in any way, shape or +form? + +Mr. HOSTY. I have previously furnished a sworn affidavit to this +Commission to the effect that I had never seen or talked to Lee Harvey +Oswald prior to the 22d of November 1963. I had never made payments +of any kind to him, and, in addition, I had never made any attempt to +develop him as an informant or source of information. I have made a +sworn affidavit to that effect. + +The CHAIRMAN. Your answer to my question then is "No." + +Mr. HOSTY. Correct. + +Mr. STERN. This might be a good opportunity, Mr. Chairman, to have +him identify this affidavit. I show you from Commission Exhibit 825 a +one-page affidavit. Can you---- + +Mr. HOSTY. This is my affidavit. This is my signature. + +Mr. STERN. And it was made when? + +Mr. HOSTY. On the 5th day of February 1964. + +Mr. STERN. Why don't you read that? + +Mr. HOSTY. "I, James P. Hosty, Jr., Special Agent of the Federal Bureau +of Investigation since January 21, 1952, having been duly sworn, make +the following statement: + +"At no time prior to the assassination of President John F. Kennedy did +I ever see or talk to Lee Harvey Oswald. I have never made payments of +any kind to him. In addition, I have never made any attempt to develop +him as an informant or source of information." + +Signed, James P. Hosty, Jr., Special Agent, Federal Bureau of +Investigation. + +Mr. STERN. Mr. Chairman, may we have admitted Exhibits 831 and 832, +which Mr. Hosty has identified, the letter from the Director of the FBI +enclosing Mr. Hosty's affidavit as 831, and 832, which is his two-page +memorandum on the interview? + +The CHAIRMAN. That may be admitted with those numbers. + +(The items marked Commission Exhibits Nos. 831 and 832 for +identification were received in evidence.) + +The CHAIRMAN. Is that all, Mr. Stern? + +Mr. STERN. There are a few other points. + +The CHAIRMAN. Let's hurry them along. + +Mr. STERN. To conclude that last point, Mr. Hosty, do you have any +knowledge of anyone else in the government service, either FBI or any +other branch---- + +Mr. HOSTY. No, sir. + +Mr. STERN. That tried or was successful in recruiting Lee Harvey Oswald +as an informant or employee or agent? + +Mr. HOSTY. No, sir. + +Mr. STERN. Did you see Oswald again after the interview that Captain +Fritz conducted? + +Mr. HOSTY. No. + +Mr. STERN. What did you do when this interview concluded? + +Mr. HOSTY. As I stated here, he was removed from Captain Fritz' office +at 4:05 p.m. Here again I checked my wristwatch, so I am certain the +time is correct. + +I then went to the outer office of Capt. Will Fritz and remained there +until approximately 8 p.m. that evening. + +Mr. STERN. You did not attend any of the lineups? + +Mr. HOSTY. No, sir. + +Mr. STERN. Did you talk to any member of the Secret Service at this +time? + +Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir; at approximately 6 p.m. on the 22d of November +1963, Special Agent in Charge Forrest V. Sorrels of the United States +Secret Service entered Captain Fritz' office with about five or six +Secret Service agents. He then proceeded to interview Lee Harvey +Oswald, I was not present during this interview. + +I did see him take Lee Oswald to the rear of Captain Fritz' outer +office and interview Lee Oswald. It appeared to me that Forrest Sorrels +of the Secret Service had appeared for the purpose of representing the +United States Secret Service in this investigation. I was aware at this +time that the FBI did not have jurisdiction over this matter, that +is, the assassination of the President of the United States, and that +if any Federal agency did have jurisdiction, it would be the United +States Secret Service. As I later determined, no Federal agency had +jurisdiction over this assassination. + +When Forrest Sorrels concluded his interview with Lee Oswald, I called +him aside and advised him that there was some additional information on +Lee Oswald which the FBI headquarters in Washington could furnish to +the headquarters of the Secret Service in Washington, and that there +were two items, and that I did not feel that I could give them to him +directly since they were secret in nature. + +Mr. STERN. Was anyone else present during this conversation? + +Mr. HOSTY. As I said, this took place in the outer office of Capt. Will +Fritz. There were about 30 or 40 people milling around