diff options
| author | nfenwick <nfenwick@pglaf.org> | 2025-03-03 21:31:18 -0800 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | nfenwick <nfenwick@pglaf.org> | 2025-03-03 21:31:18 -0800 |
| commit | 94ba4621d87ee35747dd2f94d195e41eff699995 (patch) | |
| tree | 406afc2182185ad41b61fc55a23ebf35eb8a9a77 /44005.txt | |
| parent | e912dce9a339e959daa9e2a9f6a6bcf0e42852d5 (diff) | |
Diffstat (limited to '44005.txt')
| -rw-r--r-- | 44005.txt | 58909 |
1 files changed, 0 insertions, 58909 deletions
diff --git a/44005.txt b/44005.txt deleted file mode 100644 index 5508a18..0000000 --- a/44005.txt +++ /dev/null @@ -1,58909 +0,0 @@ -The Project Gutenberg EBook of Warren Commission (5 of 26): Hearings Vol. -V (of 15), by The President's Commission on the Assassination of President Kennedy - -This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with -almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or -re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included -with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org - - -Title: Warren Commission (5 of 26): Hearings Vol. V (of 15) - -Author: The President's Commission on the Assassination of President Kennedy - -Release Date: October 20, 2013 [EBook #44005] - -Language: English - -Character set encoding: ASCII - -*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK WARREN COMMISSION - HEARINGS V5 *** - - - - -Produced by Curtis Weyant, Charlene Taylor, Charlie Howard, -and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at -http://www.pgdp.net. Images generously provided by -www.history-matters.com. - - - - - - - - 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_ V - - -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 V: -Alan H. Belmont, assistant to the Director of the Federal Bureau of -Investigation; Jack Revill and V. J. Brian of the Dallas police, who -testified concerning conversations Revill had with James Patrick Hosty, -Jr., a special agent of the FBI; Robert A. Frazier, a firearms expert -with the FBI; Drs. Alfred Olivier, Arthur Dziemian, and Frederick W. -Light, Jr., wound ballistics experts with the U.S. Army laboratories -at Edgewood Arsenal, Md.; J. Edgar Hoover, Director of the Federal -Bureau of Investigation; John A. McCone, Director of the Central -Intelligence Agency; Richard M. Helms, Deputy Director for Plans of the -Central Intelligence Agency; Thomas J. Kelley, Leo J. Gauthier, and -Lyndal L. Shaneyfelt, who testified concerning efforts to reconstruct -the facts of the assassination; Mrs. John F. Kennedy; Jack Ruby; -Henry Wade, district attorney of Dallas; Sgt. Patrick T. Dean, of the -Dallas police, who testified concerning a conversation with Ruby; -Waggoner Carr, attorney general of Texas; Richard Edward Snyder, John -A. McVickar, Abram Chayes, Bernice Waterman, and Frances G. Knight, of -the U.S. Department of State; Secretary of State Dean Rusk; Mrs. Lee -Harvey Oswald; Harris Coulter, an interpreter with the Department of -State; Robert Alan Surrey, a Dallas citizen who testified regarding his -relationship with General Walker; James J. Rowley, Chief of the U.S. -Secret Service; Robert Carswell, special assistant to the Secretary -of the Treasury; Bernard William Weissman, who testified concerning -an advertisement signed by him which appeared in the Dallas Morning -News on November 22, 1963; Robert G. Klause, a Dallas citizen who -testified regarding a "Wanted For Treason" handbill; Mark Lane, a New -York attorney; President Lyndon B. Johnson and Mrs. Lyndon B. Johnson; -Llewellyn E. Thompson, former U.S. Ambassador to the Soviet Union, and -Secretary of the Treasury C. Douglas Dillon. - - - - -Contents - - - Page - Preface v - - Testimony of-- - Alan H. Belmont. 1 - Jack Revill 33 - V. J. Brian 47 - Robert A. Frazier 58, 165 - Alfred Olivier 74 - Arthur J. Dziemian 90 - Frederick W. Light, Jr 94 - J. Edgar Hoover 97 - John A. McCone and Richard M. Helms 120 - Thomas J. Kelley 129, 175 - Leo J. Gauthier 135 - Lyndal L. Shaneyfelt 138, 176 - Mrs. John F. Kennedy 178 - Jack Ruby 181 - Henry Wade 213 - Patrick T. Dean 254 - Waggoner Carr 258 - Richard Edward Snyder 260 - John A. McVickar 299, 318 - Abram Chayes 307, 327 - Bernice Waterman 346 - Hon. Dean Rusk 363 - Frances G. Knight 371 - Mrs. Lee Harvey Oswald (resumed) 387, 410 - Harris Coulter 408 - Robert Alan Surrey 420 - James J. Rowley 449 - Robert Carswell 486 - Bernard William Weissman, accompanied by - Thomas A. Flannery, Esq 487 - Robert G. Klause 535 - Mark Lane (resumed) 546 - President Lyndon B. Johnson 561 - Mrs. Lyndon B. Johnson 564 - Llewellyn E. Thompson 567 - C. Douglas Dillon 573 - - -COMMISSION EXHIBITS INTRODUCED - - Exhibit No.: Page - 825 16 - 833 10 - 834 14 - 835 15 - 836 32 - 837 32 - 838 47 - 839 58 - 840 66 - 841 69 - 842 72 - 843 73 - 844 88 - 845 88 - 846 88 - 847 88 - 848 88 - 849 88 - 850 88 - 851 88 - 852 88 - 853 88 - 854 88 - 855 88 - 856 88 - 857 88 - 858 88 - 859 88 - 860 88 - 861 89 - 862 89 - 863 111 - 864 115 - 865 115 - 866 120 - 867 120 - 868 123 - 869 123 - 870 121 - 871 130 - 872 131 - 873 131 - 874 131 - 875 134 - 876 135 - 877 135 - 878 136 - 879 136 - 880 136 - 881 136 - 882 137 - 883 137 - 884 138 - 885 171 - 886 171 - 887 171 - 888 171 - 889 171 - 890 171 - 891 171 - 892 171 - 893 171 - 894 171 - 895 171 - 896 171 - 897 171 - 898 171 - 899 171 - 900 171 - 901 171 - 902 171 - 903 171 - 904 178 - 905 178 - 906 178 - 907 178 - 908 299 - 909 299 - 910 299 - 911 325 - 912 299 - 913 299 - 914 299 - 915 299 - 916 299 - 917 299 - 918 299 - 919 299 - 920 299 - 921 299 - 922 299 - 923 299 - 924 299 - 925 299 - 926 299 - 927 299 - 928 299 - 929 299 - 930 299 - 931 299 - 932 299 - 933 299 - 934 299 - 935 299 - 936 299 - 937 299 - 938 299 - 939 299 - 940 299 - 941 325 - 942 325 - 943 326 - 944 326 - 945 326 - 946 299 - 947 299 - 948 346 - 949 346 - 950 346 - 951 336 - 952 335 - 953 346 - 954 345 - 955 343 - 956 345 - 957 362 - 958 326 - 959 326 - 960 340 - 961 362 - 962 362 - 963 362 - 964 362 - 965 362 - 966 362 - 967 362 - 968 362 - 969 362 - 970 362 - 971 362 - 973 362 - 974 362 - 975 362 - 976 362 - 977 362 - 978 362 - 979 362 - 980 362 - 981 362 - 982 362 - 983 362 - 984 371 - 985 371 - 986 371 - 987 404 - 988 404 - 989 371 - 990 403 - 991 403 - 992 404 - 993 410 - 994 413 - 995 421 - 996 448 - 997 448 - 998 448 - 999 448 - 1000 448 - 1002 448 - 1003 448 - 1004 448 - 1005 448 - 1006 448 - 1007 448 - 1008 448 - 1009 448 - 1010 448 - 1011 448 - 1012 448 - 1013 448 - 1014 448 - 1015 448 - 1016 448 - 1017 448 - 1018 454 - 1019 461 - 1020 462 - 1021 463 - 1022 463 - 1023 465 - 1024 469 - 1025 469 - 1026 471 - 1027 471 - 1028 476 - 1029 483 - 1030 483 - 1031 532 - 1032 532 - 1033 532 - 1033-A 532 - 1034 532 - 1035 532 - 1036 532 - 1036-A 532 - 1037 532 - 1037-A 532 - 1037-B 532 - 1038 532 - 1038-A 532 - 1039 532 - 1040 532 - 1041 532 - 1042 532 - 1043 532 - 1044 532 - 1045 532 - 1046 532 - 1047 532 - 1048 532 - 1049 532 - 1050 532 - 1051 532 - 1052 532 - 1053-A 576 - 1053-B 577 - 1053-C 582 - 1053-D 583 - 1053-E 585 - - - - -Hearings Before the President's Commission - -on the - -Assassination of President Kennedy - - - - -_Wednesday, May 6, 1964_ - -TESTIMONY OF ALAN H. BELMONT - -The President's Commission met at 9:25 a.m. on May 6, 1964, at 200 -Maryland Avenue NE., Washington, D.C. - -Present were Chief Justice Earl Warren, Chairman; 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; Norman Redlich, assistant counsel; Samuel A. Stern, -assistant counsel; and Charles Murray, observer. - - -The CHAIRMAN. Well, gentlemen, the Commission will come to order. - -Mr. Belin, you had something you wanted the record to show in -connection with our testimony yesterday. - -Mr. BELIN. Yes, sir. - -The CHAIRMAN. Would you present it to the Commission now, please. - -Mr. BELIN. Yes, sir. We have a report from an FBI document that states -that Roy Truly when interviewed on November 22, advised that "it is -possible Oswald did see him with a rifle in his hands within the past -few days," that is as of November 22, "as a Mr. Warren Caster, employed -by Southwestern Publishing Co., which company has an office in the same -building, had come to his office with two rifles, one was a .22 caliber -rifle which Caster said he had purchased for his son, and the other -a larger more high-powered rifle which Caster said he had purchased -with which to go deer hunting if he got a chance," and Truly said that -he examined the high-powered rifle and raised it to his shoulder and -sighted over it and then returned it to Caster and Caster left with -both rifles. - -Then Truly went on to state that he does not own a rifle and has had -no other rifle in his hands or in his possession for a long period of -time. Now because of the problem that did arise, I believe the staff -will promptly go down to Dallas to take the deposition of both Mr. -Truly and Mr. Caster to fully get this in deposition form and find out -where these rifles were as of November 22. - -The CHAIRMAN. And their caliber, and so forth. - -Mr. BELIN. Yes, sir. - -The CHAIRMAN. Yes, sir; I think that is desirable. You ought to do that. - -Mr. Belmont, the purpose of today's hearing is to take your testimony -concerning the general procedures of the FBI and explain their -relationship to the case of Lee Harvey Oswald. - -Would you please rise and raise your right hand. 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. BELMONT. I do. - -The CHAIRMAN. Will you be seated, please. - -Mr. STERN, will you conduct the examination, please? - -Mr. STERN. Thank you, sir. Would you state your full name for the -record, please? - -Mr. BELMONT. Alan H. Belmont. - -Mr. STERN. And your address, Mr. Belmont? - -Mr. BELMONT. 2711 North Yucatan Street, Arlington, Va. - -Mr. STERN. Mr. Belmont, what was your education at the college level? - -Mr. BELMONT. Graduate of Stanford University in California, with an -A.B. degree, majoring in accounting. - -Mr. STERN. What year? - -Mr. BELMONT. 1931. - -Mr. STERN. What was your employment briefly before joining the Federal -Bureau of Investigation? - -Mr. BELMONT. I joined the Bureau, the FBI, in 1936, and in the interim -I worked for public accountants and as a public accountant myself in -California. - -Mr. STERN. Would you describe, please, for the Commission briefly your -experience in the Federal Bureau of Investigation since 1936? - -Mr. BELMONT. I entered the FBI November 30, 1936, and after the period -of training, was assigned to Birmingham, Ala., as my first office. -I transferred to Chicago in about August 1937, and remained there -until the summer of 1938 when I was transferred to Washington, D.C., -headquarters. - -In January of 1941 I was transferred to New York as supervisor of -applicant and criminal investigative matters, remained there until -the fall of 1942, when I was made assistant agent in charge of our -Chicago office. In January of 1943 I was made agent in charge of our -Cincinnati office and remained there until the summer of 1944 when I -was transferred to New York as assistant agent in charge of criminal -matters in New York. - -Subsequently, I was placed in charge of all security work in New York -for a number of years and was transferred to Washington in charge of -the domestic intelligence division in February 1950. I headed that -division until about June of 1961 when I was made assistant to the -director in charge of all investigative work of the FBI and that is my -present position. - -Mr. STERN. Could you describe the organization of the FBI with two -purposes in mind: First, to fix your position in the organization. -Second, to provide a framework for describing the investigation of the -case of Lee Harvey Oswald. - -Mr. BELMONT. The headquarters of the FBI is, of course, or the FBI is -headed by Mr. J. Edgar Hoover as Director. Directly under him is Mr. -Clyde Tolson, Associate Director. There are 10 divisions broken down in -particular types of administration. - -Mr. DULLES. May I say if any of this is classified, highly classified, -you had better let us know because then we could go off the record. - -Mr. BELMONT. There is nothing classified here. - -Mr. DULLES. Right. I know that you would have that in mind. - -Mr. BELMONT. Thank you. - -Basically, the division of the 10 divisions at headquarters is -between administrative and investigative. The 10th division is the -inspection division and reports directly to Mr. Hoover. I am in charge -of the investigative divisions which are comprised of the general -investigative divisions handling general criminal work, the special -investigative division handling special inquiries of applicant nature, -and our aggressive approach to organized crime. - -The laboratory division handles all examinations of a scientific -nature, and the domestic intelligence division handles all types of -security work. I am in charge of those four divisions, and thus am in -charge and responsible for our investigative work. - -Our field offices, numbering 55, are geographically located in -accordance with the amount of work in a particular area. Each division -in the field is headed by a special agent in charge, assisted by an -assistant special agent in charge. They are responsible for the proper -conduct of the work within their divisions. They are answerable to Mr. -Hoover. They are also supervised, of course, in the particular area of -the work concerned by the division at headquarters. - -Depending on---- - -Mr. DULLES. May I ask is that 55 in the United States? - -Mr. BELMONT. United States and its possessions. - -Mr. DULLES. And Puerto Rico? - -Mr. BELMONT. Yes. - -Mr. DULLES. It doesn't include your legal---- - -Mr. BELMONT. Legal attaches abroad? - -Mr. DULLES. Yes. - -Mr. BELMONT. No; they are under the direct supervision of our -headquarters. - -Depending on the size of the division in the field, we will have a -supervisory staff in order to properly supervise the work of the agents -in the field. - -Mr. STERN. Can you describe the establishment of a typical case, -indicating the meaning of the terms office of origin and auxiliary -office? - -Mr. BELMONT. A case is opened by the FBI upon the receipt of -information indicating a matter within the jurisdiction of the FBI. -We restrict our investigations to those matters which are within our -jurisdiction. - -The office of origin is the office where the major part of the work -is to be done. Thus it should be the controlling office of the -investigation. - -Normally, if an individual is under investigation, it will be the -office where he resides. There will be in many cases investigation to -be conducted by other offices. Those offices that have investigations -in that case are considered auxiliary offices, and will cover the -investigation sent to it, sent to them, by the office of origin or -by another auxiliary office if a lead develops within that area that -requires attention elsewhere. - -I may say that the office of origin can be changed and is changed if -during the investigation it becomes apparent that the focus of the -investigation has shifted to another area. - -It is logical, therefore, that that office which bears the brunt of the -investigation should be in possession of all the material pertinent -to the investigation and should be charged with the supervision and -running of the investigation and the direction of it. - -In the event the office of origin is changed at any given time, the -previous office of origin will forward to the new office of origin all -material pertaining to the case so that it will have a complete file -and the necessary knowledge to run the case. - -Mr. STERN. Can you tell us a bit more about how information is -maintained and how it flows through the system from headquarters to -office of origin, to the auxiliary office or in the other directions -that are possible? - -Mr. BELMONT. Since the information is maintained in a standard and -uniform filing system in both our field offices and our headquarters -so that there is complete uniformity in the handling of information, -our main filing system is at headquarters. Consequently, we need here -all pertinent information in any case. Consequently, the reports and -information developed during a case are sent to our headquarters for -filing. - -It is pertinent to observe that we conduct close to 2 million name -checks a year for other agencies and departments of the Federal -Government. Consequently, we must have here all pertinent information -so that a name check will reflect the information in possession of the -Bureau. - -When a report is prepared in our field office--an investigation, and -there are leads or investigation to be performed in another office, -copies of this report are designated for that office, together with -the lead or the investigation to be covered. Upon receipt of that the -office gathers the background information from the report and proceeds -with the investigation. - -Mr. STERN. This is the auxiliary office? - -Mr. BELMONT. The auxiliary office. - -If there is a matter of urgency rather than wait for an investigative -report, the information will be transmitted by more rapid means, such -as teletype. All of our offices have teletypes; radio, our offices have -a radio system; telephone. - -Mr. DULLES. Is that teletype from the office to Washington only, or is -there some interoffice teletypes? - -Mr. BELMONT. Each office is connected with each other office by -teletype. - -Mr. DULLES. It is; all over the country? - -Mr. BELMONT. Yes, sir; permitting rapid communication. - -Mr. DULLES. That is, New Orleans and Dallas would have teletype between -these two offices? - -Mr. BELMONT. Yes. - -The CHAIRMAN. What kind of radio communication, Mr. Belmont, did you -say? - -Mr. BELMONT. We have an emergency radio communication so that both for -normal use, in the matter of expense, to reduce expenses, and for an -emergency, our offices can communicate with headquarters and with each -other. - -The CHAIRMAN. On your own transmission system? - -Mr. BELMONT. Yes, sir; that is correct. We feel that in any type of an -emergency we must, because of our heavy responsibilities---- - -The CHAIRMAN. Yes. - -Mr. BELMONT. Be able to communicate. As a matter of fact, during the -recent disaster in Alaska, one of the few means of communication with -the mainland was our radio system. - -The CHAIRMAN. Is that so? - -Mr. BELMONT. And we assisted in passing messages down from Alaska. - -We have a communication called AIRTEL which is simply a communication -in letter form on a particular form which upon receipt is regarded as a -matter of urgency and requires special handling. - -So that you will understand that, in an effort to cut expenses, we -determined that a matter which could not wait for a report or a letter -was normally sent by teletype, which is a relatively expensive means of -communication. - -By sending an AIRTEL which would be recognized for special handling, -the office could receive the same information by mail with a delay of -perhaps 12 hours and it would still receive the urgent handling that we -require for that particular thing. That is the purpose of the AIRTEL. - -Mr. STERN. I think we might turn now to a description of your role -in the investigation of Lee Harvey Oswald, both before and after the -assassination. - -Mr. BELMONT. As the individual in charge of all investigative -operations, the Lee Harvey Oswald investigation is my responsibility, -the same as any other investigative case in the Bureau. - -Mr. STERN. Did you have any particular involvement that you can recall -in the investigation of his case before November 22--personally? - -Mr. BELMONT. No; this case was not of the importance or urgency that it -was considered necessary to call to my personal attention for personal -direction. You must bear in mind that during the fiscal year 1963 the -FBI handled something in the nature of 636,000 investigative matters. -Necessarily, then, those matters which would be called to my personal -attention for personal handling would have to be on a selective basis. - -Mr. STERN. Have you been personally involved in the investigation since -the assassination? - -Mr. BELMONT. I have indeed. - -Mr. McCLOY. Before we get to this, how many cases of defections to the -Soviet Union would you be investigating in the course of a fiscal year? - -Mr. BELMONT. I couldn't give you an exact figure on that. It is our -system to investigate any individual where there is information or -evidence that indicates a necessity for investigation within our -jurisdiction. I do know that we have investigated, and currently are -investigating, defectors not only to the Soviet Union but in other -areas of the world. - -Mr. McCLOY. They also would not come per se to your attention, your -personal attention? - -Mr. BELMONT. Depending on the case. If there is a matter which has some -urgency or there is a question of policy, it would and does come to my -attention, and indeed comes to the attention of Mr. Hoover. - -I would not seek to give you any impression that I am not advised of -many cases, I am. I am kept daily advised, as is Mr. Hoover, of all -matters of policy or urgency or where there is a question of procedure. -That is inherent in our system of close supervision. - -Mr. McCLOY. What I am getting at is, I think, is the matter of -defection just out of its own character of such significance that it -becomes a matter of out of the ordinary importance to the Bureau when -you learn of it. - -Mr. BELMONT. Again, Mr. McCloy, I have no way of knowing the extent to -which those particular cases would be called to my attention. - -As shown in the Oswald case itself, we do take cognizance of these. -Immediately upon the publicity on Oswald, there was a case opened. I -do know that I see many such cases and where there is an indication -of possible damage to the country through the leak of information, -classified or in some other instance where there is a question of -policy or urgency it is immediately called to my attention. I can only -say in general I do see many such cases. - -Mr. McCLOY. Well, we had testimony here yesterday that in a -preassassination investigation of Oswald that they learned he was a -defector, they had interviews with him, and then they marked the case -closed. - -At one stage it was reopened and then it was closed again because, as I -gather it, there was no indication other than his defection that would -lead to their, to the agents, feeling that this man was capable of -violence or that he was a dangerous character in any sense. - -I gather that whether or not he was thought to be a dangerous character -or whether he was capable of violence would be settled by the man in -the field office, in the office that had charge, the man who was in -charge of the office that was dealing with that case locally, is that -right? - -Mr. BELMONT. That is a judgment that he would render, but that judgment -would be passed on by our headquarters staff. - -Mr. McCLOY. Passed on by Washington? - -Mr. BELMONT. Yes, indeed. In this instance by the domestic intelligence -division. - -Mr. McCLOY. In this case then the decision to close that case, I am -talking always about the preassassination business, was approved or -tacitly approved by the Washington staff. - -Mr. BELMONT. Not tacitly approved. Approved. - -Mr. McCLOY. Approved. Well, you mark the paper approved or you just -accept it, accept the file with a notation "return for closing." - -Mr. BELMONT. When the closing report comes to our headquarters, it is -reviewed by our supervisory staff, and if we do not agree with the -action then the field office is notified to continue the investigation. -That is a decision of substance. - -Mr. McCLOY. Well, I can understand that but I gather when the report -comes in you simply let the report lie unless you feel from your -examination of it that it justified further action. You don't notify -the field office, do you, that the closing of the case is approved? - -Mr. BELMONT. No, Mr. McCloy. With the volume of work that we have that -would be an unnecessary move. - -Mr. McCLOY. I can understand that. - -Mr. BELMONT. It is, however, thoroughly understood through our service, -through the system that we follow, that if that report comes in and -it is reviewed and it is filed here, if there is disagreement as to -the handling of the closing of the case or any other matter pertaining -to the investigation, the seat of government will then go out with -instructions to the field. - -Mr. McCLOY. All right. - -Mr. DULLES. Could I ask one question further on that point? - -The CHAIRMAN. Yes, indeed. - -Mr. DULLES. As I recall from the testimony of your people yesterday, -with regard to the situation in Dallas and later in New Orleans, that -after the case was marked closed in Dallas, there was this incident in -New Orleans of the distribution of the Fair Play for Cuba pamphlets, -and then a case there, a live case, an open case was started. - -Now, it wasn't quite clear to me yesterday from all the testimony, I -missed a bit of it, unfortunately, as to whether the opening of a new -case in New Orleans, because of the new incident, would operate to -reopen it or change the closed status of the case in Dallas, and the -case was then transferred from New Orleans to Dallas later. If you -could clear that up for us I think it would be helpful. - -Mr. BELMONT. The agent, Fain at the time, who handled the case, closed -the case after two interviews with Oswald, arriving at the conclusion -that the purpose of our investigation of Oswald which was to determine -whether he had been given an assignment by Soviet intelligence, had -been served. He closed the case, as he felt there was no further action -to be taken. The purpose had been satisfied. Headquarters agreed. - -In March 1963 Agent Hosty received information in Dallas to the effect -that Oswald had been in communication with The Worker, the east coast -Communist newspaper. He therefore reinstituted the case, and sent out a -lead to check Oswald's employment. He also received information, as I -recall it, that Oswald had been in communication with the Fair Play for -Cuba Committee, so there were two incidents that aroused his interest. - -In June 1963 our New Orleans office likewise received information that -Oswald had communicated with The Worker or was on a subscription list -for The Worker. So that the case was revived in Dallas by Hosty. - -Mr. DULLES. That was even before what we call the New Orleans incident? - -Mr. BELMONT. Correct. - -Mr. DULLES. Yes. - -Mr. BELMONT. And he learned that Oswald had left Dallas, the residence -was then picked up in New Orleans, and the case was revived. So that -actually there was a joint revival of the case. - -Then on August 9, 1963, Oswald was arrested by the New Orleans police -in connection with a disturbance of the peace in passing out these -pamphlets, which further aroused our interest. So that the reopening -of the case after the closing was due to these incidents that I have -mentioned. - -Mr. DULLES. Thank you. So that at the time of the assassination, this -was an open and not a closed case as regards the Dallas office. - -Mr. BELMONT. That is correct. At the time that Oswald was found to be -living in New Orleans, and this was definitely established that he -was actually residing there, the Dallas office in accordance with the -procedure that I mentioned, transferred the case to New Orleans as -office of origin. - -Subsequently, the case was again transferred back to Dallas when it was -determined that Oswald was again residing in the Dallas area. - -The CHAIRMAN. All right, Mr. Stern. - -Mr. STERN. We were getting, Mr. Belmont, to the question of whether -you had been personally involved in the investigation since the -assassination. - -Mr. BELMONT. I said I have indeed. - -Mr. STERN. Yes. As a part of that you have reviewed in detail the -investigation made prior to the assassination? - -Mr. BELMONT. Yes. - -Mr. STERN. Have you participated in or supervised the preparation of -reports and other correspondence to the Commission in response to -questions from the Commission? - -Mr. BELMONT. Yes. - -Mr. STERN. I show you a letter with attached memorandum which has been -marked for identification Commission Exhibit No. 833. Can you identify -this document, Mr. Belmont? - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 833 for -identification.) - -Mr. BELMONT. This is a letter transmitted on April 6, 1964, to Mr. -Rankin by the FBI with enclosure answering a number of questions which -the Commission posed to the FBI. - -Mr. STERN. Did you supervise the preparation of this letter? - -Mr. BELMONT. Yes. - -Mr. STERN. And you have reviewed it and are familiar with it? - -Mr. BELMONT. Yes. - -Mr. STERN. We have covered in your answers to Mr. Dulles and Mr. McCloy -a good deal of the material in here. - -I would like briefly to touch upon several of the questions, the more -important questions, regarding the nature of the FBI's interest in -Lee Harvey Oswald at various times, and I would like you to refer to -each question that I indicate but not read your answer. Paraphrase -it. I think we have had a good deal of the specific detail but what -I am interested in is a description from your examination of the -investigation as it was carried on, of the nature of the FBI interest -in Oswald. - -I would like to turn to the first question in which we asked---- - -The CHAIRMAN. You mean by that that you could get, we could get, a -better idea from paraphrasing the answer than we could get from the -exact answer itself? - -Mr. STERN. I think he might be able to highlight the answer. We have -the exact answer on the record, and I thought it might---- - -The CHAIRMAN. Well, highlight it, if there is anything in addition I -would think that would be relevant and pertinent. But to ask him to -paraphrase that which he has done with great meticulousness would seem -to me to be abortive and would take a lot of our time, and I don't see -what it would prove. If you have anything in addition that you want to -ask him, if you want to ask him if there is anything in addition he has -not put in there, that is all right. But to just ask him to paraphrase -answers that have been done with great care would seem to me to be -confusing the record, and serve no purpose. - -Mr. STERN. I might ask, Mr. Belmont, whether there is anything you -would like to add or amplify in these questions? - -Mr. BELMONT. I believe the answers speak for themselves, although in -view of Mr. McCloy's questions a little while ago, I would be very -happy to make clear our approach to this matter. For example, the -fact that our interest in defectors, in this case, is shown by the -fact that in early November 1959 we opened a file on Oswald based on -the newspaper publicity as to his defection. And the fact that he had -applied to renounce his citizenship. We checked our files then to see -was this a man we had a record on, and found that we had a fingerprint -record solely based on his enlistment in the Marines. - -We had no other record on him but we placed a stop or a flash notice -in our fingerprint files, at that time so that if he should come back -into the country unbeknownst to us and get into some sort of trouble -we would be immediately notified. That is our opening interest in the -case with the thought in mind that should he come back to the country -we would want to know from him whether he had been enlisted by Soviet -intelligence in some manner. - -That is our procedure because of our experience that these things have -happened, and we consider it our responsibility to settle that issue -whenever we can. - -Mr. STERN. Could you explain, Mr. Belmont, this procedure of placing a -stop in the files that you just referred to? - -Mr. BELMONT. We merely notify our identification division to place what -we call a flash notice in the man's fingerprint file, which means that -should he be arrested and the fingerprints be sent to the FBI, that the -appropriate division, in this case the domestic intelligence division, -would be notified that the man had been arrested, for what and where he -was arrested, thus enabling us to center our attention on him. - -Our next interest in this man arose as a result of the fact that his -mother had sent, I believe, $25 to him in Moscow, so we went to her in -April 1960 and we talked to her. At that time she told us that he had -told her that he would possibly attend the Albert Schweitzer College in -Switzerland. - -So as a followup, we had our legal attache in Paris make inquiry to see -whether he had enrolled in this college. The resultant check showed -that while they had expected him and a deposit had been placed that he -did not show up at the college. - -Mr. STERN. I think that is all covered in quite adequate detail in the -answer to the first question. - -Mr. DULLES. I have one question I would like to put to you on the first -question and answer in your letter of April 6, in Exhibit 833--the -Bureau's letter of April 6. You refer, first, to the fact that the -first news you got about Oswald was from a news service item, and then -later on at the bottom of the second full paragraph you state, "A file -concerning Oswald was prepared and as communications were received from -other U.S. Government agencies those communications were placed in his -file." - -The record may show the other communications, I guess our record does -show, but do you feel that you adequately were advised by the State -Department as this case developed or by the CIA or other agencies that -might have known about it? - -Mr. BELMONT. Yes. We received a number of communications from other -agencies, and we set up a procedure whereby we periodically checked the -State Department passport file to be kept advised of his activities or -his dealings with the Embassy in Moscow so that on a periodic basis we -were sure we had all information in the State Department file. - -We received communications from the Navy, and from other agencies. - -Mr. DULLES. Is there any general procedure with respect to Americans -abroad who get into trouble. Do you get informed so in case they come -back you can take adequate precautionary measures? Is that established -SOP? - -Mr. BELMONT. Yes, Mr. Dulles. We do receive such information, and if we -pick up the information initially as we did here, from press reports or -otherwise, we go to the other agencies and ask them whether they have -any information and establish an interest there so that if they have -not voluntarily furnished us the information they will do so upon our -request. - -Mr. DULLES. Thank you. - -Mr. STERN. On page 3, Mr. Belmont, in the answer to question No. 3, the -second paragraph, could you tell us why the FBI preferred to interview -Oswald after he had established residence and why it was not preferable -to interview him upon his arrival in New York? - -Mr. BELMONT. This is a matter of experience. Generally speaking when -an individual such as Oswald arrives back in the country and the -press is there, there is an unusual interest in him. Immigration and -Naturalization Service has a function to perform, and we prefer, unless -there is a matter of urgency, to let the individual become settled in -residence. It is a much better atmosphere to conduct the interview, and -to get the information that we seek. If it is a matter of urgency, we -will interview him immediately upon arrival. - -Mr. STERN. On page 4, Mr. Belmont, in your answer to question No. 6, -was it ordinary procedure for Agent Fain to re-interview Oswald so soon -after his first interview under the circumstances? Is there anything -unusual about that? - -Mr. BELMONT. There is nothing unusual whatsoever. Agent Fain -interviewed Oswald on June 26, 1963--1962, I believe it was, was it not? - -The CHAIRMAN. Yes; 1962. - -Mr. BELMONT. And was not satisfied that he had received all the -information he wanted nor that it was a matter that should be closed at -that time. - -Therefore, he set out a lead to re-interview Oswald, and after an -appropriate period he went back and re-interviewed him. This is within -the prerogative of the investigative agent, and certainly if he was not -satisfied with the first interview it was his duty and responsibility -to pursue the matter until he was satisfied. - -Mr. STERN. In your answer to question No. 5, does the response of -Oswald to the question why he went to Russia seem typical to you of the -returned defector, or unusual? - -Mr. BELMONT. There is no such thing as a typical response. Each case is -an individual case, and is decided on its merits and on the background -of the individual, and the circumstances surrounding it. - -Mr. STERN. Would it be usual for the defector to agree to advise you if -he got a contact? Are they generally that cooperative? - -Mr. BELMONT. We ask them because we want to know, and the purpose of -our interview with him was to determine whether he had been recruited -by the Soviet intelligence, and we asked him whether he would tell us -if he was contacted here in this country. He replied he would. Whether -he meant it is a question. However, you must bear in mind that this -man, I believe it was when he was interviewed in July of 1961 in the -American Embassy, the interviewing official there said it was apparent -that he had learned his lesson the hard way, and that he had a new -concept of the American way of life, and apparently had decided that -Russia was not for him. - -When we interviewed him likewise he told us that he had not enjoyed -his stay in Russia. He likewise commented that he had not enjoyed his -stay in the Marines. So that in direct answer to your question, it is -customary for us in such a case as this, to ask the man if he will -report a contact, and it is customary for him to say yes, because -frankly, he would be putting himself in a rather bad light if he didn't -say yes. - -Mr. STERN. Turning to---- - -Mr. DULLES. Could I ask a question there: Do I correctly read your -report and those of your agents to the general effect that you had no -evidence that there was any attempt to recruit Oswald in the United -States? - -Mr. BELMONT. No evidence whatsoever. - -Mr. STERN. Question 8, Mr. Belmont, on page 5, sets out the information -from a report by Agent Hosty regarding alleged Fair Play for Cuba -Committee activity by Oswald while he was still residing in Dallas. -Have you found that an investigation was conducted to determine whether -that was accurate and do you think it should have been investigated? - -Mr. BELMONT. As to whether he was active with the Fair Play for Cuba -Committee in Dallas? We did check. We have rather excellent coverage -of such activities. There is no evidence whatsoever to indicate that -he was active with the Fair Play for Cuba Committee in Dallas. And, -as a matter of fact, I can go a step further and say that following -his dissemination of pamphlets and his activities in New Orleans, our -inquiry of our sources who are competent to tell us what is going on in -the organizations such as Fair Play for Cuba Committee, advised that -he was not known to them in New Orleans. So that his activities in New -Orleans were of his own making, and not as a part of the organized -activities of the Fair Play for Cuba Committee. - -Mr. McCLOY. On that point, Mr. Belmont, where did he get his material, -the printed material that he was distributing? Must he not have gotten -that from some headquarters? - -Mr. BELMONT. It is my recollection that he had that printed up himself. - -The CHAIRMAN. That is right. - -Mr. McCLOY. All of it, so far as you know, was self-induced, so to -speak? - -Mr. BELMONT. Correct. - -Mr. STERN. Does your answer imply, Mr. Belmont, that there were Fair -Play for Cuba activities in Dallas and New Orleans that you knew about? - -Mr. BELMONT. No; we do not have information of Fair Play for Cuba -activities in Dallas nor any organized activity in New Orleans. So that -this letter that you refer to, which was undated, was, as in so many -things that Oswald wrote, not based on fact. - -Mr. STERN. On page 7 in the answer to question 12, you refer to the -inconsistencies and contradictions between the information Oswald gave -to Agent Quigley when he interviewed him in the New Orleans jail and -the facts as they were known to the FBI before that, and say that "in -the event the investigation of Oswald warranted a further interview, -these discrepancies would have been discussed with him." - -Can you explain why the fact of these inconsistencies and -contradictions and perhaps outright lies to Agent Quigley was not -itself reason for a further interview? - -Mr. BELMONT. Let me turn this just a little bit and say why should we -re-interview him? - -Our interest in this man at this point was to determine whether his -activities constituted a threat to the internal security of the -country. It was apparent that he had made a self-serving statement to -Agent Quigley. It became a matter of record in our files as a part of -the case, and if we determined that the course of the investigation -required us to clarify or face him down with this information, we would -do it at the appropriate time. - -In other words, he committed no violation of the law by telling -us something that wasn't true, and unless this required further -investigation at that time, we would handle it in due course, in accord -with the whole context of the investigation. - -Mr. STERN. Do you know whether the fact of these contradictions was -called to the attention of the Dallas office at the time of Oswald's -return to Dallas? - -Mr. BELMONT. The entire file, of course, or the pertinent serials were -sent to Dallas at the time that the case was transferred back to Dallas -so they would have that information. - -Mr. STERN. I gather what you are saying is they would note the -contradictions from the reports? - -Mr. BELMONT. Yes. - -Mr. STERN. In the answer to question 14 on page 8, again in connection -with these inconsistencies, the letter reads "These inconsistencies -were considered in subsequent investigation." - -Can you expand on that and tell us how they were considered? - -Mr. BELMONT. That is right along the line of my previous explanation -to you, namely, that they were recorded in the file. In the event it -was desired to talk to him further at a future date, they would be -considered as to whether we desired to have him further explain. - -Mr. STERN. On page 12, in response to question 22, which asked for -an explanation of the reason for the investigation to ascertain his -whereabouts, the letter reads, "In view of Oswald's background and -activities the FBI had a continuing interest in him." - -What was the nature of that continuing interest at that time? - -Mr. BELMONT. On August 21, 1963, because of his activities in -distributing these pamphlets, and his arrest in New Orleans, -headquarters here in Washington sent a letter to the New Orleans and -Dallas offices instructing them to pursue the investigation. In other -words, in evaluating this information we felt it desirable that we -further explore his activities to determine whether they were inimical -to the internal security of the country. So that we had this continuing -interest based on our evaluation, and so instructed our field offices. - -Mr. STERN. Mr. Chairman, I believe the answers to the other questions -give us a complete enough record. - -The CHAIRMAN. Very well. - -Mr. STERN. May this exhibit which has been marked 833 for -identification be admitted? - -The CHAIRMAN. It may be admitted in evidence under that number. - -(The document referred to, previously marked Commission Exhibit No. 833 -for identification, was received in evidence.) - -Mr. McCLOY. Is there anything else, Mr. Belmont, that you may want to -add? You have already been asked this question as you went through all -these questions and answers, but is there anything else you would like -to add in view of your answers this morning in further elaboration of -the answers that have been given? - -Mr. BELMONT. No, sir; unless the Commission has further questions at -this point, I believe that the questions are answered properly and -sufficiently. - -Mr. McCLOY. You think that if you are interviewing a defector which is -something that provokes your interest, and I guess the mere fact of -defection and return to the United States would do so, and if you found -that defector was lying to you, you think that without something in -addition to that there would be no further necessity of examining him. -Is that a fair question? Let me put it another way. - -Mr. BELMONT. I have just a little difficulty following you. - -Mr. McCLOY. Here is my point. Here was a defector who comes within the -category of interesting cases naturally. - -Mr. BELMONT. Yes, sir. - -Mr. McCLOY. And you question him and you find he is lying to you. At -that stage, as I understand your testimony, you say without something -more you don't necessarily go any further, is that right? - -Mr. BELMONT. No; that is not correct. We had talked to this man twice -in detail concerning the question of possible recruitment by Soviet -intelligence. We had checked his activities. He was settling down. He -had a wife and a child. He had, according to what he had told us, in -our interview with him, he had not enjoyed his stay in Russia. The -State Department evaluation of him in Moscow was that he had learned -his lesson and, as a matter of fact, he had made some statement to the -effect that he now recognized the value of the American way of life, -along those lines. - -So that we had pretty well settled that issue. At the time that we -interviewed him in the jail in New Orleans, we had again been following -his activities because of his communications, his contacts with The -Worker and the Fair Play for Cuba Committee and our interest there was -to determine whether he was a dangerous subversive. The interview in -the jail was very apparently a self-serving interview in an attempt -to explain his activities in the New Orleans area, and if I recall -correctly, he took the position that the policy as directed against -Cuba was not correct, and that the Fair Play for Cuba Committee was -merely addressing itself to the complaints of Cuba, and was not in -effect a subversive organization. - -If, Mr. McCloy, during those first two interviews where we were -pursuing this matter of him being a defector and his recruitment, he -had lied to us, and the agent was not satisfied we would have pursued -it to the bitter end. Or if during any other time information came to -our attention which indicated a necessity to pursue that further we -would have pursued it to the bitter end. - -Mr. McCLOY. You speak of this as a self-serving interview. Do you think -that he sought the interview with you, with Mr. Quigley eventually, -because he had known of the prior contacts that he had had with the -FBI, and he simply wanted to keep out of trouble? - -Mr. BELMONT. I don't know why he asked to see an agent. I simply do not -know why. - -Mr. McCLOY. I think that is all. - -Mr. STERN. Mr. Belmont, I show you a letter marked for identification -Commission Exhibit No. 834. Can you identify that for the Commission, -please? - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 834 for -identification.) - -Mr. BELMONT. This is a letter dated May 4, 1964, addressed to the -Commission which sets forth in summary the contents of the headquarters -file on Oswald prior to the assassination. - -Mr. STERN. Do you have that file with you? - -Mr. BELMONT. Yes, sir. - -Mr. STERN. Would you explain generally to the Commission what materials -there are in that file that for security reasons you would prefer not -to disclose? - -Mr. BELMONT. The file contains the identity of some of our informants -in subversive movements. It contains information as to some of the -investigative techniques whereby we were able to receive some of the -information which has been made available to the Commission. - -Mr. STERN. I think that is enough, Mr. Belmont, on that. - -Mr. McCLOY. You didn't have anything further to add to that, did you? - -Mr. BELMONT. No. - -The CHAIRMAN. I think as to those things if it is agreeable to the -other members of the Commission, we will not pursue any questioning -that will call for an answer that would divulge those matters that you -have just spoken of. - -Mr. BELMONT. I would like to make it clear, Mr. Chairman, that--I think -that is very kind of you--I would like to make it clear that Mr. Hoover -has expressed a desire to be of the utmost help to the Commission, -and to make any information available that will be helpful to the -Commission. I think your observation is very much worthwhile. - -Mr. STERN. Mr. Belmont, have you reviewed the actual file and this -letter of May 4 which summarizes each document in the file? - -Mr. BELMONT. Yes, sir. - -Mr. STERN. And to your knowledge, is this an accurate summary of each -piece of information in the file? - -Mr. BELMONT. Yes, sir. - -Mr. STERN. The file is available to the Commission? - -Mr. BELMONT. Yes, sir. - -Mr. STERN. If they want to look at any item in it? - -Mr. BELMONT. Yes, sir. - -The CHAIRMAN. The file does not include that security matter that you -mentioned, or does it? - -Mr. BELMONT. This file is as it is maintained at the Bureau with all -information in it. - -The CHAIRMAN. With all information in it? - -Mr. BELMONT. Yes, sir; this is the actual file. - -The CHAIRMAN. I see. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Belmont, are you willing to leave the file a reasonable -time in case any of the Commissioners desire to examine it personally? - -Mr. BELMONT. Yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. We will return it. - -The CHAIRMAN. I wonder if we do want it on those conditions. If we want -to get anything from it don't you think, Mr. Rankin, that we ought -to make it known here while the witness is here. I personally don't -care to have this information that involves our security unless it is -necessary, and I don't want to have documents in my possession where it -could be assumed that I had gotten that information and used it, so I -would rather, I would rather myself confine our questions to this file -to the testimony of Mr. Belmont. Then if we want it, if we want any of -those things, it then becomes a matter to discuss here in the open, and -not just in privacy. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Chairman, I felt it made a better record if the file is -available only to the Commissioners in case they do want to examine it, -and then it will be taken back and the staff will not examine it. - -The CHAIRMAN. I think he has stated that the file will be made -available to us whenever we want it. - -Mr. RANKIN. Yes. - -The CHAIRMAN. If we do want it to read it that is one thing. For -myself, I think we can get what we want from examining the witness, -and then if there is any portion of it that comes into play why we can -determine the question here, but I really would prefer not to have a -secret file, I mean a file that contains matters of that kind in our -possession. - -Mr. RANKIN. There is one factor that I wanted to get before the -Commission and in the record, and that is that you had all the -information that the FBI had in regard to this matter, and I thought -that was important to your proceedings, so that we would not retain -such a file, and we had an accurate summary but that it is available -so that the Commission can be satisfied that nothing was withheld from -it in regard to this particular question. That was the purpose of the -inquiry. - -Mr. DULLES. I assume, Mr. Belmont, if later other testimony arises that -would make us desire to refer to this file we could consult it in your -offices or you would make it available to us? - -Mr. BELMONT. Yes, sir. - -The CHAIRMAN. I think I would personally rather have it done on that -basis. What do you think, Mr. McCloy? - -Mr. McCLOY. I was just glancing at the file, and it seems to have the -regular, the usual type of reports that we have seen. But there is a -good bit of elaboration in those, in that file of the summary which -is here. This summary I don't think can purport to be a complete -description of the documents that are in here, as I glance through them -here. - -I just happened to see a good bit of detail in here which doesn't have -anything to do with the security problem we talked about, but I would -think that probably it would be wise for some member of the Commission -or members of the Commission as a whole, to run through that file in -order to be sure that we have seen the material elements of the file -that we would not perhaps, might not, be able to get from this letter -of May 4. - -The CHAIRMAN. Well, there are so many of these questions in here that -are obviously matters that we would have no more concern with than just -to know about them. - -Start from the very beginning, a news clipping from the Corpus Christi -Times, dated October 2, 1959. Now if that excites any interest on the -part of any member, why we could say, "Well, could you show us that?" -Then the next is the United Press release, dated October 31 at Moscow, -and a great many of these. - -Now, I wonder if it wouldn't be better for us to look over all of these -various things, items that are in the file, and then if there are any -that happen to excite our interest, we can ask Mr. Belmont about it. -If it is a matter that involves security, we could then discuss it and -make our determination as to whether we wanted to see it. I would think -that when we are dealing with things that are as sensitive as the FBI -has to deal with in that respect, that that would be adequate; that is -my opinion of it. - -But if the rest of the Commission feel that they want to see it -notwithstanding the security measure, I would, of course, have no -objection. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Chief Justice, what I was trying to deal with was a -claim by someone that the Commission never saw all there was in the -hands of the FBI about Lee Harvey Oswald, and we recognize that some -of these items should not be considered important by anyone, as we look -at the matter, but we wanted you to be able to satisfy the public and -the country that whatever there was that the FBI had, the Commission -had it, and we didn't think that in light of the security problems -the whole file should be a part of the files of the Commission. And -we tried to present here a summary, even of items that did not seem -important, but we did want the record in such condition that the -Commission could say in its report, "We have seen everything that they -have." I think it is important to the case. - -Mr. McCLOY. I notice, Mr. Belmont, in running through this file, a note -here that symbols are used in instances where the identities of the -sources must be concealed. - -Mr. BELMONT. That is correct, sir. - -Mr. McCLOY. If that is so---- - -Mr. BELMONT. In some instances. - -Mr. McCLOY. Only in some instances. There are other cases where that is -not the case. - -Mr. BELMONT. Yes; that is right. - -Mr. McCLOY. There is a great deal of narrative in here about Oswald and -his relations with the Embassy. Maybe it is elsewhere in the record. - -Mr. BELMONT. I would presume that you have received that from the other -agencies. Those are copies of communications that the other agencies -sent to us. - -The CHAIRMAN. Well, why couldn't we go over this list and see what -items we would be interested in and then we can determine, can we not, -whether we want---- - -Mr. McCLOY. I am not so sure, you can look through this yourself, I am -not so sure if from reading just that short summary you get the full -impact of all the narrative that is in the various reports. There is a -good bit here. For example, one page I have here about this business of -beating his wife and the drinking. There is a good bit of detail. - -Mr. BELMONT. Mr. McCloy, you have that record. - -The CHAIRMAN. We have the record, I have read the records myself. - -Mr. McCLOY. Maybe we have that one. - -Mr. BELMONT. Any investigative report you have. - -Mr. McCLOY. Is there any investigative report in here that we have not -got? - -Mr. BELMONT. No, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. We are trying to develop, Mr. Chief Justice and -Commissioners, that you have everything that the FBI had, this is their -total file in regard to this matter of Lee Harvey Oswald so that there -is nothing withheld from you as far as the FBI is concerned. That is -part of what we are trying to develop this morning, in addition to the -items themselves. - -Mr. DULLES. I wonder if the staff, Mr. Rankin, could not go over this -and check over those items we have from other sources and what the FBI -has already furnished us so what we deal with with respect to this file -are only items that are not in the Commission's records, already. That -would cut this down by half, I would imagine or more. - -Mr. RANKIN. Yes; we could do that for you. - -Mr. DULLES. Then we could have this available possibly at a later date -just to check over the other items against your files to see if there -is any information there that we really need. - -The CHAIRMAN. You could come back, couldn't you, Mr. Belmont? - -Mr. BELMONT. I am at your disposal. - -The CHAIRMAN. I think that would be better. I think, Mr. Rankin, your -purpose is entirely laudable here, but I think we do have to use some -discretion in the matter, and you say that you want it so we can say we -have seen everything. Well, the same people who would demand that we -see everything of this kind would also demand that they be entitled to -see it, and if it is security matters we can't let them see it. It has -to go back to the FBI without their scrutiny. - -So unless, I would say, unless there is something that we think -here is vital to this situation, that it isn't necessary for us to -see the whole file, particularly in view of the fact that we have -practically--we have all the reports, he says we have all the reports -that are in that file, and it just seems like thrashing old straw to go -over it and over it again. - -Mr. McCLOY. Do we have copies of all these telegrams that are in here -from the Embassy? - -Mr. BELMONT. You are looking at---- - -Mr. McCLOY. Not Embassy; here is one from Mexico. Do we have that? We -don't have these in our files, for example. - -Mr. BELMONT. This is subsequent to the assassination. You see your area -of interest at this point is information, all information we had prior -to the assassination. I did not remove from this file the items that -started to come in subsequent to the assassination, you see. - -Mr. McCLOY. My feeling is that somebody on the Commission should -examine that file. I can't come to any other conclusion after reading -it all, because I don't know what is in it, what is in our record, -and what is in that file. There is a good bit of material there that -is narrative, which I think would be relevant. Certainly, I don't -believe we can be possibly criticized for deleting or not producing -a file which contains the type of information that you are speaking -of. We are just as interested in protecting the security of your -investigative processes as you are. But I don't think that when it is -on the record that we have this file, that may contain material that -was not in our files, and we are given the opportunity to examine it, -without disclosing these confidential matters that we ought not to have -somebody go through it. - -Mr. DULLES. I agree with that but I think we could save time if we -checked off first what we have already and that would cut out about -half of that file probably. - -Mr. McCLOY. I think in a rapid glance through it, I think just about -half of it. - -The CHAIRMAN. Well, suppose you do that then, get those and let's see. -All right, proceed, Mr. Stern. - -Mr. STERN. I think perhaps we ought to leave the entire matter of the -file then until we can give you the information. - -The CHAIRMAN. That is right. - -Mr. STERN. May we admit for the purposes of the record this list at -this time, Mr. Chief Justice, which has been marked No. 834? - -The CHAIRMAN. Yes. There are no security matters in this? - -Mr. BELMONT. No, sir. - -The CHAIRMAN. It may be admitted as Exhibit No. 834. - -(The document referred to, previously marked Commission Exhibit No. 834 -for identification, was received in evidence.) - -Mr. STERN. Mr. Belmont, can you identify this letter dated February 6 -with an attached affidavit which has been marked for identification as -Commission Exhibit No. 835? - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 835, for -identification.) - -Mr. BELMONT. Yes; this is a letter dated February 6, 1964, to the -Commission from the FBI to which is attached an affidavit by Director -J. Edgar Hoover. - -Mr. STERN. What is the subject? - -Mr. BELMONT. Stating flatly that Lee Harvey Oswald was never an -informant of the FBI. - -Mr. DULLES. Would you define informant. Obviously in the sense he knew -some information as previously indicated from the previous interviews. -I mean for the record, would you just define what you mean by an -informant in this sense? - -Mr. BELMONT. An informant in this sense is an individual who has agreed -to cooperate with the FBI and to furnish information to the FBI either -for or without payment. - -Mr. STERN. Thank you. - -Mr. BELMONT. This would not, of course, include the cooperative citizen -to whom we go, and who frequently and frankly discloses any information -in his possession, but rather someone who joins an organization or -seeks out information at the direction and instance of the FBI relative -to subversive or criminal matters. In other words, I want to make it -clear we do not regard patriotic citizens as informants. - -Mr. STERN. I take it you also would not have regarded Lee Oswald as an -informant from the contacts with him that you have told us about and -the other agents have told us about? - -Mr. BELMONT. Indeed not; in no way could he be considered an informant; -in no way. - -Mr. STERN. Did you supervise or assist in the preparation of the -information contained here? - -Mr. BELMONT. Yes, sir. - -Mr. STERN. And you are familiar with it? - -Mr. BELMONT. Yes; I am. - -Mr. STERN. And to your knowledge, does it accurately and completely -state the Bureau's practice in recruiting a prospective informant? - -Mr. BELMONT. That is correct. - -Mr. STERN. Is there anything you would like to add to the information -covered in there with respect to your practices regarding informants? - -Mr. BELMONT. No; only in my personal knowledge this is a correct -statement and Lee Harvey Oswald was not an informant of the FBI. - -Mr. STERN. Did you ever use the term "agent" to apply to anyone other -than an employee, a special agent employee of the FBI? - -Mr. BELMONT. No; we do not. - -Mr. DULLES. Could I ask you, Mr. Belmont, whether Mr. Fain's separation -from the FBI had anything whatever to do with the Oswald case or in his -handling of the Oswald case? - -Mr. BELMONT. No; indeed not. Mr. Fain came to the retirement age and -decided he wanted to retire, which is his privilege, and he retired and -is presently working in Texas and very happy, I understand. - -Mr. DULLES. Thank you. - -Mr. BELMONT. He retired in good graces, good standing, so far as the -FBI is concerned. - -The CHAIRMAN. And a year before the assassination. - -Mr. BELMONT. Frankly, I don't recall. - -The CHAIRMAN. Yes; it was August 1962, he testified. - -Mr. STERN. You have already covered this, Mr. Belmont, but just so that -the record is completely clear on this point, was Lee Oswald ever an -agent of the FBI? - -Mr. BELMONT. Lee Oswald was never an agent of the FBI. - -Mr. STERN. The letter of February 6, 1964, from Mr. Hoover, alludes to -testimony furnished the Commission by District Attorney Wade. Have you -subsequently been advised that Mr. Wade had not testified before the -Commission? - -Mr. BELMONT. Yes; we received a letter from the Commission advising us -that the incident referred to was an informal discussion rather than -actual testimony before the Commission. - -Mr. STERN. And also to complete the record, have you been advised that -Mr. Wade was not suggesting that he believed the rumor about Oswald -as an informant, but felt obliged to call it to the attention of the -Commission? - -Mr. BELMONT. The Commission's letter so advised us. - -Mr. STERN. Mr. Chairman, may this be admitted with No. 835? - -The CHAIRMAN. It may be admitted under that number. - -(The document referred to, previously marked Commission Exhibit No. 835 -for identification, was received in evidence.) - -Mr. STERN. Mr. Belmont, I show you a letter dated February 12, 1964, -a number of affidavits by special agents, attached to it. It was -identified yesterday, parts of it were identified yesterday and it -therefore carries the number for identification 825. Can you identify -this letter for us? - -Mr. BELMONT. In order to be sure--I beg your pardon. This is a letter -dated February 12, 1964, to the Commission from the FBI, to which is -attached affidavits of FBI personnel who had reason to contact Lee -Harvey Oswald and who were in a supervisory capacity over the agents -who contacted Oswald. - -Mr. STERN. Did you supervise the preparation of this material? - -Mr. BELMONT. These affidavits were prepared, of course, by the men -themselves. I have read the affidavits, and they were compiled as an -enclosure and sent over with this letter. - -Mr. STERN. You have reviewed them in preparation for your testimony -before the Commission? - -Mr. BELMONT. Yes, sir. - -Mr. STERN. To your knowledge, are they accurate? - -Mr. BELMONT. They are accurate, to my knowledge, yes. - -Mr. STERN. Are they complete? - -Mr. BELMONT. Yes. - -Mr. STERN. They do not omit any significant fact you know of? - -Mr. BELMONT. No. - -Mr. STERN. In connection with the material they cover? - -Mr. BELMONT. No. - -Mr. STERN. Unless there are any questions on that, Mr. Chairman, I -suggest we admit this document. - -The CHAIRMAN. It may be admitted as No. 825. - -(The document referred to, previously marked Commission Exhibit No. 825 -for identification, was received in evidence.) - -Mr. STERN. Mr. Belmont, I show you a letter dated March 31, 1964, from -Director Hoover to Mr. Rankin, the General Counsel of the Commission, -with a series of attachments. Can you identify this which has been -marked for identification as No. 836. Can you identify this for the -Commission? - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 836 for -identification.) - -Mr. BELMONT. This is a letter dated March 31, 1964, to the Commission -from the FBI to which is attached the instructions contained in our -manuals as to the type of information which should be disseminated to -Secret Service and our relations or liaison with Secret Service. - -Mr. STERN. It was prepared in response to a request from the Commission? - -Mr. BELMONT. That is correct. - -Mr. STERN. Did you supervise or assist in the preparation? - -Mr. BELMONT. I did. - -Mr. STERN. Have you reviewed it recently? - -Mr. BELMONT. Yes. - -Mr. STERN. Is it complete with respect to the matters covered? - -Mr. BELMONT. Yes; it is. - -Mr. STERN. Is there anything you would like to add to it with respect -to the matters covered? - -Mr. BELMONT. Well---- - -Mr. DULLES. May I just interrupt here a moment. Is this inquiry -directed to the question of whether it is now adequate or whether this -is complete as of the time of the assassination? I think we have two -questions there to consider. - -Mr. BELMONT. Mr. Dulles, this letter outlines our relations with Secret -Service and the material that is attached covers both the instructions -to our agents prior to the assassination and the current instructions. - -Mr. DULLES. Subsequent to the assassination? - -Mr. BELMONT. Yes, sir. - -Mr. DULLES. Yes. - -Mr. STERN. What were the criteria you employed and instructed your -agents to employ before the assassination in determining what -information should be reported to the Secret Service regarding threats -against the President, members of his family, the President-elect, and -the Vice President? - -Mr. BELMONT. These are contained in detail in the attachments which -represent sections of our manual of instructions which are available to -all of our personnel in the field as well as the seat of Government, -and also in the FBI handbook which is in possession of the individual -agent in the field. These instructions require that any information -indicating the possibility of an attempt against the person or safety -of the persons mentioned by you must be referred immediately by the -most expeditious means of communications to the nearest office of the -Secret Service. Further, that our headquarters in Washington must be -advised by teletype of the information and the fact that it has been -furnished to Secret Service. - -Mr. STERN. Specifically, the kind of information you were interested -in, that is before the assassination? - -Mr. BELMONT. Yes. Specifically the kind? - -Mr. STERN. Yes. - -Mr. BELMONT. Any information indicating the possibility of a threat -against the President and Vice President and members of the family. - -Mr. STERN. Have you broadened---- - -Mr. BELMONT. I may say, sir---- - -Mr. STERN. Yes. - -Mr. BELMONT. That this practice was assiduously followed, and you will -find that the files of the Secret Service are loaded with information -over the years that we have furnished them. That was a practice -religiously followed and a practice voluntarily followed without -request. In other words, we do not have a written request for this type -of information but rather considered it our responsibility and duty to -furnish this information. - -Mr. STERN. Did you ever participate in or do you know of any discussion -with the Secret Service before the assassination regarding the kind of -information they were interested in? - -Mr. BELMONT. We had close liaison with Secret Service, and I have no -doubt that in oral discussions that the question came up. I wasn't -present but I would assume it has come up, particularly as we were -constantly furnishing information. We have no written criteria, you -might say, as to what should be furnished. - -Mr. STERN. That is, established by the Secret Service. - -Mr. BELMONT. That is correct. - -Mr. STERN. And you yourself never participated in any discussion of---- - -Mr. BELMONT. No; I did not. - -Mr. STERN. This liaison function. - -Mr. BELMONT. This is something we have done for years on the basis that -we consider it our responsibility not only as far as the President -goes. As you know, Mr. Chairman, we have also followed the same policy -relative to other high officials when it appears desirable. - -Mr. STERN. Have you subsequent to the assassination augmented your -instructions to special agents in this respect? - -Mr. BELMONT. Yes. On December 26, 1963, we prepared additional -instructions reiterating those already in effect, and adding other -dissemination to Secret Service concerning the security of the -President. - -The CHAIRMAN. Where do those new ones appear in the exhibit, Mr. -Belmont? - -Mr. BELMONT. They appear as an attachment--working from the back, I -think, Mr. Chairman, I can help you most. - -The CHAIRMAN. Yes. - -Mr. BELMONT. Eight pages from the back it starts, it reads, "Manual of -Instructions Section 83." - -The CHAIRMAN. Yes; I have it. - -Mr. BELMONT. The first page is the same information that we previously -furnished to Secret Service involving threats. - -The CHAIRMAN. The first page is intact, as it was before. - -Mr. BELMONT. There may be some slight changes in wording but -essentially it is the same dealing with possible threats. - -The CHAIRMAN. Yes. - -Mr. DULLES. Mr. Belmont, I wonder if it would be possible for the -Commission's convenience to date each one of these papers as of a -certain date. It is quite difficult going through it now without -referring to the letter in each case to determine whether the -instructions are as of the date of the assassination or as of the -present date? - -Mr. BELMONT. We can do that without any difficulty. I would be glad to -do it with the staff, or can I help you here? - -Mr. DULLES. Well, I think we can do that later but I think it would -be useful when this goes into the record for our later reference in -studying this to have those dates available to us on each one of the -attachments. - -Mr. BELMONT. Very good. - -Mr. DULLES. Thank you. - -Mr. BELMONT. Coming back to this item you inquired about, sir, -the other dissemination to Secret Service concerning the security -of the President is set forth on pages 2 and 3 of this inclusion -in our manual, and it extends the dissemination to "subversives, -ultrarightists, racists, and fascists, (_a_) possessing emotional -instability or irrational behavior, (_b_) who have made threats of -bodily harm against officials or employees of Federal, State or local -government or officials of a foreign government, (_c_) who express -or have expressed strong or violent anti-U.S. sentiments and who -have been involved in bombing or bomb-making or whose past conduct -indicates tendencies toward violence, and (_d_) whose prior acts or -statements depict propensity for violence and hatred against organized -government." That was prepared in an effort to provide additional, and -a voluntary effort, without request, to provide additional information -that might be helpful to avoid such an incident as happened November -22, 1963. - -Mr. STERN. This did not come about, this change did not come about, -through any request from the Secret Service or discussion with the -Secret Service? - -Mr. BELMONT. No. We made these changes, as I say, in an effort to -provide any additional information in the light of what happened that -might be of assistance to Secret Service and might assist in protecting -the President. - -Mr. DULLES. I wonder, Mr. Belmont, whether you would consider possibly -changing in section (_d_) the word "and" to "or" whose prior acts or -statements depict propensity for violence" and then it now reads "and -hatred against organized government". There have been cases, I believe, -where the propensity for violence had not been previously noted but the -hatred of organized government has. - -Mr. BELMONT. We will be happy to change that. - -Mr. DULLES. I just suggest for your consideration, I don't wish to -rewrite it. - -Mr. BELMONT. We would be happy to change it, Mr. Dulles. - -Mr. STERN. Following Mr. Dulles' thought, in the line above that, Mr -Belmont, should that "and" before (_d_) be "and" or "or"? Do you mean -these---- - -Mr. BELMONT. We do not mean that all of these items must be coupled -together if that is your thought. - -Mr. STERN. That is right. - -Mr. BELMONT. We will be happy to change the "and" before (d) to an "or". - -Mr. STERN. This means any of the broad classifications of people, -subversives, ultrarightists, racists or fascists who meet any of these -four tests. - -Mr. BELMONT. That is correct. - -Mr. STERN. Can you give the Commission some notion of the increase in -volume which the broadening of your criteria has brought about? By -volume, I mean the volume of your references to the Secret Service. - -Mr. BELMONT. I do not have an exact figure, however, I do know that -more than 5,000 additional names have gone over to Secret Service under -these criteria. - -The CHAIRMAN. In what period of time? - -Mr. BELMONT. Since we put them out. - -The CHAIRMAN. I see. - -Mr. BELMONT. Which was December 26. - -The CHAIRMAN. Yes. - -Mr. McCLOY. Have you included defectors in this list? - -Mr. BELMONT. Yes, sir; we do include defectors. - -Mr. STERN. You mean as of December 26, 1963? - -Mr. BELMONT. Correct. - -Mr. STERN. Has the expansion of your criteria led to any problem or -difficulty for you or for individuals or do you anticipate any problem -or difficulty under the expanded criteria? - -Mr. BELMONT. It seems to me that there is a necessity to balance -security against freedom of the individual. This is a country of laws -and a government of law, and not a government of men. Inevitably the -increase in security means an increase in the control of the individual -and a diminishment, therefore, of his individual liberties. It is -a simple matter to increase security. But every time you increase -security you diminish the area of the rights of the individual. In -some countries the problem of a visiting dignitary is met without much -difficulty. Persons who are suspect or may be considered dangerous -are immediately rounded up and detained while the individual is in the -country. The authorities have no problem because in those countries -there is not a free society such as we enjoy, and the people who are -detained have no redress. The FBI approaches this whole field of -security--I am not boring you with this, am I? - -The CHAIRMAN. No, indeed. This is tremendously important. - -Mr. BELMONT. The FBI approaches this whole field of security and its -tremendous responsibilities to protect the internal security of the -country as a sacred trust. In carrying out our investigations and our -work in the security field, we do it in such a manner under the law -that we strengthen rather than weaken the free society that we enjoy. -It is for that reason that our men are trained carefully, thoroughly, -and supervised carefully, to insure that their approach to the entire -security field, which inevitably touches on control of thought, is -handled with extreme care. Our activities are directed to meet the -terrific responsibility we have for the internal security of the -country, but to meet it under the law. We feel that to place security -as such above the rights of the individual or to increase these -controls beyond what is absolutely essential is the first step toward -the destruction of this free society that we enjoy. - -We have been asked many times why we don't pick up and jail all -Communists. The very people who ask those questions don't realize that -if action, unrestrained action, is taken against a particular group -of people, a precedent is set which can be seized on in the future by -power-hungry or unscrupulous authorities as a precedent, and which -inevitably will gnaw away at this free society we have, and sooner or -later will be applied to the very individuals who are seeking this -action. Up until the time of the assassination we religiously and -carefully and expeditiously furnished to Secret Service immediately -on a local basis as well as on a national basis, headquarters basis, -any and all information that in any way was indicated to be a possible -threat against the President. This permitted Secret Service to take -such action as was required against these individuals who had by -their action set the stage for appropriate restraint or observation -based on something they did. Therefore, they were not in a position -to complain legitimately because they had by some word or deed set -in motion a threat against the President of the United States. Since -the assassination, as I have testified, we have broadened the area of -dissemination in an effort to be helpful. It stands without question -that we could have said, "No; we won't go any further." But we felt -that it was our responsibility to do whatever we could do and, hence, -we have broadened these criteria, and we have distributed thousands of -pieces of information on individuals to Secret Service. - -(At this point in the proceedings, Representative Ford enters the -hearing room.) - -We are not entirely comfortable about this, because under these -broadened criteria after all we are furnishing names of people who have -not made a threat against the President, people who have expressed -beliefs, who have belonged or do belong to organizations which believe -in violent revolution or taking things into their own hands. Unless -such information is handled with judgment and care, it can be dangerous. - -For example, we know that in one city when the President recently -visited, the police went to these people and told them, "You stay in -the house while the President is here or if you go out, we will go with -you." We know that these people have threatened to consult attorneys, -have threatened to make a public issue of the matter on the theory that -this is restraint that is not justified as they have made no threats -against the President. Now, when you examine this a bit further, we -give these names to Secret Service. Secret Service must do something -with those names, and Secret Service solicits the assistance of the -police, quite properly. But I don't need, I think, to paint this -picture any further, that when you get away from a specific act or deed -of threats against the President, and you go into the broader area of -what, perhaps, a man is thinking and, therefore, he may be a threat, -and you take action against the man on the basis of that, there is a -danger. - -That is why, despite the fact that we have given this additional -information and will continue to do so, we are uneasy. Again, if I -may be permitted to continue, this is inherent in the entire approach -of the FBI to the security field. We go as far in our investigations -as is necessary. But we go no further. We do not harass people. -We do not conduct an investigation of a man for what he may be -thinking. We attempt to the very best of our ability to carry out -this responsibility for internal security without adopting tactics -of harassment or unwarranted investigation, and we will not pursue -a security matter beyond that which is essential to carry out our -responsibilities. Now, I say that because that is the broad field of -our policy, and I say it with complete sincerity, because I know. I -have been in this work with the FBI both in the actual investigative -field and in the policymaking and supervisory field for 27 years, and -I know the policies and the procedures that are followed, and the care -with which this problem is approached, and I agree with it fully. - -Mr. McCLOY. You are going to impose a pretty heavy burden on the Secret -Service when you dump them with the 5,000 more names than they have -been used to having. - -Mr. BELMONT. It will be more than 5,000, sir. This will continue. - -Mr. McCLOY. From your knowledge of the situation, do you feel that -the Secret Service is equipped to cope with this added burden? Is it -something that you feel---- - -Mr. BELMONT. The Secret Service, as it has in the past, is required -to call on the police for assistance in this field when the President -visits a city. I do not know the exact complement of personnel of -Secret Service, but they are a relatively small organization. - -Mr. McCLOY. It may be they will have to reorganize some of their -procedures to cope with this, won't they? - -Mr. BELMONT. I do not know. - -Mr. McCLOY. You have got a pretty broad classification here. "All -investigative personnel should be alert for the identification of -subversives, ultrarightists, racists, and Fascists (_a_) possessing -emotional instability or irrational behavior." That may include a -good many people in the United States and maybe some members of this -Commission--I am speaking for myself. There is irrational behavior that -I have been guilty of many times. [Laughter.] This doesn't mean you -are going to send everybody over there, but the names that--all those -under your classification, all of those in your opinion come under that -classification unless you feel they have some, there is some, reason -behind it. In other words, you are selective in this list. You purport -to be selective in the numbers that you are going to convey to, the -names you are going to convey to, the Secret Service. - -Mr. BELMONT. We endeavor to use good judgment, sir. Now, as you -indicate there are what, 190 million people in this country, and who -knows when someone may adopt abnormal behavior. - -You cannot tell tomorrow who will pose a risk. This is an effort to be -as helpful as possible and, as we have in the past, we will use our -best judgment. But this will broaden considerably the type of people -and the number of people who go to the Secret Service. - -Mr. McCLOY. That is what I am getting at really, Mr. Belmont. You are -not saying that all those people that you characterize here under -this paragraph 2 will ipso facto be sent over to the Secret Service -every time the President makes a move. This simply says that all -investigative personnel should be alert in that situation; am I right -in that? - -Mr. BELMONT. No, sir. If you will follow in the next paragraph, we say, -"If cases are developed falling within the above categories, promptly -furnish Secret Service locally a letterhead memorandum" with the -information. - -Mr. McCLOY. So without any further ado all the people in your list who -are in that category will be transferred over to the Secret Service -when there is an occasion, when the President travels? - -Mr. BELMONT. No. This is a continuing procedure. In other words, during -our investigations we come across someone who is in this area or -category, and this is a requirement that that man's name go to Secret -Service with a brief description of him, and Secret Service then has -that filed and is in a position to know that that individual has been -referred to them. - -Mr. McCLOY. Well, that brings up again the comment that I originally -made. This does put a big burden of investigation and judgment on -the Secret Service, one which they have not heretofore presumably had -placed on their shoulders. - -Mr. BELMONT. I think you are correct. - -Mr. McCLOY. The reason I am asking these questions is because by -implication, at least, one of our directives is to look into this -situation for the future protection of the President, and we want to -see that we have got something that is practical as well as cautious. - -Mr. DULLES. Do the memoranda attached, Mr. Belmont, to this exhibit -indicate what classes were so identified for investigation under the -procedures existing at the time of the assassination and what change -has been made, how it has been extended? - -Mr. BELMONT. Yes, sir. If you---- - -Mr. DULLES. By the definitions under paragraph 2 of the Manual of -Instructions. - -Mr. BELMONT. The previous page and the paragraph right above No. 2 sets -forth the same information that we acted on prior to the assassination. - -Mr. DULLES. That is paragraph 1? - -Mr. BELMONT. Yes, sir. - -Mr. DULLES. The Manual of Instructions, section 83. - -Mr. BELMONT. Yes, sir. - -Mr. DULLES. What are the various categories given now at the top of -page 2 of this exhibit which have been added? - -Mr. BELMONT. At the top of page 2, sir, that is the information that -should be included in the notification to headquarters as to who the -individual is and the background information that was furnished to -Secret Service so that we, too, can disseminate to Secret Service here. - -Representative FORD. Under the new criteria would Oswald's name have -gone to the Secret Service automatically? - -Mr. BELMONT. Well, Congressman, right now we are including all -defectors automatically. - -Now, the question whether Oswald meets these criteria here as set -forth is a question of judgment. As I say, right now we do furnish all -defectors. - -Representative FORD. Defectors are for the time being at least a -special category other than what is set forth here unless for some -other reason they would fall into one of these categories. - -Mr. BELMONT. Yes. - -Mr. McCLOY. Do you under that category send forward all Communists? - -Mr. BELMONT. Yes. - -Mr. McCLOY. All Communists, yes. - -Mr. DULLES. Mr. Chairman, I wonder whether or not it would be wise -for the record at this point to read into the record, in view of the -importance of this, this paragraph which we are now discussing and -which, as I understand it, contains the new definition of investigative -cases? - -The CHAIRMAN. Yes; we can put it into the record. - -Mr. DULLES. Mr. Belmont, as I understand it, the new criteria are set -forth in paragraph 2 on page 2 of the Manual of Instructions, section -83; is that correct? - -Mr. BELMONT. That is correct. - -Mr. McCLOY. Which, as I counted, is the 12th page of the Commission's -Exhibit No. 836; is that right, Mr. Stern? - -Mr. STERN. That is right number of the exhibit. - -Mr. McCLOY. 836, and I think it is the 12th page. - -Mr. DULLES. For convenient reference I suggest that when this be -included that we add the dates and the page numbers. - -Mr. STERN. I think the witness can do this immediately. - -The CHAIRMAN. We will give a copy of it to the reporter and he may copy -it and incorporate it later in the record. - -(Paragraph 2 reads as follows:) - -"Other dissemination to Secret Service concerning security of the -President. All investigative personnel should be alert for the -identification of subversives, ultrarightists, racists, and Fascists -(_a_) possessing emotional instability or irrational behavior, (_b_) -who have made threats of bodily harm against officials or employees -of Federal, State, or local government or officials of a foreign -government, (_c_) who express or have expressed strong or violent -anti-U.S. sentiments and who have been involved in bombing or bomb -making or whose past conduct indicates tendencies toward violence, and -(_d_) whose prior acts or statements depict propensity for violence and -hatred against organized government." - -Mr. DULLES. Do I understand you, Mr. Belmont, to say, as drafted -you would not consider that defectors automatically fell under this -paragraph 2, but it is your practice to notify the Secret Service about -defectors? - -Mr. BELMONT. We do notify Secret Service of any defectors coming to our -attention. - -Mr. DULLES. And by defectors, I guess we mean here maybe a redefector, -meaning those who have gone to Russia and have come back or maybe those -who have gone and not come back. - -Mr. BELMONT. If they haven't come back---- - -Mr. DULLES. They are not a danger. - -Mr. BELMONT. They are not within our cognizance and we don't notify -Secret Service. - -Mr. DULLES. These would be defectors who have gone to the Soviet Union -and who then come back to the United States and tried to defect while -they were over there. - -Mr. McCLOY. Not necessarily, not exclusively the Soviet Union, of -course. - -Mr. DULLES. Communist countries, I would say. - -Representative FORD. Just to get an order of magnitude, how many are -there? Is this a sizable number? - -Mr. BELMONT. I don't have a figure, Mr. Ford. You have had defectors in -Korea from the military. You have had defectors---- - -Mr. McCLOY. Germany. - -Mr. BELMONT. Berlin. When these are military personnel they are within -the cognizance of the military, so that it is very difficult for me to -give you a figure. - -When we become interested is when they return to this country and -warrant action by us from an internal security standpoint. - -As in the Oswald case, we started our action based on newspaper -publicity that he had attempted to or indicated his intention to, -renounce his citizenship in Moscow. But I do not have a figure because -many of these people are members of the armed services and I would -hesitate to give you an estimate. - -Mr. STERN. Mr. Belmont, do these terms "subversives, ultrarightists, -racists, and Fascists" have a particular meaning of art in FBI -parlance? Can you tell us how you use these terms in this regulation or -what these mean to you and to your agents. - -Mr. BELMONT. I will have to refer you to the dictionary, I think, Mr. -Stern. A subversive is an individual who is active in the Communist -Party or front groups associated with it or one of the other groups -that we term subversive, such as the Socialist Workers Party. - -The ultrarightists---- - -Mr. DULLES. Socialist Workers Party is a Trotskyite Party, is it not? - -Mr. BELMONT. Yes, sir. - -The ultrarightists, I believe here we attempt to spell out those people -who are so far to the right that they do not consider themselves -subject to the law and the proper procedures, and take things into -their own hands. - -The racists, I think, are--that speaks for itself, individuals who will -go beyond the bounds of propriety in seeking their goals, and who adopt -violence. - -The Fascists---- - -Mr. McCLOY. I was wondering how you were going to define that one. - -Mr. BELMONT. Is to give you the opposite end of the spectrum of -subversives. - -Mr. DULLES. Do we have anarchists in this country at the present time? -There used to be an old anarchist society in the old days. - -Mr. BELMONT. That used to be, but it is dissolved. There is no -organization. I venture to say we have individual anarchists at this -time. - -Mr. DULLES. No organized anarchist organization. - -Mr. BELMONT. No. - -Mr. STERN. Mr. Belmont, in view of the quite important considerations -you mentioned before, the danger of interfering with individual -liberty, would it be possible within your organization to have the -agents recommend to headquarters here and have someone at a higher -level examine the recommendation before it is made to the Secret -Service? This is, as I understand it, a continuing program and not one -that comes into effect only when the President schedules a trip. This -would operate without respect to scheduled trips by the President. -Would that be possible? Would it fit your operation? Do you think it -might help any? - -Mr. BELMONT. Well, what is your thought behind that, Mr. Stern? In -other words, so that names of persons won't indiscriminately be sent on -a local level? - -Mr. STERN. Precisely. These categories are, after all, fairly gross. -They use large terms which can mean different things to different -people. The considerations you mention, I think, are quite real and -important. Would it help any to do something of the sort? - -Mr. BELMONT. I think we will find that our agents are using good -judgment in this matter. The danger involved in referring these matters -to headquarters for a decision as to dissemination is the delay in -time and, you will note, we stress the time element that when such -information comes into the possession of our agents, immediate steps -must be taken to transmit this information to Secret Service by the -most expeditious means possible. - -This might be of assistance to you. This information which we send to -Secret Service in the field is placed in a control file, a separate -file in the field, and is subject, under instructions, to inspection -by our inspectors as they visit our field offices to insure that this -requirement is being carried out properly; and they will examine the -type of material that is being sent over. - -Each field office is thoroughly inspected about once a year, and that -is one of the requirements that they go through this to make sure this -instruction is being properly carried out. - -Mr. McCLOY. I have no further questions. I have some general questions -I would like to get to at the end, but I have to leave early this -afternoon. - -Mr. RANKIN. I have one question I wanted to interject, Mr. Chairman, -and that is as to statements, Mr. Belmont, about subversives, including -persons who are members of Communist front groups. You mean to say that -that includes any person who is a member of a Communist front group -because, as you know, many leading citizens have been members of such -groups. - -Mr. BELMONT. Now, Mr. Rankin, I wouldn't carry it by any means that -far. It would be dependent upon the front group, the extent of activity -in it, and the activities of the individual. By no means would we -classify someone as a subversive who was connected with a front group -by name or---- - -Mr. DULLES. By front groups you mean those on the Attorney General's -list; you are taking that as a criterion of a front group? - -Mr. BELMONT. No, sir; not necessarily that, sir. There are other groups -that we consider front groups. - -Mr. DULLES. I see. - -Mr. BELMONT. I am glad you raised that because each case would have to -be considered on its own individual merits as to what is the extent of -the activity and the purpose and intent of the activity. - -Mr. RANKIN. You recognize in the work in this field that there are many -Americans who are interested in certain causes and purposes and front -groups in connection with them who are loyal Americans, don't you? - -Mr. BELMONT. I have no doubt of that whatsoever. - -Mr. RANKIN. I just wanted to get that in the record. - -Mr. BELMONT. I also know many loyal Americans, unfortunately, who -don't look behind some of these groups to determine their intents -and purposes, and allow their names to be used where they would not -otherwise do so if they took the time and trouble to check into what -the organization was. - -Mr. RANKIN. So you don't lump them all under the term "subversive," -that is what I was trying to get at. - -Mr. BELMONT. Right. - -The CHAIRMAN. I suppose some join before an organization is -infiltrated, too. - -Mr. BELMONT. That is correct, sir. - -The CHAIRMAN. They find themselves in a mousetrap then. - -Mr. BELMONT. That is correct, sir; that is right. - -Mr. McCLOY. In other words, you would expect your agents to exert some -selection before they would send these names over to the Secret Service. - -Mr. BELMONT. Our agents use judgment in the pursuance of this work, and -they would continue to use judgment in the selection of people who meet -this criterion. Otherwise if you carried this to the extreme you would -get out of hand completely. So that there is judgment applied here and -our agents are capable of applying the judgment. - -Representative FORD. What has been the reaction of the Secret Service -to this greater flow of information that they have received? - -Mr. BELMONT. They have taken it. There has been no official reaction, -to my knowledge. - -Representative FORD. Have they objected to the greater burden? - -Mr. BELMONT. No, sir; I would like to say, I don't know whether you -are going to cover this, Mr. Stern, that our relations with the Secret -Service are excellent. We work closely together. - -As a matter of fact, since the assassination, at the request of -Mr. Rowley, we have furnished agents to assist on occasion in the -protection of the President, which is primarily a function of Secret -Service, but as a cooperative gesture we have on a number of occasions -made agents available at the request of Mr. Rowley. I think the figure -runs to something like 139 agents--yes, 139 agents that we have made -available. - -We do have a very close liaison with Secret Service both at the seat -of Government and in our field offices. We have a supervisor here at -the seat of Government whose duty it is to stay directly in touch -with Secret Service, to cut redtape and produce results both for -Secret Service and for the FBI; to see that the problems are handled -immediately. He has direct access to Mr. Rowley, and we have on a -number of occasions at the request of Secret Service, sent one of our -agents with the Secret Service when the President travels abroad, -particularly where we have a representative in the countries being -visited, because our relations with the law enforcement officials in -those countries have been built up over the years, and we are thus -in a position to assist Secret Service in establishing the necessary -security measures and the flow of information to serve their purpose. - -In addition, when the President travels abroad we alert all of our -offices to advise us of any information which may pertain to the travel -of the President, and we set up a supervisor back here to receive -that information and cable it or get it immediately to our man who is -accompanying the President when he makes this trip. - -This is done, this agent going with Secret Service is done, at the -invitation and request of Secret Service. - -Representative FORD. 169 agents of the FBI who have assisted since the -assassination. Did Secret Service make a specific request for their -help in these instances? - -Mr. BELMONT. Yes; Mr. Rowley advised that he needed help, it was -offered to him by Mr. Hoover, and when the President is going to visit -a city and Secret Service does not have sufficient personnel in that -particular city to cover what they consider is necessary, they need -specialized help from us, they will make the request to us and we will -authorize our local agent in charge to make those men, the designated -number, available to the Secret Service representative, who then uses -their services while the President is there. - -Representative FORD. I gather that prior to the assassination such -requests, specific requests, had not come from Secret Service to the -Bureau. - -Mr. BELMONT. No. There were never any such requests before. - -Mr. STERN. At the level at which the requests have been made so far, -have they proved to be a difficult burden for the FBI? - -Mr. BELMONT. Mr. Stern, any time that we have a pending caseload of -something like 115,000 investigative matters, which is what we have, -and our agents are assigned about 20 to 25 cases apiece across the -country, ranging from matters of immediate urgency to matters which -can be handled in due time, and whenever our agents are putting in an -average of over 2 hours overtime a day voluntarily, the loan of 139 men -will be felt. - -Representative FORD. 169. - -Mr. BELMONT. I believe it was 139, sir. I think the letter says 139. - -Mr. STERN. 