out there. There +were three or four Texas Rangers. There were perhaps a dozen Dallas +police officers. There were, as I said, five or six Secret Service +agents. + +There were three other FBI agents besides myself, various clerical +personnel from the police department who were assigned to the homicide +division. I recognized two postal inspectors. I directed this +conversation to Mr. Sorrels. I called him to one side and directed this +to him directly. + +Mr. STERN. Did you repeat the same information to anyone else later on? + +Mr, HOSTY. No, sir. + +Mr. STERN. What did you have in mind? What were the two pieces of +information? + +Mr. HOSTY. The two pieces of information I had in mind were the +contacts that Lee Oswald had with the Soviet Embassy in Mexico City, +and the contact that he had had with the Soviet Embassy in Washington, +D.C. + +Mr. STERN. Were you in touch with your Dallas office from the police +headquarters regularly during the evening of the 22d? + +Mr. HOSTY. Yes. I went out and made phone calls to them, advised them +of my interview and how things were going. + +Mr. STERN. Did you make any calls directly to Bureau headquarters in +Washington? + +Mr. HOSTY. I didn't; no, sir. + +Mr. STERN. Were you advised at any time on the 22d after you left +your office of other information, any other information with regard +to Lee Harvey Oswald that had been supplied by Bureau headquarters in +Washington through your Dallas office? + +Mr. HOSTY. No; that was all, just what I previously related. + +Mr. STERN. Just what you mentioned, nothing else came through? + +Mr. HOSTY. Nothing else. + +Mr. STERN. Were you in the police headquarters on Saturday, the 23d, or +Sunday, the 24th, at all? + +Mr. HOSTY. No, sir. + +Mr. STERN. Did you have any further discussions with Lieutenant Revill +that weekend? + +Mr. HOSTY. No. + +Mr. STERN. At any time until now? + +Mr. HOSTY. I have had discussions with him on two occasions since +then. We did not discuss this matter of the 22d of November, this +conversation of the 22d. + +Mr. STERN. Did you discuss the assassination with him on either of +these two occasions that you recall? + +Mr. HOSTY. No, sir. + +Mr. STERN. The only conversation you had with him was going up +the stairway from the basement to the third floor of the police +headquarters on November 22? + +Mr. HOSTY. That is correct. + +Representative FORD. Do you recall the dates of these two subsequent +meetings with him? + +Mr. HOSTY. No, sir; I don't. Just the first time was maybe in January, +January sometimes, possibly February, and that was at his office. Then +he came to our office maybe in March. I just don't recall the dates. + +Representative FORD. But those visits were on matters not at all +related to the assassination or the events surrounding it? + +Mr. HOSTY. Actually, when he came to our office he was coming to talk +to another agent, and I just said "Hello" to him, and we didn't discuss +anything official. I just nodded "hello" to him, "How are you doing?" +When I went to his office it was in connection with another matter. + +Mr. STERN. But on neither occasion did you discuss the assassination or +the events surrounding it? + +Mr. HOSTY. No, sir. + +The CHAIRMAN. Have you any further questions, Congressman Ford? + +Representative FORD. What did you do on Saturday and Sunday following, +in rough outline, involving the assassination, if anything? + +Mr. HOSTY. I worked practically round the clock Saturday night. I +didn't go to bed at all, as I recall, Friday night and Saturday. I was +covering various leads in connection with the assassination, talking to +people who knew Lee Oswald. + +I talked to Mrs. Paine, to give you an example, the first thing +Saturday morning. I talked to various people that knew Oswald, +just covering general investigative leads in connection with the +assassination, like everyone else was. But I wasn't working at the +police department. + +Representative FORD. You weren't at the police department at all on +Saturday or Sunday? + +Mr. HOSTY. That is correct. + +The CHAIRMAN. Mr. McCloy, have you anything? + +Mr. McCLOY. I noticed you mentioned Lieutenant Revill and Jackie Brian. +There is another name mentioned here, Gordon Shanklin. + +Mr. HOSTY. He is the agent in charge of the Dallas FBI Office. + +Mr. McCLOY. It doesn't say so in this article, but it may be in this +by implication. You said nothing or anything that is comparable to +the alleged statement, "We have a suspect who is capable of the +assassination of the President, but I never dreamed of it," to your +colleague Gordon Shanklin? + +Mr. HOSTY. No, sir. + +Mr. McCLOY. When you went to talk to Mrs. Paine, did you go over the +premises then with her? Did she, for example, show you where Oswald is +alleged to have kept the rifle in the garage? + +Mr. HOSTY. No, sir; I didn't do that, no. + +Mr. McCLOY. Did you, in the course of your followup leads, talk to Mr. +Truly? + +Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. McCLOY. Can you tell us what transpired between you and Mr. Truly? + +Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir; I talked to him about---- + +Mr. McCLOY. Is this anticipating something you have got? + +Mr. STERN. No. + +Mr. HOSTY. This interview took place quite a bit after the +assassination. I did talk to Mr. Truly about I believe it was in +January or February of 1964, and it concerned the time that he, Mr. +Truly, was aware of the fact that there would be a parade through +downtown Dallas. And his recollection was that he was not aware of +the fact that the motorcade would pass in front of his building until +shortly before noon on the 21st when an article appeared in the Dallas +Times Herald. + +Now the Dallas Times Herald appears on the street at approximately +10:30 a.m., and Mr. Truly said shortly before noon someone from his +office saw this article and mentioned it to the office employees and +said they all became excited, and this was apparently the first time +anyone at the Texas School Book Depository realized the motorcade was +going to pass directly in front of their building. + +Representative FORD. This was Thursday? + +Mr. HOSTY. Thursday before, yes. It was shortly before noon. + +Representative FORD. The 21st? + +Mr. HOSTY. On the 21st of November, yes. + +Mr. McCLOY. But according to your recollection of what he said, all +the employees were excited and became aware of the fact that the +motorcade---- + +Mr. HOSTY. At that time. + +Mr. McCLOY. At that time was going to pass the School Book Depository. + +Mr. HOSTY. Right. + +Mr. McCLOY. Did you notice that Oswald said in the course of his +interview by Captain Fritz that he had not had a rifle but he had seen +a rifle in the possession of Mr. Truly? + +Mr. HOSTY. Right. + +Mr. McCLOY. Did you interrogate Mr. Truly about that? + +Mr. HOSTY. No, I didn't. + +Mr. McCLOY. Do you know whether anyone else did? + +Mr. HOSTY. I can't say for certain, no. + +(Discussion off the record.) + +Mr. McCLOY. Back on the record. + +Do you know, Mr. Rankin, whether or not Mr. Truly has been interviewed +on this subject? + +Mr. RANKIN. It has been reported to me by the staff that he has. + +Mr. McCLOY. Does he deny it, do you know? + +Mr. RANKIN. He denies it. + +Mr. McCLOY. He denies it? + +Mr. RANKIN. Yes. + +Mr. McCLOY. But we have no deposition from him in that regard as yet. + +Mr. BELIN. No; we do not. + +Senator COOPER. May I ask first as to Exhibit No. 830, you have it? + +Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir. + +Senator COOPER. Does that represent statements made to you? + +Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir. + +Senator COOPER. On November 5, did Mrs. Ruth Paine tell you that she +thought Lee Oswald was an illogical person? + +Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir. + +Senator COOPER. And that he admitted to her being a Trotskyite +Communist? + +Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir. + +Senator COOPER. Did you know that he had engaged in this Fair Play for +Cuba demonstration in New Orleans and had been arrested? + +Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir. + +Senator COOPER. You were told on November 1 that he was employed at the +Texas School Book Depository? + +Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir. + +Senator COOPER. Had you checked there to see if he was employed? + +Mr. HOSTY. I made a pretext interview on the 4th. + +Senator COOPER. On what day? + +Mr. HOSTY. The 4th of November. + +Senator COOPER. Considering that he was a defector, you knew he was a +defector? + +Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir. + +Senator COOPER. And considering that he had been engaged in this +demonstration in New Orleans, and the statement that Mrs. Paine had +made to you, did it occur to you at all that he was a potentially +dangerous person? + +Mr. HOSTY. No, sir. + +Senator COOPER. Why? + +Mr. HOSTY. There is no indication from something of that type that he +would commit a violent act. This is not the form that a person of that +type would necessarily take. This would not in any way indicate to me +that he was capable of violence. + +Senator COOPER. I believe you testified that you didn't know the route +of the---- + +Mr. HOSTY. That is correct, sir. + +Senator COOPER. Of the procession which passed the Texas School Book +Depository? + +Mr. HOSTY. That is correct, sir. + +Senator COOPER. Did it occur to you to communicate this information to +the Secret Service or the Dallas police about Oswald? + +Mr. HOSTY. No, sir; there would be no reason for me to give it to them. + +Mr. McCLOY. You did know he was lying though, didn't you? + +Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir. + +Mr. McCLOY. Don't you think the combination of the fact that you knew +that he was lying and that he was a defector and that he had this +record with the Fair Play for Cuba, that he might be involved in some +intrigue that would be if not necessarily violent, he was a dangerous +security risk? + +Mr. HOSTY. He was a security risk of a sort, but not the type of person +who would engage in violence. That would be the indication. + +Representative FORD. What are the criteria for a man being a potential +violent man? Is this a subjective test? + +Mr. HOSTY. You mean to the point where we would report him to the +Secret Service? + +Representative FORD. Yes. + +Mr. HOSTY. It is instructions we had as of the 22d of November, we had +to have some indication that the person planned to take some action +against the safety of the President of the United States or the Vice +President. + +Representative FORD. How do you evaluate that? Do you have any criteria? + +Mr. HOSTY. No; at that time it was that there had to be some actual +indication of plan or a plot. + +Representative FORD. There had to be a conspiracy of some sort? + +Mr. HOSTY. Well, or a single person doing something if anyone was +going to take any action against the safety of the President or Vice +President. + +Representative FORD. I think you testified earlier that at the time of +the motorcade you were at your lunch hour. + +Mr. HOSTY. Right. + +Representative FORD. And were actually eating lunch? When a +President visits a community, is the FBI or its people assigned any +responsibilities as far as the security of the President is concerned? + +Mr. HOSTY. Prior to November 22, I know of no incidents where the FBI +was called in to help the Secret Service, to my knowledge. + +Representative FORD. And particularly on this day none of the---- + +Mr. HOSTY. Definitely not. + +Representative FORD. Of the people in the FBI in the Dallas area were +given any assignments? + +Mr. HOSTY. That is correct. + +Representative FORD. For the security of the President? + +Mr. HOSTY. That is correct. + +Mr. McCLOY. Mr. Hosty, let me ask you this: Suppose you had known that +that motorcade was going to go past the School Book Depository, do you +think your action would have been any different? + +Mr. HOSTY. No, sir; it wouldn't have been any different. + +Mr. McCLOY. Even though you knew that he was located there? + +Mr. HOSTY. Right. + +Mr. McCLOY. And that he was a defector? + +Mr. HOSTY. Right. + +The CHAIRMAN. Senator. + +Senator COOPER. Have you received any evidence that any person other +than Lee Oswald was involved in the assassination of President Kennedy? + +Mr. HOSTY. No, sir; I have no knowledge of anyone else. + +Senator COOPER. Did you know anything about the attempt on General +Walker's life? + +Mr. HOSTY. I have read in the newspapers about the attempt on General +Walker's life; yes. + +Senator COOPER. Your office was not connected with an investigation of +that? + +Mr. HOSTY. No; this was not a matter under the jurisdiction of the FBI. +It was under the jurisdiction of the Dallas Police Department. + +The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Hosty, you told us what your instructions were +concerning dangerous persons as of the 22d of November. Have they been +changed? + +Mr. HOSTY. I think Mr. Belmont will bring that up tomorrow if