139 on 16 separate occasions. - -Mr. BELMONT. Yes. I do not wish to overplay this. We are not -complaining. - -We do feel that at such time as Secret Service is able to increase -its personnel or meet this problem within the organization that it is -properly their problem. But meanwhile we are following this procedure -and we are not complaining. - -Mr. DULLES. I had hoped, Mr. Chairman, that at some time while Mr. -Belmont was here, we could ask him to just briefly define for us, going -back to the assassination day, a clear definition of the respective -functions of the FBI and the Secret Service prior to and immediately -after the assassination. There seemed to have been at one time a little -confusion there. Naturally in a situation of this kind it always -happens, but I am not absolutely clear in my mind as to---- - -Mr. BELMONT. At the time of the assassination? - -Mr. DULLES. Yes. Just before, I mean what your responsibilities were -just before the assassination, and just after as contrasted with the -functions of the Secret Service. - -Mr. BELMONT. The Secret Service has the responsibility for protecting -the President and his family, and the Vice President and so on. That is -a basic responsibility. - -Mr. DULLES. And you have no auxiliary function to that---- - -Mr. BELMONT. No, sir. - -Mr. DULLES. Except to furnish names and suspects, as you have indicated. - -Mr. BELMONT. That is correct. We have no function there. That is a -primary responsibility and function of Secret Service. - -Now, we do have what we have considered our responsibility, to furnish -to Secret Service any indication of a threat to the President, and that -we have done religiously. - -After the assassination the President ordered us into an investigation -of the assassination which changed the picture as far as this -particular case was concerned. - -Mr. DULLES. You mean President Johnson, immediately after the -assassination? - -Mr. BELMONT. Yes, sir. - -Mr. DULLES. And there was a period there, there was a period though, -after the assassination and before President Johnson took the oath of -office--did this order come to you during that period or after he had -taken the oath of office? - -Mr. BELMONT. It was very rapid, probably within a day. - -Mr. DULLES. I see. It wasn't immediately after. - -Mr. BELMONT. No. - -Mr. DULLES. It wasn't this period I am speaking of. - -Mr. BELMONT. You see, Mr. Dulles, the Federal Government still has no -jurisdiction over the assassination of the President. That was a murder -and was within the province of the local police who immediately took -hold of it and started the investigation. - -Mr. DULLES. I realize that. - -Mr. BELMONT. And started the investigation and it was theirs. - -Mr. DULLES. You were only in there by courtesy. What you did was by -courtesy of the local authorities. - -Mr. BELMONT. Yes, sir; we went to the Dallas Police Department and -immediately went into action because of what had happened, and there -was no time for us to stand on priorities. But we felt we should be -of the utmost assistance, and we sent men to the police department to -assist in the interview and do anything else we could. This wasn't a -time, of course, to sit back and say, "This isn't our job." - -Mr. DULLES. I understand. - -Mr. BELMONT. Yes. - -The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Belmont, just one question. Do you know of any -legislation in recent years that might have been introduced in the -Congress to make an attack upon the President a Federal offense? - -Mr. BELMONT. I do know that there is legislation presently pending. - -The CHAIRMAN. Since the assassination? - -Mr. BELMONT. Since the assassination. - -The CHAIRMAN. Yes. But had it been considered in recent years? I know -it had at the time of other assassinations, but so far as you know were -there any recent legislation to that effect? - -Mr. BELMONT. Mr. Chairman, I must plead ignorance. I haven't done -research on it, and I just don't know. - -The CHAIRMAN. Yes. Well, we can find that out very easily. - -Representative FORD. Mr. Chairman, just the other day in the House of -Representatives a bill was approved giving Federal officials the right -to take certain action when a chief of state from a foreign country was -within the United States; a broadening of their authority when they had -a suspicion or they had some reason to believe that an attack was being -made on a foreign dignitary. - -At the time it went through the House I thought of the same question -you just raised, and I wondered whether there were any specific -legislative matters pending before any committee on this particular -point. - -Mr. BELMONT. I am sure there is a pending bill because my recollection -is that it was called to our attention--I cannot pinpoint it for -you--but I think there is pending legislation now in this matter. - -Mr. McCLOY. I noticed in some Law Review article recently reference to -the fact that previous bills had been introduced but had gone into the -wastebasket. - -The CHAIRMAN. That is true. - -Mr. McCLOY. In respect of other incidents. - -The CHAIRMAN. When the emotion died down. - -Mr. McCLOY. When the emotion died down, that is true. - -I have some further questions. - -The CHAIRMAN. Have you finished, Mr. Stern? - -Mr. STERN. I want to get one thing established that came up yesterday. -Mr. Belmont, yesterday the Commission was interested in determining, if -possible, when Agent Hosty recorded the interviews that he had taken on -October 29, November 1, and November 5. He wasn't certain, except that -he thought it had been done after the assassination. Have you caused a -check to be made on that? - -Mr. BELMONT. Yes; we checked with our Dallas office, and they do not -have a specific record of when that information was recorded. - -Mr. STERN. Was it recorded in substantially the same form in some -contemporaneous communication? - -Mr. BELMONT. Yes; within a day or two, I think on November 4, if I -recall correctly, the fact that Hosty had talked to the neighbor of -Mrs. Paine and had located Marina Oswald, was sent in by AIRTEL. - -Mr. STERN. You might refer to Commission Exhibit 834, page 9, items 64 -and 67, just so the record is straight. - -Mr. BELMONT. Item 64 is an AIRTEL from the Dallas office to the -headquarters dated October 30, wherein Hosty reported this interview -that he had had with the neighbor of Mrs. Paine. - -On November 4 the Dallas office reported by AIRTEL the results of his -contact with Mrs. Paine on November 1, so that the results of his -interviews were incorporated at that time, October 30, November 4, -but the actual insert for the report was not prepared until some time -later. To the best of Hosty's recollection it was after the 22d and -prior to December 2, but he was already on record by these AIRTELS. - -Mr. STERN. Thank you, Mr. Belmont. - -I have no further questions. - -The CHAIRMAN. Mr. McCloy. - -Mr. McCLOY. I have one or two questions. - -Mr. Belmont, you do know the charge has been made by some that Oswald -was what is called a secret agent. Do you have any information whatever -that would cause you to believe that Oswald was or could have been an -agent or an informant of the FBI? - -Mr. BELMONT. I have covered that in some considerable detail, Mr. -McCloy, and I will make a positive statement that Oswald was not, never -was, an agent or an informant of the FBI. - -Mr. McCLOY. In the course of your investigation do you have any reason -to make you believe that he was an agent of any other country? - -Mr. BELMONT. No, sir; we have no reason to believe that he was an agent -of any other country. - -Mr. McCLOY. Or any other agency of the United States? - -Mr. BELMONT. Or any other agency of the United States. - -Mr. McCLOY. You said this morning, I believe, or at least I guess Mr. -Hosty said, that the assassination of the President and any leads in -connection with it are still of constant concern to the FBI. - -Do you feel there are any areas as of the present time that you feel at -the present time require or justify further investigation other than -routine checkups that have not already been undertaken? - -Mr. BELMONT. No, sir; frankly, I don't. I will say that from the -requests we have received from the Commission, you have explored -this most thoroughly. We do not have any unexplored areas in this -investigation that should be explored. There are some pending requests -that you have made, and we are running them out as rapidly as we can. - -Mr. McCLOY. Maybe this isn't a fair question to ask you, but, after -all, you have had a long record of criminal investigation, and you have -had a long exposure to investigation in this case. - -As a result of your investigation do you feel that there is any -credible evidence thus far which would support a conclusion or an -opinion that the death of the President was the result of a conspiracy -or anything other than the act of a single individual? - -Mr. BELMONT. No, sir; we have no evidence, and I could support no -conclusion that this was other than an act of Oswald. - -Mr. McCLOY. Now, the investigation does lead you to the conclusion that -he was the President's assassin? - -Mr. BELMONT. Yes, sir. - -Mr. McCLOY. Did you ever at any time have any connection whatever--you -or the agency--have anything to do with the Walker, General Walker, -case? - -Mr. BELMONT. No, sir; that was a matter handled by the Dallas police. I -am drawing on my recollection of it now, but, as I recall it, after the -incident, we offered to examine the bullets that were recovered---- - -Mr. McCLOY. Bullets. - -Mr. BELMONT. And the police apparently wanted to retain them, so that -we did not conduct the examination of the bullets until subsequent to -the assassination itself. - -Mr. McCLOY. Until recently. - -Mr. BELMONT. No; we had no connection with it, with that investigation. - -Mr. McCLOY. In your investigation of the President's assassination, did -you have occasion, after the event, to make an investigation of Ruby's -background or Ruby's relationship to Oswald? - -Mr. BELMONT. Yes, sir; we went into that very thoroughly. - -Mr. McCLOY. Have we got all your reports on that? - -Mr. BELMONT. Yes, sir. - -Mr. McCLOY. Have you come to any conclusions or opinions in regard to -Ruby and his connection with Oswald, if any? - -Mr. BELMONT. The reports, of course, speak for themselves. But in -summation, we did not come up with anything of a solid nature, that is -anything that would stand up to indicate that there was any association -between Ruby and Oswald. We had numerous allegations which we ran out -extensively and carefully, but there is nothing, no information, that -would stand up to show there was an association between them. - -Mr. McCLOY. Maybe this is in the record, but do you--by reason of your -very close association with this investigation, I venture to ask this -question--do you, from your knowledge of the investigation find--was -there any evidence in regard to Ruby's propensity for violence before -this shooting took place in the police headquarters in Dallas? - -Mr. BELMONT. Did we have any information of that character and of that -nature? - -Mr. McCLOY. Yes; I am not talking before it happened, but as a result -of your investigation did you turn up any other indications of any -violence on the part of Ruby? - -Mr. BELMONT. I hesitate to attempt to evaluate the information that we -gathered from hundreds and hundreds of people that we talked to during -the investigation of Ruby after the assassination. I just don't feel -that I am in a position to render a judgment as to his character or his -impulsiveness, the degree of impulsiveness, whether he was capable---- - -Mr. McCLOY. Whether he was prone to violent action. - -Mr. BELMONT. I just don't feel really competent. I have no doubt that -a conclusion can be drawn from reports; of course, that was one of the -basic issues at the trial. - -Representative FORD. Was there any evidence that the FBI found to the -effect that Ruby was a Communist? - -Mr. BELMONT. No, sir. - -Representative FORD. None whatsoever? - -Mr. BELMONT. No, sir. - -Representative FORD. Was there any evidence found by the FBI to the -effect that Ruby was connected with in any way whatsoever so-called -rightist groups? - -Mr. BELMONT. No, sir; I do not recall anything of that nature. - -Mr. McCLOY. No association that you know of as a result of the -investigation of Ruby with any foreign government or agency of a -foreign government? - -Mr. BELMONT. No, sir; you understand, you are asking me questions, and -I am replying on the basis of my best recollection, but I am giving you -an answer from my knowledge of the case. - -Mr. McCLOY. That is what we were seeking, no more than that, because -your impressions would be valuable. - -Mr. BELMONT. The reason I say that there may be someone we interviewed -who made a statement about Ruby and it was run out, and it was found to -be false. Congressman Ford, you asked me if he was a Communist. I would -say we have no evidence of that. - -Mr. McCLOY. Do you feel that in view of the evidence that Oswald was -a defector, that he engaged in this Fair Play for Cuba business, that -he lied in his communications with the FBI, that Mr. Hosty should have -been alerted by locating Oswald in the School Book Depository early -in November, that he should have been alerted to informing the Secret -Service of that? - -Mr. BELMONT. No, sir; I do not. You must take this matter in its proper -context. I pointed out to you previously that this man came back from -Russia; he indicated that he had learned his lesson, was disenchanted -with Russia, and had a renewed concept--I am paraphrasing, a renewed -concept--of the American free society. - -We talked to him twice. He likewise indicated he was disenchanted with -Russia. We satisfied ourselves that we had met our requirement, namely -to find out whether he had been recruited by Soviet intelligence. The -case was closed. - -We again exhibited interest on the basis of these contacts with -The Worker, Fair Play for Cuba Committee, which are relatively -inconsequential. - -His activities for the Fair Play for Cuba Committee in New Orleans, we -knew, were not of real consequence as he was not connected with any -organized activity there. - -The interview with him in jail is not significant from the standpoint -of whether he had a propensity for violence. - -Mr. McCLOY. That is the Quigley interview you are talking about? - -Mr. BELMONT. Yes; it was a self-serving interview. - -The visits with the Soviet Embassy were evidently for the purpose of -securing a visa, and he had told us during one of the interviews that -he would probably take his wife back to Soviet Russia some time in the -future. He had come back to Dallas. Hosty had established that he had -a job, he was working, and had told Mrs. Paine that when he got the -money he was going to take an apartment when the baby was old enough, -he was going to take an apartment, and the family would live together. - -He gave evidence of settling down. Nowhere during the course of this -investigation or the information that came to us from other agencies -was there any indication of a potential for violence on his part. - -Consequently, there was no basis for Hosty to go to Secret Service and -advise them of Oswald's presence. Hosty was alert, as was the Dallas -office, to furnish information to Secret Service on the occasion of the -President's visit. - -It is my recollection that Hosty actually participated in delivering -some material to Secret Service himself, and helped prepare a -memorandum on another matter that was sent over there. So that most -certainly the office was alert. The agent in charge had alerted his -agents, even on the morning of the visit, as he had previously done a -week or 10 days before the visit. - -So that, in answer to your question, I cannot even through the process -of going back and seeking to apply this against what happened, -justifiably say that Hosty should have given this information under the -existing conditions and with the history of this matter, that he was in -a position to give it to the Secret Service. Now, most certainly---- - -Mr. McCLOY. We wish he had. - -Mr. BELMONT. Of course. - -Representative FORD. Mr. Chairman, I have a call from the floor of the -House. I wonder if I could ask Mr. Belmont a question. - -The CHAIRMAN. Yes, indeed. - -Representative FORD. In response to a question by Mr. McCloy, you -categorically said that Federal Bureau of Investigation under no -circumstances had employed Oswald as an informant, as an agent or in -any other way whatsoever. - -Mr. BELMONT. Yes, sir. - -Representative FORD. You would be in a position to know specifically -that information? - -Mr. BELMONT. Yes, sir. - -Representative FORD. You also said, as I recall, that you had found no -credible information or evidence thus far that Oswald was connected in -any way whatsoever with another country as an agent. Is that about what -you said or do you wish to reaffirm it in another way? - -Mr. BELMONT. I will affirm what you said. - -Representative FORD. There is a difference, however, between your -knowledge as to whether the FBI had hired Oswald, you can be very -categorical about that. - -Mr. BELMONT. That is correct. - -Representative FORD. You can only---- - -Mr. BELMONT. Say based on the evidence that we have or which developed -or all information that we received, there was no indication that -Oswald was in any way connected or within the service of a foreign -government. - -Representative FORD. But there is a difference in the way you can -answer those two questions. - -Mr. BELMONT. There is a difference, yes; there is a difference -because in the one case we know, in the other case we rely on all the -information and evidence available. - -Representative FORD. But as far as a foreign government is concerned, -you only know what you have been able to find out? - -Mr. BELMONT. That is correct, sir. - -Representative FORD. There is always the possibility in the second -case, involving a foreign government, that something might come up at -some other time. - -Mr. BELMONT. There is always the possibility. We have no indication of -it. There is always the possibility; yes, sir. - -Representative FORD. But you cannot be as categorical about the future -in the second case as you were in the first case. - -Mr. BELMONT. Yes, sir; you are right. - -The CHAIRMAN. Are there any other questions? - -Mr. DULLES. Do you have some more? - -Mr. McCLOY. I think I have got all the questions I wanted to ask. - -(At this point in the proceedings, Representative Ford leaves the -hearing room.) - -Mr. DULLES. I have two or three questions. - -As you know, Mr. Belmont, there have been a wide variety of rumors -that have been spread abroad very particularly with regard to the -assassination. - -I have before me, just received last night, a book just being published -in England, it is coming out in the next day or 2, called "Who Killed -Kennedy," by Thomas G. Buchanan, published in London by Secker and -Warburg. I have not had an opportunity yet to read the book. I have -read a good deal of the background material on which it is based. - -I would like to ask though when this book is available to you, and we -will make a copy available to you and see that you get one promptly, -whether you would have the Bureau read this, an appropriate person in -the Bureau familiar with the case or yourself, and possibly give us -your views with regard to certain of the allegations here within your -particular competence. - -Mr. BELMONT. As I understand it, Mr. Dulles, this is probably a -compilation of the articles that he wrote in the French press. - -Mr. DULLES. Express; yes. - -Mr. BELMONT. Which, I believe, we sent over to the Commission as we -received them. - -Mr. DULLES. That is correct. - -Mr. BELMONT. And from my recollection of perusing those articles, they -are filled with false statements, innuendoes, incorrect conclusions, -misinformation, and certainly what I would term false journalism. In -other words, he has stated as fact or as a correct conclusion many -things which the Commission's investigation has disproved completely. - -We will be glad to read the book and to furnish you with a general -comment on it. But to take down each statement in there and go into it -would probably result in a critique of 500 pages. - -Mr. DULLES. We do not want that. I don't think we need that. - -Mr. BELMONT. Where actually many of these allegations have already been -resolved by the Commission, I am sure. We will be glad to read it and -give you a---- - -Mr. DULLES. I think that would be useful for the Commission to have, -Mr. Chairman. Do you agree? - -The CHAIRMAN. Very well; yes. If you find any factual matters in there -that contradict your findings, we would expect you to call it to our -attention. - -Mr. BELMONT. Most certainly, sir. - -The CHAIRMAN. But otherwise I don't think we want a review of the book. -That is your idea, is it? - -Mr. DULLES. Not a review of the book, but if there are allegations -there, any evidence you can factually deny, that would be helpful to -have it. - -Mr. McCLOY. Do you have any record of Buchanan? Do you know anything -about Buchanan's background? - -Mr. BELMONT. No, sir; I do not recall. - -Mr. DULLES. I wish you would check. - -Mr. BELMONT. We can send you a letter. - -The CHAIRMAN. We have the record. - -Mr. McCLOY. He seems to be very much Ivy League, Lawrenceville School -and Yale. - -Mr. DULLES. He was at one time, I believe, he admitted to being a -Communist at one time. He was at one time employed by the Washington -Star, I am advised, and I believe, according to the information I have, -that he was terminated by the Star some years ago. - -Mr. BELMONT. I thought he had been in touch with the Commission. - -The CHAIRMAN. He came in, he did come in here, and made a statement -which we have recorded. His testimony wasn't taken. He just walked in -off the street. - -Mr. DULLES. I have one or two more questions, Mr. Chairman. - -I believe, Mr. Belmont, that you probably have furnished us already -with information with regard to any contacts that Oswald might have -had, individuals whom he knew, persons who might have been accused of -being accomplices of his, but if there is anybody there or any persons -in your file whom Oswald knew who have not been communicated to us, we -would certainly like to have them to be sure we have looked into that -field exhaustively, anybody who, according to your records, Oswald knew. - -Mr. BELMONT. I am sure we have explored that fully, and we have -reported it to the Commission fully. - -Mr. DULLES. All right; good. - -Mr. BELMONT. Yes, sir. - -Mr. DULLES. In view of your deep study of the case, have you reached -any views of your own or are there any views of the Bureau, as to -Oswald's motivation in the act that he committed? - -Mr. BELMONT. Again I don't feel competent to give you an answer. There -is an indication from the exploration of his background that he wanted -to be somebody. He wanted to be known as someone. Whether this caused -him to do this terrible thing I don't know. I think if it were possible -to peer into Oswald's mind, that would really be the only way you could -get your question answered. - -Mr. DULLES. Have you and the Bureau made any comparative study of the -various assassination attempts and assassinations of other Presidents -and people in high authority in this Government to see whether any -pattern at all runs through these various attempts other than attempts -where there is clearly a plot, as in the case of the attack on -President Truman, and probably also in the case of President Lincoln? I -am thinking chiefly of the assassination of President McKinley and the -attempted assassination of President-elect Roosevelt in 1933. - -Mr. BELMONT. No, sir; we have not made a study of that nature. I would -imagine that Secret Service has made a study. - -Mr. DULLES. They have made a study. I didn't know whether you had made -one also. - -Mr. BELMONT. No, sir; we have not. - -Mr. DULLES. That is all I have, Mr. Chairman. - -The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Belmont, I have here in my hand a sheet that appeared -on the newsstands over the weekend. It is supposed to be the National -Enquirer. I believe it is out of New York, and it contains a page and -a third about the assassination of the President and certain actions -of the FBI, and so forth, and for the record I should like to read a -portion of it and merely ask you if, in your opinion---- - -Mr. BELMONT. All right, sir. - -The CHAIRMAN. And with your knowledge there is any truth to any part of -it. You, of course, are acquainted with that paper. - -Mr. BELMONT. No, sir; I am not. In fact, someone told me it was, it -came from, the Philadelphia Inquirer, and I was shocked that something -like that would be in that paper. I found it was not the Philadelphia -Inquirer. - -(Discussion off the record.) - -The CHAIRMAN. I think, in view of the relationship you have had in this -whole matter, I would like to have your testimony in the record on it. - -Mr. BELMONT. Very good, sir. - -The CHAIRMAN. There is no date on this paper, and I am told it appeared -in three different days in three different formats with different -headlines, but the same item. It is said to be by John Henshaw, -Enquirer Washington Bureau Chief. - -"Washington--The hottest story making the rounds here is that the U.S. -Justice Department prevented the arrest of Lee Harvey Oswald and Jack -Ruby BEFORE the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. Oswald and -the man who killed him, Ruby, were suspected of being partners in crime -7 months before the President's death. - -"The incredible details of the story are so explosive that officials -won't even answer 'no comment' when queried about it. But the story -being discussed by top-level Government officials reveals: - -"1. That the Justice Department deliberately kept Oswald and Ruby out -of jail before the assassination. - -"2. That Dallas cops suspected Oswald of being the gunman and Ruby -the paymaster in a plot to murder former Maj. Gen. Edwin A. Walker--7 -months before the President was assassinated. - -"3. That the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency was using Ruby to recruit -commandoes for raids against Castro's Cuba. To prevent this explosive -information from being disclosed, the CIA asked the Justice Department -to step in and stop the Dallas police from arresting Jack Ruby, as well -as Oswald. - -"A top-secret document--a letter signed by a high official of the -Justice Department--was sent in April 1963 from the Dallas Police -Department to Dallas Chief of Police Jesse E. Curry requesting the -Dallas police NOT to arrest Oswald and Ruby in connection with the -attempted slaying of General Walker. - -"After a sniper shot at, but missed, General Walker in Dallas, April -10, 1963, Dallas police suspected that Oswald was the sniper and Ruby -the payoff man. - -"The cops were set to arrest the pair. But they never got the -chance because of the heavy pressure brought to bear by the Justice -Department. And so Oswald and Ruby were allowed to remain free. And 7 -months later, on last November 22 in Dallas, Oswald was able to kill -the President of the United States. - -"The top-secret document--a copy of it is reportedly in the hands of -the Presidential Commission investigating the assassination--bares a -web of intrigue that involves the Federal Bureau of Investigation, -along with the Justice Department and the Central Intelligence Agency. - -"It is so politically explosive that the Presidential Commission, -headed by Supreme Court Chief Justice Earl Warren, has even withheld it -from one of its own members, Senator Richard Russell (D., Ga.). - -"It is feared that Senator Russell, who leads the South in the fight -against the civil rights bill, might use the document as a weapon -against the Justice Department and its chief, Attorney General Robert -Kennedy, a leader in the fight for civil rights. - -"The document--requesting the cops not to arrest Ruby and -Oswald--contradicts the FBI report on the assassination and the -subsequent murder of Oswald." - -My question is, do you have any information that would lead you to -believe that any of those allegations are true? - -Mr. BELMONT. My answer, sir, is that that is utter fantastic nonsense, -and I have no information to indicate that any of the allegations are -true. - -The CHAIRMAN. I think we had better mark this and introduce it in -evidence. There is much more to the article, but it is explanatory of -this, but I thought that was sufficiently a direct allegation that we -ought to note it in the testimony. So will you give that a number, Mr. -Stern. - -Mr. STERN. It will be numbered 837. - -The CHAIRMAN. 837. It is introduced in evidence as No. 837. - -Mr. STERN. May we also have admitted, Mr. Chief Justice, Exhibit No. -836, the letter of March 31, 1964, which Mr. Belmont has identified. - -The CHAIRMAN. It may be admitted under that number. - -(The documents referred to were marked for identification as Commission -Exhibits Nos. 836 and 837 and were received in evidence.) - -The CHAIRMAN. Is there anything further, gentlemen? - -Mr. McCLOY. May I suggest that we get a copy of the paper which does -have the date on it. I forget what date it was. - -Mr. BELMONT. Mr. Rankin, I understand you have sent it over to us, so -we will be glad to answer your letter. - -The CHAIRMAN. Well, Mr. Belmont, we appreciate your cooperation, and we -thank you for your courtesy. - -(Whereupon, at 12:40 p.m., the President's Commission recessed.) - - - - -_Wednesday, May 13, 1964_ - -TESTIMONY OF LT. JACK REVILL - -The President's Commission met at 10 a.m. on May 13, 1964, at 200 -Maryland Avenue NE., Washington, D.C. - -Present were Chief Justice Earl Warren, Chairman; Representative Gerald -R. Ford; and Allen W. Dulles, members. - -Also present were J. Lee Rankin, General Counsel; Norman Redlich, -assistant counsel; Arlen Specter, assistant counsel; and Charles -Murray, observer. - - -The CHAIRMAN. Lieutenant Revill, the purpose of today's hearing is to -hear your testimony and that of Detective V. J. Brian with particular -regard to alleged conversation with Special Agent James P. Hosty, Jr., -of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, claimed to have occurred on -November 22, 1963, in the afternoon, and also concerning the facts -surrounding the discussion of Commission Exhibits 710 and 711. - -What are those--those are the affidavits? - -Mr. RANKIN. That is his affidavit and Detective Brian's. - -The CHAIRMAN. Those are the affidavits that you made in that regard. - -Would you please rise and raise your right hand and be sworn? - -Do you solemnly swear that 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? - -Lieutenant REVILL. I do, sir. - -The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Rankin will conduct the examination. - -Mr. RANKIN. Lieutenant Revill, will you state your name and place of -residence for the record, please? - -Mr. REVILL. My name is Jack Revill. I reside at 5617 Madowics, Dallas, -Tex. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you have an official connection with the police -department of Dallas? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir; I do. - -Mr. RANKIN. What is that? - -Mr. REVILL. I am presently a lieutenant of police of the Dallas Police -Department. - -Mr. RANKIN. How long have you occupied that position? - -Mr. REVILL. I was promoted to lieutenant June 26, 1958. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you have any particular area of responsibility? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir; I am presently in charge of the criminal -intelligence section. - -Mr. RANKIN. Have you been in charge of that section since November 22 -of 1963? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir; I have. - -Mr. RANKIN. What are the functions of your work in that job? - -Mr. REVILL. My unit--our primary responsibility is to investigate -crimes of an organized nature, subversive activities, racial matters, -labor racketeering, and to do anything that the chief might desire. We -work for the chief of police. I report to a captain who is in charge of -the special service bureau. - -Mr. RANKIN. Who is that? - -Mr. REVILL. Capt. Pat Gannaway. - -Mr. RANKIN. How long have you reported to him? - -Mr. REVILL. In my present capacity? - -Mr. RANKIN. Yes. - -Mr. REVILL. Since I have been assigned to the criminal intelligence -section. - -Mr. RANKIN. So that was for all times since and on November 22, 1963? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir; this is true. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you know James P. Hosty, Jr.? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir; I do. - -Mr. RANKIN. How long have you known him? - -Mr. REVILL. I have known Jim, Mr. Hosty, since 1959, when I took over -the intelligence section. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you see him on November 22? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir; I did. - -Mr. RANKIN. Where. - -Mr. REVILL. In the basement of the city hall. - -Mr. RANKIN. Just before you saw Special Agent Hosty, where had you been? - -Mr. REVILL. I had been at the Texas School Book Depository. - -Mr. RANKIN. What did you do there? - -Mr. REVILL. We conducted a systematic search of the building, evacuated -the people working in the building, and took names, addresses, and -phone numbers of all of these people before they were permitted to -leave. - -Mr. RANKIN. Was anyone working with you there? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. Who? - -Mr. REVILL. Numerous people. - -Mr. RANKIN. I see. Was Detective Brian with you there? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir. I had taken Detective Brian with me from the -Trade Mart, Dallas Trade Mart, upon hearing of the shots being fired at -Mr. Kennedy. I took Detective Brian and two other officers assigned to -my unit, Detective R. W. Westphal and Detective Tarver, O. J. Tarver. - -Mr. RANKIN. How did you come back to the police department? - -Mr. REVILL. By automobile. - -Mr. RANKIN. By car? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. Was anyone with you? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir, I had Detectives Brian, Tarver, and Westphal. - -Mr. RANKIN. They were all in the car with you? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. And which way did you enter the building? - -Mr. REVILL. The Main Street ramp into the basement of the city hall. - -Mr. RANKIN. About what time of the day? - -Mr. REVILL. It must have been about 2:45, 2:50. - -Mr. RANKIN. All of these officers were with you? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. Where did you see Special Agent Hosty? - -Mr. REVILL. If I might explain that, I followed Mr. Hosty into the -basement of the city hall. He drove into the basement, parked his car, -I did the same, and Mr. Hosty departed from his car, ran over to where -I was standing, Detective Brian and I. - -The other two officers, Westphal and Tarver, as well as I recall, had -remained in the rear talking to some other officers. I don't know who -they were. At that time everything was mass confusion, and we were all -upset. - -Mr. RANKIN. Will you explain to the Commission where you parked the car -with reference to the point where you saw Agent Hosty? - -Mr. REVILL. I got out of my car, and we have two attendants assigned to -the basement, two Negro attendants, and one of these individuals parked -my vehicle for me, I don't know where he parked it. But as I got out of -the car, Mr. Hosty ran toward me---- - -Mr. RANKIN. Now, about the parking, excuse me. - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. Is that a part of the basement area of the police -department? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir; it is. - -Mr. RANKIN. All right; proceed. - -Mr. REVILL. And Mr. Hosty ran over to me and he says, "Jack"--now as I -recall these words--"a Communist killed President Kennedy." - -I said, "What?" - -He said, "Lee Oswald killed President Kennedy." - -I said, "Who is Lee Oswald?" - -He said, "He is in our Communist file. We knew he was here in Dallas." -At that time Hosty and I started walking off, and Brian, as well as -I recall, sort of stayed back, and as we got onto the elevator or -just prior to getting on the elevator Mr. Hosty related that they had -information that this man was capable of this, and at this I blew up at -him, and I said, "Jim"---- - -Mr. RANKIN. What did he say in regard to his being capable? - -Mr. REVILL. This was it. They had--"We had information that this man -was capable"---- - -Mr. RANKIN. Of what? - -Mr. REVILL. Of committing this assassination. This is what I understood -him to say. - -Mr. RANKIN. Are those his exact words? - -Mr. REVILL. As well as I recall. Give him the benefit of the doubt; I -might have misunderstood him. But I don't believe I did, because the -part about him being in Dallas, and the fact that he was a suspected -Communist, I understand by the rules of the Attorney General they -cannot tell us this, but the information about him being capable, -I felt that we had taken a part in the security measures for Mr. -Kennedy, and if such, if such information was available to another law -enforcement agency, I felt they should have made it known to all of us, -and I asked Hosty where he was going at that time. By this time we were -on the elevator and he said he was going up to homicide and robbery to -tell Captain Fritz the same thing. I said, "Do you know Captain Fritz?" -and he said he had never met him. I said, "All right, I will take you -up and introduce you to Captain Fritz." So Detective Brian and I and -Hosty went to the third floor of the city hall and went to Captain -Fritz' office, the homicide and robbery bureau. We didn't see Captain -Fritz, he may or may not have been there. His office door was closed. - -Mr. DULLES. What time of the day, could you give me the approximate -time? - -Mr. REVILL. Between 2:30 and 3 o'clock, and I have the reason for -saying this because of the typing of this report here. Our secretary -got off at 4 o'clock. - -Mr. DULLES. And Chief Curry had not yet returned, had he? - -Mr. REVILL. I don't know where he was. - -Mr. DULLES. You didn't know about that? - -Mr. REVILL. No, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you say anything about this to Captain Fritz? - -Mr. REVILL. I did not talk to Captain Fritz, as I said, I didn't see -him. I introduced Mr. Hosty to Lieutenant Ted Wells, who is one of -the lieutenants assigned to the homicide and robbery bureau and also -present at that time was another special agent, Mr. Bookhout, and -Hosty, there was confusion within this office, so Brian and I, after -introducing Mr. Hosty to Wells, left and went back to the special -service bureau office. - -Mr. RANKIN. And you didn't say anything to the inspector about it? - -Mr. REVILL. The inspector? - -Mr. RANKIN. Lieutenant Wells. - -Mr. REVILL. No, sir; I did not. - -Mr. RANKIN. You didn't tell him this important information? - -Mr. REVILL. Hosty was going up to tell him the same thing. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did he tell you that? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir; he told me that. - -Mr. RANKIN. And Hosty told you then that he was going up to tell him -that they knew he was capable of being the assassin? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir; being at that time I was out of touch with -everything, being in the building, I had put no connection between the -shooting of Tippit and the President. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you know that Oswald had been arrested? - -Mr. REVILL. No, sir; at that time I did not. - -Mr. RANKIN. You just knew about the someone by the name of Lee, didn't -you? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir; Lee. And this was told to me by a colored -employee of the School Book Depository. Myself and Lieutenant Frank -Dyson took charge of the search of the building and we must have had -75 or 80 men in the building assisting in this search. I talked to a -Negro---- - -Mr. DULLES. Were you in charge of that? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir; I was in charge of that phase of the search. -I talked to a Negro by the name of Givens, and we had handled this -person in the past for marijuana violations and I recognized him and in -talking to him I asked him if he had been on the sixth floor, and as -well as I recall, and Detective Brian was present at this same time he -said, yes, that he had observed Mr. Lee, over by this window. Well, -I asked him who Mr. Lee was, he said, "It is a white boy." He didn't -know his full name. So, I turned this Givens individual over to one -of our Negro detectives and told him to take him to Captain Fritz for -interrogation, and while going to the city hall, or the police station -I passed this detective and Givens, and they came into the homicide -and robbery bureau shortly after Hosty and I did, so I am sure Captain -Fritz did talk to Mr. Givens. - -Mr. RANKIN. When did you learn that Oswald had been arrested? - -Mr. REVILL. I really don't know, sir. Because time, we were all shocked -that this thing had happened in our city and I personally felt that -maybe a sense of responsibility, maybe we could have done more to -prevent this thing. I just don't know when I heard that he had been -arrested. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you know it by the time you went to Lieutenant Wells' -office? - -Mr. REVILL. No, sir; I did not. He may have been in the office at that -time. - -Mr. RANKIN. You didn't know that Oswald was already in the police -department? - -Mr. REVILL. No, sir; I did not. I had been in this building since word -came of the shots being fired until about 2:30, 2:35, and at that time -I decided that my unit could possibly do more at our office where we -kept all of our files, cataloging these people, the suspects that were -running through my mind at that time. So, I was, I put out a call for -all of the intelligence unit personnel to meet me at the office and I -got no reply to this because they were all up in the special service -bureau. We had been assigned to the Trade Mart, and two or three of my -officers had taken into custody four or five of these picket carriers, -and we did this more for protection than anything else because after -the word came of the assassination, well, I am afraid they would have -been mobbed, and they were all up in the special service bureau booking -these prisoners at the time, and I decided we would stop by the special -service bureau office, to report back to my captain and see if there -was something we could do there. And as I pulled into the basement this -conversation took place with Mr. Hosty. - -Mr. RANKIN. And the particular words about Oswald being capable of -being an assassin those were told you by Agent Hosty in the elevator? - -Mr. REVILL. No, sir; either just outside the elevator and as we got on. -He never mentioned this again because I guess I lost my temper at him -for withholding this type of information. - -Mr. RANKIN. I see. Did you do anything about losing your temper, did -you say anything? - -Mr. REVILL. No; Jim Hosty and I are friends, and this has hurt me that -I have involved Hosty into this thing, because he is a good agent, he -is one of the agents there that we can work with; that has been most -cooperative in the past, and I worked with him just like he is one of -us. - -Mr. RANKIN. You went to the third floor on the elevator? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. Who else went with you? - -Mr. REVILL. Detective Brian and Hosty, the elevator was--had several -people on it. I don't recall who they were. - -Mr. RANKIN. Was Detective Brian on that elevator? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir; he was. - -Mr. RANKIN. At that same time? - -Mr. REVILL. He went to the third floor with me. - -Mr. RANKIN. And you are sure Agent Hosty was on the elevator with you? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir; he was. - -Mr. RANKIN. And you are sure you were on the elevator? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. Now, will you tell us exactly what you said to Hosty and -also what he said to you? - -Mr. REVILL. After hearing about the information that they were -purported to have had---- - -Mr. RANKIN. Have you told us all the information that Hosty told you? - -Mr. REVILL. As well as I recall; yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. Now, did you say anything to him about it? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. What? - -Mr. REVILL. I asked him why he had not told us this, and the best, my -recollection is that he said he couldn't. Now, what he meant by that I -don't know. Because in the past our relations had been such that this -type of information, it surprised me they had not, if they had such -information he had not brought it or hadn't made it available to us. - -Mr. RANKIN. And you are certain you went up there on the elevator -together? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir; took him to the third floor and introduced him to -Lieutenant Wells. - -Mr. RANKIN. Are you sure you didn't go up the stairs together. - -Mr. REVILL. No, sir; we went to the third floor on the elevator. - -Mr. RANKIN. You are positive? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir; because we caught the elevator in the basement, -and there would have been no reason to walk up the stairs. - -Mr. RANKIN. If Agent Hosty said you went up the stairs rapidly -together, that would be untrue? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir; this would be untrue. - -Mr. DULLES. Did you go in that same driveway that the car went in that -was to take Oswald out? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir. - -Mr. DULLES. That driveway; and you took that elevator right to the left -as you went in there? - -Mr. REVILL. No, sir; we go straight into the doors into the elevator -that goes up to the third floor. - -Mr. DULLES. Yes. - -Mr. REVILL. Third and fourth floor. - -Representative FORD. May I ask a question to reconstruct this a bit? -Both Detective Brian and yourself came in one car? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir. - -Representative FORD. And you had two other officers with you? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir. - -Representative FORD. More or less the same time Mr. Hosty came in? - -Mr. REVILL. We followed Mr. Hosty into the basement. - -Mr. DULLES. Each in a car? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir; he was in a car and we were in mine. - -Representative FORD. Your first contact with Mr. Hosty was in the -basement there? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir. - -Representative FORD. What did he say there? - -Mr. REVILL. He come running up to me, and he said, "Jack, a Communist -killed President Kennedy." I said, "What? What are you talking about?" -He said, "Lee Harvey Oswald killed President Kennedy," and at that I -said "Who is Lee Harvey Oswald?" And then he told me about him having -him in their security files, and then that, "We had information that he -was capable of this." By "we" I assumed he meant the Federal Bureau of -Investigation. - -Representative FORD. Then Brian, Hosty, and yourself walked to the -elevator? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir. - -Representative FORD. And the three of you took the elevator up to the -third floor? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir. - -Mr. DULLES. It is about 10 feet as I remember it. - -Mr. REVILL. No, sir; it is more than that. - -Mr. DULLES. It is a different elevator. It is not the one that take -prisoners down? - -Mr. REVILL. No, sir; it is the swinging doors, you go through the -swinging doors. - -Mr. DULLES. It is another elevator? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir. - -Representative FORD. At what point in the sequence did you blow up, as -you say? - -Mr. REVILL. When he told me about the capability. By blowing up---- - -Representative FORD. Was that standing in the basement near the car or -was it over toward the elevator? - -Mr. REVILL. We were walking over toward the elevator during this -conversation and as far as blowing up, this is semantics. I wanted to -know why they had not given us this information. - -Representative FORD. What is his reaction to that? - -Mr. REVILL. "We couldn't." I do not know what he meant by that. - -Representative FORD. When you use words like "We couldn't" that "Oswald -was a Communist" this is what I am trying to find out. You mean these -are the precise words he said or are these your interpretations of what -he said? - -Mr. REVILL. The time involved it could be my interpretation, to give -him the benefit of the doubt, because as I said Hosty is a friend of -mine, and the last thing I wanted to do was to cause this man any -trouble, because of our relations in the past. - -Representative FORD. Have you ever had any doubt in the interval -between that time and now that what your recollection is is accurate or -inaccurate, fair or unfair? - -Mr. REVILL. As far as I am concerned I have; this report is honest, -and it was made within an hour after he made the thing. And since this -assassination I have gone over in my mind could I have misunderstood -him. I sometimes wish or hoped that I have. But this is in essence what -he said to me. It might not be exactly the "we's" the "I's" but in -essence it is what Mr. Hosty said. - -Representative FORD. At one point as I recall your testimony, you -said Hosty said that Oswald was a Communist. A few minutes after that -testimony I think you said that Hosty suspected he was a Communist. -Now, did you say that deliberately or did you just---- - -Mr. REVILL. No, sir; if I said that I was wrong. - -Representative FORD. Was that just confusion? - -Mr. REVILL. As I mentioned earlier he come hurrying up to me and he -said, "Jack, a Communist killed the President." I said, "What?" He -said, "Lee Harvey Oswald, a Communist killed the President," and then -he went into the fact that they had known he was there, and then at -the conclusion of our, not the conclusion because we continued to -discuss this thing going up on the elevator, he made the statement that -they had information that he was capable of this. He might have said -probably or possibly capable of it, I don't recall, because in Dallas -that day, the town died, and I know I was sick that this thing happened -in my city, and I felt that maybe we could have done something else to -prevent it. - -Mr. DULLES. You stress the word "capable", that sticks in your mind, -does it? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir. - -Mr. DULLES. He didn't say might have done it? - -Mr. REVILL. No, sir; capable. - -Mr. DULLES. Normally would information of this kind have passed to you -directly from the FBI or through the Secret Service in the event--of -course, there hadn't been other Presidential visits, I guess, so there -was no precedent but I was wondering in the case of a Presidential -visit would it normally have come to you directly from the Secret -Service rather than directly from the FBI? - -Mr. REVILL. Well, in the past Mr. Kennedy had visited Mr. Rayburn -there and this information had never been made known to us and usually -the information we got from the FBI and you have got to realize the -relations are good, was on a personal basis, working with Mr. Hosty and -the other agent assigned to their security section and men assigned to -their criminal section, it was a share and share alike thing because -I have 11 men, and we just augmented their force really with the -information we gathered. - -Mr. DULLES. Had you had a meeting with the FBI, a general meeting, to -go over security problems prior to this time, prior to the President's -visit? - -Mr. REVILL. No, sir; I personally had taken part in no meetings. - -Mr. DULLES. With the FBI? - -Mr. REVILL. With the FBI. - -Mr. DULLES. Or Secret Service? - -Mr. REVILL. Or Secret Service. - -Mr. DULLES. Why was this? - -Mr. REVILL. This I do not know. This was handled at a higher level. -It is my understanding meetings were held and my captain who is my -immediate supervisor was involved in these meetings but---- - -Mr. DULLES. You were not present at these meetings? - -Mr. REVILL. No, sir; I was not. - -Mr. DULLES. But the meetings you think were held? - -Mr. REVILL. This is my understanding; yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. Lieutenant Revill, have you seen the original of that -Exhibit 709? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir; I have. - -Mr. RANKIN. Is that the report that you referred to when you were -answering questions? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir; I brought a copy. - -Mr. RANKIN. And Congressman Ford? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir; there was just one copy made of this and this is -the copy I retained. The original went to Chief Curry. And on this, -Chief Curry called me and he would like me to swear that this was a -true and correct statement, and this I did. - -Mr. RANKIN. By that you are referring to the statement sworn to and -subscribed before me this 7th day of April 1964? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. Now, will you tell us how you happened to make this report, -Exhibit 709? - -Mr. REVILL. Why I made the report? - -Mr. RANKIN. How did it happen that you made it? - -Mr. REVILL. After Mr. Hosty had related these circumstances to me, and -after taking him to the third floor, I reported this incident to my -captain, Captain Gannaway. - -Mr. RANKIN. When was this? - -Mr. REVILL. Within minutes after I left Mr. Hosty at the homicide and -robbery bureau. - -Mr. RANKIN. What did you say to him? - -Mr. REVILL. I told him what had happened, what had transpired. - -Mr. RANKIN. Just describe what you said to him. - -Mr. REVILL. About meeting Mr. Hosty in the basement? - -Mr. RANKIN. Just tell us what you said. - -Mr. REVILL. About Mr. Hosty, following Mr. Hosty in the basement, that -he came up to me, and stated that a Communist had killed the President, -and that a Lee Harvey Oswald, they had him in their security files, and -that they knew he was in Dallas, and that he was capable, that they had -information he was capable of this. To this---- - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you say anything about what you have said? - -Mr. REVILL. No, sir; I don't recall. I might have. - -Mr. RANKIN. You don't recall that at all? - -Mr. REVILL. No, sir; I don't. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did your captain ask you whether you said anything about -that? - -Mr. REVILL. I don't recall him asking me that; no, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did he say anything to you about it? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir; he did. He told me to put this on paper. - -Mr. RANKIN. That is all he said? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir; and to which I told him that I hated to do that -because of Mr. Hosty, that he might have been stating a personal -opinion. He said, "You put it on paper and give it to me and I will -take it to Chief Curry," and this I did. - -Within 30 minutes to an hour after the thing happened. - -Mr. RANKIN. Neither one of you said anything about this being strange -that Agent Hosty would say anything like this? - -Mr. REVILL. I do not recall, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. You didn't say anything like that? - -Mr. REVILL. I don't recall making such a statement. - -Mr. RANKIN. And he didn't say anything like that to you that you -recalled? - -Mr. REVILL. No, sir. - -Representative FORD. Did you write this out in longhand? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir; and then I dictated it to one of the stenos in -the office. And she was to, this is what I mentioned earlier the time -element, she was to, she got off at 4 o'clock and this was before she -went home for the day. - -Mr. DULLES. This is on November 22 you are talking about? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir. - -Mr. DULLES. Did you sign it on November 22 or at a later date? - -Mr. REVILL. The same time. - -Mr. DULLES. But you swore to it on the 7th day of April 1964? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir. - -Mr. DULLES. You swore that was your signature? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir; at the time I was hoping it would never come up. - -Mr. RANKIN. Why? - -Mr. REVILL. Because of the relations that we had with the Bureau. - -Mr. RANKIN. You thought this was a bad thing for the Bureau? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir; I did. - -Mr. RANKIN. For them to admit to you that they knew---- - -Mr. REVILL. Not the admitting but to withhold it. - -Mr. RANKIN. To withhold the information? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes. - -Mr. RANKIN. They thought this man was capable of being an assassin? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. And yet you say that Agent Hosty just blurted that out? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir; he did. - -Mr. RANKIN. Have you told us all that you remember about it? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir; all that I remember. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you make this---- - -Mr. DULLES. Could I ask a question that comes right along with that? -Did he say anything to you about his having been in Russia and -redefected? - -Mr. REVILL. No, sir. - -Mr. DULLES. That did not come up in this conversation? - -Mr. REVILL. No, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you ask him how he knew he was a Communist? - -Mr. REVILL. No, sir; I did not. - -Mr. DULLES. Why not? - -Mr. REVILL. I don't know. - -Representative FORD. In the statement that you gave on November 22 -which you have signed, you say? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir. - -Representative FORD. "The subject was arrested for the murder of J. -D. Tippit and is a prime suspect in the assassination of President -Kennedy." - -Mr. REVILL. This I found out after reporting to my office, I didn't -know what time this happened. - -Representative FORD. In other words, you learned this subsequent to -going with Hosty? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir. - -Representative FORD. And then coming back to your own office? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir; some of the officers assigned to the Special -Service Bureau on--were involved in the arrest, Detectives Carroll and -I talked to Agent Bob Barrett, I ran into him in the hall and he had -told me about the arrest of Oswald. I think he was present at the time. - -Representative FORD. That is how you learned about this? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir. - -Mr. DULLES. At what time of day did you make this actual statement and -sign it approximately? - -Mr. REVILL. Approximately 3:30, 3:35. - -Mr. DULLES. 3:35 on the 22d of November? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir. - -Mr. DULLES. This is the actual statement that you then signed and then -you swore to it, and the notary's signature was put on on the 22d of -April? - -Mr. REVILL. No, sir; the notary's was on April 7, I believe. - -Mr. DULLES. 7th day of April, I mean, 7th day of April. - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir; but this is the report that I signed on the 22d. - -Mr. DULLES. This is the actual report that you signed on the 22d? - -Mr. REVILL. On the 22d. This is a copy, I believe. - -Mr. DULLES. Yes; this is a copy I have in my hand. - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir. - -Mr. DULLES. The original of this was made on November 22? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir. - -Mr. DULLES. And signed on November 22d? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir; it was. - -Mr. DULLES. And later sworn to on April 7? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir; this is correct. - -Mr. DULLES. April 7, 1964. - -Mr. RANKIN. Is all the information on 709 given by you? - -Mr. REVILL. Is this 709? - -Mr. RANKIN. Yes. - -Mr. REVILL. All of the information, what do you mean by this, sir? - -Mr. RANKIN. All of the language and everything on that exhibit, did you -give that to some stenographer to write? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir; I wrote it out. My stenographer, she is a clerk -typist, and--I roughed it out and then she typed it for me. - -Mr. RANKIN. Now, the words "subject" Lee Harvey Oswald. - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. Was that given by you on the slip of paper you wrote out? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir; I wrote it out in longhand. - -Mr. RANKIN. And the words 605 Elsbeth Street, was that given by you? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir; this is the address we were given or I was given -by some of the officers involved in the arrest. - -Mr. RANKIN. Who gave that to you? - -Mr. REVILL. I believe Detective Carroll, Carroll or Detective Taylor, -they were both there. - -Mr. RANKIN. And was that at the time you made this out that you were -given that information? - -Mr. REVILL. Shortly before I made this out. - -Mr. RANKIN. You didn't even know where he lived then? - -Mr. REVILL. No, sir; I did not. I had never heard of him. - -Mr. RANKIN. You know that is wrong, don't you? - -Mr. REVILL. The 605? - -Mr. RANKIN. Yes. - -Mr. REVILL. I don't know. - -Mr. RANKIN. Is it wrong? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes; it is. - -Mr. DULLES. As of the time. - -Mr. REVILL. That is what they gave me. - -Mr. RANKIN. You found that out? - -Mr. DULLES. This is an address he once lived at. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you know that? - -Mr. DULLES. This is correct. I want to find out what he knows about it. - -Mr. REVILL. Is this a--is this an incorrect address on Mr. Oswald where -he was living at the time? - -Mr. RANKIN. If you check it up I think you will find--it is an -incorrect address at the time. I think you will also find that 602 -Elsbeth Street is where he lived at one time. - -Mr. REVILL. Now, where they got this address---- - -Mr. RANKIN. You never checked that? - -Mr. REVILL. I personally have not checked it but I am sure it has been -checked. - -Mr. RANKIN. I see. - -Mr. REVILL. But this is the address I was given. - -Mr. RANKIN. Now, you say here that you were told that the subject was a -member of the Communist Party. Is that right? - -Mr. REVILL. This might be my interpretation of Mr. Hosty saying a -Communist killed the President and we had him in our security files. - -Mr. RANKIN. You are an expert in this field, aren't you? You are -working in the subversive field? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir; but as far as an expert, I wouldn't say I am an -expert. - -Mr. RANKIN. You know the difference between membership and a person -being a Communist, don't you? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. And you know it is a very real difference? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir; there is a difference. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you know which Mr. Hosty told you? - -Mr. REVILL. He did not say that he was a member. This was my -connotation of what he said that a Communist, that "We had him in our -security files." - -Mr. DULLES. Could I ask a question? Where did you get this address that -you put on of 605 Elsbeth Street, do you recall? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir; from Detective E. B. Carroll or Detective Taylor. - -Mr. DULLES. Are they subordinates? - -Mr. REVILL. No; they are detectives assigned to the special service -bureau. One of them works the narcotics squad and one of them is -assigned to the vice unit. - -Mr. DULLES. You never ascertained where they got it? - -Mr. REVILL. No, sir; this might be the address that they got from -Oswald, I do not know. I never even thought about it until you brought -up the point that this is not the address. - -Mr. DULLES. Can you find out where they got this address? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir; I can. - -Mr. DULLES. I think that would be useful. I would like to know that. I -would like to know where they got this address also. - -Mr. REVILL. It would have been the same day because this was made -within an hour---- - -Mr. RANKIN. You didn't put down on this statement anything about what -you said, did you? - -Mr. REVILL. No, sir; I did not. - -Mr. RANKIN. Why didn't you? - -Mr. REVILL. All I was doing was reporting what Mr. Hosty said to me. - -Mr. RANKIN. Is that the way you make all your reports just one side? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir; yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. You never say what you said? - -Mr. REVILL. No, sir; I do not put our opinions or our interpretation in -the report. - -Mr. RANKIN. You don't even say what you asked? - -Mr. REVILL. No, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. You just put the answer down? - -Mr. REVILL. Put what was given to me; yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. And that is the way all the police department reports are -made? - -Mr. REVILL. No, sir; I don't know whether this is the way they are all -made. This is the way we do it in our unit. - -Mr. RANKIN. After you made this report, do you know what happened to it? - -Mr. REVILL. I gave it to the captain, my captain, Captain Gannaway. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you know whether it was given to the Commission when the -police reports were furnished to the Commission? - -Mr. REVILL. This I do not know, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. I will tell you that it was not given to the Commission. Do -you know any reason why it was withheld? - -Mr. REVILL. No, sir; I do not. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you know any reason why it should have been withheld -until Chief Curry came here? - -Mr. REVILL. No, sir; I do not. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you have anything to do with that being withheld? - -Mr. REVILL. No, sir; I gave it to my superior, and what he did with it, -I do not know. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you ever have any discussions about withholding it? - -Mr. REVILL. No, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. You did want to protect Agent Hosty, you say? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. And you hoped the information would not get out? - -Mr. REVILL. By hoping---- - -The CHAIRMAN. He didn't say exactly that, Mr. Rankin. He said he hoped -he wouldn't have to use it against Hosty as I understood him to say. - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir; my opinion, and this was my personal opinion that -it would not serve any purpose. In your scope of the investigation, -yes, I can see where it would, but I hated to get involved in a -controversy with the FBI, because of our past relations. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you recently have a conversation with Lieutenant -Hopkins of Fort Worth? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. Where was that? - -Mr. REVILL. Lieutenant Hopkins and I went to Sacramento, Calif., to a -law enforcement intelligence unit conference and shared a room. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you discuss this matter with him? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir; it broke in the papers while we were there. - -Mr. RANKIN. What did you say to him about it? - -Mr. REVILL. About the report? About this report? - -Mr. RANKIN. Yes. - -Mr. REVILL. I told him about the conversation with Mr. Hosty and -about according to the news release, the news stories, this thing -was released, and the newspaper reporters and television people in -Sacramento made it impossible for me to remain at the conference so I -returned to Dallas. I was there for 1 day and returned the next, the -next evening. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you say anything about the report being inaccurate? - -Mr. REVILL. Inaccurate? - -Mr. RANKIN. Yes. - -Mr. REVILL. No, sir. - -Representative FORD. What was the date of this conference in Sacramento? - -Mr. REVILL. April 22, 23, and 24, I believe. It was on a Thursday, -Friday, and Saturday. It could have been the 23d, 24th, and 25th but I -returned on Friday evening. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you examine the newspaper report of your report, -Exhibit 709? - -Mr. REVILL. Did I examine it? Yes, sir; I read several newspaper -reports of it. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you give the reports to the newspapers? - -Mr. REVILL. No, sir; I did not. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you have anything to do with giving it to the -newspapers? - -Mr. REVILL. No, sir; this would have been the last thing I would have -done. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you know who did? - -Mr. REVILL. No, sir; I do not. - -Representative FORD. What prompted you to discuss this information with -the other officer from Fort Worth? - -Mr. REVILL. I started getting long-distance telephone calls on the -evening, it must have been the 23d, it was Thursday night, I got two -long-distance phone calls, and Lieutenant Hopkins and I were sharing a -double room and, of course---- - -The CHAIRMAN. Lieutenant who? - -Mr. REVILL. Lieutenant Hopkins of the Fort Worth Police Department. H. -F. Hopkins. - -The CHAIRMAN. Yes. - -Mr. REVILL. And I discussed it with him. - -Representative FORD. Who was calling you long distance, what relevance -does that have to it? - -Mr. REVILL. To my discussing it with him? - -Representative FORD. Yes. - -Mr. REVILL. The long-distance phone calls were about this report, the -Associated Press and the United Press. - -Representative FORD. I see. They had heard about it, they called you -long distance and you discussed it with Hopkins who was in the room -with you? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. That is all that I have, Mr. Chief Justice. - -The CHAIRMAN. Have you anything further, or you? - -Mr. DULLES. Tippit was not under your jurisdiction, was he? - -Mr. REVILL. No, sir; he was not. - -The CHAIRMAN. Lieutenant, I am not familiar with the newspaper report -that you are speaking of. What, in substance, did it say? - -Mr. REVILL. There were several articles written. The Dallas papers -carried articles on it and the Sacramento, Calif., paper carried an -article on it. In essence it had to do with this conversation that -Hosty and I had and about this report and somewhere, someplace some -newspaper reporter must have seen a copy of this because he knew how -many paragraphs they had in it and he quoted, I believe, the last -paragraph of the report verbatim, and this is what concerned me, that a -report such as this would fall into their hands. - -Now, who the reporter is, there were several reporters that were -curious about the thing, and I don't even recall which newspaper -carried the verbatim paragraph about Agent Hosty's conversation. - -The CHAIRMAN. And that is what caused you and Lieutenant Hopkins to -have a discussion? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir. - -The CHAIRMAN. Did he bring the matter up to you or did you bring it up -to him? - -Mr. REVILL. I might have brought it up to him because I was concerned -that this thing had been released. - -The CHAIRMAN. What was your conversation concerning that? - -Mr. REVILL. That I had received these calls, the first one must have -been around 2 o'clock in the morning, California time, from the -Associated Press. It was a lady writer, and she asked about this and -I told her that any statement would have to be made by Chief Curry, -and she trapped me really. She made a false statement that Hosty was -supposed to have said something else and I said no, that is not so. He -did not make a statement, and then there was my comment. From that it -looked like I had written them out a press release. - -The CHAIRMAN. Looks like what? - -Mr. REVILL. It appears as if I had written out a press release from the -comment in the newspapers but that was the only statement I made that -Hosty had not made such statement, it was a fabrication, he knew he was -capable, but he did not make such a statement. Hosty did not make such -a statement. - -The CHAIRMAN. Then you discussed that with Mr. Hopkins? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir. - -The CHAIRMAN. Do you recall just what Mr. Hopkins asked you and what -you told him about this report? - -Mr. REVILL. Well, when I received the first call, I was in the coffee -shop, it was 2 o'clock in the morning, we had been out with two of -the Sacramento County Sheriff's officers and I got the call and after -getting the call I went to the room and Hopkins had been awakened by -this phone call, and I told him about the call, and then from there on, -I had numerous long-distance calls, and I answered the one with the -UPI, and then I decided I would not talk to people. Because I couldn't -see where it would help anything. - -The CHAIRMAN. Did he ask you if the substance of this report was true, -I am speaking now of Exhibit 709, the one we have been talking about. - -Mr. REVILL. Mr. Hopkins had never seen this report. I just told him -what had transpired between Hosty and I and told him that a report had -been made, and this is what they were calling on. - -The CHAIRMAN. Did you at any time in talking to him repudiate anything -that was in this report? - -Mr. REVILL. No, sir. The only thing I repudiated was the fact that this -reporter had said that Hosty had made a statement and I said no, this -is not true, about them not believing that he would do it, and I think -I told Hopkins that. - -The CHAIRMAN. Yes. Anything more? - -Mr. DULLES. I have nothing more. - -The CHAIRMAN. Lieutenant, thank you very much, sir, for your help here. - -Mr. REVILL. Thank you, sir. I am just sorry it happened. - -The CHAIRMAN. You have told us what the truth of the situation is, you -could do no more and no less. - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir. - -(Discussion off the record.) - -The CHAIRMAN. Lieutenant, just a question or two, we forgot to ask, Mr. -Rankin, would you ask them, please? - -Mr. RANKIN. You said you made some handwritten notes about this 709 -exhibit. - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. When you gave them to the typist--do you know what happened -to those notes? - -Mr. REVILL. They were destroyed, I am sure. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you know what her name is who typed 709? - -Mr. REVILL. Mary Jane Robertson. - -Mr. RANKIN. Is she still with the police department? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. What position is she in now? - -Mr. REVILL. She is a clerk-typist in the special service bureau. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you know where the original of 709 is? - -Mr. REVILL. With Chief Curry, I assume. Well, let's see. You have a -copy; I would assume he has got it. - -Mr. DULLES. Wasn't a copy made at the time? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir; I have it. - -Mr. DULLES. The actual copy, you have? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir; it is in my little briefcase. - -Mr. RANKIN. So that original would be available to us? - -Mr. DULLES. You have it here now? - -Mr. REVILL. I have a copy. - -Mr. DULLES. A carbon copy? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir. - -The CHAIRMAN. He showed us a copy of his testimony. - -Representative FORD. Do you know how many copies were made? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir; one and one; an original and one. - -Representative FORD. And you kept one copy and one went to Captain -Gannaway? - -Mr. REVILL. No; both copies went to Captain Gannaway who is my -immediate superior and he later gave me back the carbon and the -original went to Chief Curry. - -Representative FORD. And you have had the one copy in your possession -since how long? - -Mr. REVILL. Probably a week or two after this thing happened, and I -have had it in the Lee Harvey Oswald file. - -Representative FORD. You have had this copy in your files in the police -department? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir. - -Representative FORD. Since about December 1 or thereabouts? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir; thereabouts. - -The CHAIRMAN. Do you number those items in the file? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir. - -The CHAIRMAN. And the order in which they come in? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir. Now, this particular report was put in the Lee -Harvey Oswald file, and he was given an intelligence number, A & T, if -I may get this copy I will explain to you---- - -The CHAIRMAN. Yes; would you do so, please? - -Mr. REVILL. Excuse me just a moment. You see, he was given A & T 2965, -page 34, as it appears in his file. This is indexed with a card with -this file number and page number. - -The CHAIRMAN. May I ask, would the next item in that file be numbered -35? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir; it would. - -The CHAIRMAN. And the one directly preceding it would be 33? - -Mr. REVILL. Thirty-three; yes, sir. - -The CHAIRMAN. I see, and you have the rest of your file which would -indicate that? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir; I don't have it with me. - -The CHAIRMAN. No; but you have it in your records. - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir. - -The CHAIRMAN. And that could be produced if we wanted it? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir; it is the complete file we have now on Lee Harvey -Oswald. - -The CHAIRMAN. Yes. - -Mr. RANKIN. May we have---- - -Mr. DULLES. Could I just see that? - -Mr. RANKIN. Could we make a copy of that? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir; I put another piece in there because it is on -onion skin. - -Mr. RANKIN. We could make a photostatic copy quickly and return this to -you. - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Chief Justice, I would like to number this in the next -order of exhibits and offer it in evidence, if I may, this copy, the -photostatic copy. - -The CHAIRMAN. Yes. - -Mr. DULLES. Just as a security matter, would you kindly look in the -file and see if by any chance your original longhand notes could have -been put in the file, at this place in the file? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir; I can, but I am sure they were not, because this -was not made at my office. You see, we are removed physically from the -police department, the intelligence unit, and this was made at the -special service bureau office. - -Mr. DULLES. I see, not in your own office. - -Mr. REVILL. No, sir; we are an integral part of the special service -bureau office but our files are maintained elsewhere, and this was made -at the special service bureau office. - -Representative FORD. When you sat down to write out this statement, -just describe where you did it and how you did it, what kind of paper -you used and so forth. - -Mr. REVILL. Well, we use the white pads like this, and I wrote it out -on the pad, and in the special service bureau office and it was made in -Lieutenant Dyson's office, he was out, and I used his desk, and then I -took it to Mrs. Robertson, and she typed it. - -Representative FORD. Did you consult with Detective Brian? - -Mr. REVILL. No, sir. - -Representative FORD. During the time you were preparing it? - -Mr. REVILL. No, sir. - -Representative FORD. Or subsequent to its preparation? - -Mr. REVILL. No, sir; I did not. At the time I couldn't have told you -who was with me or who overheard this thing because there was so much -confusion in the elevator and going to the elevator. - -Representative FORD. But Brian was with you on the elevator? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir; he was with me in the automobile and on the -elevator. - -Representative FORD. Was he up in Gannaway's office with you, too? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir; he works for me. - -Representative FORD. He was with you at the time you went to Gannaway's -office? - -Mr. REVILL. The special service bureau office; yes, sir. - -Representative FORD. But he didn't see this at anytime? - -Mr. REVILL. No, sir; I say he didn't, I don't know whether he ever saw -it or not. He might have seen it when I was working on it and I gave -both of the copies to the captain. - -The CHAIRMAN. Lieutenant, did that entire Oswald file that you have -just told us about come to the Commission, do you know? - -Mr. REVILL. I don't know. Now what we did, we made up several large -books, and it is my understanding that a copy of one of these was given -to the Attorney General Waggoner and he was in turn to furnish it to -this Commission, this I was told by Captain Gannaway. - -Mr. RANKIN. When was that? - -Mr. REVILL. This was a month or two ago. - -Mr. RANKIN. Yes; but not when you first gave the files. - -Mr. REVILL. No, sir; because this happened on the same day. - -The CHAIRMAN. Should that file have included this? - -Mr. REVILL. No, sir; it didn't. There were only two pieces made of it, -one copy and the original made of this. - -The CHAIRMAN. I see. What I am getting at, when the department sent -their reports to us, did they send copies of this file that Exhibit 709 -is in? - -Mr. REVILL. The Lee Harvey Oswald file? - -The CHAIRMAN. Yes. - -Mr. REVILL. I don't believe they did, because much of this is, pertains -to newspaper articles, and information that we picked up such as leads -where Ruby and Oswald were seen together, we ran all these things down, -and then we would make a report of the lead, or the findings, and a -copy of it would go in their files. - -The CHAIRMAN. I see. - -Mr. REVILL. But this one here, was not placed in that book? - -Mr. DULLES. In the original of Commission Exhibit No. 709 that you have -just given us prior to the notary public's inscription, subscription to -it, there is red ink underlining of Lee Harvey Oswald and James Hosty. -When was that put on this copy? - -Mr. REVILL. I don't know, sir. Captain Gannaway must have done that -because he had the thing and then later gave it to me. Now, the reason -for it being underlined, I don't know. On the original--yes; I do. - -Mr. DULLES. Would that be for filing purposes? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir; I do. Normally we retain the original copy of -every report for our file copy, but I did not have the file copy or the -original report so our clerk in indexing this underscored the name and -the address and she made cards for the index files. - -Mr. DULLES. That was a card, also, under the file of James Hosty? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir. - -Mr. DULLES. His name is also underlined in red? - -Mr. REVILL. His name indexed; yes, sir. - -Mr. DULLES. In your original copy of Exhibit 709? - -Mr. REVILL. No, sir; not the original copy, because the original---- - -Mr. DULLES. The carbon copy, excuse me, the carbon copy of 709. - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir. - -Mr. DULLES. And I assume that Commission's Exhibit No. 709 which is a -photostat is a photostat of the original rather than of the carbon copy? - -Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir; and I don't know who made the photostat, I did -not. I assume Chief Curry had it made. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Reporter, we are giving the number 838 to the carbon -copy of Exhibit 709 that Lieutenant Revill has just produced. - -The CHAIRMAN. You propose to take a photostat of this and return this -report to the lieutenant? - -Mr. RANKIN. If we may, Mr. Chief Justice, this is the only copy that I -have. - -The CHAIRMAN. You should have it back. - -Mr. REVILL. That is fine. - -The CHAIRMAN. We will take a photostat and return this to you then. - -Mr. REVILL. I appreciate that. - -The CHAIRMAN. It may be admitted in that manner. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 838 for -identification, and received in evidence.) - -The CHAIRMAN. I think that is all. Thank you, again, lieutenant. - -Mr. REVILL. I will attempt to find out on that address, and I shall let -Mr. Sorrels know, with Secret Service. - -Mr. RANKIN. Yes; that will be fine. - -The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. - - -TESTIMONY OF V. J. BRIAN - -The CHAIRMAN. Come right in, sir. Detective Brian, the purpose of -today's hearing is to hear the testimony of Lieutenant Revill and -yourself with particular regard to an alleged conversation with Special -Agent James P. Hosty, Jr. of the Federal Bureau of Investigation -claimed to have occurred on November 22, 1963, in the afternoon and -also concerning the facts surrounding the discussion of Commission -Exhibits Nos. 709 and 711. 709 is the affidavit of Lieutenant Revill, -and 711 is the affidavit that you made concerning that matter. - -Mr. BRIAN. Yes, sir. - -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. BRIAN. Yes, sir; I do. - -The CHAIRMAN. Please be seated. - -Mr. Rankin will conduct the examination. - -Mr. BRIAN. My name is Brian. - -Mr. RANKIN. Where do you live? - -Mr. BRIAN. In Dallas, Tex. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you have some connection with the police department in -Dallas? - -Mr. BRIAN. Yes, sir; I am a detective in the criminal intelligence -section. - -Mr. RANKIN. How long have you occupied that position? - -Mr. BRIAN. Since June of 1955. - -Mr. RANKIN. What is your function as a detective for the criminal -intelligence section? - -Mr. BRIAN. To gain, obtain information and keep records and files, and -usually when an important Government official comes to town we guard -them or help assist guard them, and furnish information for other -agencies outside of the Dallas Police Department and have liaison, and -general criminal investigation work. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you have anything to do with the Lee Harvey Oswald case? - -Mr. BRIAN. Yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. When was the first time that you had anything to do with -that matter? - -Mr. BRIAN. Well, we started interrogating people and talking to people -immediately after the assassination. - -Mr. RANKIN. About what time of the day? - -Mr. BRIAN. In the middle of the afternoon, probably---- - -Mr. RANKIN. November 22, 1963? - -Mr. BRIAN. Yes, sir. The first thing that we done, I was, I personally -that day was, assigned at the Dallas Trade Mart where the President was -to speak, I was on the side of the speaker stand when he was to come -in, and they came in and got us and told us that he had been shot, and -the President of the United States had been shot, and that a man in the -Book Depository down there and told us to go down there and see if we -could get him out, and four of us detectives down there got in a car -and we went to the Book Depository and we arrived there a short time, I -don't know what time it was, a short time after the shooting occurred. - -Mr. RANKIN. Who were the four you are describing now? - -Mr. BRIAN. Lieutenant Revill, myself, a detective, O. J. Tarver, and a -detective, Roy W. Westphal. - -Mr. RANKIN. What did you do there? - -Mr. BRIAN. We searched the Book Depository for a couple of hours. We -spent about 2 hours, I would guess, approximately 2 hours down there -searching the Depository. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you find anything at that time? - -Mr. BRIAN. No, sir. I was there on the floor when the man found shells -over in a corner when--where the assassin was hidden at. But other than -that, I wasn't present when anything was found. - -Mr. RANKIN. Will you just describe that event when you saw those shells? - -Mr. BRIAN. Well, a police sergeant, Jerry Hill, hollered, I was on the -opposite side of the sixth floor, hollered that he had, this is where -he shot from, and shells were laying there, and I walked from where I -was at over to the other corner of the building and looked, and that -is about the extent of my investigation there because they called the -crime laboratory and everybody else to get down there and they got an -officer to guard the place and not let nobody get around and we went on -searching the building. - -Mr. RANKIN. What did you see, how many shells did you see? - -Mr. BRIAN. I am going to guess. - -Mr. RANKIN. We don't want you to guess. If you can tell us your -recollection, that is all. - -Mr. BRIAN. Well, the first time I went over there, I believe I saw two, -but I am not sure, but I went back again later and there were three -shells there. - -Mr. RANKIN. Now after that, did you leave the Depository Building? - -Mr. BRIAN. Yes, sir; after we spent considerable time, we went from the -top floor down to the bottom floor, back up, going through it, and we -finally wound up on the second floor taking all the acoustic tile out -of the ceiling looking up to see if anybody was hidden up there, and I -believe that was the last thing we did in the building. By that time, -there were a number of people in the building. - -Mr. RANKIN. You were making a complete search of each floor, were you? - -Mr. BRIAN. Yes, sir; I was with, I mean there were a number of officers -there. I didn't do it by myself, there were a number of us there and we -were searching it. - -Mr. RANKIN. Then you left the building? - -Mr. BRIAN. Yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you leave with some other officers? - -Mr. BRIAN. Yes, sir; Lieutenant Revill, myself, and Tarver and Westphal -all went back to the car and left to go to city hall. - -Mr. RANKIN. Then you got back to the city hall. What did you do? - -Mr. BRIAN. We drove into the basement and parked. - -Mr. RANKIN. What time of the day was that, can you tell us? - -Mr. BRIAN. Probably around 2 o'clock or somewhere in that. I don't -really know to be truthful because I didn't pay any attention to the -time but it was around 2 o'clock, I would guess. - -Mr. RANKIN. And the four of you were together at that time? - -Mr. BRIAN. Yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. What happened at that point? - -Mr. BRIAN. We got out of the car, and as we got out of the car---- - -Mr. DULLES. Was the car already inside the building or in the driveway -there? - -Mr. BRIAN. Yes, sir. - -Let me explain. City hall basement, as some of you all know---- - -Mr. DULLES. I was just there so I want to know. - -Mr. BRIAN. We came around the ramp and we parked in the basement. We -were parked in the basement, and we got out, and started around, there -is a railing there, we started around the railing and at that time Jim -Hosty was coming across the basement, at a fast trot, or moving fairly -fast---- - -Mr. RANKIN. Special Agent Hosty of the Bureau? - -Mr. BRIAN. Yes, sir. - -And he came across there and I know him, and I had known him for a good -while to speak to him. - -Mr. RANKIN. Where were you with reference to Lieutenant Revill at that -point? - -Mr. BRIAN. I think I was on his, probably his right-hand side. - -Mr. RANKIN. Close to him? - -Mr. BRIAN. Fairly close; yes, sir. - -And so we walked over to meet, kind of cornered, you cross paths and we -walked up there to meet Jim, and he said, he came up there and he said, -that Lee Oswald, a Communist, killed the President, and then Revill -said, "What?" He said, Lee Oswald, a Communist, killed the President. - -He was in--nervous--in a hurry, and was just talking. - -And then he said, he said that he knew that he was a Communist and he -knew he worked in the Book Depository, and then Lieutenant Revill said -something else to him, I am not--I don't know what he said, and they -walked off in front of me going in around and in through the door over -to the elevator to go up, and then we accompanied Agent Hosty up to -Captain Fritz' office which is on the---- - -Mr. DULLES. Was the elevator there at the basement floor when you took -it or did you have to wait? - -Mr. BRIAN. We had to wait just a very short time on it. It wasn't -standing open waiting; no, sir. - -We had to wait on it just a very short time, I believe, and we went up -to the third floor, and Hosty and Lieutenant Revill went in there and -talked. I went to the door and just stepped inside and waited and then -we went back downstairs to our office which is on two, right underneath -Captain Fritz' office. - -Mr. DULLES. You accompanied them to the third floor and then you came -down? - -Mr. BRIAN. Yes, sir. - -Mr. DULLES. In the elevator? - -Mr. BRIAN. That I am not sure. - -Mr. DULLES. Or did you get out and come down the stairs? - -Mr. BRIAN. I am not sure. - -Mr. DULLES. But you weren't with Lieutenant Revill any further? - -Mr. BRIAN. When we came back down to our office, we came back down, I -am not sure whether we rode the elevator or not. It is a short trip -down and I am--I would be afraid to say whether we walked, rode, or -how we got down, but we went into Captain Gannaway's office and Revill -told, Lieutenant Revill told the Captain what Hosty had said, so he -said, "Write a report." - -Mr. RANKIN. What did he say at that time? What did he tell the Captain -that Agent Hosty had said? - -Mr. BRIAN. He told him, short and very quick, that they knew that -Oswald was a Communist and that he was in the Book Depository, and he -said, "Write a report and get it back to me right now." - -And he went right back and wrote a report. - -I forgot about the whole incident, I didn't think it would be important -and I didn't--well, in fact, I didn't have time to because when I got -back there they had a list of names they were going to start checking -out and they handed me six of them and says, "Start going and checking -here and here and here and checking these people." - -So I never did dwell on it again. - -Mr. RANKIN. In this conversation down in the basement, have you told us -all that Agent Hosty said that you recall? - -Mr. BRIAN. Yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. And have you told us all that Lieutenant Revill said that -you recall? - -Mr. BRIAN. Yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. Have you told us all that Lieutenant Revill told to Captain -Gannaway that you recall? - -Mr. BRIAN. Well, let's see. I believe that I have, yes, sir. -When--Captain Gannaway's office, as you go in the door and turn right -and his office is in there and if I recall correctly I didn't go all -the way in his office, he did and I stood in the door, and I really -didn't make a mental note of what happened and things were moving at a -rather fast pace, and I believe that I did; yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. You have made an affidavit about this, have you not? - -Mr. BRIAN. Yes, sir; I made a report to Chief Curry. - -Mr. RANKIN. And you swore to that? - -Mr. BRIAN. Yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. Is Exhibit 711 a photostatic copy of your report that you -made that you have just described? - -Mr. BRIAN. Yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you swear to that report on the date that it bears? - -Mr. BRIAN. Yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. April 20, 1964? - -Mr. BRIAN. Yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. You read the Exhibit 711 right now, didn't you? - -Mr. BRIAN. Yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. Is it correct? - -Mr. BRIAN. Yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. Are there any additions or corrections that you wish to -make to it? - -Mr. BRIAN. No, sir. - -The CHAIRMAN. I was just going to ask if you fixed the date on which he -dictated that or wrote it, whichever he did. - -Mr. RANKIN. I haven't, but I will. - -Will you tell us on what date you wrote or dictated Exhibit 711? - -Mr. BRIAN. Yes, sir; the day before, I believe it was the day before, -Chief Curry came up here. It was either a day or 2 days before April -20th is what it says on there. That is the date that I made the report, -the day or 2 days before Chief Curry came up here. - -Will you tell us on what date you wrote or dictated Exhibit 711? - -Mr. BRIAN. I didn't think--well, Captain Gannaway told Lieutenant -Revill to write a report about the thing the date it happened, and he -did, or I assumed he did, and I guess that he did. I haven't---- - -Mr. RANKIN. Have you ever seen that report? - -Mr. BRIAN. I have seen it, but I haven't read it. That is unusual but I -haven't. I didn't think the incident was really important, that is the -reason why I didn't dwell on it, and I am sure it is now or I wouldn't -be up here. - -But they, a few days before Chief Curry was to come up here they said -they wanted a report, you know, to what I had heard in the basement -and this and that and the other, and I said, "Well, I better write one -then." - -I just assumed it was all taken care of, and so I wrote one on the -20th, I wrote that report on the 20th and swore to it and turned it in -and he brought it up here. - -Mr. DULLES. You made no contemporaneous memoranda, that is on November -22 you made no notes or memoranda of this? - -Mr. BRIAN. No, sir. - -Mr. DULLES. So the report of April 20 you dictated on or about April 20 -is based on your memory? - -Mr. BRIAN. Yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. Exhibit 711, your report, was that written out in longhand -or dictated to a girl? - -Mr. BRIAN. No, sir; I typed it myself on the typewriter. We don't have -a stenographer in our office to dictate to. - -Mr. RANKIN. You did type the part about the notary and so forth on the -bottom? - -Mr. BRIAN. No, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you know who did that? - -Mr. BRIAN. I believe Bill Biggio. - -Mr. RANKIN. Who is he? - -Mr. BRIAN. He is a detective who works the desk there, who is a notary -who notarized it. - -Mr. RANKIN. Now, before you made Exhibit 711 did anyone give you -Lieutenant Revill's report to examine? - -Mr. BRIAN. No, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. Compare your report with? - -Mr. BRIAN. No, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. And you have never read that? - -Mr. BRIAN. I don't recall reading it; no, sir. I sure don't. I probably -looked at it but as far as sitting down and reading it, I have never -read the report, I don't believe. - -Mr. RANKIN. So if there is any differences between your report and his -you are not familiar with them? - -Mr. BRIAN. No, sir. - -Representative FORD. Subsequent to November 22 and prior to April 20, -when you prepared this Exhibit 711, did you ever talk to Lieutenant -Revill about the incident? - -Mr. BRIAN. Yes, sir; I sure did. He couldn't remember who was with him -down in the basement, and it rocked on there and had rocked on there, -and somewhere it came out that somebody said he was lying about it and -he was telling us, he said, "I am telling you the truth". "You don't -have to tell me, I know you are; I was standing there with you." - -And he said, "You were the one who was with me?" - -And I said, "Yes, I was with you." - -And I assumed he knew that I was with him. That is when he talked to -Chief Curry and Chief Curry come back and said he needed the report -from me, too. - -Representative FORD. When did this conversation take place? - -Mr. BRIAN. The date I don't have any idea. Probably 2 or 3 weeks, I -will tell you---- - -Mr. DULLES. 