it be all +right. Yes; they have been. + +The CHAIRMAN. You will be sure to ask him that to get that from him. + +Are there any other questions, gentlemen? + +Mr. McCLOY. Mr. Hosty, are you still engaged in any aspects of the +assassination? + +Mr. HOSTY. Oh, yes. I am still involved in the investigation of it, +what investigation we still have. + +Mr. McCLOY. And any odds and ends that come up? + +Mr. HOSTY. Right. + +Mr. McCLOY. You are still in the process of investigating? + +Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir. + +The CHAIRMAN. I would like to ask Professor Redlich, did you find +anything in the deposition of lieutenant, what was his name? + +Mr. REDLICH. Revill. + +The CHAIRMAN. Revill, on this subject? + +Mr. REDLICH. No, sir. Lieutenant Revill was deposed on Tuesday, March +31, by Mr. Hubert of the Commission's staff. + +The CHAIRMAN. What date? + +Mr. REDLICH. March 31, 1964. The deposition consisted almost entirely +of questions relating to Mr. Revill's responsibilities in connection +with the investigation of the murder of Lee Harvey Oswald, and during +the course of that interrogation there is nothing at all on the matter +which was the subject of Commission Exhibit No. 709. + +The CHAIRMAN. Is there any reference in his testimony to his going up +the stairs with Agent Hosty on the 22d of November? + +Mr. REDLICH. No, sir. + +The CHAIRMAN. Nothing concerning that particular time in the police +station? + +Mr. REDLICH. No; there was not. + +The CHAIRMAN. Very well. That is all. + +Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Chief Justice, I answered Mr. McCloy's question in +error about Mr. Truly. Mr. Belin tells me that he examined the FBI +statement, and there is a statement by Mr. Truly in regard to two +rifles in which he explains it, as he says, innocently. Mr. Belin, +would you tell for the record what that is? + +Mr. BELIN. I would almost rather wait until tomorrow morning to have +the FBI reports before the Commission, if I can. I think it is a friend +brought a rifle. + +The CHAIRMAN. It would be better to have the report itself here. + +Mr. BELIN. I will have that for the Commission tomorrow morning, sir. + +Mr. McCLOY. I think, Mr. Hosty, you have probably answered this +question which is very closely related to that which Senator Cooper +asked you. You testified that you were continuing your investigation of +various aspects of this case. You have not thus far at least unearthed +anything which could be called in the nature of a conspiracy? + +Mr. HOSTY. No, sir. + +Mr. McCLOY. In connection with this assassination? + +Mr. HOSTY. You mean involving someone else? + +Mr. McCLOY. Someone else? + +Mr. HOSTY. No. + +Mr. McCLOY. Other than---- + +Mr. HOSTY. Lee Oswald. + +Mr. McCLOY. Oswald. And that would cover certainly any connection with +Mr. Ruby? + +Mr. HOSTY. That is correct. + +Mr. McCLOY. Have you ever interviewed Mr. Ruby? + +Mr. HOSTY. No, sir. + +Mr. McCLOY. I think that is all I have. + +The CHAIRMAN. Are there any other questions? + +Congressman Ford? + +Representative FORD. I think earlier, Mr. Hosty, you indicated that the +case of Oswald was under your jurisdiction? + +Mr. HOSTY. Was assigned to me; yes, sir. + +Representative FORD. Assigned to you? + +Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir. + +Representative FORD. As I recall the language you indicated that +documents or papers or reports came to you? + +Mr. HOSTY. Correct. + +Representative FORD. Would this go through the special agent in charge +of the Dallas area or what would it be? + +Mr. HOSTY. Here would be the procedure. The mail would be received at +the chief clerk's office. They would then match it up with the proper +file, and take it to the supervisor in question. + +Representative FORD. Who is that? + +Mr. HOSTY. Mr. Kenneth Howe was supervisor of the internal security +squad, and he would get it first, would read it, and then route it to +the agent to whom the case was assigned. + +Representative FORD. So Mr. Howe---- + +Mr. HOSTY. Yes. + +Representative FORD. Was knowledgeable about the Oswald case? + +Mr. HOSTY. Right. + +Representative FORD. Now how knowledgeable would a person in that +capacity be about this case? + +Mr. HOSTY. Well, I might point out where I would have 25 to 40 +cases that I was working on, he might have 500 to 700 cases he was +supervising, so obviously he couldn't pay as much attention to the +details of the case as the agent to whom it was assigned. + +Representative FORD. He saw all the documents that came in or went out +involving this case? + +Mr. HOSTY. This case and many other cases. + +Representative FORD. Did you and Mr. Howe ever discuss the Oswald case +prior to the assassination? + +Mr. HOSTY. I have no recollection of any discussion of the case; no. + +Representative FORD. Is this unusual or is this typical? + +Mr. HOSTY. There would be a discussion if in my opinion there was +something I wanted to consult him on or if in his opinion there was +something he wanted to consult me on. If he thought I was handling the +case all right, and I had no questions, we would not discuss the case. + +Representative FORD. Your recollection is that in this instance you and +Mr. Howe had no such discussion? + +Mr. HOSTY. That is my recollection. + +Mr. McCLOY. After this one interview in which you participated at least +in part with Lieutenant or Captain Fritz, I forgot what his rank is---- + +Mr. HOSTY. Captain Fritz. + +Mr. McCLOY. Captain Fritz, did you ever interview or were you ever a +participant in an interview of Oswald thereafter? + +Mr. HOSTY. No; this was the only time I participated. + +Mr. McCLOY. Did you return to the police headquarters the next day? + +Mr. HOSTY. No, sir. + +Mr. McCLOY. You weren't there when Oswald was shot? + +Mr. HOSTY. No, sir. + +The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Mr. Hosty. + +Mr. HOSTY. Thank you, Mr. Chief Justice. + +The CHAIRMAN. Thank you for your help. We are very glad to have seen +you, sir. + +The meeting will adjourn. + +(Whereupon, at 5:10 p.m., the President's Commission recessed.) + + + + +Transcriber's Notes: + + +Punctuation and spelling were made consistent when a predominant +preference was found in this book; otherwise they were not changed. + +Misspellings in quoted evidence not changed; misspellings that could be +due to mispronunciations were not changed. + +Some simple typographical errors were corrected. + +Inconsistent hyphenation of compound words retained. + +Ambiguous end-of-line hyphens retained. + +Occasional uses of "Mr." for "Mrs." and of "Mrs." for "Mr." corrected. + +Dubious repeated words, (e.g., "What took place by way of of +conversation?") retained. + +Several unbalanced quotation marks not remedied. + +Occasional periods that should be question marks not changed. + +Occasional periods that should be commas, and commas that should be +periods, were changed only when they clearly had been misprinted (at +the end of a paragraph or following a speaker's name in small-caps at +the beginning of a line). Some commas and semi-colons were printed so +faintly that they appear to be periods or colons: some were found and +corrected, but some almost certainly remain. + +The Index and illustrated Exhibits volumes of this series may not be +available at Project Gutenberg. + +Page 21: "intransit to the FBI" perhaps should be "in transit". + +Page 21: "Mr. Dulles. Is is likely" should be "Is it likely". + +Page 36: "With you permission" should be "your". + +Page 48: "Frankly, I don't know what there conclusion was" should be +"their". + +Page 68: "protrusion" was misprinted as "protrustion"; corrected here. + +Page 79: "this cotton of this cotton" should be "or". + +Page 107: "Several sutures of chromic gut where used" probably should +be "were used". + +Page 138: "alignement" was printed that way. + +Page 139: "alinement" was printed that way. + +Page 159: "we had a plane to fall" was printed that way. + +Page 279: "so help you God" was misprinted as "held"; corrected here. + +Page 320: "We would has asked them" was printed that way. + +Pages 394 and 395: "Hideel" and "Hidell" both used. + +Page 397: "October 13 1958" was printed without a comma after "13". + +Page 439: "Mr. Quigley. I show you an envelope" was printed as though +Mr. Quigley was the speaker, but in context, this must have been spoken +by Mr. Stern. + +Page 467: "harassing his wife in anyway?" probably should be "any way". + + + + + + + + +End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of Warren Commission (4 of 26): Hearings +Vol. IV (of 15), by The President's Commission on the Assassination of President Kennedy + +*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK 44004 *** |