2 or 3 weeks what? After November 22? - -Mr. BRIAN. No, sir; before the date I wrote the report, because I -messed around there for another couple of weeks and then I walked in -the office one day and he said, "Chief Curry wants it today," and I -said, "All right, I will write it," and I sat down and wrote it, and -I believe the next day or the day after that he brought it, came up -here, and all this come out in the paper about making a statement and -me backing the statement up in Dallas, I don't know whether it came up -here or not. - -Representative FORD. Who prompted this conversation that you have been -describing? - -Mr. BRIAN. In our office that day? - -Representative FORD. Yes. - -Mr. BRIAN. I am trying to think what brought it on. Somebody, there was -a statement in the paper or something that said that--anyway, somewhere -down the line it came out, it said it wasn't right what Lieutenant -Revill had said. - -And I said, "I know it is right, I was standing there," and that was -about the extent of that. - -And then he said, "Well, I will need"--he talked to Chief Curry, I -guess, and they decided they needed a report from me on it, and then -I finally wrote the report and he brought it up here. I guess it was -just in the course of a conversation more than anything. I don't think -anybody prompted it, really. - -Representative FORD. In this Commission 711 you actually typed it out -yourself? - -Mr. BRIAN. Yes, sir. - -Representative FORD. Are you a fairly accomplished typist? - -Mr. BRIAN. No, sir. I can type fairly well. I am not a touch typist. I -can't copy, but I can type fairly well typing something I don't have -to copy off of a sheet of paper. In other words, I have to look at the -keys to type it. - -Representative FORD. Did you have to rewrite this a second time on the -typewriter? - -Mr. BRIAN. Yes, sir. I made several strikeovers and some other stuff, -and typed it, I had to type it over again. - -Representative FORD. In other words, you typed it out once, and then -retyped it yourself? - -Mr. BRIAN. Yes, sir; I typed it twice. The first time everything wasn't -right in there and the spelling and the strikeovers and stuff, and not -being an accomplished typist I still don't like to throw things out, -you know, that don't look too bad so I typed it over again. - -Representative FORD. But after you typed it over the first time did you -show it to somebody else? - -Mr. BRIAN. I believe Lieutenant Revill looked at it and called a bunch -of mistakes to my attention. - -Representative FORD. What kind of mistakes? - -Mr. BRIAN. Well, I don't know. There were some strikeovers and some, a -couple of misspelled words, I believe, and I don't have a copy of the -one that I copied from so I couldn't say, but I did have to type the -report over. - -Representative FORD. But these mistakes that were pointed out by -Lieutenant Revill, were they mistakes of substance or just mistakes -involving spelling and the like? - -Mr. BRIAN. Well, what do you mean by substance now? - -Representative FORD. Well, I mean as to the precise things that you -said as to what transpired? - -Mr. BRIAN. I don't believe there were. I am trying to recall what I had -to add that took place there, and---- - -Representative FORD. It is important whether or not any statements of -facts were altered or whether the changes were simply typographical -errors or otherwise. - -Mr. BRIAN. I will tell you one thing that I recall he called to my -attention was 2:05 p.m., I believe, and I told him, I said I can't put -that in there because I don't know what time it was, and I don't. I -don't have any idea of what time it was, and he said, "Well, all right, -leave that out," but I think the substance was probably the same in -both reports. In fact, I am sure the substance was probably the same, -because it was, the grammar was changed in some places, some spelling -was changed, and some strikeovers were changed, and I think probably -the second report was copied, that one was copied partially from the -first one and then I made some changes. - -Representative FORD. While you were in the process of discussing this -with Lieutenant Revill he didn't show you his report, Exhibit 709? - -Mr. BRIAN. I don't know whether he did or not. I don't believe that he -did. I don't believe he did. - -Representative FORD. Had you seen it before? - -Mr. BRIAN. I have seen the report. - -Representative FORD. Did you see it before you typed this up? - -Mr. BRIAN. I don't recall seeing it. I may have, but I don't recall it. - -Now, he has got something in there that I don't have in mine, I know -about him saying that Hosty knew that Oswald, I believe, was capable of -assassinating the President, but I didn't hear Hosty say that. - -Representative FORD. When did you learn that that statement was in -Revill's statement? - -Mr. BRIAN. Just to be truthful, I don't know. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did Lieutenant Revill ask you to include in your statement -that Hosty had said that Oswald was known to be capable of being an -assassin? - -Mr. BRIAN. No, sir; he asked me if I heard him say it and I told him -no, but I don't believe he asked me to include that in the report. - -Mr. DULLES. You told him, no. - -Mr. RANKIN. When was that? - -Mr. BRIAN. Probably the day--now, this all happened in the course of a -week's time and the conversations are hard to put on a day or time, I -mean when you don't think--I didn't think all this was real important, -and so I didn't try to backlog it to where--it was probably the day, -probably about April 20, along in there. - -Mr. RANKIN. Before or after you wrote your report? - -Mr. BRIAN. In between the first report and the second report I imagine. - -Mr. RANKIN. I am not quite clear about how you happened to make this -report in that I understood you to say that there were some newspaper -accounts about it, and the lieutenant said, well, he had said what was -true and something like that. Can you tell us what happened? - -Mr. BRIAN. Well, now, to go back. We were in the office talking and I -don't know how long this was because it may have been 2 days, 3 days, -2 weeks or 3 weeks, before I wrote that report, we were sitting in the -office, and I don't recall whether it was a newspaper account or what -it was, but anywhere somewhere down the line he got--somebody said that -it wasn't the truth and he was lying or something and he was sitting -out there talking and he said, he said he wasn't lying about it and I -told him, I said "I know you are not lying because I stood there and -heard you." - -And he said, "Oh, you are the one who was with me?" And I said, "Yes." - -But I assumed that his report, up until that time I had not seen his -report, and I have seen it since then and I haven't read it from one -end to the other until the other day, and he said, "Well, I am glad -to know you are the one who was there then," and evidently he had -forgotten I was there, too. - -So, he said, "Well, make me a report on what you heard," and I said, -"All right, I will," and he talked to Chief Curry and evidently before -he told me that it was a matter of days or time differential in there -and I said, "All right," and I just did not get around to it until -finally one day I came in the office and he said, "I've got to have -that report today," and I said, "All right," and I sat down and wrote -it and I had to write it over again, that happened on the day the -report is dated. - -Mr. RANKIN. All of that happened, though, before any news accounts of -it, didn't it? - -Mr. BRIAN. Well, I don't remember when they started putting it in the -newspapers. There had been something about it to make him, somewhere to -make him say, he was trying to convince me he was telling the truth and -I said, "Well, I know you are." - -I don't know what brought it on, I don't know whether it was a -newspaper report or something, but anyway there was some--maybe -Chief Curry was on him about it, I don't know. But he said that he -was telling the truth and I told him I knew he was telling the truth -because I had heard it. - -Mr. RANKIN. You said you were there with him? - -Mr. BRIAN. Yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. How close were you to him when he was talking to Hosty? - -Mr. BRIAN. Right next to him when we were talking with him. We talked -around there and how you meet, you know, you walk up together and meet -and went on with him. - -Mr. DULLES. You were walking toward the elevator at that time, weren't -you? - -Mr. BRIAN. Let me draw you a little picture of how that is down there. - -Mr. DULLES. I have been in the basement so I know something about it. - -Mr. BRIAN. Yes, sir. But the ramp goes up here, this is why it would be -easier to draw a picture and it would be easier than I can explain. He -came down the ramp. - -Mr. DULLES. In the car? - -Mr. BRIAN. Yes, sir. - -Mr. DULLES. And you parked in the basement? - -Mr. BRIAN. And we parked the car, and Hosty had parked over here. You -know the ramp is wide here and the other side goes up here, he had -parked over in here and he was coming across this way and we coming -across this way and we met. - -Mr. DULLES. Where is the elevator which takes prisoners up where Oswald -was shot? - -Mr. BRIAN. Right through here, right in here somewhere is where Ruby -shot Oswald and this is a ramp from the Main Street side and this is -the ramp to the Commerce side. And this is the elevator. - -Mr. DULLES. Where is the elevator? - -Mr. BRIAN. The elevator is right there. - -The CHAIRMAN. That is the prisoners' elevator? - -Mr. BRIAN. No, sir. - -The CHAIRMAN. Or the freight elevator? - -Mr. BRIAN. No, sir; that is the elevator going up---- - -The CHAIRMAN. Which one did you take? - -Mr. BRIAN. We took the elevator inside the city hall basement. - -The CHAIRMAN. I see. - -Mr. DULLES. Is there only one elevator there? - -Mr. BRIAN. No, sir; there are two side by side. Back on this side of -the basement there are two elevators over here and one freight elevator -right back on in here. But this is to the city hall this direction and -this is the ramp coming in from Main Street and the ramp going up to -Commerce Street. We drove in this ramp one way going in this way and -one way going out. - -Mr. DULLES. Where are the stairs? - -Mr. BRIAN. In the basement? - -Mr. DULLES. You don't know? - -Mr. BRIAN. There are no stairs in the basement. I mean out here where -the cars are parked. Right here is the ramp, there is a walkway going -up but it is not a stairway and then it levels off and you go by -through here, and the jail is right here, do you recall the jail being -here, on the right by the doors as you go in. - -Mr. DULLES. I only saw the jail on top side. - -Mr. BRIAN. Well, the jail office is right there at the head of this -ramp, the jail office where they book the prisoners through. - -Mr. DULLES. I didn't go in there. - -Mr. BRIAN. That is the door they brought Lee Oswald out of when he was -shot, going into the jail office right there. - -Mr. RANKIN. There are no stairs from the basement to the third floor? - -Mr. BRIAN. There are stairs inside of the basement but there are none -out here, inside of the basement of city hall but none out here in the -parking area. - -Mr. RANKIN. Where are the stairs from the place where the elevators are -that you took. Are there any stairs? - -Mr. BRIAN. I didn't take any stairs. - -Mr. RANKIN. No. You say you took elevators. - -Mr. BRIAN. Yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. Were there stairs near the elevators? - -Mr. BRIAN. Back right over--let me get a pencil and draw the whole -thing for you. That is about the way it is situated right there. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Brian, we will call that Exhibit 839. Will you just -briefly tell the Commission what you have done in making that exhibit -now? - -Mr. BRIAN. All right, sir. I am not an artist. But we came down the -ramp on Main Street, came around here to the parking area. Mr. Hosty -was parked over here. There is a bunch of poles out there and I won't -try to draw them in here. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mark that "A" where Mr. Hosty was parked as you just -indicated. - -Mr. BRIAN. All right. And he was coming this way and we were coming -this way. We met him about in the middle of this ramp out here, and -talked, and---- - -Mr. RANKIN. You were right alongside of Lieutenant Revill? - -Mr. BRIAN. Yes, sir; and they walked on off and I came back behind -through here to these elevators and off here we caught the elevators -and went on up. - -Mr. RANKIN. How close were you when you came behind them? - -Mr. BRIAN. Just--I didn't keep a constant pace with them, but as far -as--I don't recall exactly---- - -Mr. RANKIN. You were close to them, were you? - -Mr. BRIAN. Here is the stairway in the basement, there is one narrow -stairway going up to the first floor, and you pass it and you go by the -phone booth and a jail office and you pass the stairway, it is right -over here in the basement of city hall. - -Mr. RANKIN. And you were close to them as you went across there to take -the elevator? - -Mr. BRIAN. I was behind them and they were going away from me and I was -fairly close, yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. About how far? - -Mr. BRIAN. Probably 6 or 7 feet or 8 feet behind. When we got to the -elevator and we all stopped there together and caught the elevator. - -Mr. DULLES. Where did the conversation take place, in front of the -elevators there? - -Mr. BRIAN. That I heard? - -Mr. DULLES. Yes. - -Mr. BRIAN. Right out here, because Mr. Hosty started blurting it out -just as soon as he started across here. - -Mr. DULLES. And you walked from this point here? - -Mr. BRIAN. Over to here, to the elevators. - -Mr. DULLES. Mark that point "B." - -Mr. RANKIN. Where you met? - -Mr. DULLES. Where you met Hosty. - -Mr. BRIAN. OK. - -Mr. DULLES. And you walked along, make a mark there, if you would, -along there to the elevators where you walked. - -Mr. BRIAN. That is not exactly that way, this is offset, you have to -come over here to go up, it is not drawn exactly right, we walked -across here to the elevators straight through. - -Mr. DULLES. How far is that, a hundred feet--no, less than that. - -Mr. BRIAN. It is much less than a hundred feet. - -Mr. DULLES. Fifty feet, something like that. - -Mr. BRIAN. Probably 60, 70 feet. - -Mr. DULLES. Yes, sir. - -Mr. BRIAN. Something like that. - -Mr. DULLES. Where is this, where does that stairway go? - -Mr. BRIAN. Up to the first floor. Back in the hallway. - -Mr. DULLES. And you are quite clear you didn't go up that stairway? - -Mr. BRIAN. We didn't go up a stairway, no; not that stairway here. - -Mr. DULLES. Or any other stairway? - -Mr. BRIAN. Going up? - -Mr. DULLES. Yes. - -Mr. BRIAN. No, sir; we didn't go up the stairway going up. - -The CHAIRMAN. When you got up to the first floor by that stairway, are -there other stairs leading up to the floors above that connect with -this? - -Mr. BRIAN. Yes, sir; you have to go around. This is just a narrow -stairway going from the basement, it is probably, well, just a regular -narrow staircase that goes up, straight up. After you get to the first -floor the stairways widen out probably as wide as that window and go up -half a floor and meet another landing and then go up to the third floor -that way. They widen out. - -Representative FORD. Was anybody with Mr. Hosty? - -Mr. BRIAN. Not when we met him there; no, sir. - -Representative FORD. When you got on the elevator, who was on the -elevator? - -Mr. BRIAN. It was full. - -Mr. DULLES. Were there a lot of pressmen down there, no television---- - -Mr. BRIAN. I don't recall seeing any but there may have been some. I -don't recall seeing any but there may have been. - -The CHAIRMAN. You say the elevator was full? - -Mr. BRIAN. Yes, sir. - -The CHAIRMAN. About how many people would it carry approximately? - -Mr. BRIAN. Probably 10 or 12. - -Representative FORD. Did Revill and Hosty and yourself get on the -elevator? - -Mr. BRIAN. Yes, sir. - -Representative FORD. Anybody else get on at that point that you recall? - -Mr. BRIAN. As I recall there was a little interchange of people, some -got off and some got on, I believe. I believe there was a little -interchange of people. - -Mr. DULLES. At the bottom, that is the bottom story for the elevator? - -Mr. BRIAN. Yes, sir; in the basement. - -Representative FORD. As you got on the elevator and as you rode up, did -you hear Hosty and Revill converse at all? - -Mr. BRIAN. No, sir. - -Representative FORD. There was no further conversation on this problem? - -Mr. BRIAN. No, sir. - -Representative FORD. When you got off the elevator where did you go? - -Mr. BRIAN. Right on around. You get off the elevator and you come -straight out---- - -Mr. DULLES. What floor--three? - -Mr. BRIAN. Three. Went around to the left to Captain Fritz' office and -turned right in Captain Fritz' office and I stopped right there at the -door and he took him over and introduced him, talked to, I believe, -Lieutenant Wells. - -Mr. DULLES. Captain Fritz wasn't there at that time? - -Mr. BRIAN. I don't recall seeing him in there. But Captain Fritz has -got him a little office in the side and you have got to walk up in -front and see if he is in there because he stays in there all the time. - -Representative FORD. What did Revill and you do? - -Mr. BRIAN. Went back down to our office. - -Representative FORD. Gannaway's--is that Gannaway's office? - -Mr. BRIAN. Gannaway's; yes, sir. - -Representative FORD. As you drove---- - -Mr. DULLES. What floor is that on? - -Mr. BRIAN. Captain Gannaway's is on the second floor. - -Representative FORD. As you drove from the Texas School Depository -Building after making a check of the facilities who was in the car? - -Mr. BRIAN. Our car? - -Representative FORD. Yes. - -Mr. BRIAN. Let me see, Lieutenant Revill, myself, Westphal, Tarver, -and we gave a man a lift, and I don't remember whether he was a CID, I -don't know the man, I don't remember whether he was a CIC agent or a -CID or OSI, he was some type of, as I recall, Army intelligence man. - -Mr. DULLES. Army, Air Force, or something? - -Mr. BRIAN. He was connected with the service and we let him out a -couple of blocks, if I recall, up about Field Street, somewhere along -in there. Lieutenant Revill knew him, who he was, and he rode up there -with us. - -Representative FORD. Who drove the car? - -Mr. BRIAN. Lieutenant Revill. It was his car. - -Representative FORD. Did you sit in the front or back seat? - -Mr. BRIAN. Sat in the back seat on the left-hand side. - -Representative FORD. Who sat in the front seat. - -Mr. BRIAN. I don't recall. - -Mr. DULLES. You were right behind Lieutenant Revill? - -Mr. BRIAN. I believe I was right behind Lieutenant Revill. Yes, sir; -that is, I believe I sat in the back seat. - -Representative FORD. When you got into the building and got out of the -car, what happened to the other occupants of the car? - -Mr. BRIAN. I don't know. They went on about, probably went up to -Captain Gannaway, but I don't recall seeing them after we started -talking to Hosty and went on, somewhere in the shuffle they didn't stay -with us and went on. - -Representative FORD. They didn't accompany you up the elevator? - -Mr. BRIAN. No, sir; and I don't know where they went. - -Mr. DULLES. That is they weren't among the possibly 10 men of the -police who were in the elevator, as far as you remember, I mean? - -Mr. BRIAN. As far as I remember; no. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Brian, I call your attention to Exhibit 857A and the -fact that is a newspaper account and ask you to examine and state -whether or not you recall having seen that before. I want to correct -the record, that is Commission 857A which is attached to Exhibit 831. - -Mr. BRIAN. Yes, sir; I read this in the Dallas paper, I believe. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you have anything to do with giving that to the paper? - -Mr. BRIAN. No, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you talk to any newspaper people about it? - -Mr. BRIAN. No, sir; haven't talked to any since it happened. - -Mr. RANKIN. All you know about it is that you just saw it in the paper? - -Mr. BRIAN. Yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. Then---- - -Mr. BRIAN. I know the next--it was supposed to come out on Friday -because on Saturday they started calling my house and I left. - -Mr. RANKIN. You never answered any of the calls? - -Mr. BRIAN. No, sir; I never talked to any reporters about it. - -Mr. RANKIN. That is all I have, Mr. Chief Justice. - -The CHAIRMAN. Congressman, do you have anything? - -Representative FORD. I don't believe so, Mr. Chief Justice. - -The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Dulles? - -Mr. DULLES. Give me just 1 minute, Mr. Chief Justice. In the second -paragraph of your letter, Commission Exhibit 711, you say "Upon -entering the basement of city hall," he, Agent Hosty, that you -explained, who had already parked his car, he also parked his car in -the basement of the city hall building? - -Mr. BRIAN. Yes, sir; over here where you told me to put "A" he was or -in that area over there and was out of his car walking towards us. - -Mr. DULLES. And you go on to say "and was walking very fast toward the -entrance of the city hall from the parking area." - -Mr. BRIAN. Yes, sir; that is this entrance over here. - -Mr. DULLES. What is that marked? Is there a mark on that? - -Mr. BRIAN. No, sir. You didn't tell me to mark "A" and "B" where we met. - -Mr. DULLES. You might mark that "C," I think we have "A" and "B." - -Mr. BRIAN. O.K., "C" would be the entrance by the jail office. - -Mr. DULLES. That is right. - -"At this time Hosty made the statement that Lee Oswald had killed the -President, and that Oswald was a Communist." - -Now, at this time, that is walking toward point "C" you have just -marked on exhibit---- - -Mr. BRIAN. No, sir; we stopped here for a pause just for a short time, -it would be hard to say how long but it wasn't because--it wasn't long -because it don't take long to make a statement. - -Representative FORD. That is point "B." - -Mr. BRIAN. Yes, sir. - -Mr. DULLES. Near point "B" is where this conversation took place. - -Mr. BRIAN. Yes, sir. - -Mr. DULLES. And you did not hear the content of any further -conversations? - -Mr. BRIAN. No, sir; other than that he said he knew he was a Communist -and knew he was working in the Book Depository. - -Mr. DULLES. Did further conversations take place between Lieutenant -Revill and Agent Hosty after that? - -Mr. BRIAN. Yes, sir; they walked on talking. - -Mr. DULLES. But you did not hear what they said at that time? - -Mr. BRIAN. I was behind them and Lieutenant Revill got in a hurry when -that happened and they got on and I was behind them, and it is pretty -hard to hear what people are saying in front of you when they have got -their back turned to you and you are behind them. - -Mr. DULLES. You have indicated that in paragraph 3 of Exhibit 7. You -say, "While we were in the basement Hosty also said several things to -Lieutenant Revill that I could not hear," because of the excitement and -commotion, that is what you had reference to? - -Mr. BRIAN. Yes, sir; they were conversing as they walked on and I -couldn't hear them and I didn't hear what they said, I was behind them. -I didn't pay a whole lot of attention to the whole thing because like -I say I didn't think it would matter any. It was just--and things were -happening pretty fast, and along about that time. - -Mr. DULLES. That is all I have, Mr. Chairman. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Chairman, I would like to offer the diagram, Exhibit -839, if I may. - -The CHAIRMAN. Yes, all right; it may be admitted under that number. -Thank you very much. - -(At this point Representative Ford left the hearing room.) - -(Commission Exhibit No. 839 was marked for identification and received -in evidence.) - -Mr. DULLES. That is the original before the notary public put his -endorsement on it. - -Mr. BRIAN. Yes, sir; that went forward. - -The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Chief Justice, Mr. Specter is going to examine these -people about the velocity and so forth and I want to speak on--speak to -him just a minute about the matter we talked about. - -The CHAIRMAN. We will take a break now. - -(Recess.) - - -TESTIMONY OF ROBERT A. FRAZIER - -The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Specter, you may proceed. - -You have been sworn and you are still under oath, as you understand? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes. - -Mr. SPECTER. Will you state your name again for the record, please? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Robert A. Frazier. - -Mr. SPECTER. Mr. Frazier, you have appeared heretofore to testify -about certain tests which you have conducted, but at this phase of the -record, will you state briefly your occupation and your specialty, -please? - -Mr. FRAZIER. I am a special agent assigned to the FBI laboratory, -the firearms identification unit in Washington, D.C., where I make -examinations of bullets, cartridges, gunpowder tests, bullet holes, -examinations of clothing, and other similar types of examinations. - -Mr. SPECTER. In the course of your duties have you had an occasion -to examine the clothing which was purportedly worn by President John -Kennedy on November 22, 1963? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir; I have. - -Mr. SPECTER. And do you have that clothing with you at the present -time, sir? - -Mr. FRAZIER. I have certain parts of it. I have the coat, shirt, tie, -and the bandages and support belt which he allegedly was wearing that -day. - -Mr. SPECTER. Would you refer at this time to the coat, if you please, -which, may the record show, has heretofore been marked as Commission -Exhibit 393. - -And by referring to that coat will you describe what, if anything, you -observed on the rear side of the coat? - -Mr. FRAZIER. There was located on the rear of the coat 5-3/8 inches -below the top of the collar, a hole, further located as 1-3/4 inches to -the right of the midline or the seam down the center of the coat; all -of these being as you look at the back of the coat. - -Mr. SPECTER. What characteristics did you note, if any, on the nature -of that hole? - -Mr. FRAZIER. I noticed that the hole penetrated both the outer and -lining areas of the coat, that it was roughly circular in shape. When -I first examined it it was approximately one-fourth of an inch in -diameter, and the cloth fibers around the margins of the hole were -pushed inward at the time I first examined it in the laboratory. - -Mr. SPECTER. Did any tests conducted on the coat disclose any metallic -substance on that area of that hole? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir. I had a spectrographer run an analysis of a -portion of the hole which accounts for its being slightly enlarged at -the present time. He took a sample of cloth and made an analysis of it. -I don't know actually whether I am expected to give the results of his -analysis or not. - -Mr. SPECTER. Yes; would you please, or let me ask you first of all, -were those tests run by the Federal Bureau of Investigation in the -regular course of its testing procedures? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir; they were. - -Mr. SPECTER. And have those results been made available to you through -the regular recordkeeping procedures of the FBI? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir. - -Mr. SPECTER. Would you then please tell us what those tests disclose? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Traces of copper were found around the margins of the hole -in the back of the coat, and as a control, a very small section under -the collar was taken, and no copper being found there, it was concluded -that the copper was foreign to the coat itself. - -Mr. SPECTER. Have you now described all of the characteristics of -that hole, which you consider to be important for the Commission's -consideration? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir. - -Mr. SPECTER. Assuming that those clothes, that jacket, specifically, -at this juncture, was worn by President Kennedy, and was in the same -condition when that hole was made as it is now, and at the time when -you made your examination, do you have a professional opinion as to -what caused that hole in the back of the jacket? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir; I would say that it was an entrance hole for a -bullet. - -Mr. SPECTER. And what is the reason for that conclusion, please? - -Mr. FRAZIER. It has all the physical appearance characteristics which -are considered when examining holes, such as its shape, its size, and -in particular the fact that the fibers around the margins of the hole -were all pushed inward where the cloth was torn by the object which -passed through, and the fibers were unraveled as they were pushed -inward, which is characteristic of a entrance-type bullet hole. - -Mr. SPECTER. Is the presence of the metallic substance relevant in your -conclusion that it was a bullet hole? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Not necessarily. It is a factor which corroborates that -opinion but even without it, it would still have been my opinion that -it was a bullet entrance hole. - -Mr. SPECTER. Can you tell the size of the bullet from the hole in the -jacket? - -Mr. FRAZIER. The hole in the jacket is approximately a quarter of an -inch in diameter. - -Mr. SPECTER. Would that hole be consistent with a hole which would be -caused by a 6.5 millimeter bullet? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir; the actual bullet which makes a hole cannot be -determined because the cloth in one instance may stretch more than -it does in another instance causing either a larger or smaller hole -even for the same caliber, but it is consistent for a bullet of 6.5 -millimeters in diameter to make a hole of approximately this size. - -Mr. SPECTER. Were there any holes indicative of being bullet holes -found on the front part of the President's jacket? - -Mr. FRAZIER. No, sir. - -Mr. SPECTER. Did you have further occasion to examine the President's -shirt? - -Mr. FRAZIER. I did. - -Mr. SPECTER. May the record show that the shirt has heretofore been -identified as Commission Exhibit 394? - -The CHAIRMAN. Yes; it may be. - -Mr. SPECTER. What, if anything, did you observe then on the back side -of the shirt, Mr. Frazier? - -Mr. FRAZIER. I found on the back of the shirt a hole, 5-3/4 inches -below the top of the collar, and as you look at the back of the shirt -1-1/8 inch to the right of the midline of the shirt, which is this hole -I am indicating. - -Mr. SPECTER. May the record show the witness is examining the shirt, as -he has the coat, to indicate the hole to the Commission. - -The CHAIRMAN. The record may show that. - -Mr. FRAZIER. In connection with this hole, I made the same examination -as I did on the coat, Exhibit 393. I found the same situation to -prevail, that is the hole was approximately circular in shape, about -one-fourth inch in diameter, and again the physical shape of it is -characteristic of a bullet hole, that is the edges are frayed, and -there are slight radial tears in the cloth, which is characteristic -of a bullet having passed through the cloth, and further, the fibers -around the margin of the hole were--had been pressed inward, and -assuming that, when I first examined the shirt it was in the same -condition as it was at the time the hole was made, it is my opinion -that this hole, in addition, was caused by a bullet entering the shirt -from the back at that point. - -Mr. SPECTER. Is that hole consistent with having been caused by a 6.5 -millimeter bullet? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes; it is. - -Mr. SPECTER. With respect to the front side of the shirt, what, if any, -hole did you find there? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Only one hole. - -Mr. DULLES. May I ask one question there? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes; certainly. - -Mr. DULLES. Is the hole in the shirt and the hole in the coat you have -just described in a position that indicates that the same instrument, -whatever it was, or the same bullet, made the two? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes; they are. They are both--the coat hole is 5-3/8 -inches below the top of the collar. The shirt hole is 5-3/4 inches, -which could be accounted for by a portion of the collar sticking up -above the coat about a half inch. - -Mr. DULLES. I see. - -Mr. FRAZIER. And they are both located approximately the same distance -to the right of the midline of both garments. - -Now, on the front of the shirt, I found what amounts to one hole. -Actually, it is a hole through both the button line of the shirt and -the buttonhole line which overlap down the front of the shirt when it -is buttoned. - -Mr. SPECTER. Proceed. - -Mr. FRAZIER. This hole is located immediately below the button being -centered seven-eighths of an inch below the button on the shirt, and -similarly seven-eighths of an inch below the buttonhole on the opposite -side. - -The CHAIRMAN. You are speaking of the collar button itself, aren't you? - -Mr. FRAZIER. The collar button. - -The CHAIRMAN. Yes. - -Mr. FRAZIER. In each instance for these holes, the one through the -button line and the one through the buttonhole line, the hole amounts -to a ragged slit approximately one-half inch in height. It is oriented -vertically, and the fibers of the cloth are protruding outward, -that is, have been pushed from the inside out. I could not actually -determine from the characteristics of the hole whether or not it -was caused by a bullet. However, I can say that it was caused by a -projectile of some type which exited from the shirt at that point and -that is again assuming that when I first examined the shirt it was--it -had not been altered from the condition it was in at the time the hole -was made. - -Mr. SPECTER. What characteristics differ between the hole in the rear -of the shirt and the holes in the front of the shirt which lead you to -conclude that the hole in the rear of the shirt was caused by a bullet -but which are absent as to the holes in the front of the shirt? - -Mr. FRAZIER. The hole in the front of the shirt does not have the round -characteristic shape caused by a round bullet entering cloth. It is an -irregular slit. It could have been caused by a round bullet, however, -since the cloth could have torn in a long slitlike way as the bullet -passed through it. But that is not specifically characteristic of a -bullethole to the extent that you could say it was to the exclusion of -being a piece of bone or some other type of projectile. - -Mr. SPECTER. Have you now described all of the characteristics of the -front of the shirt holes which you consider to be important? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir. - -Mr. DULLES. Could I ask one question there. If the bullet, after -entering, hit something that made it tumble or change, would that -account for this change in the appearance of the exit through the shirt? - -Mr. FRAZIER. I think not. In my opinion it would not have been -necessary, if I may put it that way, for the bullet to have turned -sideways or partially sideways in order to make an elongated hole. - -Mr. DULLES. I see. - -Mr. FRAZIER. I think the effect in the front of the shirt is due more -to the strength of the material being more in the horizontal rather -than the vertical direction which caused the cloth to tear vertically -rather than due to a change in the shape or size of the bullet or -projectile. - -Mr. DULLES. Or possibly the velocity of the bullet at that place, would -that have anything to do with it? - -Mr. FRAZIER. I think the hole would not have been affected unless it -was a very large change in velocity. - -The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Frazier, I notice that the front of the shirt -immediately around the hole you have just been describing and in fact -on much of the front of the shirt is bloodsoaked. Would that, with the -other evidences you have seen there indicate to you as an expert that -this was the exit of the bullet that had entered in the back of the -coat as you have described it? - -Mr. FRAZIER. The presence of the blood would have in my opinion no -value for determining which was entrance or exit, because I have seen -entrance wounds which bleed extensively and exit wounds which bleed not -at all and vice versa. It depends entirely on the type of bullet which -strikes, whether or not it mutilates itself in the body, and probably -more importantly it depends on the position of the person who is shot -after the shooting occurs as to where the blood will be located on the -garments. - -The CHAIRMAN. May I put it this way, probably a little better. Do the -evidences that you see on this shirt indicate to you that this hole in -the front of the shirt that you have just described was made by the -bullet which entered in the rear. - -Mr. FRAZIER. I can say that this hole in the collar area could have -been made by this bullet but I cannot say that the bullet which entered -the back actually came out here or at some other place because I am not -aware of the autopsy information as to the path of the bullet through -the body. - -The CHAIRMAN. I see. - -Mr. FRAZIER. But if the path of the bullet was such that it came -through the body at the right angle, then one bullet could have caused -both holes. - -The CHAIRMAN. Could have caused both holes. - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes. - -The CHAIRMAN. That is sufficient. - -Mr. DULLES. Is it correct that the blood on the shirt might well have -been occasioned by the second wound rather than exclusively by the -first wound? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes; it could have come from any other wound on the body -as well as this one. - -Mr. SPECTER. When you refer to any other wound, Mr. Frazier, are -you referring to the head wound which is widely known to have been -inflicted on the President at the time of the assassination? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir. - -Mr. SPECTER. Did you have occasion to examine the President's tie or -the tie purportedly worn by the President on November 22, 1963? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes; I did. - -Mr. SPECTER. May the record show at this juncture that that tie has -heretofore been marked as Commission Exhibit 395? - -The CHAIRMAN. Yes; it may show that. - -Mr. SPECTER. What did you note, if anything, with respect to the tie, -Mr. Frazier? - -Mr. FRAZIER. When the tie was examined by me in the laboratory I noted -that the neck portion had been cut from one side of the knot. However, -the knot remained in apparently its original condition. The only damage -to the tie other than the fact that it had been cut, was a crease or -nick in the left side of the tie when you consider the tie as being -worn on a body. As you view the front of the tie it would be on the -right side. This nick would be located in a corresponding area to the -area in the shirt collar just below the button. - -Mr. SPECTER. As you now indicate on your own tie, you are indicating on -the portion of the tie to your right? - -Mr. FRAZIER. If it was on my tie it would be on the left side of the -tie. - -Mr. SPECTER. Your left side. - -Mr. FRAZIER. The left side of my tie. There is a nick on the left side -of the tie if you consider it as left and right according to the person -wearing the tie. - -Mr. SPECTER. Does the nick in the tie provide any indication of the -direction of the missile? - -Mr. FRAZIER. The nick is elongated horizontally, indicating a possible -horizontal direction but it does not indicate that the projectile which -caused it was exiting or entering at that point. The fibers were not -disturbed in a characteristic manner which would permit any conclusion -in that connection. - -Mr. SPECTER. Is the nick consistent with an exiting path? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Oh, yes. - -Mr. SPECTER. Is there any indication from the nature of the nick as to -the nature of the projectile itself? - -Mr. FRAZIER. No, sir. - -Mr. SPECTER. Is the nick consistent with a 6.5 millimeter bullet having -caused the nick? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes. Any projectile could have caused the nick. In this -connection there was no metallic residue found on the tie, and for that -matter there was no metallic residue found on the shirt at the holes in -the front. However, there was in the back. - -Mr. SPECTER. Did any of the other---- - -Mr. DULLES. Excuse me, on the back of the coat? - -Mr. FRAZIER. The shirt. - -Mr. DULLES. Back of the coat and on the shirt? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir. - -Mr. SPECTER. Did any of the other items of President Kennedy's clothing -which you have heretofore referred to contain any indications at all of -any bullet holes or any other type of holes? - -Mr. FRAZIER. No, sir. - -Mr. SPECTER. Mr. Frazier, did you have occasion to examine the clothing -which has heretofore been identified in prior Commission proceedings -as that worn by Governor Connally on November 22, 1963? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes; I did. - -Mr. SPECTER. I now hand you what purports to be the Governor's coat, -and may the record show that has been heretofore marked as Commission -Exhibit No. 683? - -(At this point the Chairman left the hearing room.) - -Mr. DULLES [presiding]. The record may so show. - -Mr. SPECTER. Have you had opportunity heretofore to examine that coat? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes; I have. - -Mr. SPECTER. What did your examination reveal with respect to the back -side of the coat? - -Mr. FRAZIER. There was found on the coat by me when I first examined -it, near the right sleeve 1-1/8 inches from the seam where the sleeve -attaches to the coat, and 7-1/4 inches to the right of the midline -when you view the back of the coat, a hole which is elongated in a -horizontal direction to the length of approximately five-eights of an -inch, and which had an approximate one-quarter inch height. - -Mr. SPECTER. Were you able to determine from your examination of the -Governor's clothing whether or not they had been cleaned and pressed -prior to the time you saw them? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes; they had. - -Mr. SPECTER. Is that different from or the same as the condition of the -President's clothing which you have just described this morning? - -Mr. FRAZIER. It is different in that the President's clothing had not -been cleaned. It had only been dried. The blood was dried. However, the -Governor's garments had been cleaned and pressed. - -Mr. SPECTER. Had the President's clothing been pressed then? - -Mr. FRAZIER. No, sir. - -Mr. SPECTER. Will you proceed to describe any other characteristics---- - -Mr. DULLES. Had been dried artificially or let nature take its course? - -Mr. FRAZIER. It appeared to be air dried. - -Mr. DULLES. Air dried, artificially? - -Mr. FRAZIER. I couldn't say whether any outside heat had been applied -but it did not appear that any heat had been applied to the blood. - -Mr. SPECTER. Proceed. - -Mr. FRAZIER. On the hole on the back of the coat although it had the -general appearance and could have been a bullet hole, possibly because -of the cleaning and pressing of the garment. I cannot state that it -actually is a bullet hole nor the direction of the path of the bullet, -if it were a bullet hole. - -Mr. SPECTER. Is the nature of the opening consistent with being a -bullet hole? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir; it is. - -Mr. SPECTER. And is it consistent with a bullet hole caused by a -missile traveling from the back to the front of the wearer of the -garment? - -Mr. FRAZIER. I could not determine that. - -Mr. SPECTER. You couldn't determine that it was, but could it have been? - -Mr. FRAZIER. It could have been, yes; either way. - -Mr. SPECTER. All right. Will you now turn to the front side of the coat -and state what, if any, damage you observed on the body of the garment? - -Mr. FRAZIER. When considered from the wearer's standpoint, on the right -chest area of the coat there is a hole through the lining and the outer -layer of the coat which is located 6-1/2 inches from the right side -seam line and also 6-1/2 inches from the armpit which places this hole -approximately 5 inches to the right of the front right edge of the coat. - -This hole was approximately circular in shape, three-eights of an inch -in diameter, and again possibly because of the cleaning and pressing -of the garment, I could not determine whether it actually was a bullet -hole or whether or not it entered or exited if it were a bullet hole. - -Mr. SPECTER. Was the hole consistent with being an exit bullet hole? -That is to say, could it have been caused by an exiting bullet? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir. - -Mr. SPECTER. Did you find any damage on the right sleeve of the jacket? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir; on more or less the top portion of the right -sleeve very near the end of the sleeve there is a very rough hole which -penetrates both the outside layer, the lining and the inside layer of -the sleeve. - -Mr. SPECTER. Were you able to observe sufficient characteristics to -formulate any conclusion as to the cause of that tear? - -Mr. FRAZIER. This also did not indicate direction from the condition of -the fibers, possibly due to the cleaning and pressing of the garment. - -However, it could have been a bullet which struck the garment at an -angle to the surface which caused a slight elongation. The hole was -approximately five-eights of an inch in length, and three-eights of -an inch in width. The elongation could also have been the result of a -mutilated bullet having struck the garment or it could have been caused -by a fold in the garment at the time the object or bullet struck. - -Mr. SPECTER. Did you have occasion to examine the shirt, which was -purportedly worn by Governor Connally, and which has heretofore been -identified by the Governor in Commission proceedings, as that worn by -him on November 22, 1963? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes; I did. - -Mr. SPECTER. May the record show at this point that Mr. Frazier is -examining the shirt heretofore identified on the back side with a -photograph marked Commission Exhibit 685 and on the front side with a -photograph marked Commission Exhibit 686. - -Now, referring to that shirt, Mr. Frazier, what, if anything, did you -observe on the rear side by way of an imperfection, hole or defect? - -Mr. FRAZIER. I found a hole which is very ragged. An L-shaped tear -actually is what it amounted to in the back of the shirt near the right -sleeve, 2 inches from the seam line where the sleeve attaches to the -shirt, and 7-1/2 inches to the right of the midline of the shirt, the -right side being as you look at the back of the shirt. - -This tear amounted to a five-eights of an inch long horizontal and -approximately one-half inch long vertical break in the cloth, with a -very small tear located immediately to its right, as you look at the -back of the shirt, which was approximately three-sixteenths of an inch -in length. - -This hole corresponds in position to the hole in the back of the coat, -Governor Connally's coat, identified as Commission No. 683. - -Mr. SPECTER. Were there sufficient characteristics observable to -formulate a conclusion as to the cause and direction of that hole? - -Mr. FRAZIER. No, sir; there were no characteristics on which you could -base a conclusion as to what caused it, whether or not it was a bullet -and if it had been, what the direction of the projectile was. - -Mr. SPECTER. Could it have been caused by a 6.5-mm. bullet coming from -the rear of the wearer toward his front? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir. - -Mr. SPECTER. Referring now to the front side of the Governor's shirt, -what, if anything, did you observe with respect to a tear or a hole -thereon, as to the body of the shirt? - -Mr. FRAZIER, I found in the right chest area of the shirt, considering -the shirt when it is being worn, a very irregular tear more or less -in the form of an "H," of the letter "H." This tear was approximately -1-1/2 inches in height, with the crossbar tear being approximately 1 -inch in width, which caused a very irregularly shaped and enlarged -hole in the front of the shirt. The hole is located 5 inches from the -right-side seam, and 9 inches below the top of the right sleeve. The -9-inch figure is from the top of the right shoulder where the sleeve -adjoins the yoke of the shirt. - -Mr. SPECTER. Had that garment been cleaned and pressed, Mr. Frazier, -prior to the time you examined it? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir. - -Mr. SPECTER. Were there sufficient characteristics then remaining on -the hole on the front side to enable you to formulate an opinion as to -the cause of the hole? - -Mr. FRAZIER. No, sir. - -Mr. SPECTER. Could it have been caused by a 6.5 millimeter bullet -exiting from the chest of the Governor? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, it could. - -Mr. SPECTER. Now what, if anything---- - -Mr. DULLES. Could I ask there, would the size and character of this -hole indicate the condition of the bullet, I mean as to whether it was -tumbling or whether it was a mutilated bullet or anything of that kind? - -Mr. FRAZIER. No, sir; it would not. - -Mr. DULLES. Even a bullet in full flight, full velocity could have made -this kind of a hole in the shirt? - -Mr. FRAZIER. It could have, particularly if the shirt had been wrinkled -at the time it passed through, and particularly because the material in -this shirt tore rather severely at the time the object passed through, -indicating a very weak structure of the cotton fiber, so that it would -tear out of all proportion to a stronger fabric. - -And for that reason, the shape of the hole could be affected by the -condition of the material as well as any folds in the material or, as -you say, by a mutilated bullet or a passage of a bullet through the -cloth at an angle to the surface or the passing of a bullet partially -sideways through the cloth. - -(Discussion off the record.) - -Mr. DULLES. Will you proceed? - -Mr. SPECTER. Mr. Frazier, what, if any, defect or hole did you observe -on the right sleeve of the Governor's shirt? - -Mr. FRAZIER. I found in the cuff of the shirt which is a French cuff, -through both the outer and inner layers of the cuff, a hole which is -ragged in contour, irregularly shaped, and which had more or less -star-shaped tears extending outward from the hole into the material, -located 1-1/2 inches up from the end of the sleeve, and 5-1/2 inches -from the outside cuff link hole, through both, as I said, through both -layers of the cuff, and the hole was in such a condition, possibly -due to the washing of the material, that I could not determine what -actually caused it or if it had been caused by a bullet, the direction -of the path of the bullet with reference to entrance and exit. - -Mr. SPECTER. Could those holes have been caused by a bullet passing -through the Governor's wrist from the dorsal or upper portion to the -volar or palmar side? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes; they could. - -Mr. SPECTER. Did you have occasion to examine the trousers which have -been heretofore identified in Commission hearings as those worn by -Governor Connally on November 22, 1963? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, I did. - -Mr. SPECTER. May the record show that Mr. Frazier has taken and is -observing the trousers which have been identified in the record, -through a picture of the front side, bearing Commission Exhibit No. 687 -and a picture of the rear side bearing Commission Exhibit No. 688. - -Now, referring to those trousers, what if anything did you observe in -the nature of a defect or hole, Mr. Frazier? - -Mr. FRAZIER. In the area which would be the left-knee area of the -person wearing the trousers, there was a hole which is roughly circular -in shape, and approximately one-quarter of an inch in diameter with -some possible expansion of the hole due to slight tearing of the cloth -at the outer margins of the hole. - -Mr. SPECTER. Had the trousers been cleaned and pressed prior to your -examination? - -Mr. SPECTER. Yes, sir. - -Mr. SPECTER. Were there sufficient characteristics available for you to -formulate any conclusion as to the cause of that hole? - -Mr. FRAZIER. No, sir; I can say that it had the general appearance of a -bullet hole but I could not determine the direction of the bullet if, -in fact, it had been caused by a bullet. - -Mr. SPECTER. What are the characteristics which led you to believe that -it had the characteristics of a bullet hole? - -Mr. FRAZIER. It has the roughly circular shape with slight tearing away -from the edges of the material. - -Mr. SPECTER. Is there any other hole on the trousers which could be a -hole of exit? - -Mr. FRAZIER. No, sir. - -Mr. SPECTER. Mr. Frazier, did you have occasion to examine an -automobile which was the vehicle used customarily by the President of -the United States in parades? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes; I did. - -Mr. SPECTER. When did that examination occur? - -Mr. FRAZIER. In the early morning hours of November 23, 1963, at the -Secret Service garage here in Washington, D.C. - -Mr. SPECTER. I now hand you a photograph previously identified for the -record as Commission Exhibit No. 344 and ask you if that depicts the -car which you examined? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir; it is. - -Mr. SPECTER. I hand you a subsequent exhibit of the Commission, No. -346, showing the interior view of the automobile and ask you if that -depicts the automobile which you examined? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir; however, it wasn't in this condition. It wasn't -as clean as it is in Exhibit 346. - -Mr. SPECTER. What was the condition with respect to cleanliness? - -Mr. FRAZIER. There were blood and particles of flesh scattered all over -the hood, the windshield, in the front seat and all over the rear floor -rugs, the jump seats, and over the rear seat, and down both sides of -the side rails or tops of the doors of the car. - -Mr. SPECTER. Is that condition depicted by Commission Exhibits 352 and -353 to the extent that they show the interior of the automobile? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir. - -Mr. SPECTER. What was the purpose of the examination which you made of -the car at that time and place? - -Mr. FRAZIER. I examined the car to determine whether or not there were -any bullet fragments present in it, embedded in the upholstery of the -back of the front seat, or whether there were any impact areas which -indicated that bullets or bullet fragments struck the inside of the car. - -Mr. SPECTER. With respect to the fragments first, what did your -examination disclose? - -Mr. FRAZIER. We found three small lead particles lying on the rug in -the rear seat area. These particles were located underneath or in the -area which would be underneath the left jump seat. - -Mr. SPECTER. Have those particles been identified during the course of -your prior testimony? - -Mr. FRAZIER. No, sir; they have not? - -Mr. SPECTER. Will you produce them at this time then, please? May we -assign to this group of particles Commission Exhibit No. 840? - -Mr. DULLES. These have not been discussed before, have they? - -Mr. SPECTER. They have not. - -Mr. DULLES. It shall be admitted as Commission Exhibit No. 840. - -(Commission Exhibit No. 840 was marked for identification and received -in evidence.) - -Mr. SPECTER. I move formally for their admission, then, into evidence -at this time. - -Mr. DULLES. They shall be admitted. - -Mr. SPECTER. Will you describe the three pieces of metal which are -contained within this vial, please? - -Mr. FRAZIER. The three pieces of metal are lead. They were weighed -immediately upon recovery and were found to weigh nine-tenths of -a grain, seven-tenths of a grain, and seven-tenths of a grain, -respectively. Since that time small portions have been removed for -spectrographic analysis and comparison with other bullets and bullet -fragments. - -Mr. SPECTER. Has that comparison been made with a whole bullet -heretofore identified as Commission Exhibit 399 which in other -proceedings has been identified as the bullet from the Connally -stretcher? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir; the comparison was made by comparing Exhibit -399 with a bullet fragment found in the front seat of the Presidential -limousine and then comparing that fragment with these fragments from -the rear seat of the automobile. - -Mr. SPECTER. For identification purposes, has that fragment from the -front seat been heretofore identified during your prior testimony? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes; it has. It bears Commission No. 567. - -Mr. SPECTER. Now, what did the comparative examination then disclose as -among Commission Exhibits 399, 567, and 840? - -Mr. FRAZIER. That examination was performed by a spectrographer, John -F. Gallagher, and I do not have the results of his examinations here, -although I did ascertain that it was determined that the lead fragments -were similar in composition. - -Mr. SPECTER. So that they could have come from, so that the fragments -designated 840 could have come from the same bullet as fragment -designated 567? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir. - -Mr. SPECTER. Were the tests sufficient to indicate conclusively whether -fragments 840 did come from the fragment designated as 567? - -Mr. FRAZIER. No, sir. - -Mr. SPECTER. Did you personally find any other fragments in the -President's car during the course of your examination? - -Mr. FRAZIER. No; I did not. - -Mr. SPECTER. Now, where, according to information provided to you then, -was the fragment designated Commission Exhibit 567 found? - -Mr. FRAZIER. That was found by the Secret Service upon their -examination of the limousine here in Washington when it first arrived -from Dallas, and Commission No. 567 was delivered by Deputy Chief -Paul Paterni and by a White House detail chief, Floyd M. Boring, to a -liaison agent of the FBI, Orrin Bartlett, who delivered them to me in -the laboratory at 11:50 p.m., on November 22, 1963. - -Mr. SPECTER. Does that constitute the total chain of possession then -from the finder with the Secret Service into your hands, as reflected -on the records of the FBI? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir. - -Mr. SPECTER. Was there another fragment, was there any other fragment -found in the front seat of the car? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes. Alongside the right side of the front seat, -Commission Exhibit No. 569, which is the base portion of the jacket of -a bullet, was found, and handled in identical manner to the Exhibit 567. - -Mr. DULLES. And the front seat is the seat which would be the driver's -seat? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes. - -Mr. DULLES. And the Secret Service man on his right, I believe? - -Mr. SPECTER. Mr. Kellerman. - -Mr. DULLES. That was the seat from which this came? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Commission Exhibit 567 was found on the seat right beside -the driver, and Exhibit 569 was found on the floor beside the right -side of the front seat. - -Mr. SPECTER. The right side of the front seat, Mr. Dulles, as the -prior testimony shows was occupied by Roy Kellerman and the driver was -William Greer. - -Mr. DULLES. Right. Thank you. - -Mr. SPECTER. Would you state what the chain of possession was from -the time of discovery of Exhibit 569 until the time it came into your -possession, based on the records of the FBI, please, if you have those -records available? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir. It was delivered by Secret Service Deputy Chief -Paul Paterni, and SAC of the White House detail Floyd M. Boring of the -Secret Service again, to Special Agent Orrin Bartlett of the FBI who -delivered it to me at 11:50 p.m. on November 22, 1963. - -Mr. SPECTER. Are the records which you have just referred to relating -to the chain of possession of Exhibits 567 and 569 maintained by you in -the normal course of your duties as an examiner of those items? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir. - -Mr. SPECTER. Mr. Frazier, is it possible for the fragments identified -in Commission Exhibit 840 to have come from the whole bullet heretofore -identified as Commission Exhibit 399? - -Mr. FRAZIER. I would say that based on weight it would be highly -improbable that that much weight could have come from the base of that -bullet since its present weight is--its weight when I first received it -was 158.6 grains. - -Mr. SPECTER. Referring now to 399. - -Mr. FRAZIER. Exhibit 399, and its original normal weight would be 160 -to 161 grains, and those three metal fragments had a total of 2.1 -grains as I recall--2.3 grains. So it is possible but not likely since -there is only a very small part of the core of the bullet 399 missing. - -Mr. SPECTER. Have you now described all of the bullet fragments which -you found in the President's automobile? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir. - -Mr. SPECTER. Was it your job to analyze all of the bullets or bullet -fragments which were found in the President's car? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes; it was, except for the spectrographic analysis of the -composition. - -Mr. SPECTER. Have you now described all of the bullet fragments which -were brought to you by anyone else and identified as having been found -in the President's car? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir; not this morning but at previous times during my -testimony I have; yes. - -Mr. SPECTER. But then there is on the record now all of the -identification of the metallic or bullet fragments found in connection -with your examination of the President's car or which were examined by -you after having been found by someone else? - -Mr. FRAZIER. No, sir. There is one other, it is not a metal particle -but it is a residue of metal on the inside of the windshield. - -Mr. SPECTER. Aside from that residue of the windshield which I am going -to come to now, have we placed on the record a description of all of -the bullets or bullet fragments? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir. - -Mr. SPECTER. Now---- - -Mr. DULLES. Just one moment. You mean bullet fragments related to the -car or bullet fragments found anywhere? - -Mr. SPECTER. Related to the President's automobile. - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes; you have. - -Mr. SPECTER. Did you have occasion then to examine the windshield of -the Presidential limousine? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes; I did. - -Mr. SPECTER. What did that examination disclose? - -Mr. FRAZIER. On the inside surface of the windshield there was a -deposit of lead. This deposit was located when you look at the inside -surface of the windshield, 13-1/2 inches down from the top, 23 inches -from the left-hand side or driver's side of the windshield, and was -immediately in front of a small pattern of star-shaped cracks which -appeared in the outer layer of the laminated windshield. - -Mr. DULLES. What do you mean by the "outer layer of the laminated -windshield"? - -Mr. FRAZIER. The windshield is composed of two layers with a very thin -layer of plastic in between which bonds them together in the form of -safety glass. The inside layer of the glass was not broken, but the -outside layer immediately on the outside of the lead residue had a very -small pattern of cracks and there was a very minute particle of glass -missing from the outside surface. - -Mr. DULLES. And the outside surface was the surface away from where the -occupants were sitting? - -Mr. FRAZIER. That is correct; yes. - -Mr. DULLES. And the inside surface was the surface nearest the -occupants? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes. - -Mr. SPECTER. What do those characteristics indicate as to which side of -the windshield was struck? - -Mr. FRAZIER. It indicates that it could only have been struck on the -inside surface. It could not have been struck on the outside surface -because of the manner in which the glass broke and further because of -the lead residue on the inside surface. The cracks appear in the outer -layer of the glass because the glass is bent outward at the time of -impact which stretches the outer layer of the glass to the point where -these small radial or wagon spoke-wagon wheel spoke-type cracks appear -on the outer surface. - -Mr. DULLES. So the pressure must have come from the inside and not from -the outside against the glass? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir; that is correct. - -Mr. DULLES. As far as the car is concerned from the back to the front? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir. - -Mr. DULLES. Not from outside against the glass--from the front against -the glass. - -Mr. FRAZIER. That is right. - -Mr. SPECTER. Was a comparison made of the lead residues on the inside -of the windshield with any of the bullet fragments recovered about -which you have heretofore testified? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes. They were compared with the bullet fragment found on -the front seat, which in turn was compared with Commission 399. The -lead was found to be similar in composition. However, that examination -in detail was made by a spectrographer, Special Agent John F. Gallagher. - -Mr. SPECTER. Was that examination made in the regular course of -examining procedures by the FBI? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir. - -Mr. SPECTER. And was that information made available to you through the -normal conference procedures among FBI examiners? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir. He submitted his report to me and I prepared the -formal report of the entire examination. - -Mr. SPECTER. Are his report and your formal report a part of the -permanent record of the FBI then? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir. - -Mr. SPECTER. I now show you Commission Exhibit No. 350 which has -heretofore been identified as a picture of the windshield of the -Presidential limousine and I ask you if that is the crack about which -you have just testified? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes; it is. This Exhibit 350 is a photograph which I took -on the 23d of November, showing a view from the front toward the rear -of the Presidential limousine and showing the crack in the glass and -the lead residue on the inside surface. - -Mr. SPECTER. Would you produce at this time the lead residue obtained -by you from that inside surface, please? May it please the Commission, -I would like to mark this as Commission Exhibit 841 and move for its -admission into evidence at this time. - -Mr. DULLES. It shall be admitted into evidence. - -(Commission Exhibit No. 841 was marked for identification and received -in evidence.) - -Mr. DULLES. May I just ask a question of you, Mr. Specter, and possibly -of the witness. - -I assume that the windshield we are now discussing is the windshield -that was exhibited to the Commission several weeks ago and which -members of the Commission examined? - -Mr. SPECTER. It was, Mr. Dulles, and we can establish that, of record, -through another Commission Exhibit which is 351, which was the number -given to the windshield and we have a reproduction here through the -photograph. - -Mr. DULLES. You don't have the windshield here today, though? - -Mr. SPECTER. No, we do not. - -Mr. DULLES. It would be the same windshield that the Commission saw. - -Mr. SPECTER. We can establish it through the witness, too. - -Mr. Frazier, for that purpose can you identify what is depicted in a -photograph heretofore identified as Commission Exhibit 351? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir; this is a photograph of the very small pattern -of cracks in the windshield which was on the Presidential limousine -at the time I examined it, and which I also later examined in the FBI -laboratory. - -(Discussion off the record.) - -Mr. SPECTER. Mr. Frazier, have you now described all of your findings -on the windshield of the Presidential limousine? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir; that is concerning the glass itself and not the -molding around the windshield. - -Mr. SPECTER. Will you then move to the molding around the windshield -and state what, if anything, you found there? - -Mr. FRAZIER. On the strip of chrome which goes across the top of the -windshield and again on the passenger side of the windshield or the -inside surface, I found a dent in the chrome which had been caused by -some projectile which struck the chrome on the inside surface. - -Mr. SPECTER. Was there one dent or more than one dent or what? - -Mr. FRAZIER. One dent. - -Mr. SPECTER. Will you identify what is depicted by a photograph -heretofore marked as Commission Exhibit 349? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir; this is a photograph which I took of this dent -at that time, showing the damaged chrome, just to the right of the -rearview mirror support at the top of the windshield. - -Mr. SPECTER. Did your examination of the President's limousine disclose -any other holes or markings which could have conceivably been caused by -a bullet striking the automobile or any part of the automobile? - -Mr. FRAZIER. No, sir. - -Mr. DULLES. I wonder if I could go back just a moment to the -indentation in the chrome around the windshield at the top of the -windshield, but on the inside, could that have been caused by a -fragment of a bullet? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, it very easily could have. It would not have been -caused, for instance, by a bullet which was traveling at its full -velocity from a rifle, but merely from a fragment traveling at fairly -high velocity which struck the inside surface of the chrome. - -Mr. DULLES. Could that have been caused by any of the fragments that -you have identified as having been found on the front seat or near the -front seat of the car? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes; I believe it could have by either, in fact, of the -two fragments of rifle bullets found in the front seat. - -Mr. DULLES. Thank you. - -Mr. SPECTER. Mr. Frazier, assume certain facts to be true for -purposes of expressing an opinion on a hypothetical situation, to -wit: that President Kennedy was struck by a 6.5 millimeter bullet -which passed through his body entering on the rear portion of his -neck 14 centimeters to the left of his right acromion process and 14 -centimeters below his mastoid process, with a striking velocity of -approximately 1,904 feet per second, and exited after passing through -a fascia channel in his body, through the lower anterior third of his -neck with an exit velocity of approximately 1,772 to 1,779 feet per -second; and that bullet had then traveled from the point where it -exited from his neck and struck the front windshield in some manner. -What effect would that have had on the front windshield and the -subsequent flight of the missile? - -Mr. FRAZIER. It would have shattered the front windshield. It would -have caused a very large, relatively large hole, approximately -three-eighths to an inch in diameter with radiating cracks extending -outward into the glass for several inches, even to the side of the -glass. - -Mr. DULLES. It would have penetrated the windshield? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir. - -Mr. SPECTER. Would the missile then have proceeded in a forward -direction? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir; it would. - -Mr. SPECTER. Do you have an opinion as to how far it would have gone? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Until it struck some other object in the area of -approximately a mile. - -Mr. SPECTER. Now assume the same sequence with respect to exit velocity -from the point of the President's neck at the same rate of 1,772 -to 1,798 feet per second, and assume still further that the bullet -had, the whole bullet had, struck the metal framing which you have -heretofore described and identified. What effect would that have had on -the metal framing? - -Mr. FRAZIER. It would have torn a hole in the chrome, penetrated the -framing both inside and outside of the car. I can only assume, since -I haven't tested the metal of that particular car, I would assume -that the bullet would completely penetrate both the chrome, the metal -supporting the chrome, on the inside, and the body metal on the outside -which supports the windshield of the car. - -Mr. SPECTER. Now, assume the same set of factors as to the exit -velocity from the President's neck. What effect would that bullet have -had on any other portion of the automobile which it might have struck -in the continuation of its flight? - -Mr. FRAZIER. In my opinion it would have penetrated any other metal -surface and, of course, any upholstery surface depending on the -nature of the material as to how deep it would penetrate or how many -successive layers it may have penetrated. - -Mr. SPECTER. Was there any evidence in any portion of the car that the -automobile was struck by a bullet which exited from the President's -neck under the circumstances which I have just asked you to assume? - -Mr. FRAZIER. No, sir; there was not. - -Mr. SPECTER. And had there been any such evidence would your -examination of the automobile have uncovered such an indication or such -evidence? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir; I feel that it would have. - -Mr. SPECTER. Was your examination a thorough examination of all aspects -of the interior of the automobile? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir; for our purpose. However, we did not tear out -all of the rugs on the floor, for instance. We examined the rugs -carefully for holes, for bullet furroughs, for fragments. We examined -the nap of the rug, in the actual nap of the rug, for fragments and -bullet holes. We pulled the rug back as far as we could turn it back -and even tore the glue or adhesive material loose around the cracks -at the edges of the rug so we could observe the cracks to see whether -they had been enlarged, and we examined all of the upholstery covering, -on the back of the front seat, on the doors, and in the rear seat -compartment, the jump seats, the actual rear seat, the back of the rear -seat, and we examined the front seat in a similar manner, and we found -no bullet holes or other bullet impact areas, other than the one on the -inside of the windshield and the dent inside the windshield chrome. - -Mr. SPECTER. Had any of those portions of the automobile been struck by -the bullet exiting from the President's neck, which I have described -hypothetically for you, would you have found some evidence of striking? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir. - -Mr. DULLES. When was this examination made? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Between 2 and 4:30 a.m. on November 23, 1963. - -Mr. DULLES. That was about 10 hours, 12 hours after the assassination? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir; 14 to 16 hours. - -Mr. DULLES. Fourteen to sixteen hours. - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir. - -Mr. DULLES. May I ask, do you know in whose custody the automobile was -prior to your examination from the time it was shipped on the airplane? - -Mr. FRAZIER. When I arrived there were two Secret Service men present -but I do not recall their names. They were introduced to me, and they -were there during the entire examination but I don't recall their -actual names. The car was under guard in the Secret Service garage in -Washington, D.C. - -Other than that I do not know. - -Mr. DULLES. Was this a joint examination by you and by the Secret -Service or was the examination made by the FBI? - -Mr. FRAZIER. No, sir; by the FBI at the request of the Secret Service -who had already examined the interior of the car for personal effects -and other items. - -Mr. DULLES. Did they certify to you or advise you that the car had been -under their custody during this 14-to 16-hour period? - -Mr. FRAZIER. I don't recall whether they actually stated that. What -they stated was that the car had immediately been flown to Washington -and placed in this garage and kept under surveillance the entire time. - -Mr. DULLES. Thank you. - -Mr. SPECTER. Was a fragment of metal brought to you which was -identified as coming from the wrist of Governor Connally? - -Mr. FRAZIER. It was identified to me as having come from the arm of -Governor Connally. - -Mr. SPECTER. Will you produce that fragment at this time, please? - -Mr. FRAZIER. This one does not have a Commission number as yet. - -Mr. SPECTER. May it please the Commission, I would like to have this -fragment marked as Commission Exhibit 842. - -(Commission Exhibit No. 842 was marked for identification and received -in evidence.) - -Mr. SPECTER. Now, referring to a fragment heretofore marked as Q9 for -FBI record purposes, and now marked as Commission Exhibit No. 842, will -you describe that fragment for us, please? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir; this is a small fragment of metal which weighed -one-half a grain when I first examined it in the laboratory. It is a -piece of lead, and could have been a part of a bullet or a core of a -bullet. - -However, it lacks any physical characteristics which would permit -stating whether or not it actually originated from a bullet. - -Mr. SPECTER. Are its physical characteristics consistent with having -come from Commission Exhibit 399? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir; it could have. - -Mr. SPECTER. Are they consistent with that fragment identified as -Commission Exhibit No. 842, as having come from fragment identified as -Commission Exhibit 567? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Which is 567? - -Mr. SPECTER. 567 is the one which was found on the front seat. - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir; it could have. - -Mr. SPECTER. Were the characteristics of the fragment identified as -Commission Exhibit 842 consistent with having come from the fragment -heretofore identified as Commission Exhibit 569? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir. - -Mr. SPECTER. Would you set forth from the records of the FBI, if -you have those before you, the chain of possession of the fragment -identified as Commission Exhibit 842, please? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Commission Exhibit 842, that is the one from Governor -Connally's arm, was delivered to me in the FBI laboratory on November -23, 1963, by Special Agent Vincent E. Drain of the Dallas Office of the -FBI, who stated he had secured this item from Capt. Will Fritz of the -Dallas Police Department. - -I do not know where Captain Fritz obtained it. - -Mr. SPECTER. Referring back for just a moment to the coat identified as -that worn by Governor Connally, Mr. Frazier, was there any observable -angle of elevation or declination from the back side of the Governor's -coat to the front side of the Governor's coat? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir; there was, approximately a 35-degree downward -angle. - -Mr. SPECTER. Measuring from---- - -Mr. FRAZIER. That is---- - -Mr. SPECTER. Back to front or front to back? - -Mr. FRAZIER. From back towards the front. - -Mr. SPECTER. How about the same question as to the Governor's shirt? - -Mr. FRAZIER. I would say it was approximately the same angle or -slightly less. I think we measured approximately 30 degrees. - -Mr. SPECTER. Was that from the front to back or from the back to front -of the Governor's shirt? - -Mr. FRAZIER. That would be from the back towards the front. Downward -from back towards the front. - -Mr. SPECTER. Mr. Dulles, those questions complete the ones which we -have to ask, sir. - -Mr. Frazier, one additional question: Do you have any knowledge through -any source whatsoever of any bullets or bullet fragments found anywhere -in the vicinity of the assassination other than those which you have -already testified to, which were in the car, or the whole bullet from -the Connally stretcher or the fragments from Governor Connally's wrist? - -Mr. FRAZIER. No, sir; I have never heard of any nor have any been -submitted to me. - -Mr. SPECTER. During the regular processing of the FBI examination in -this case, would all such bullets or bullet fragments be brought to -you for examination in accordance with your assignment to this matter -generally? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes; they would. - -Mr. SPECTER. Were any metallic fragments brought to you which were -purported to have been found in the head of President Kennedy? - -Mr. DULLES. Or body? - -Mr. SPECTER. Or body of President Kennedy? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes; they were. - -On November 23, 1963, at 1:35 a.m., the two metal fragments in this -container were delivered to me in the FBI laboratory by Special Agent -James W. Sibert, and Special Agent Francis O'Neill of the Baltimore -office of the FBI who stated they had obtained these in the autopsy -room at the Naval Hospital near Washington, D.C., where they were -present when they were removed from the head of President Kennedy. - -Mr. SPECTER. Is there any specification as to the portion of the -President's head from which they were removed? - -Mr. FRAZIER. No, sir; they told me that there had been numerous -particles in the head but only these two had been removed, the others -being very small. - -Mr. SPECTER. May it please the Commission I would like to have those -marked and admitted into evidence as Commission Exhibit No. 843. - -Mr. DULLES. It shall be so marked and admitted under those numbers. - -(Commission Exhibit No. 843 was marked for identification and received -in evidence.) - -Mr. SPECTER. In the event we have not already had 842 admitted into -evidence, I move, Mr. Dulles, for the admission into evidence of 842 -which was the fragment from Governor Connally's arm. - -Mr. DULLES. That shall be admitted. - -Mr. SPECTER. Moving back to 843 will you describe those fragments -indicating their weight and general composition? - -Mr. FRAZIER. These fragments consisted of two pieces of lead, one -weighed 1.65 grains. The other weighed .15 grain. They were examined -spectrographically so their present weight would be somewhat less since -a very small amount would be needed for spectrographic analysis. - -Mr. SPECTER. Was a comparison made between or among these two fragments -with the other metal from the bullets heretofore identified as -Commission Exhibits 399, 567, 569, 840, and 842? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes; they were. - -Mr. SPECTER. What did that examination disclose? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Possibly my numbers do not agree with those you have. -These two particles from the President's head were compared with the -lead of Exhibit 842. - -Mr. SPECTER. Which is the fragment from the arm of Governor Connally? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir; they were compared with the lead scraping from -the inside of the windshield. - -Mr. SPECTER. Which is Exhibit 841. - -Mr. FRAZIER. And with the three lead fragments found on the rear -floorboard carpet of the limousine. - -Mr. SPECTER. Which is Exhibit 840. - -Mr. FRAZIER. And they were found to be similar in metallic composition. - -Mr. SPECTER. Can you state with any more certainty---- - -Mr. FRAZIER. Excuse me, one thing. These, as a group, were compared -with the bullet fragment, Commission Exhibit 567, which was found on -the front seat of the automobile, which also was found to be similar in -metallic composition. - -Mr. SPECTER. Is it possible to state with any more certainty whether or -not any of those fragments came from the same bullet? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Not definitely, no; only that they are of similar lead -composition. - -Mr. SPECTER. Have you now described fully all of the relevant -characteristics of the fragments identified as Commission Exhibit 843? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir. - -Mr. SPECTER. Are there any other bullets or bullet fragment or metallic -substances of any sort connected with this case in any way which you -have examined which you have not already testified to here today or on -your prior appearance? - -Mr. FRAZIER. No, sir; that is all of them. - -Mr. DULLES. Is there anything further? - -Mr. SPECTER. No. - -Mr. DULLES. Thank you very much, Mr. Frazier. - -The Commission will reconvene at 2:30. - -(Whereupon, at 1:30 p.m., the President's Commission recessed.) - - - - -Afternoon Session - -TESTIMONY OF DR. ALFRED G. OLIVIER - - -The President's Commission reconvened at 3 p.m. - -The CHAIRMAN. The Commission will come to order. - -Mr. Specter, has the doctor been sworn yet? - -Mr. SPECTER. No, sir; he has not. - -The CHAIRMAN. Doctor, would you raise your right hand and be sworn, -please? Do you solemnly swear the testimony you are about to give in -the matter before this Commission will be the truth, the whole truth, -and nothing but the truth, so help you God? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Yes, sir. - -The CHAIRMAN. You may be seated. - -Mr. SPECTER. State your full name for the record. - -Dr. OLIVIER. Dr. Alfred G. Olivier. - -Mr. SPECTER. What is your occupation or profession? - -Dr. OLIVIER. A supervisory research veterinarian and I work for the -Department of the Army at Edgewood Arsenal, Md. - -Mr. SPECTER. Would you describe the nature of your duties at that -arsenal, please? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Investigating the wound ballistics of various bullets and -other military missiles. - -Mr. SPECTER. Would you describe the general nature of the tests which -are carried on at Edgewood Arsenal? - -Dr. OLIVIER. For example, with a bullet we run tissue studies getting -the retardation of the bullet through the tissues, the penetration, -various characteristics of it. We use as good tissue simulant 20 -percent gelatin. This has a drag coefficient of muscle tissue and makes -an excellent homogenous medium to study the action of the bullet. -We also use animal parts and parts of cadavers where necessary to -determine the characteristics of these things. - -Mr. SPECTER. Would you set forth your educational background briefly, -please? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Yes; I did 2 years of preveterinary work at the University -of New Hampshire and 4 years of veterinary school at the University of -Pennsylvania, and I hold a degree doctor of veterinary medicine at the -University of Pennsylvania. - -Mr. SPECTER. In what year did you complete your educational work? - -Dr. OLIVIER. 1953. - -Mr. SPECTER. Would you outline your experience in the field subsequent -to 1953? - -Dr. OLIVIER. In this field? - -Mr. SPECTER. Yes, sir. - -Dr. OLIVIER. I came to Edgewood Arsenal, then the Army Chemical Center, -in 1957, and originally to work, take charge of the animal colonies but -immediately I got interested in the research and started working in -the field of wound ballistics and have been in it ever since, and am -presently Chief of the Wound Ballistics Branch. - -Mr. SPECTER. Have you been in charge of a series of tests performed -to determine certain wound ballistics on circumstances analogous to -the underlying facts on wounds inflicted upon President Kennedy and -Governor Connally on November 22, 1963? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Yes; I have. - -Mr. SPECTER. And in the course of those tests what weapon was used? - -Dr. OLIVIER. It was identified as Commission Exhibit 139. It was a 6.5 -mm. Mannlicher-Carcano rifle. - -Mr. SPECTER. Did the designation, Commission Exhibit No. 139, appear on -the body of that rifle? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Yes; it did. - -Mr. SPECTER. What type of bullets were used in the tests which you -performed? - -Dr. OLIVIER. We used the Western ammunition, Western being a division -of Olin Industries, Winchester Western, it was lot 6,000 to 6.5 mm. -round. Has a muzzle velocity of approximately 2,160 feet per second. - -Mr. SPECTER. And were those bullets obtained by you upon information -provided to you by the Commission's staff as to the identity of the -bullets which were believed to have been used during the assassination? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Yes; I first got the identity from the people at Aberdeen -Proving Grounds and then I further checked with the Commission to see -if that was right before ordering this type of ammunition. - -Mr. SPECTER. And where were those bullets obtained from? - -Dr. OLIVIER. I obtained 100 rounds from Remington at Bridgeport. -Conn., and Dr. Dziemian obtained another 160 rounds, I believe, from -Winchester in New Haven. - -Mr. SPECTER. Did you perform certain tests to determine the wound -ballistics and include in that the penetration power of the -Mannlicher-Carcano rifle, which you referred to, firing the Western -Cartridge Co. bullet by comparison with other types of bullets? - -Dr. OLIVIER. We didn't fire any of the others at the same time. These -had been fired previously. We have all these records for comparison. - -Mr. SPECTER. Was the Mannlicher-Carcano rifle then fired for comparison -purposes with the other bullets where you already had your experience? - -Dr. OLIVIER. No; it was fired for the purposes for which--to try to -shed some light on say the factors leading to the assassination and -all, not for comparison with the other bullets. - -Mr. SPECTER. I now show you a photograph which is marked as Commission -Exhibit No. 844, may it please the Commission, and ask you if this -photograph was prepared by you in conjunction with the study on the -Mannlicher-Carcano and the Western Cartridge Co. bullet? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Yes; it was. - -Mr. SPECTER. Would you explain to the Commission what that photograph -depicts? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Actually, the bullet passed through two gelatin blocks. -This was done as part of an energy study to see the amount of energy -imparted to the block of gelatin taking a high-speed motion picture. -These blocks show a record of the permanent cavity left in the gelatin. -This is not necessarily the total penetration. This bullet when it -comes out of the second block still has quite a bit of penetrating -power. Quite a few of these bullets would go into a dirt bank and imbed -themselves so deeply that they couldn't be recovered. - -Mr. SPECTER. I now show you Commission Exhibit No. 845 which is a -photograph, and ask you to state for the record what that photograph -represents? - -Dr. OLIVIER. This has been adopted as standard military ammunition of -the U.S. Army. It is known as the NATO round. It is M-80 ball fired -in the M-14 rifle. It has a different--it is a full jacketed military -bullet but has a different point, what they call a no jag point, a -sharp point. It has tumbling characteristics. When it goes in a certain -block it tumbles and does the same in the body. It is more efficient in -producing wounds than the bullet under study. - -Mr. SPECTER. How do the impact, penetration, and other characteristics -of the bullet depicted in 845 compare with the Western Cartridge Co. -bullet fired from the Mannlicher-Carcano in 844? - -Dr. OLIVIER. It has better wounding potential due to the quicker -tumbling but it would not have as good penetrating ability, when it -starts tumbling and releasing all that energy doing all that damage it -comes to a stop in a shorter distance. - -Mr. SPECTER. Would the Western bullet be characterized as having the -qualities of a more stable bullet? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Yes; it would. You mean in the target? - -Mr. SPECTER. Yes, sir. - -Dr. OLIVIER. Yes. - -Mr. SPECTER. The stability in the air would be the same for any -missile, would it not? - -Dr. OLIVIER. To be a good bullet they should be stable in air in order -to hit what you are aiming at, yes. - -Mr. SPECTER. Then would the characteristics of stability in the air be -the same for either of the two bullets you have heretofore referred to? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Essentially so. - -Mr. SPECTER. I now hand you photograph marked as Commission Exhibit No. -846 and ask you to state what that depicts? - -Dr. OLIVIER. This is a 257 Winchester Roberts soft nose hunting bullet. -This one pictured fired from right to left instead of left to right -and the bullet didn't even go out of the block. It deforms almost -immediately on entering the block and releases its energy rather -rapidly. This type of ammunition is illegal for military use. We are -just studying the wounding characteristics of various bullets, but this -is not a military bullet. - -Mr. SPECTER. How does it compare with the Western bullet? - -Dr. OLIVIER. It would be better for wounding, better for hunting -purposes. But as I said, it isn't acceptable as a military bullet. - -Mr. SPECTER. How does it compare with respect to penetration power? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Much less than the Mannlicher-Carcano. - -Mr. SPECTER. In the normal course of the work that you perform for -the U.S. Army at Edgewood Arsenal, do you have occasion to simulate -substances for testing purposes on determining the path of a bullet -through the human body? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Yes; we do use animal tissues or gelatin as simulants for -tissues of the human body. - -Mr. SPECTER. Has the autopsy report on President John F. Kennedy been -made available to you for your review? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Yes; it has. - -Mr. SPECTER. And subsequent to your review of that report, did you -make an effort to simulate the body tissue through which the bullet is -reported to have passed through the President in accordance with the -report of the autopsy surgeon; entering on the rear of his neck, 14 cm. -below the mastoid process and 14 cm. to the left of the right acromion -process, passing through a fascia channel, striking the trachea and -exiting through the lower anterior of the neck? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Yes; I did. - -Mr. SPECTER. What substance did you prepare to simulate that portion of -the President's body? - -Dr. OLIVIER. We determined the distance on various people by locating -this anatomical region and using people of various sizes we found that -regardless of general body build, the distance penetrated was around -13-1/2 to 14-1/2 cm. - -As a consequence, I used gelatin blocks 20 percent gelatin cut at -13-1/2 cm. lengths and also used horsemeat and goatmeat placed in a -box so that--this was a little harder to get the exact length but that -varied between 13-1/2 and 14-1/2 cm. of muscle tissue. - -Mr. SPECTER. Did that simulate, then, the portion of the President's -body through which the bullet is reported to have passed, as closely as -you could for your testing purposes? - -Dr. OLIVIER. As closely as we could for these test purposes; yes. - -Mr. SPECTER. I now hand you a photograph marked as Commission Exhibit -No. 847 and ask you to testify as to what that depicts? - -Dr. OLIVIER. This is a box containing--I couldn't say looking at -it whether it is the horsemeat or the goatmeat but one of the two. -The distance traveled through that meat would be 13-1/2 to 14-1/2 -centimeters. It is also covered with clothing and clipped goatskin -on the entrance and exit sides, and behind that are the screens for -measuring the exit velocity. We had already determined the striking -velocity by firing I believe it was--I have it right here if you -want---- - -Mr. SPECTER. Before you proceed to that, describe the type of screens -which are shown in the picture which were used to measure exit -velocity, if you please? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Yes. These screens are known as the break-type screen. -They are silver imprinted on paper and when the bullet passes through -it breaks the current. When it passes through the first screen it -breaks the current activating a chronograph, counting chronograph. When -it passes through the second screen it stops. This is over a known -distance, and so the time that it took to pass between the first and -the second will give you the average velocity halfway between the two -screens. - -Mr. SPECTER. I now hand you a photograph marked Commission Exhibit 848 -and ask you to describe what that shows? - -Dr. OLIVIER. This was a similar setup used for firing through gelatin. -It had clothing and skin over the entrance side only. If it had been -placed on the other side it would have just flown off. - -Mr. SPECTER. And that is similar to that depicted in 846? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Essentially; yes. - -Mr. SPECTER. Except that it is---- - -Dr. OLIVIER. Gelatin instead of the tissues. - -Mr. SPECTER. Now at what range was the firing performed on the gelatin, -goatmeat and horsemeat? - -Dr. OLIVIER. This firing was done at a 60-yard range. - -Mr. SPECTER. And what gun was used? - -Dr. OLIVIER. The 6.5 Mannlicher-Carcano that was marked Commission -Exhibit 139. - -Mr. SPECTER. And what bullets were used? - -Dr. OLIVIER. The Western ammunition lot 6,000, 6.5 Mannlicher-Carcano. - -Mr. SPECTER. And was there any substance placed over the gelatin, -horsemeat and goatmeat? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Yes; over the gelatin we had clothing; had a suit, shirt -and undershirt, and underneath that a clipped goatskin. The same thing -was over the meat, and on the other side of the meat was also clipped -goatskin. - -Mr. SPECTER. Would there be any significant difference to the test by -leaving out the undershirt if the President had not worn an undershirt? - -Dr. OLIVIER. No. - -Mr. SPECTER. So that the circumstance was simulated with the actual -type clothing and a protective skin over the substance just as -realistically as you could make it? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Yes. - -Mr. SPECTER. What measurement was obtained as to the entrance velocity -of the bullet at the distance of 60 yards which you described? - -Dr. OLIVIER. The striking velocity at an average of three shots was -1,904 feet per second. - -Mr. SPECTER. And what was the average exit velocity on each of the -substances used? - -Dr. OLIVIER. For the gelatin the average exit velocity was 1,779 feet -per second. The horsemeat, the average exit velocity was 1,798 feet -per second. And the goatmeat the average exit velocity was 1,772 feet -per second. - -Mr. SPECTER. I now hand you a photograph marked Commission Exhibit 849 -and ask you what that picture represents? - -Dr. OLIVIER. This is one of the gelatin blocks used in that test. It -shows the type of track left by the bullet passing through it. That -bullet is very stable. Passing through the body and muscle, it would -make a similar type wound. Of course, you couldn't observe it that -nicely. - -Mr. SPECTER. Would you describe that as being a straight line? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Yes. - -Mr. SPECTER. I now hand you a picture marked Commission Exhibit No. 850 -and ask you what that represents? - -Dr. OLIVIER. These are pieces of clipped goatskin, clipped very -shortly. There is still some hair on it. These were placed, these -particular ones were placed over the tissues. This would be placed over -the entrance side of the animal. - -Mr. SPECTER. When you say "this," you are referring to a piece of -goatskin which is marked "enter"? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Marked "enter." The one marked "exit" was placed on the far -side of the tissues and the bullet passed through that after it came -out of the tissues. - -Mr. SPECTER. For the record, will you describe the characteristics, -which are shown on the goatskin at the point of entry, please? - -Dr. OLIVIER. At the point of entry the wound holes through the skin -are for all purposes round. On the exit side they are more elongated, -two of them in particular are a little more elongated. The bullet had -started to become slightly unstable coming out. - -Mr. SPECTER. And how about the third or lower bullet on the skin -designated exit? - -Dr. OLIVIER. That hole appears as more stable than the other two. In -all three cases the bullet is still pretty stable. The gelatin blocks, -there were gelatin blocks placed behind these things too, and for all -practical purposes, the tracks through them still indicated a stable -bullet. - -Mr. SPECTER. Are there any other conclusions which you would care to -add to those which you have already indicated, resulting from the tests -you have heretofore described? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Well, it means that the bullet that passed through the -President's neck had lost very little of its wounding potential and -was capable of doing a great deal of damage in penetrating. I might -mention one thing showing how great its penetrating ability was. That -say on one of the gelatin shots, it went through a total, counting the -gelatin block, it went through plus the backing up blocks of gelatin, -it went through a total of 72-1/2 centimeters of gelatin, was still -traveling and buried itself in a mound of earth so it has terrific -penetrating ability. This means that had the bullet that passed through -the President's neck hit in the car or anywhere you would have seen -evidence, a good deal of evidence. - -Mr. SPECTER. Dr. Olivier, in the regular course of your work for the -U.S. Army, do you have occasion to perform tests on animal materials -where the characteristics of those animals materials are sufficiently -similar to human bodies to make a determination of the effect of the -bullet wounds in human bodies? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Yes; I do. - -Mr. SPECTER. And did you have occasion to make a test on goat material -in connection with the experiments which you ran? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Yes. - -Mr. SPECTER. Are you familiar with the wounds inflicted on Governor -Connally on November 22, 1963? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Yes; from reading the surgeon's report and also from -talking to Dr. Gregory and Dr. Shaw. - -Mr. SPECTER. Did you have access to the medical reports of Parkland -Hospital concerning the wounds of Governor Connally in all respects? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Yes. - -Mr. SPECTER. And did you have occasion to discuss those wounds in -great detail with Dr. Shaw and Dr. Gregory when they were present in -Washington, D.C. on April 21, 1964, preparatory to their testifying -before this Commission? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Yes; I did. - -Mr. SPECTER. What was the nature of the wound on Governor Connally's -back? - -Dr. OLIVIER. The surgeon's report described it as about 3 centimeters -long, its longest dimension, and it is hard for me to remember reading -it or discussing it with him but I did both. Apparently it was a jagged -wound. He said a wound like this consists of two things, usually a -defect in the epidermis and a central hole which is small, and he could -put his finger in it so it was a fairly large wound. - -Mr. SPECTER. What was the path of the bullet in a general way, based on -the information provided to you concerning Governor Connally's wound in -the back? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Apparently it passed along the rib. I don't recall which -rib it was but passed the fifth rib, passed along this rib causing a -fracture that I believe removed about 10 centimeters of the rib through -fragments through the pleura, lacerating the lung. I asked Dr. Shaw -directly whether he thought the bullet had gone through the pleural -cavity and he said he didn't believe that it had, that the damage was -done by the rib fragments. Then the bullet exited as described somewhat -below the right nipple. - -Mr. SPECTER. Did you perform a test on goat substance to endeavor to -measure the reduction in velocity of a missile similar to the one which -passed through Governor Connally? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Yes; I did. - -Mr. SPECTER. Why was goat substance selected for that purpose in the -testing procedure? - -Dr. OLIVIER. We usually use this in our work so we are familiar with -it. I am not saying it is the only substance that could be used, but we -were not using any unknown procedures or any procedures that we hadn't -used already. - -Mr. SPECTER. Does it closely simulate the nature of a wound in the -human body? - -Dr. OLIVIER. In this particular instance it did. - -Mr. SPECTER. Was the wound inflicted on the goat, then, subjected to -X-ray analysis for the purpose of determining the precise nature of the -wound and for comparison purposes with that wound---- - -Dr. OLIVIER. Yes; it was. - -Mr. SPECTER. Inflicted on Connally? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Yes; it was. - -Mr. SPECTER. I now hand you an X-ray marked Commission Exhibit 851 and -ask you to state what that shows? - -Dr. OLIVIER. It shows a fractured rib. From this you wouldn't be able -to--well, if you were a better radiologist than I was, you might be -able to tell which one, but it was the eighth left rib. It shows a -comminuted fracture extending some distance along the rib. - -Mr. SPECTER. I now hand you Commission Exhibit No. 852, which is a -photograph, and ask you to testify as to what that depicts, please? - -Dr. OLIVIER. This is a photograph taken from the same X-ray again -showing the comminuted fracture of the eighth left rib. - -Mr. SPECTER. And is that a photograph then of the X-ray designated -Commission Exhibit 851? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Yes; it is. - -Mr. SPECTER. Did you have an opportunity to observe personally the -X-rays showing the wound on Governor Connally's rib? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Yes; I did. - -Mr. SPECTER. And how do those X-rays compare with the wound inflicted -as depicted in Exhibits 851 and 852? - -Dr. OLIVIER. They are very similar. - -Mr. SPECTER. When the wounds were inflicted, as depicted in 851 and -852, what weapon was used? - -Dr. OLIVIER. This was again the 6.5 millimeter Mannlicher-Carcano -rifle. - -Mr. SPECTER. And what bullets were used? - -Dr. OLIVIER. The 6.5 millimeter Western ammunition lot 6,000. - -Mr. SPECTER. And what distance was utilized? - -Dr. OLIVIER. On the goat the distance was 70 yards. - -Mr. SPECTER. And was there any covering over the goat? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Yes. There was a suit, shirt, and undershirt. - -Mr. SPECTER. What was the entrance velocity of the bullet? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Striking velocity for an average of 11 shots was 1,929 -feet per second. - -Mr. SPECTER. And what was the exit velocity? - -Dr. OLIVIER. The exit velocity was 1,664 feet per second. - -Mr. SPECTER. I now hand you a box containing a bullet, which has been -marked as Commission Exhibit No. 853, and ask you if you have ever seen -that bullet before? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Yes; I have. - -Mr. SPECTER. And under what circumstances have you previously seen that -bullet? - -Dr. OLIVIER. This was the bullet that was fired through the goat. It -went through the velocity screens into some cotton waste, dropped out -of the bottom of that and was lying on the floor. It was picked up -immediately afterwards still warm, so we knew it was the bullet that -had fired that particular shot. - -Mr. SPECTER. Was that fired through the goat depicted in the -photographs and X-ray, 851 and 852? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Yes; that was the goat. - -Mr. SPECTER. Would you describe for the record, verbally please, the -characteristics of that bullet? - -Dr. OLIVIER. The bullet has been quite flattened. The lead core is -extruding somewhat from the rear. We weighed the bullet. It weighs -158.8 grains. - -Mr. SPECTER. I now hand you Commission Exhibit 399, which has been -heretofore in Commission proceedings identified as the bullet found -on the stretcher of Governor Connally, and ask if you have had an -opportunity to compare 399 with 853? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Yes; I have. - -Mr. SPECTER. And what did you find on that comparison? - -Dr. OLIVIER. The bullet recovered on the stretcher has not been -flattened as much, but there is a suggestion of flattening there from -a somewhat similar occurrence. Also, the lead core has extruded from -the rear in the same fashion, and it appears that some of it has even -broken from the rear. - -Mr. SPECTER. Is there some flattening on both of those bullets in -approximately the same areas toward the rear of the missiles? - -Dr. OLIVIER. In the bullet, our particular bullet is flattened the -whole length, but you say towards the rear? - -Mr. SPECTER. You say our bullet; you mean 853? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Yes, 853 is flattened. No. 399 is flattened more towards -the rear. - -Mr. SPECTER. Are there any other conclusions which you have to add to -the tests performed on the goat? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Well, again in this test it demonstrates that the bullet -that was stable when it struck in this fashion again lost very little -velocity in going through that much goat tissue. - -Incidentally, the amount of goat tissue it traversed was probably -somewhat less than the Governor, but in any case it indicates the -bullet would have had a lot of remaining velocity and could have done a -lot of damage. - -Another thing that hasn't been brought up is the velocity screen -immediately behind the goat, the imprint of the bullet left on it was -almost the length of the bullet. - -Mr. SPECTER. What does that indicate? - -Dr. OLIVIER. This indicates that the bullet was now no longer traveling -straight but either traveling sideways or tumbling end over end at the -time it hit the screen. - -Mr. SPECTER. And that was after the point of exit from the goat? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Yes. - -Mr. SPECTER. Are there any other conclusions which you found from the -studies on the goat? - -Dr. OLIVIER. No, I believe that is all I can think of right at this -moment. - -Mr. SPECTER. In the regular course of your work for the U.S. Army, -do you have occasion to perform tests on parts of human cadavers to -determine the effects of bullets on human beings? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Yes, I do. - -Mr. SPECTER. And was a series of tests performed under your supervision -on the portions of human cadavers simulated to the wound inflicted on -the wrist of Governor Connally? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Yes. - -Mr. SPECTER. Were you familiar with the nature of the wound on Governor -Connally's wrist prior to performing those tests? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Yes, I was. - -Mr. SPECTER. What was the source of your information on those wounds? - -Dr. OLIVIER. I had read the surgeon's report, also talked with Dr. -Gregory, the surgeon who had done the surgery, and had looked at the -X-rays. - -Mr. SPECTER. Had you had an opportunity to discuss the wounds with Dr. -Gregory and view the X-rays taken at Parkland Hospital, here in the -Commission headquarters? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Yes; I did. - -Mr. SPECTER. On April 21, 1964? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Yes. - -Mr. SPECTER. I now hand you an X-ray marked as Commission Exhibit 854, -and ask you what that depicts? - -Dr. OLIVIER. This is a comminuted fracture of the distal end of the -radius of a human arm. - -Mr. SPECTER. And in what manner was that wound caused? - -Dr. OLIVIER. It was caused by a bullet from the Commission Exhibit 139. -This was again the 6.5-millimeter Mannlicher-Carcano Western ammunition -lot 6,000. - -Mr. SPECTER. Fired at what distance? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Fired at a distance of 70 yards. - -Mr. SPECTER. And was there anything protecting the wrist at the time of -impact? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Not protection but there was again clothing, this time -suit material or suit lining, at least suit material and shirt. I am -not sure about the lining. I can tell you. I have it right here. Suit -material, suit lining material, and shirt material. - -Mr. SPECTER. I now hand you a photograph marked as Commission Exhibit -855 and ask you what that represents? - -Dr. OLIVIER. This is a photograph taken from the X-ray, Commission -Exhibit 854. - -Mr. SPECTER. Will you describe for the record the details of the -injuries shown on 854 and 855, please? - -Dr. OLIVIER. This is a comminuted fracture of the distal end of the -radius. It was struck directly by the bullet. It passed through, not -directly through but through at an oblique angle so that it entered -more proximal on the dorsal side of the wrist and distal on the volar -aspect. - -Mr. SPECTER. How does the entry and exit compare with the wound on -Governor Connally which you observed on the X-rays? - -Dr. OLIVIER. In this particular instance to the best of my memory from -looking at the X-rays, it is very close. It is about one of the best -ones that we obtained. - -Mr. SPECTER. Is there any definable difference at all? - -Dr. OLIVIER. I couldn't determine any. - -Mr. SPECTER. It is close, you say? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Yes. If I had both X-rays in front of me if there was a -difference I could determine it, but from memory I would say it was for -all purposes identical. - -Mr. SPECTER. I now hand you a bullet in a case marked Commission -Exhibit 856 and ask if you have ever seen that before? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Yes. This is the bullet that caused the damage shown in -Commission Exhibits Nos. 854 and 855. - -Mr. SPECTER. Would you describe that bullet for the record, please? - -Dr. OLIVIER. The nose of the bullet is quite flattened from striking -the radius. - -Mr. SPECTER. How does it compare, for example, with Commission Exhibit -399? - -Dr. OLIVIER. It is not like it at all. I mean, Commission Exhibit 399 -is not flattened on the end. This one is very severely flattened on the -end. - -Mr. SPECTER. What was the velocity of the missile at the time it struck -the wrist depicted in 854 and 855? - -Dr. OLIVIER. The average striking velocity was 1,858 feet per second. - -Mr. SPECTER. Do you have the precise striking velocity of that one? - -Dr. OLIVIER. No; I don't. We could not put velocity screen in front of -the individual shots because it would have interfered with the gunner's -view. So we took five shots and got an average striking velocity. - -Mr. SPECTER. When you say five shots with an average striking velocity, -those were at the delineated distance without striking anything on -those particular shots? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Right, and after establishing that velocity, then we went -on to shoot the various arms. - -Mr. SPECTER. And what was the exit velocity? - -Dr. OLIVIER. On this particular one? - -Mr. SPECTER. If you have it? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Yes. Well, I don't know if I have that or not. We didn't -get them in all because some of these things deflect. No, I have no -exit velocity on this particular one. - -Mr. SPECTER. What exit velocity did you get on the average? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Average exit velocity was 1,776 feet per second. This was -for an average of seven. We did 10. We obtained velocity on seven. - -Mr. SPECTER. Would the average reduction be approximately the same, -in your professional opinion, as to the bullet exiting from the wrist -depicted in 854 and 855? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Somewhat. Let me give you the extremes of our velocities. -The highest one was 1,866 and the lowest was 1,664, so there was a -202-feet-per-second difference in the thing. Some of the cases bone was -missed, in other cases glancing blows. But I would say it is a close -approximation to what the exit velocity was on that particular one. - -Mr. SPECTER. And what would the close approximation be, the average? - -Dr. OLIVIER. The average. - -Mr. SPECTER. Would you compare the damage, which was done to Governor -Connally's wrist, as contrasted with the damage to the wrist depicted -in 854 and 855? - -Dr. OLIVIER. The damage in the wrist that you see in the X-ray on 854 -and 855, the damage is greater than was done to the Governor's wrist. -There is more severe comminution here. - -Mr. SPECTER. How much more severe is the comminution? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Considerably more. If I remember correctly in the -X-rays of the Governor's wrist, I think there were only two or three -fragments, if that many. Here we have many, many small fragments. - -Mr. SPECTER. In your opinion, based on the tests which you have -performed, was the damage inflicted on Governor Connally's wrist caused -by a pristine bullet, a bullet fired from the Mannlicher-Carcano rifle -6.5 missile which did not hit anything before it struck the Governor's -wrist? - -Dr. OLIVIER. I don't believe so. I don't believe his wrist was struck -by a pristine bullet. - -Mr. SPECTER. What is the reason for your conclusion on that? - -Dr. OLIVIER. In this case I go by the size of the entrance wound and -exit wound on the Governor's wrist. The entrance wound was on the -dorsal surface, it was described by the surgeon as being much larger -than the exit wound. He said he almost overlooked that on the volar -aspect of the wrist. - -In every instance we had a larger exit wound than an entrance wound -firing with a pristine bullet apparently at the same angle at which it -entered and exited the Governor's wrist. - -Also, and I don't believe they were mixed up on which was entrance and -exit. For one thing the clothing, you know, the surgeon found pieces -of clothing and the other thing the human anatomy is such that I don't -believe it would enter through the volar aspect and out the top. - -So I am pretty sure that the Governor's wrist was not hit by a pristine -or a stable bullet. - -Mr. SPECTER. What is there, in and of the nature of the smaller wound -of exit and larger wound of entrance in the Governor's wrist as -contrasted with a smaller wound of entrance and larger wound of exit in -854 and 855, which leads you to conclude that the Governor's wrist was -not struck by a pristine bullet? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Do you want to repeat that question again? - -Mr. SPECTER. What is there about the wound of entry or exit which led -you to think that the Governor's wrist wasn't struck by a pristine -bullet? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Well, he would have had a larger exit wound than entrance -wound, which he did not. - -Mr. SPECTER. And if the velocity of the missile is decreased, how does -that effect the nature of the wounds of entry and exit? - -Dr. OLIVIER. If the velocity is decreased, if the bullet is still -stable, he still should have a larger exit wound than an entrance. - -Now, on the other hand, to get a larger entrance wound and a smaller -exit wound, this indicates the bullet probably hit with very much of a -yaw. I mean, as this hole appeared in the velocity screen the bullet -either tumbling or striking sideways, this would have made a larger -entrance wound, lose considerable of its velocity in fracturing the -bone, and coming out at a very low velocity, made a smaller hole. - -Mr. SPECTER. So the crucial factor would be the analysis that the -bullet was characterized with yaw at the time it struck? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Yes. - -Mr. SPECTER. Causing a larger wound of entry and a smaller wound of -exit? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Yes. - -Mr. SPECTER. Now is there anything in the---- - -Dr. OLIVIER. Also at a reduced velocity because if it struck at -considerable yaw at a high velocity as it could do if it hit something -and deflected, it would have, it could make a larger wound of exit but -it would have been even a more severe wound than we had here. It would -have been very severe, could even amputate the wrist hitting at high -velocity sideways. We have to say this bullet was characterized by an -extreme amount of yaw and reduced velocity. How much reduced, I don't -know, but considerably reduced. - -Mr. SPECTER. Does the greater damage, inflicted on the wrist in 854 and -855 than that which was inflicted on Governor Connally's wrist, have -any value as indicating whether Governor Connally's wrist was struck by -a pristine bullet? - -Dr. OLIVIER. No; because holding the velocity the same or similar the -damage would be greater with a tumbling bullet than a pristine. - -I think it reflects both instability and reduced velocity. You have -to show the two. I mean, the size of the entrance and exit are very -important. This shows that the thing was used when it struck. The -fact that there was no more damage than was done by a tumbling bullet -indicates the bullet at a reduced velocity. You have to put these two -things together. - -Mr. SPECTER. Had Governor Connally's wrist been struck with a pristine -bullet without yaw, would more damage have been inflicted---- - -Dr. OLIVIER. Yes. - -Mr. SPECTER. Than was inflicted on the Governor's wrist? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Yes. - -Mr. SPECTER. So then the lesser damage on the Governor's wrist in and -of itself indicates in your opinion---- - -Dr. OLIVIER. That it wasn't struck by a pristine bullet; yes. - -Mr. SPECTER. Are there any other conclusions which flow from the -experiments which you conducted on the wrist? - -Dr. OLIVIER. We concluded that it wasn't struck by a pristine bullet. -Also drew the conclusion that it was struck by an unstable bullet, a -bullet at a much reduced velocity. The question that it brings up -in my mind is if the same bullet that struck the wrist had passed -through the Governor's chest, if the bullet that struck the Governor's -chest had not hit anything else would it have been reduced low enough -to do this, and I wonder, based on our work--it brings to mind the -possibility the same bullet that struck the President striking the -Governor would account for this more readily. I don't know, I don't -think you can ever say this, but it is a very good possibility, I think -more possible, more probable than not. - -The CHAIRMAN. What is more probable than not, Doctor? - -Dr. OLIVIER. In my mind at least, and I don't know the angles at which -the things went or anything, it seems to me more probable that the -bullet that hit the Governor's chest had already been slowed down -somewhat, in order to lose enough velocity to strike his wrist and do -no more damage than it did. I don't know how you would ever determine -it exactly. I think the best approach is to find out the angles of -flight, whether it is possible. But I have a feeling that it might have -been. - -The CHAIRMAN. It might have been? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Yes. - -The CHAIRMAN. The one that went through his chest went through his hand -also. - -Dr. OLIVIER. Yes; and also through the President. - -The CHAIRMAN. The first shot? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Well, I don't know whether the first or second. The first -one could have missed. It could have been the second that hit both. - -The CHAIRMAN. The one that went through his back and came out his -trachea? - -Dr. OLIVIER. It could have hit the Governor in the chest and went -through because it had so little velocity after coming out of the wrist -that it barely penetrated the thigh. - -The CHAIRMAN. May I ask one more question? Would you think, that the -same bullet could have done all three of those things? - -Dr. OLIVIER. That same bullet was capable. - -The CHAIRMAN. Gone through the President's back as it did, gone through -Governor Connally's chest as it did, and then through his hand as it -did? - -Dr. OLIVIER. It was certainly capable of doing all that. - -The CHAIRMAN. It was capable? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Yes. - -The CHAIRMAN. The one shot? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Yes. - -Mr. SPECTER. Doctor Olivier, based on the descriptions of the wound on -the Governor's back, what in your opinion was the characteristic of the -bullet at the time it struck the Governor's back with respect to the -course of its flight? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Let's say from the size of the wound as described by the -surgeon, it could have been tipped somewhat when it struck because that -is a fairly large wound. Another thing that could have done it is the -angle at which it hit. On the goat some of the wounds were larger than -others. On the goat material some of the wounds were larger than others -because of the angle at which it hit this material. The same thing -could happen on the Governor's back. - -Mr. SPECTER. And how was that wound described with respect to its size? - -Dr. OLIVIER. The Governor's wound? - -Mr. SPECTER. On the Governor's back? - -Dr. OLIVIER. About 3 centimeters at its largest dimension. - -Mr. SPECTER. And would you have any view as to which factor was more -probable, as to whether it was a tangential strike on the Governor's -back, or whether there was yaw in the bullet at the time it struck the -Governor's back? - -Dr. OLIVIER. I couldn't as far as being tangential. I couldn't answer -that, not knowing the position of the Governor. But it could have been -caused by a bullet yawing. I mean it would have made a larger wound, as -that was. - -Mr. SPECTER. Is there any other cause which could account for that type -of a large wound on the Governor's back other than with the bullet -yawing? - -Dr. OLIVIER. With this particular bullet those would be the two -probable causes of this wound of this size. - -Mr. SPECTER. And those two probable causes are what? - -Dr. OLIVIER. One, the bullet hitting not perpendicular to the surface -of the Governor, in other words, hitting tangential at a slight angle -on his back so that it came in cutting the skin. Another, the bullet -hitting that wasn't perpendicular to the surface as it hit. The bullet -did go along, the surgeon described the path as tangential but he is -speaking of along the rib. It isn't clear it was, as it struck, whether -it was a tangential shot or actually perpendicular to the Governor's -back. - -Mr. SPECTER. Permit me to add one additional factor which Dr. Shaw -testified to during the course of the proceeding after he measured the -angle of decline through the Governor; and Dr. Shaw testified that -there was a 25 deg. to 27 deg. angle of declination measuring from front to -back on the Governor, taking into account the position of the wound on -the Governor's back and the position of the wound on the Governor's -chest below the right nipple. - -Now with that factor, added to those which you already know, would -that enable you to form a conclusion as to whether the nature of the -wound on the Governor's back was caused by yaw of the bullet or by a -tangential strike? - -Dr. OLIVIER. I don't think I would want to say. If I could have seen -the Governor's wound, this would have been a help. - -Mr. SPECTER. Would the damage done to the Governor's wrist indicate -that a bullet which was fired approximately 160 to 250 feet away with -the muzzle velocity of approximately 2,000 feet per second, would it -indicate that the bullet was slowed up only by the passage through the -Governor's body, in the way which you know, or would it indicate that -there was some other factor which slowed up the bullet in addition? - -Dr. OLIVIER. It would indicate there was some other factor that had -slowed up the bullet in addition. - -Mr. SPECTER. What is your reason for that conclusion, sir? - -Dr. OLIVIER. The amount of damage alone; striking that end it would have -caused more severe comminution as we found. You know--if it hadn't been -slowed up in some other fashion. At that range it still had a striking -velocity of 1,858 or in the vicinity of 1,800 feet per second, which is -capable of doing more damage than was done to the Governor's wrist. - -Mr. SPECTER. Had the same bullet which passed through the President, in -the way heretofore described for the record, then struck the Governor -as well, what effect would there have been in reducing its velocity as -a result of that course? - -Dr. OLIVIER. You say the bullet first struck the President. In coming -out of the President's body it would have had a tendency to be slightly -unstable. In striking the Governor it would have lost more velocity in -his chest than if it had been a pristine bullet striking the Governor's -chest, so it would have exited from the Governor's chest I would say -at a considerably reduced velocity, probably with a good amount of yaw -or tumbling, and this would account for the type of wound that the -Governor did have in his wrist. - -Mr. SPECTER. The approximate reduction in velocity on passage through -the goat was what, Doctor? - -Dr. OLIVIER. The average velocity loss in the seven cases we did was 82 -feet per second. - -Mr. SPECTER. If the bullet had passed through the President prior to -the time it passed through the Governor, would you expect a larger loss -than 82 feet per second resulting from the passage through the body of -the Governor? - -Dr. OLIVIER. I am not sure if I heard you correctly. This is if it hit -the Governor without hitting the President or hitting the President -first? - -Mr. SPECTER. Let me rephrase it for you, Dr. Olivier. - -Dr. OLIVIER. Yes; please. - -Mr. SPECTER. You testified that the bullet lost 82 feet per second when -it passed through the goat. - -Dr. OLIVIER. Yes. - -Mr. SPECTER. Now what would your expectations be as to the reduction in -velocity on a bullet which passed through the Governor, assuming that -it struck nothing first? - -Dr. OLIVIER. It would be greater; the distance through the Governor's -chest would have been greater. - -Mr. SPECTER. Would that be an appreciable or approximately the same? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Can I bring in any other figures? Dr. Dziemian has -computed approximately what he thought it would have lost. - -Mr. SPECTER. Yes, of course, if you have any other figure which would -be helpful. - -Dr. DZIEMIAN. I believe you misunderstood Mr. Specter. I think you -gave the figure for the loss of velocity through the Governor's wrist -instead of through his chest. - -Dr. OLIVIER. I am sorry. We were on the wrist; okay. - -Mr. SPECTER. Let me start again then. In an effort to draw some -conclusion about the reduction in velocity through the Governor's -chest, I am now going back and asking you what was the reduction in -velocity of the bullet which passed through the goat? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Yes; I did misunderstand you. I am sorry. The loss in -velocity passing through the goat was 265 feet per second. - -Mr. SPECTER. Now, would that be the approximate loss in velocity of a -pristine bullet passing through the Governor? - -Dr. OLIVIER. The loss would be somewhat greater. - -Mr. SPECTER. How much greater in your opinion? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Do you have that figure, Dr. Dziemian? - -Dr. DZIEMIAN. I would say a pristine bullet of the Governor was about -half again thicker. It would be about half again as great velocity, -somewhere around 400. - -Mr. SPECTER. Had the bullet passed through only the Governor, losing -velocity of 400 feet per second, would you have expected that the -damage inflicted on the Governor's wrist would have been about the same -as that inflicted on Governor Connally or greater? - -Dr. OLIVIER. My feeling is it would have been greater. - -Mr. SPECTER. Had the bullet passed through the President and then -struck Governor Connally, would it have lost velocity of 400 feet per -second in passing through Governor Connally or more? - -Dr. OLIVIER. It would have lost more. - -Mr. SPECTER. What is the reason for that? - -Dr. OLIVIER. The bullet after passing through, say a dense medium, then -through air and then through another dense medium tends to be more -unstable, based on our past work. It appears to be that it would have -tumbled more readily and lost energy more rapidly. How much velocity it -would have lost, I couldn't say, but it would have lost more. - -Mr. SPECTER. Are there any indications from the internal wounds on -Governor Connally as to whether or not the bullet which entered his -body was an unstable bullet? - -Dr. OLIVIER. The only thing that might give you an indication would be -the skin wound of entrance, the type of rib fracture and all that I -think could be accounted for by either type, because in our experiment -we simulated, although not to as great a degree, the damage wasn't as -severe, but I think it would be hard to say that. - -One thing comes to my mind right now that might indicate it. There was -a greater flattening of the bullet in our experiments than there was -going through the Governor, which might indicate that it struck the rib -which did the flattening at a lower velocity. This is only a thought. - -Mr. SPECTER. It struck the rib of the Governor? - -Dr. OLIVIER. It struck the rib of the Governor at a lower velocity -because that bullet was less flattened than the bullet through the goat -material. - -Mr. SPECTER. Based on the nature of the wound inflicted on the -Governor's wrist, and on the tests which you have conducted then, do -you have an opinion as to which is more probable on whether the bullet -passed through only the Governor's chest before striking his wrist, or -passed through the President first and then the Governor's chest before -striking the Governor's wrist? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Will you say that again to make sure I have it? - -Mr. SPECTER. [To the reporter.] Could you repeat that question, please? - -(The question was read by the reporter.) - -Dr. OLIVIER. You couldn't say exactly at all. My feeling is that it -would be more probable that it passed through the President first. At -least I think it is important to establish line of flight to try to -determine it. - -Mr. SPECTER. Aside from the lines of flight, based on the factors which -were known to you from the medical point of view and from the tests -which you conducted, what would be the reason for the feeling which you -just expressed? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Because I believe you would need that, I mean to account -for the damage to the wrist. I don't think you would have gotten a low -enough velocity upon reaching the wrist unless you had gone through the -President's body first. - -Mr. SPECTER. The President's body as well as the Governor's body? - -Dr. OLIVIER. As well as the Governor's. - -Mr. SPECTER. Does the nature of the wound which was inflicted on -Governor Connally's thigh shed any light on this subject? - -Dr. OLIVIER. This, to my mind, at least, merely indicates the bullet -at this time was about spent. In talking with doctor, I believe it was -Gregory, I don't think he did the operation on the thigh but at least -he saw the wound, and he said it was about the size of an eraser on a -lead pencil. This could be accounted for--and there was also this small -fragment of bullet in this thigh wound--this, to me, indicates that -this was a spent bullet that had gone through the wrist as the Governor -was sitting there, went through the wrist into his thigh, just partly -imbedded and then fell out and I believe this was the bullet that was -found on the stretcher. - -Mr. SPECTER. Would you have any opinion as to the velocity of that -bullet at the time it struck the Governor's thigh? - -Dr. OLIVIER. No. We didn't do any work to simulate this, but it would -have been at a very low velocity just to have gone in that far and drop -out again. - -Mr. SPECTER. Dr. Olivier, in the regular course of your work for the -U.S. Army, do you have occasion to perform tests on reconstructed human -skulls to determine the effects of bullets on skulls? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Yes; I do. - -Mr. SPECTER. And did you have occasion to conduct such a test in -connection with the series which you are now describing? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Yes; I did. - -Mr. SPECTER. And would you outline briefly the procedures for -simulating the human skull? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Human skulls, we take these human skulls and they are -imbedded and filled with 20 percent gelatin. As I mentioned before, 20 -percent gelatin is a pretty good simulant for body tissues. - -They are in the moisture content. When I say 20 percent, it is 20 -percent weight of the dry gelatin, 80 percent moisture. - -The skull, the cranial cavity, is filled with this and the surface is -coated with a gelatin and then it is trimmed down to approximate the -thickness of the tissues overlying the skull, the soft tissues of the -head. - -Mr. SPECTER. And at what distance were these tests performed? - -Dr. OLIVIER. These tests were performed at a distance of 90 yards. - -Mr. SPECTER. And what gun was used? - -Dr. OLIVIER. It was a 6.5 Mannlicher-Carcano that was marked Commission -Exhibit 139. - -Mr. SPECTER. What bullets were used? - -Dr. OLIVIER. It was the 6.5 millimeter Mannlicher-Carcano Western -ammunition lot 6,000. - -Mr. SPECTER. What did that examination or test, rather, disclose? - -Dr. OLIVIER. It disclosed that the type of head wounds that the -President received could be done by this type of bullet. This surprised -me very much, because this type of a stable bullet I didn't think -would cause a massive head wound, I thought it would go through making -a small entrance and exit, but the bones of the skull are enough to -deform the end of this bullet causing it to expend a lot of energy and -blowing out the side of the skull or blowing out fragments of the skull. - -Mr. SPECTER. I now hand you a case containing bullet fragments marked -Commission Exhibit 857 and ask if you have ever seen those fragments -before. - -Dr. OLIVIER. Yes, I have. - -Mr. SPECTER. And under what circumstances have you viewed those before, -please? - -Dr. OLIVIER. There were, the two larger fragments were recovered -outside of the skull in the cotton waste we were using to catch the -fragments without deforming them. There are some smaller fragments in -here that were obtained from the gelatin within the cranial cavity -after the experiment. We melted the gelatin out and recovered the -smallest fragments from within the cranial cavity. - -Mr. SPECTER. Now, I show you two fragments designated as Commission -Exhibits 567 and 579 heretofore identified as having been found on the -front seat of the President's car on November 22, 1963, and ask you if -you have had an opportunity to examine those before. - -Dr. OLIVIER. Yes, I have. - -Mr. SPECTER. And have you had an opportunity to compare those to the -two fragments identified as Commission Exhibit 857? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Yes, I have. - -Mr. SPECTER. And what did that comparison show? - -Dr. OLIVIER. They are quite similar. These two fragments on, what is -the number? - -Mr. SPECTER. 857. - -Dr. OLIVIER. On 857 there isn't as much of the front part in this one, -but in other respects they are very similar. - -Mr. SPECTER. I now hand you a photograph marked Commission Exhibit 858 -and ask you what that depicts. - -Mr. DULLES. Could I see that other exhibit? - -Dr. OLIVIER. These are the same fragments as marked 857. - -Mr. SPECTER. That is a photograph of the fragments marked 857? - -Dr. OLIVIER. 857. - -Mr. SPECTER. I now hand you a photograph marked Commission Exhibit 859 -and ask you what that depicts? - -Dr. OLIVIER. These are the smaller fragments that have been labeled, -also, Exhibit 857. This picture or some of the fragments labeled 857, -these are the smaller fragments contained in the same box. - -Mr. SPECTER. Are all of the fragments on 859 contained within 857? - -Dr. OLIVIER. They are supposed to be, photographed and placed in the -box. If they dropped out they are supposed to be all there. - -(Discussion off the record.) - -Mr. DULLES. Back on the record. - -Mr. SPECTER. At what point on the skull did the bullet, which -fragmented into Commission Exhibit 857, strike? - -Dr. OLIVIER. I would have to see the picture. I mean I can't remember -exactly what point. I can tell you the point we were aiming at and -approximately where it hit. - -Mr. SPECTER. Permit me to make available a photograph to you, then, for -purposes of refreshing your recollection, and in testifying as to the -point which was struck, for that purpose. - -Dr. OLIVIER. We did 10 skulls so I can't remember offhand where -everyone struck. - -Mr. SPECTER. For that purpose I hand you Commission Exhibit 860 and ask -you if that is designated in any way to identify it. - -Mr. DULLES. This is the test we are talking about now, is it? - -Mr. SPECTER. Yes, sir; where the bullet fragmented into pieces in 857. - -Mr. DULLES. Are you introducing that into evidence? - -Mr. SPECTER. Yes, sir. - -Mr. DULLES. Have you already introduced it in the record? - -Mr. SPECTER. May I at this point move for the admission into evidence -of Commission Exhibits 844 through 860, and they have been identified -in sequence as being the photographs, X-rays, and other tangible -exhibits used in connection with these tests. - -Mr. DULLES. They shall be admitted. - -(The documents heretofore marked for identification as Commission -Exhibits Nos. 844 through 860 were received in evidence.) - -Dr. OLIVIER. This photograph is the skull that was shot with the -bullet, the fragments which are marked 857. - -Mr. SPECTER. At what point on the skull did the bullet strike? - -Dr. OLIVIER. From this I couldn't tell you exactly the point. We were -aiming, as described in the autopsy report if I remember correctly the -point 2 centimeters to the right of the external occipital protuberance -and slightly above it. We placed a mark on the skull at that point, -according to the autopsy the bullet emerged through the superorbital -process, so we drew a line to give us the line of flight, put unclipped -goat hair over the back to simulate the scalp and put a mark on the -area which we wished to shoot. - -Now, every shot didn't strike exactly where we wanted, but they all -struck in the back of the skull in the vicinity of our aiming point, -some maybe slightly above the external occipital protuberance. In some -cases very close to our aiming spot. - -This particular skull blew out the right side in a manner very similar -to the wounds of the President, and if I remember correctly, it was -very close to the point at which we aimed. - -In other words, a couple centimeters to the right. - -Mr. SPECTER. Do you have any record which would be more specific on the -point of entrance? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Our notebook has all---- - -Mr. SPECTER. Will you refer to your notes, then? - -Dr. OLIVIER. The notebook is in the safe in there in the briefcase. - -Mr. SPECTER. Would you get the notebook and refer to it so we can be as -specific as possible on this point. - -Dr. OLIVIER. I have the location of that wound. - -Mr. SPECTER. Would you give us then the precise location of the wound -caused by bullet identified as 857? - -Dr. OLIVIER. The entrance wound is 2.9 centimeters to the right and -almost horizontal to the occipital protuberance. This is almost exactly -where we were aiming. We were aiming 2 centimeters to the right. - -Mr. SPECTER. I now hand you a photograph marked as Commission Exhibit -861, move its admission into evidence, and ask you to state what that -depicts. - -Dr. OLIVIER. This is the skull in question, the same one from which the -fragments marked Exhibit 857 were recovered. - -Mr. SPECTER. And what does that show as to damage done to the skull? - -Dr. OLIVIER. It blew the whole side of the cranial cavity away. - -Mr. SPECTER. How does that compare, then, with the damage inflicted on -President Kennedy? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Very similar. I think they stated the length of the -defect, the missing skull was 13 centimeters if I remember correctly. -This in this case it is greater, but you don't have the limiting scalp -holding the pieces in so you would expect it to fly a little more but -it is essentially a similar type wound. - -Mr. SPECTER. Does the human scalp work to hold in the human skull in -such circumstances to a greater extent than the simulated matters used? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Yes; we take this into account. - -Mr. SPECTER. I hand you Commission Exhibit 862, move its admission into -evidence, and ask you what that depicts? - -Dr. OLIVIER. This is the same skull. This is just looking at it -from the front. You are looking at the exit. You can't see it here -because the bone has been blown away, but the bullet exited somewhere -around--we reconstructed the skull. In other words, it exited very -close to the superorbital ridge, possibly below it. - -Mr. SPECTER. Did you formulate any other conclusions or opinions based -on the tests on firing at the skull? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Well, let's see. We found that this bullet could do -exactly--could make the type of wound that the President received. - -Also, that the recovered fragments were very similar to the ones -recovered on the front seat and on the floor of the car. - -This, to me, indicates that those fragments did come from the bullet -that wounded the President in the head. - -Mr. SPECTER. And how do the two major fragments in 857 compare, then, -with the fragments heretofore identified as 567 and 569? - -Dr. OLIVIER. They are quite similar. - -Mr. SPECTER. Do you have an opinion as to whether the wound on the -Governor's wrist could have been caused by a fragment of a bullet -coming off of the President's head? - -Dr. OLIVIER. I don't believe so. Frankly, I don't know, but I don't -believe so, because it expended so much energy in blowing the head -apart and took a lot of energy that I doubt if they could have -fractured the radius. The radius is a very strong, hard bone and I -don't believe they could have done that much damage. I believe they -could have caused a superficial laceration on someone or a mark on the -windshield, but I don't believe they could have done that damage to the -wrist. - -Mr. DULLES. And it couldn't have then gone through the wrist into the -thigh? - -Dr. OLIVIER. I don't believe so. - -Mr. SPECTER. Have you had an opportunity to examine a fragment -identified as Commission Exhibit 842 which is the fragment taken from -Governor Connally's wrist? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Yes, I have. - -Mr. SPECTER. Could that fragment have come from the bullet designated -as Commission Exhibit 399? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Yes, I believe it would have, I will add further I believe -it could have because the core of the bullet extrudes through the back -and would allow part of it to break off very readily. - -Mr. SPECTER. Do you have an opinion as to whether, in fact, bullet -399 did cause the wound on the Governor's wrist, assuming if you will -that it was the missile found on the Governor's stretcher at Parkland -Hospital? - -Dr. OLIVIER. I believe that it was. That is my feeling. - -Mr. SPECTER. To be certain that the record is complete on the skull -tests, would you again state the distance at which those tests were -performed? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Yes, the skulls--it was fired at the skulls at a range of -90 yards. - -Mr. SPECTER. With what gun? - -Dr. OLIVIER. The 6.5 mm. Carcano which was marked Commission Exhibit -139 and using Western ammunition lot 6,000, again the 6.5 mm. -Mannlicher-Carcano. - -Mr. SPECTER. Going to the results of the test on the cadavers, what was -the average exit velocity? - -Dr. OLIVIER. The average exit velocity on the wrist was 1,776 feet per -second. - -Mr. SPECTER. Had Governor Connally's wrist been struck with a pristine -bullet and the bullet exited at that speed, what damage would have been -inflicted had it then struck the area of the thigh which was struck on -the Governor according to the Parkland Hospital records which you have -said you have examined? - -Dr. OLIVIER. It would have made a very severe wound. - -Mr. SPECTER. Would it have been more severe than the one which was -inflicted? - -Dr. OLIVIER. Much more so. - -Mr. SPECTER. Do you have anything to add, Dr. Olivier, which you think -would be helpful to the Commission in any way? - -Dr. OLIVIER. No; I don't believe so. - -Mr. DULLES. I have no further questions. - -Mr. SPECTER. That completes my questions, Mr. Dulles. - -Mr. DULLES. Thank you very much. We appreciate very much your coming. - -(Discussion off the record.) - - -TESTIMONY OF DR. ARTHUR J. DZIEMIAN - -Mr. SPECTER. Dr. Dziemian. - -Mr. DULLES. Doctor, will you raise your right hand, please? Do you -solemnly swear the testimony you give in this proceeding is the truth, -the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? - -Dr. DZIEMIAN. Yes, sir. - -Mr. SPECTER. Dr. Dziemian, as you know, the purpose of the proceeding -is to question you concerning the experiments which were performed at -Edgewood Arsenal which may shed light on the assassination of President -Kennedy. With that brief statement of purpose, will you state your full -name for the record, please? - -Dr. DZIEMIAN. Arthur J. Dziemian. - -Mr. SPECTER. What is your profession or occupation, sir? - -Dr. DZIEMIAN. I am a physiologist at the U.S. Army Chemical Research -and Development Laboratories, and am chief of the Biophysics Division. - -Mr. SPECTER. Would you outline your educational background briefly, -please? - -Dr. DZIEMIAN. Yes; A.B. and Ph. D. from Princeton, Ph. D. in 1939. I -was national research fellow at the University of Pennsylvania in the -physiology department of the medical school and fellow in anatomy at -Johns Hopkins University Medical School. - -Mr. SPECTER. In a general way, what have your professional activities -been since 1939? - -Dr. DZIEMIAN. Since 1939? - -Well, these fellowships that I had. Then I went to Edgewood Arsenal, -was there for a few months and then went into the Army, was in the Army -for 3 years, in the sanitary corps, officer in the sanitary corps, and -then I returned to Edgewood Arsenal in 1947 and in 1947 I went into -wound ballistics work and have been in it since 1947. - -Mr. SPECTER. And how long have you been chief of the Biophysics -Division? - -Dr. DZIEMIAN. Since November of 1959. - -Mr. DULLES. Where is this Biophysics Division? - -Dr. DZIEMIAN. U.S. Army Chemical Research and Development Laboratories, -Edgewood Arsenal, Md. - -Mr. SPECTER. Would you describe in a general way the tests which are -performed at the Edgewood Arsenal, please? - -Dr. DZIEMIAN. Yes; well, our mission, the division's mission is to -study the antipersonnel effects of munitions, including kinetic energy -munitions, incendiary, and some chemical munitions. - -Mr. SPECTER. Is it the regular function of your unit then to test the -effects of bullet wounds on various parts of the human body? - -Dr. DZIEMIAN. Yes; it is. - -Mr. SPECTER. And does Dr. Olivier function under your direction in his -capacity as chief of the Wounds Ballistics Branch? - -Dr. DZIEMIAN. Yes; his branch is one of the branches of the Biophysics -Division. - -Mr. SPECTER. Have you been present today to hear the full testimony of -Dr. Olivier? - -Dr. DZIEMIAN. Yes; I have. - -Mr. SPECTER. Were the tests which he described, performed under your -general supervision and direction as his superior? - -Dr. DZIEMIAN. Yes; they were. - -Mr. SPECTER. As to the underlying facts which those tests disclosed, -do you have any details to add as to results which you think would be -helpful or significant for the Commission to know? - -Dr. DZIEMIAN. Well, I think that Dr. Olivier described them pretty well -on the whole, got all the details in. - -Mr. SPECTER. Do you agree with the recitation of the detailed findings, -then, as described by Dr. Olivier? - -Dr. DZIEMIAN. I do, yes. - -Mr. SPECTER. Then moving to the general topic of reconstructing the -events in terms of what professional opinion you may have as to what -actually occurred at Dallas, permit me to ask you some questions in -terms of the known medical facts, and in the light of the results of -this series of tests which you have performed. First of all, have you -had access to the autopsy report on President Kennedy? - -Dr. DZIEMIAN. Yes, I have. - -Mr. SPECTER. And have you had access to the same general information -described by Dr. Olivier on the wounds inflicted on Governor Connally? - -Dr. DZIEMIAN. Yes, I have. I did not speak to the surgeons. I was not -here at that time. My information on Dr. Connally's wounds---- - -Mr. DULLES. Governor Connally. - -Dr. DZIEMIAN. Governor Connally, are from the reports and from -discussions with Dr. Light or Dr. Olivier. - -Mr. SPECTER. So that all of the information available to Dr. Light and -Dr. Olivier obtained through consultations with Governor Connally's -doctors, Dr. Shaw and Dr. Gregory, have been passed on to you? In -addition, you have had access to the records of Parkland Hospital on -Governor Connally's treatment there? - -Dr. DZIEMIAN. That is right. - -Mr. SPECTER. And have you had an opportunity to observe certain films -known as the Zapruder films showing the assassination? - -Dr. DZIEMIAN. No; I did not see those. - -Mr. SPECTER. Have you had, then, brought to your attention the -approximate distances involved from the situation here, to wit; -that the shots were fired from a 6th floor window at a distance of -approximately 160 to 250 feet at a moving vehicle, striking the -Governor and the President at angles estimated from 25 to 45 degrees, -the angle of impact on President Kennedy being given by the autopsy -surgeon as a 45-degree angle of declination, and the angle on Governor -Connally being described as 25 to 27 degrees? - -Dr. DZIEMIAN. Yes, I did---- - -Mr. DULLES. You are speaking now of the first two wounds, aren't you? - -Mr. SPECTER. Yes. - -Mr. DULLES. You are not speaking now of the brain wound at all, are you? - -Mr. SPECTER. Correct, Mr. Dulles. The wound that I am referring to -on the President is the wound which entered the back of his neck and -exited from the front part of his neck in accordance with the prior -testimony of the doctors in the case. - -Now, based on the tests which have been performed, and the other -factors which I will ask you to assume, since you weren't present; for -purposes of expressing an opinion, what is your opinion as to whether -all of the wounds on Governor Connally were inflicted by one bullet? - -Dr. DZIEMIAN. My opinion is that it is most probably so, that one -bullet produced all the wounds on Governor Connally. - -Mr. SPECTER. And what is your opinion as to whether the wound through -President Kennedy's neck and all of the wounds on Governor Connally -were produced by one bullet? - -Dr. DZIEMIAN. I think the probability is very good that it is, that all -the wounds were caused by one bullet. - -Mr. SPECTER. When you say all the wounds, are you excluding from that -the head wound on President Kennedy? - -Dr. DZIEMIAN. I am excluding the head wound, yes. - -Mr. SPECTER. And what is the reasoning behind your conclusion that one -bullet caused the neck wound on President Kennedy and all of the other -wounds on Governor Connally? - -Dr. DZIEMIAN. I am saying that the probability is high that that was so. - -Mr. SPECTER. What is the reason for your assessment of that high -probability? - -Dr. DZIEMIAN. The same reasons that Dr. Olivier gave, based on the -same information, that especially the wound to the wrist. That higher -velocity strike on the wrist would be caused by the bullet slowing down -by going through all this tissue would cause more damage to the wrist -and also more damage to the thigh. - -Mr. SPECTER. Had the bullet only gone through Governor Connally's chest -then, what is your opinion as to whether or not there would have been -greater damage to the Governor's wrist? - -Dr. DZIEMIAN. I think there would have been greater damage to the -Governor's wrist, and also to the thigh from the information, from the -experiments obtained by Dr. Olivier's group. - -Mr. DULLES. Could I ask a question here? Does that take into account -any evidence as to the angle of fire and the relative positions of the -two men, or excluding that? - -Dr. DZIEMIAN. Excluding that. I do not know enough details about that -to make an opinion on that. This is just on the basis of the velocities -of the bullets. - -Mr. SPECTER. Would the nature of the wounds on the Governor's wrist -and thigh, then, be explained by the hypothesis that the bullet passed -through the President first, then went through the Governor's chest -before striking the wrist and in turn the thigh? - -Dr. DZIEMIAN. I think that could be a good explanation. - -Mr. SPECTER. What is your opinion as to whether or not a fragment of -a bullet striking the President's head could have caused the wound to -Governor Connally's wrist? - -Dr. DZIEMIAN. I think it is unlikely. - -Mr. SPECTER. What is your opinion as to whether or not Governor -Connally's wrist wound could have been caused by a pristine bullet? - -Dr. DZIEMIAN. That is unlikely, too. Our results with pristine bullets -were very different from the wound that the Governor had. - -Mr. SPECTER. Based on the description provided to you of the nature of -the wound in the Governor's back, what is your opinion as to whether, -or not, that was a pristine bullet or had yaw in it, just on the basis -of the nature of the wound on the Governor's back? - -Dr. DZIEMIAN. It could very well have yaw in it because of the rather -large wound that was produced in the Governor's back. The wound from a -nonyawing bullet could be considerably smaller. - -Mr. SPECTER. For the record, would you define in lay terms what yaw -means? - -Dr. DZIEMIAN. It is the procession of the bullet. The bullet is -wobbling on its axis, so that as it wobbles, it presents different -presented areas to the target or to the air, and this changes the drag -coefficient of the bullet. It will slow down the bullet more both in -the air and in tissues, in the yawing. - -Mr. SPECTER. What is the course of a bullet, then, which is a pristine -bullet or the nature of the bullet immediately after coming out of the -muzzle of a rifle before it strikes anything? - -Dr. DZIEMIAN. A pristine bullet is normally stable. It does not -wobble in the air. It presents the same presented area along most of -its trajectory until it slows down, so that the drag coefficient in -air or in the tissue of this type of bullet is less than the drag -coefficient---- - -Mr. SPECTER. What do you mean by drag coefficient? - -Dr. DZIEMIAN. It is a measurement of the resistance of the target -material or the air to the bullet. The greater the drag coefficient, -the more the resistance to the bullet, the more the bullet slows down -within a given time. - -Mr. SPECTER. So would a bullet with yaw cause a greater or lesser hole -on the surface which it strikes than a bullet without yaw? - -Dr. DZIEMIAN. It would normally cause a greater hole. It usually would -have more presented area, that is more the surface of the bullet would -hit the skin. - -Mr. SPECTER. And would a bullet with yaw decrease in velocity to a -greater, lesser, or the same extent as a bullet without yaw? - -Dr. DZIEMIAN. It would decrease in velocity to a greater extent. - -Mr. SPECTER. Whether it passed through air or---- - -Dr. DZIEMIAN. Or through tissue, and the important thing in tissue is -that it transfers more energy to the target than would a nonyawing -bullet. - -Mr. SPECTER. Dr. Dziemian, Governor Connally testified that he -experienced the sensation of a striking blow on his back which he -described as being similar to a hard punch received from a doubled-up -fist. Do you have an opinion as to whether that sensation would -necessarily occur immediately upon impact of a wound such as that -received by Governor Connally, or could there be a delayed reaction in -sensing that feeling? - -Dr. DZIEMIAN. I don't have too much of an opinion on that. All I can -say is that some people are struck by bullets and do not even know they -are hit. This happens in wartime. But I don't know about that. - -Mr. SPECTER. So that it is possible in some situations there is some -delay in reaction? - -Dr. DZIEMIAN. I couldn't say. - -Mr. SPECTER. Is it a highly individual matter as to the reaction of an -individual on that subject? - -Dr. DZIEMIAN. I don't know. - -Mr. DULLES. But take a wound like the wrist wound of Governor Connally. -He couldn't get that without knowing it, could he? - -Dr. DZIEMIAN. I think he said that he didn't know he had a wrist wound -until much later. - -(Discussion off the record.) - -Mr. SPECTER. I have no further questions of Dr. Dziemian, Commissioner -Dulles. - -Mr. DULLES. Thank you very much. - - -TESTIMONY OF DR. FREDERICK W. LIGHT, JR. - -Mr. DULLES. Doctor, would you give your full name? - -Dr. LIGHT. Frederick W. Light, Jr. - -Mr. DULLES. Would you raise your right hand? Do you swear that the -testimony that you will give before this Commission is the truth, the -whole truth, so help you God? - -Dr. LIGHT. I do. - -Mr. SPECTER. Dr. Light, the purpose of asking you to appear today is -to question you concerning the results of tests taken at the Edgewood -Arsenal. With that brief statement of purpose, I will ask you to state -your full name for the record, please. - -Dr. LIGHT. Frederick W. Light, Jr. - -Mr. SPECTER. What is your business or profession, sir? - -Dr. LIGHT. I am a physician specializing in pathology. - -Mr. SPECTER. What is your educational background? - -Dr. LIGHT. I have an A.B. from Lafayette in 1926, M.D. from Johns -Hopkins Medical School in 1930, and Ph. D. from Hopkins in 1948. - -Mr. SPECTER. Would you outline your experience since 1933 in a very -general way, please? - -Dr. LIGHT. Well, in 1933 I was still at the Reading Hospital, resident -in pathology. Between then and 1940 I was pathologist in Clarksburg, W. -Va., and later in Springfield, Ill. In 1940 I returned to Johns Hopkins -University to study mathematics for awhile. - -Mr. DULLES. To study mathematics? - -Dr. LIGHT. Yes. And then in 1952, or 1951, excuse me, I began working -at Edgewood Arsenal where I am at the present time. - -Mr. SPECTER. What have your duties consisted of while working at -Edgewood Arsenal? - -Dr. LIGHT. Primarily the study of pathology of wounding. - -Mr. SPECTER. What is your formal title there now, Dr. Light? - -Dr. LIGHT. I am chief of the Wound Assessment Branch and assistant -chief of the Biophysics Division. - -Mr. SPECTER. And what is your relationship to Dr. Olivier and Dr. -Dziemian? - -Dr. LIGHT. Dr. Dziemian is the chief of the division. Dr. Olivier -is chief of one of the branches, and I am chief of one of the other -branches. - -Mr. SPECTER. Have you been present here today to hear the full -testimony of Dr. Olivier? - -Dr. LIGHT. Yes. - -Mr. SPECTER. And were the tests which he described conducted under your -joint supervision with Dr. Olivier? - -Dr. LIGHT. Only a very general way. I wouldn't want to say I supervised -him at all. We discussed what he was going to do. - -Mr. SPECTER. Would it be more accurate to state that you coordinated -with him in the tests which were under his general supervision? - -Dr. LIGHT. Yes; that might be stretching it a bit even. - -Mr. SPECTER. How would you characterize your participation? - -Dr. LIGHT. Largely--originally Dr. Dziemian, as I recall, was ill, and -by the time we began to do these specific tests that you mention, -Dr. Dziemian was back on the job again. So he took over whatever -supervision was needed. - -Mr. SPECTER. Were the tests which Dr. Olivier described made at the -request of the President's Commission on the Assassination of President -Kennedy? - -Dr. LIGHT. Yes; they were. - -Mr. SPECTER. Do you have anything to add by way of any detail to the -findings reported by Dr. Olivier in his testimony here earlier today? - -Dr. LIGHT. No; I think he covered it very thoroughly. - -Mr. SPECTER. And as to the conclusions and opinions which he expressed, -do you agree or disagree, to some extent, on his conclusions? - -Dr. LIGHT. I agree in general at least. I am not quite so certain about -some of the things, but generally I certainly agree with what he said. - -Mr. DULLES. What are the things on which you are not quite so certain? - -Dr. LIGHT. For example, I am not quite as sure in my mind as I believe -he is that the bullet that struck the Governor was almost certainly one -which had hit something else first. I believe it could have produced -that wound even though it hadn't hit the President or any other person -or object first. - -Mr. DULLES. That is the wound, then, in the thigh? - -Dr. LIGHT. No; in the chest. - -Mr. DULLES. I was thinking that the wound in the thigh--let me start -again. As I understand the previous testimony, Dr. Olivier would have -expected the wound in the thigh to be more serious if it had not hit -some object. - -Dr. LIGHT. Yes. - -Mr. DULLES. Prior to entering Governor Connally's body, but you feel -that the wound in the thigh might be consistent? - -Dr. LIGHT. The wound in the thigh is the terminal end, is the far end -of the whole track. I don't believe that in passing through the tissue -which was simulated by what Dr. Olivier described first, 13 or 14 -centimeters of gelatin, I don't believe that the change in velocity -introduced by the passage through that much tissue can be relied upon -to make such a definite difference in the effect. - -Mr. SPECTER. Do you believe that if the Governor had been struck by a -pristine bullet which had gone through his chest, that it would have -caused no more damage than which appeared on the Governor's chest? - -Dr. LIGHT. I think that is possible; yes. I might say I think perhaps -the best, the most likely thing is what everyone else has said so far, -that the bullet did go through the President's neck and then through -the chest and then through the wrist and then into the thigh. - -Mr. SPECTER. You think that is the most likely possibility? - -Dr. LIGHT. I think that is probably the most likely, but I base -that not entirely on the anatomical findings but as much on the -circumstances. - -Mr. SPECTER. What are the circumstances which lead you to that -conclusion? - -Dr. LIGHT. The relative positions in the automobile of the President -and the Governor. - -Mr. SPECTER. Are there any other circumstances which contribute to that -conclusion, other than the anatomical findings? - -Dr. LIGHT. And the appearance of the bullet that was found and the -place it was found, presumably, the bullet was the one which wounded -the Governor. - -Mr. SPECTER. The whole bullet? - -Dr. LIGHT. The whole bullet. - -Mr. SPECTER. Identified as Commission Exhibit No. 399? - -Dr. LIGHT. Yes. - -Mr. SPECTER. And what about that whole bullet leads you to believe that -the one bullet caused the President's neck wound and all of the wounds -on Governor Connally? - -Dr. LIGHT. Nothing about that bullet. Mainly the position in which they -are seated in the automobile. - -Mr. SPECTER. So in addition to the---- - -Dr. LIGHT. And the fact that the bullet that passed through the -President's body lost very little velocity since it passed through -soft tissue, so that it would strike the Governor, if it did, with a -velocity only, what was it, 100 feet per second, very little lower than -it would have if it hadn't struck anything else first. I am not sure, -I didn't see, of course, none of us saw the wounds in the Governor in -the fresh state or any other time, and I am not too convinced from -the measurements and the descriptions that were given in the surgical -reports and so on that the actual holes through the skin were unusually -large. - -Mr. SPECTER. Have you had access to the autopsy records? - -Dr. LIGHT. Yes. - -Mr. SPECTER. And have you had access to the reports of Parkland -Hospital on the Governor's operations there? - -Dr. LIGHT. Yes. - -Mr. SPECTER. All three of them? - -Dr. LIGHT. Yes. - -Mr. SPECTER. And have you had an opportunity to view the films of the -assassination commonly known as the Zapruder films? - -Dr. LIGHT. Yes. - -Mr. SPECTER. And the slides? - -Dr. LIGHT. Yes. - -Mr. SPECTER. And have you had an opportunity to talk to Dr. Shaw and -Dr. Gregory who performed the thoracic and wrist operations on Governor -Connally? - -Dr. LIGHT. Yes. - -Mr. SPECTER. And you heard Governor Connally's version yourself? - -Dr. LIGHT. Yes; but not in---- - -Mr. SPECTER. Not in the Commission? - -Dr. LIGHT. Not in the Commission session. - -Mr. SPECTER. But at the time when the films were viewed by the Governor? - -Dr. LIGHT. Yes; I did. - -Mr. SPECTER. At the VFW building on the first floor? - -Dr. LIGHT. Yes. - -Mr. SPECTER. Focusing on a few of the specific considerations, do you -believe that there would have been the same amount of damage done to -the Governor's wrist had the pristine bullet only passed through the -Governor's body without striking the President first? - -Dr. LIGHT. I think that is possible; yes. It won't happen the same way -twice in any case, so you have got a fairly wide range of things that -can happen if a person is shot in more or less this way. - -Mr. SPECTER. Do you think it is as likely that the damage would have -been inflicted on the Governor's wrist as it was, with the bullet -passing only through the Governor's chest as opposed to passing through -the President's neck and the Governor's chest? - -Dr. LIGHT. I think the difference in likelihood is negligible on that -basis alone. - -Mr. SPECTER. So the damage on the Governor's wrist would be equally -consistent---- - -Dr. LIGHT. Equally consistent; yes. - -Mr. SPECTER. With (_A_) passing only through the Governor's chest, or -(_B_) passing through the President's neck and the Governor's chest? - -Dr. LIGHT. Yes. - -Mr. SPECTER. Now, as to the damage on the thigh, would the nature of -that wound again be equally consistent with either going through (_A_) -the President's neck, the Governor's chest, the Governor's wrist, and -then into the thigh, or (_B_) only through the Governor's chest, the -Governor's wrist and into the thigh? - -Dr. LIGHT. I'd say equally consistent; yes. - -Mr. SPECTER. And based on the descriptions which have been provided to -you about the nature of the wound on the Governor's back, do you have -an opinion as to whether the bullet was yawing or not at the time it -struck the Governor's back? - -Mr. LIGHT. No; I don't. That is really one of the points---- - -Mr. SPECTER. It would be either way? - -Dr. LIGHT. Yes; I don't feel too certain that it was yawing. The -measurements were not particularly precise as far as I could tell. -You wouldn't expect them to be in an operating room. So I think it is -difficult to be sure there that the missile wasn't presenting nose on. -It undoubtedly struck not at normal instance, that is to say it was a -certain obliquity, just in the nature of the way the shoulder is built. - -Mr. SPECTER. Then do you think based on only the anatomical findings -and the results of the tests which Dr. Olivier has performed that the -scales are in equipoise as to whether the bullet passed through the -President first and then through the Governor or passed only through -the Governor? - -Dr. LIGHT. Yes; I would say I don't feel justified in drawing a -conclusion one way or the other on that basis alone. - -Mr. SPECTER. Do you have any preference of any sort? - -Dr. LIGHT. Yes; I do, for other reasons. - -Mr. SPECTER. But only for the other reasons? - -Dr. LIGHT. As I mentioned, their positions in the automobile, the -fact that if it wasn't the way--if one bullet didn't produce all -of the wounds in both of the individuals, then that bullet ought -to be somewhere, and hasn't been found. But those are not based on -Dr. Olivier's tests nor are they based on the autopsy report or the -surgeon's findings in my mind. - -(Discussion off the record.) - -Mr. DULLES. On the record. - -Mr. SPECTER. Dr. Light, do you have an opinion as to whether or not the -wound inflicted on Governor Connally's wrist could have been caused by -a fragment which struck the President's head? - -Dr. LIGHT. It is barely conceivable but I do not believe that that is -the case. - -Mr. SPECTER. You say barely? - -Dr. LIGHT. Barely conceivable. I mean a fragment probably had enough -velocity, it couldn't have produced that wound, in my mind, but it -can't be ruled out with complete certainty. - -Mr. SPECTER. Do you have anything to add which you think would be -helpful to the Commission in any way? - -Dr. LIGHT. I don't believe I do. - -Mr. SPECTER. Those are all the questions I have, Commissioner Dulles. - -Mr. DULLES. Thank you very much indeed. I express our appreciation. -I didn't realize these tests were being carried out. I am very glad -they have been. It is a very useful thing to do and very helpful to -the Commission. Thank you very much. I want to thank all three of you -doctors for having so fully cooperated in this matter, and I think that -these tests that you have run have made a real contribution to the -Commission's work. - -(Whereupon, at 5:10 p.m., the President's Commission recessed.) - - - - -_Thursday, May 14, 1964_ - -TESTIMONY OF J. EDGAR HOOVER, JOHN A. McCONE, AND RICHARD M. HELMS - -The President's Commission met at 9:15 a.m., on May 14, 1964, at 200 -Maryland Avenue NE., Washington, D.C. - -Present were Chief Justice Earl Warren, Chairman; Senator John Sherman -Cooper, Representative Hale Boggs, Representative Gerald R. Ford, and -Allen W. Dulles, members. - -Also present were J. Lee Rankin, General Counsel; Norman Redlich, -assistant counsel; Charles Murray and Walter Craig, observers; and -Waggoner Carr, attorney general of Texas. - - -TESTIMONY OF J. EDGAR HOOVER - -The CHAIRMAN. The Commission will be in order. - -Director Hoover, will you please raise your right hand to be sworn, -please. You solemnly swear the testimony you are about to give before -the Commission will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the -truth, so help you God? - -Mr. HOOVER. I do. - -The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Rankin will carry on the examination, Mr. Director. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Chief Justice, do you want to tell him briefly what our -purpose is? - -The CHAIRMAN. Oh, yes; it is our practice to make a brief statement -before the testimony of each witness, and I will do it now. - -Mr. Hoover will be asked to testify in regard to whether Lee H. Oswald -was ever an agent, directly or indirectly, or an informer or acting on -behalf of the Federal Bureau of Investigation in any capacity at any -time, and whether he knows of any credible evidence of any conspiracy, -either domestic or foreign, involved in the assassination of President -Kennedy. - -What he has to say about an article in the National Enquirer, -Commission Exhibit No. 837, and concerning the failure to include -the name and information concerning special agent Hosty in the -initial report of the Oswald address book and any suggestions and -recommendations he may have concerning improvements or changes in -provisions for the protection of the President of the United States. -Now, Mr. Rankin, you may proceed. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Hoover, will you state for the record your name and -position? - -Mr. HOOVER. J. Edgar Hoover, Director of the Federal Bureau of -Investigation of the Department of Justice. - -Mr. RANKIN. Where do you live, Mr. Hoover? - -Mr. HOOVER. I live at 4936 30th Place, Northwest, Washington, D.C. - -Mr. RANKIN. And you have been Director of the Bureau for some 40 years -according to the newspapers? - -Mr. HOOVER. That is correct; since 1924. - -Mr. RANKIN. You have furnished us a considerable amount of information, -Mr. Hoover, about whether or not Lee Harvey Oswald was ever an agent or -acting for the Bureau in any capacity as informer or otherwise at any -time. Are those statements correct? - -Mr. HOOVER. They are correct. I can most emphatically say that at no -time was he ever an employee of the Bureau in any capacity, either as -an agent or as a special employee, or as an informant. - -Mr. RANKIN. I call your particular attention to Exhibit 835, and -suggest that you will find that that is your letter, together with -your affidavit about this subject matter, and other matters that you -furnished to us concerning this particular subject. - -Mr. HOOVER. That is correct. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you wish to add anything? - -Mr. HOOVER. No; there is nothing that I desire to add to what appears -in this letter and my affidavit which accompanied it to the Commission. - -Mr. RANKIN. You have provided many things to us in assisting the -Commission in connection with this investigation and I assume, at -least in a general way, you are familiar with the investigation of the -assassination of President Kennedy, is that correct? - -Mr. HOOVER. That is correct. When President Johnson returned to -Washington he communicated with me within the first 24 hours, and -asked the Bureau to pick up the investigation of the assassination -because as you are aware, there is no Federal jurisdiction for such -an investigation. It is not a Federal crime to kill or attack the -President or the Vice President or any of the continuity of officers -who would succeed to the Presidency. - -However, the President has a right to request the Bureau to make -special investigations, and in this instance he asked that this -investigation be made. I immediately assigned a special force headed -by the special agent in charge at Dallas, Tex., to initiate the -investigation, and to get all details and facts concerning it, which we -obtained, and then prepared a report which we submitted to the Attorney -General for transmission to the President. - -Mr. RANKIN. From your study of this entire matter of the assassination -and work in connection with it, do you know of any credible evidence -that has ever come to your attention that there was a conspiracy either -foreign or domestic involved in the assassination? - -Mr. HOOVER. I know of no substantial evidence of any type that would -support any contention of that character. I have read all of the -requests that have come to the Bureau from this Commission, and I have -read and signed all the replies that have come to the Commission. - -In addition, I have read many of the reports that our agents have made -and I have been unable to find any scintilla of evidence showing any -foreign conspiracy or any domestic conspiracy that culminated in the -assassination of President Kennedy. - -Representative FORD. May I ask this, Mr. Hoover. As I understand your -testimony, it is based on the evidence that has been accumulated thus -far? - -Mr. HOOVER. That is correct, sir. - -Representative FORD. Is the Federal Bureau of Investigation continuing -its investigation of all possible ramifications of this assassination? - -Mr. HOOVER. That is correct. We are receiving and we, I expect, will -continue to receive for days or weeks to come, letters from individuals -that normally would probably be in the category of what we would -call crank letters in which various weird allegations are made or in -which people have reported psychic vibrations. We are still running -out letters of that character and in turn making a report to this -Commission upon it, notwithstanding the fact that on the face of it the -allegation is without any foundation. Individuals who could not have -known any of the facts have made some very strange statements. There -have been publications and books written, the contents of which have -been absurd and without a scintilla of foundation of fact. I feel, from -my experience in the Bureau, where we are in constant receipt over the -years of these so-called crank letters, that such allegations will be -going on possibly for some years to come. - -I, personally, feel that any finding of the Commission will not be -accepted by everybody, because there are bound to be some extremists -who have very pronounced views, without any foundation for them, who -will disagree violently with whatever findings the Commission makes. -But I think it is essential that the FBI investigate the allegations -that are received in the future so it can't be said that we had ignored -them or that the case is closed and forgotten. - -Representative FORD. Could you give us some idea of how many agents are -currently working to one degree or another on any aspects of this case? - -Mr. HOOVER. I would estimate, Congressman Ford, that there are at the -present time at least 50 or 60 men giving their entire time to various -aspects of the investigation, because while Dallas is the office of -origin, investigation is required in auxiliary offices such as Los -Angeles or San Francisco, and even in some foreign countries like -Mexico. We have representatives in Mexico City. - -At the outset of the investigation, following the assassination, it was -the desire of the President to have this report completed by the Bureau -just as quickly as possible, and as thoroughly as possible, and I would -say we had about 150 men at that time working on the report in the -field, and at Washington, DC. - -Now, all the reports that come in from the field are, of course, -reviewed at Washington by the supervisor in charge of the case, and -then in turn by the assistant director of the division, and then in -turn by Mr. Belmont, who is the assistant to the Director. - -Reports in which there is a controversial issue or where statements -have been made of the existence of some particular thing that we have -never heard of before, I myself, go over these to see that we haven't -missed anything or haven't had any gap in the investigation so it can -be tied down. - -Recently the National Enquirer had a fantastic article in it as to the -existence of a letter that had been written or a request that had been -made by the Department of Justice to Chief Curry of the Dallas Police -Department, to withhold arresting Rubinstein, or Ruby, and Oswald after -the Oswald attempt on General Walker's life. - -First, I had the agent in charge at Dallas interview Chief Curry and -I have sent to the Commission a letter as to what Chief Curry had to -say. He branded it as an entire lie--that he had never received any -request of that kind. I had our files searched to be certain we had -not written any such letter as that and found we had not. I requested -the Department of Justice to advise me whether they had written any -such letter and Mr. Katzenbach advises there is no reference in the -Department files to the alleged letter from any Department of Justice -official to Chief Curry nor any reference that an FBI official was -asked to request the Dallas police not to arrest Oswald or Ruby. -A letter is being sent to the Commission today setting forth this -information. - -Representative FORD. The point that I think ought to be made is that -despite the magnitude of the effort that has been made by the FBI -and by other agencies, and despite the tremendous effort that has -been made, I believe, by the Commission to help and assist and to -consolidate all of the evidence that we possibly could, that there is -always the possibility at some future date that some evidence might -come to the surface. - -Mr. HOOVER. That is, of course, possible; yes. - -Representative FORD. I want just to be sure that no leads, no evidence -regardless of its credibility will be ignored, that it will be pursued -by the Bureau or any other agency to make certain that it is good, bad -or of no value. - -Mr. HOOVER. Well, I can assure you so far as the FBI is concerned, -the case will be continued in an open classification for all time. -That is, any information coming to us or any report coming to us from -any source will be thoroughly investigated, so that we will be able -to either prove or disprove the allegation. We found in the course of -our investigations that individuals have made statements. Yet, when we -investigate they will frankly admit that the statement is an entire -falsehood, or that they don't know why they wrote the letter or why -they made the statement. But, nevertheless, we have the record and -generally in those instances we try to get a signed statement from that -individual so it can be made a part of the record. - -Representative FORD. Under your authority from the President, the -authority which gave you the FBI, the responsibility to conduct this -investigation it is not an authority with a terminal point. It is an -authority that goes on indefinitely? - -Mr. HOOVER. Very definitely so. The President wanted a full and -thorough investigation made of this matter, and we have tried to do -so. As I have stated, I think we will continue to receive allegations. -I think this will be a matter of controversy for years to come, -just like the Lincoln assassination. There will be questions raised -by individuals, either for publicity purposes or otherwise, that -will raise some new angle or new aspect of it. I think we must, and -certainly we intend in the FBI to continue to run down any such -allegations or reports of that kind. - -Representative BOGGS. Mr. Chairman. - -The CHAIRMAN. Yes, Congressman Boggs. - -Representative BOGGS. Mr. Hoover, I don't want any cover--to cover any -ground which has been covered but I just have one or two questions. -First, let me say that you and the Bureau have been very cooperative -with this Commission. - -Mr. HOOVER. Thank you. - -Representative BOGGS. And tremendously helpful. I have been concerned -about some of these wild press reports and concerned about what impact -it may have ultimately on the history of this thing. For instance there -is a man named Buchanan who has written a series of articles. - -Mr. DULLES. A book now. A book is out; yes. - -Representative BOGGS. A book now. I understand they have been widely -circulated in the European press, and this man came here and was, as -I got it from some other sources, he took in some people here, some -American journalists, and I am told that this man has a Communist -background, and in addition to that is a most unreliable person. He has -made these allegations that the Dallas police force was involved in the -assassination and so on. - -Would you have any suggestions on how this Commission should deal with -this sort of thing? - -Mr. HOOVER. We have received a request from the Commission to review -that book and to make a report upon any portions of it that can be -contradicted or substantiated by actual facts or documents. I know -Buchanan's background. He worked on the Washington Star and he was -dismissed from the Washington Star because he was a member of the -Communist Party. He spent much of his time in recent years in France -writing for French newspapers. I have followed the articles that -he has written about this matter and they are what I would call -"journalistic garbage." There is not a scintilla of truth to most of -the things he has written in these articles and in his book which I -have had a chance to scan but haven't actually reviewed yet. It is -being reviewed by my research section. Some of the allegations are -utterly fantastic. I often wonder where some of these individuals get -such ideas and why they make such statements without foundation. - -Now, he makes many wild charges there, and to read it, a person not -knowing him, or his views, or his background, would be inclined to -wonder. I think you are going to have that problem, as I say, for years -to come. I don't know how you can handle individuals like him other -than to have the record clear upon the facts of the case, and either -substantiate or disprove his statements. I don't think too much time -should be given to these individuals who have such unsavory backgrounds -as Buchanan has and who makes statements that have been proved to be -untrue. But, at the same time I think when a book like that comes out -or an article of that type comes out that deals with the assassination -of the late President, I think it should be gone into from an -investigative point of view. We should then submit to this Commission, -even after it has concluded its hearings, for record purposes, what we -have found in each particular instance. - -Representative BOGGS. Now, on the other side of the fence---- - -Mr. DULLES. May I add one other thing just to interrupt. I wish you -would add to your list a book called "The Red Roses of Dallas" by a man -named Gun. He is a more reliable correspondent. - -Mr. HOOVER. He is a Philadelphia correspondent. - -Mr. DULLES. He has been living in this country since 1946. I have met -him over here. Let's see, he was at Dallas at the time. He was then -reporting, I think, for the Italian newspaper Epoca. - -Mr. HOOVER. That is not the same one. - -Mr. DULLES. He might have been lying. This book is full of lies. But I -think it is a book that ought to be added, too, and I will see that a -copy is sent to the Bureau. - -Mr. HOOVER. I would appreciate that. - -Representative BOGGS. On the other side of the spectrum some professor -out at the University of Illinois wrote a piece in which he alleged -the President was a Communist agent, President Kennedy, and Buchanan's -allegations are that the extreme right assassinated the President and -this fellow's allegations are that the Communists assassinated the -President. Would you care to comment? Have you read that piece? - -Mr. HOOVER. I have read that piece. My comment on it is this in -general: I think the extreme right is just as much a danger to the -freedom of this country as the extreme left. There are groups, -organizations, and individuals on the extreme right who make these -very violent statements, allegations that General Eisenhower was a -Communist, disparaging references to the Chief Justice and at the other -end of the spectrum you have these leftists who make wild statements -charging almost anybody with being a Fascist or belonging to some -of these so-called extreme right societies. Now, I have felt, and I -have said publicly in speeches, that they are just as much a danger, -at either end of the spectrum. They don't deal with facts. Anybody -who will allege that General Eisenhower was a Communist agent, has -something wrong with him. - -A lot of people read such allegations because I get some of the -weirdest letters wanting to know whether we have inquired to find out -whether that is true. I have known General Eisenhower quite well myself -and I have found him to be a sound, level-headed man. - -In New York City there is a woman by the name of Kraus who must be -mentally deranged as she stands on a Broadway corner there handing out -leaflets in which she charges me with being in the conspiracy with the -Communists to overthrow this Government and so forth. - -Well now, if any person has fought communism, I certainly have fought -it. We have tried to fight it and expose it in democratic ways I think -that is the thing we have to very definitely keep in mind in this whole -problem in the security of the President and the successor to office. -Just how far you are going to go for his protection and his security. I -don't think you can get absolute security without almost establishing a -police state, and we don't want that. You can't put security in a black -groove or a white groove. It is in a gray groove, and certain chances -have to be taken. You are dealing with a human being when you are -dealing with the President of the United States. President Johnson is a -very down to earth human being, and it makes the security problem all -the more difficult, but you can't bar him from the people. - -There are certain things that can be done, and I submitted a memorandum -to the Secret Service, and to the White House on certain security -steps that might be taken and tightened up. But you are dealing with -the general public and that is what has given me great concern in the -recent expansion, of the criteria for dissemination that we adopted -after the assassination. - -Prior to that time we reported to the Secret Service all information -that dealt with individuals who were potential killers or by whom -acts of violence might be anticipated. The Secret Service would take -that information and would do with it as they saw fit. I gave great -consideration to it because I am not very happy with the criteria -expansion, but I felt we had to include subversives of various -character, and extremists. We have, in turn, furnished their names to -the Secret Service. I think 5,000 names up to the present time already -have been submitted and there are at least three or four thousand more -that will be submitted within the next few months. - -Then you come to the problem of what you are going to do when the -Secret Service gets those names. They have to call upon the local -authorities. Just recently, in the city of Chicago, when the President -was there, the local authorities were asked to give assistance as they -usually do to the Secret Service and they went to the homes of some of -these people, and it resulted really almost in a house arrest. - -Now, I don't think there is any place in this country for that -kind of thing, but these people who belonged to extreme subversive -organizations or organizations that advocated the overthrow of -government by force and violence were told that they couldn't leave -their house or if they did they would be accompanied by a police -officer. That gives me great concern because in New York City alone, -you run into maybe three or four thousand such individuals who would be -members of subversive organizations, and then you get into the twilight -zone of subversive fronts. - -Now, there again, merely because a man belongs to a subversive front -organization, in my estimation doesn't mean that he is blacklisted and -is a menace to the country for life. If he belongs to 20 of them, it -certainly shows either one of two things, he is either very gullible -and dumb or he is a menace. That has been my attitude in regard to -Government service where you find a Government employee who belonged to -one or two, maybe in his early days. I don't believe this necessarily -makes him a security risk. Rather, this would be dependent on the -degree of his activity in the front group and his purpose and intent in -associating himself with it. But where he has belonged to 15, 18, 20 of -them, I don't think he has enough good judgment to be in the Government. - -Some ministers get drawn into organizations, some of which are under -the domination of the Communist Party. Now, those ministers don't know -that. They are just as loyal and patriotic as you and I are, but they -happen to belong. Now, that is where the question of human judgment -has to be used. We try to use it in selecting these names. But I was -startled when I learned of the incident in Chicago because there you -come pretty close to a house arrest and we don't want that. We don't -want a gestapo. We have to, I think, maintain an even balance. - -I think it was very well expressed-- - -Mr. DULLES. May I ask you, Mr. Hoover, was this house arrest based on -names you had furnished the Secret Service and they furnished the local -authorities? - -Mr. HOOVER. Yes, sir. - -Representative BOGGS. That brings me back to the question I think I -heard Congressman Ford ask you as I came into the room, because I -think this is the crux of our investigation. - -I read the FBI report very carefully and the whole implication of the -report is that, number one, Oswald shot the President; number two, -that he was not connected with any conspiracy of any kind, nature or -description. - -Mr. HOOVER. Correct. - -Representative BOGGS. Do you still subscribe to that? - -Mr. HOOVER. I subscribe to it even more strongly today than I did at -the time that the report was written. You see, the original idea was -that there would be an investigation by the FBI and a report would be -prepared in such form that it could be released to the public. - -Representative BOGGS. Surely. - -Mr. HOOVER. Then a few days later, after further consideration, -the President decided to form a commission, which I think was very -wise, because I feel that the report of any agency of Government -investigating what might be some shortcomings on the part of other -agencies of Government ought to be reviewed by an impartial group such -as this Commission. And the more I have read these reports, the more I -am convinced that Oswald was the man who fired the gun; and he fired -three times, killed the President, and wounded Governor Connally. - -And I also am further convinced that there is absolutely no association -between Oswald or Ruby. There was no such evidence ever established. - -Mr. DULLES. Or Oswald and anybody else? Would you go that far? - -Mr. HOOVER. Anybody else who might be---- - -Mr. DULLES. In connection with the assassination? - -Mr. HOOVER. Yes; I would certainly go that far. There was suspicion at -first this might be a Castro act. - -Representative BOGGS. Right. - -Mr. HOOVER. We had information that had been obtained in Mexico City -by another intelligence agency indicating there was a man who had seen -a certain amount of money passed to Oswald at the Cuban Consulate. I -think it was $6,000 that was passed. We went into that very thoroughly. -The man later retracted his statement and stated it was not true. He -was asked whether he would take a lie detector test, and he did. The -lie detector test showed that he was telling a lie. - -As to the lie detector, I do want to make this comment on it. I have -always held to the opinion that it is not a perfect piece of machinery. -It is an interpretation made by human beings of what the machine, the -polygraph, shows. I would never want to convict or to send to the -penitentiary any person solely on the evidence of the lie detector. It -is a contribution in an investigation, a more or less psychological -contribution. - -But I have seen individuals who have failed the lie detector test and -who were just as innocent as they could be. That particular lead in -Mexico City was completely disproved; there was no foundation for it. - -We found no associations between Oswald and Ruby. There has been a -story printed that Ruby and Oswald worked together and were close -friends. - -There was no evidence, there was never any indication that we could -find that Oswald had ever been in Ruby's nightclub or had had any -association with him. - -Ruby comes from Chicago, he was on the fringe of what you might call -the elements of the underworld there. He came to Dallas, opened up -the nightclub and it was a place where, certainly not the better -class of people went, but it wasn't any so-called "joint," to use the -vernacular. It was just another nightclub. So far as we have been able -to establish there was no relationship or contact between Oswald and -Ruby or anyone else allegedly involved in this assassination. - -Representative BOGGS. The FBI interviewed practically everybody who -ever associated with Oswald? - -Mr. HOOVER. It did. - -Representative BOGGS. You didn't find any indication of why anyone -should even suspect that Oswald would do this, did you? - -Mr. HOOVER. We found no indication at all that Oswald was a man -addicted to violence. The first indication of an act of violence came -after he, Oswald, had been killed, and Mrs. Oswald told us about the -attempt on General Walker's life by Oswald. No one had known a thing -about that. - -I think in the Enquirer article there is reference to the fact that the -Dallas Police knew or suspected Oswald of possibly being a party to the -shooting into the house of General Walker. Chief Curry specifically -denies that. There was no connection of that kind and there was no -evidence that Oswald had any streak of violence. - -We went back into his Marine Corps record. He was a "loner." He didn't -have many friends. He kept to himself, and when he went abroad, he -defected to Russia. The first evidence we had of him in our file was -a statement to the press in Moscow. And then later, about 22 months -later, he returned to the Embassy there and according to the report of -the Embassy we have and which the Commission has been furnished, the -Embassy gave him a clean bill. He had seen the error of his ways and -disliked the Soviet atmosphere, et cetera, and they, therefore, cleared -him, paid his way and paid his wife's way to come back to this country. - -At no time, other than the so-called street disturbance in New Orleans, -was there any indication that he might be a fighter. Well, in that -particular instance he was handing out leaflets that he printed for -the Fair Play for Cuba Committee, and some of the anti-Castro forces, -we have several thousand of them in New Orleans alone, happened to see -him and they moved in on him and immediately the police moved in and -arrested him. I believe they fined him $10 for disorderly conduct. -There was no evidence in the place where he was employed in Dallas of -acts of violence or temper or anything of that kind on his part. - -Representative BOGGS. You have spent your life studying criminology and -violence and subversion. Would you care to speculate on what may have -motivated the man? I know it would be just speculation. - -Mr. HOOVER. My speculation, Mr. Boggs, is that this man was no doubt a -dedicated Communist. He prefers to call himself a Marxist, but there -you get into the field of semantics. He was a Communist, he sympathized -thoroughly with the Communist cause. - -I don't believe now, as I look back on it, that he ever changed his -views when he asked to come back to this country. I personally feel -that when he went to the American Embassy in Moscow originally to -renounce his citizenship he should have been able right then and there -to sign the renouncement. He never could have gotten back here. I think -that should apply to almost all defectors who want to defect and become -a part of a system of government that is entirely foreign to ours. If -they have that desire, they have that right, but if they indicate a -desire for it, let them renounce their citizenship at once. - -That was not done. He stayed in Moscow awhile and he went to Minsk -where he worked. There was no indication of any difficulty, personally -on his part there, but I haven't the slightest doubt that he was a -dedicated Communist. - -There has been some question raised which cannot be resolved, because -Oswald is dead, as to whether he was trying to kill the President or -trying to kill the Governor. He had had some correspondence with the -Governor as to the form of his discharge from the Marine Corps. It was -not a dishonorable discharge, but a discharge less than honorable after -he defected. - -Governor Connally had left the Navy Department, and was back in Texas -as Governor. Oswald may have had his anger or his animosity against -the Governor, but no one can say definitely--that is mere speculation, -no one can tell that, because the gun and the sighting of the gun was -directed at the car. - -Now, first, it was thought that the President had been shot through the -throat that is what the doctors at the Parkland Hospital felt when he -was brought in. - -If that had been true, the shot would have had to come from the -overpass. But as soon as the body arrived in Washington, the doctors -at Bethesda Hospital performed the autopsy and it was then determined -definitely from their point of view that he had been shot from the -rear, and that portions of the skull had been practically shot off. -There was no question but that the gun and the telescopic lens could -pinpoint the President perfectly. The car was moving slowly. It wasn't -going at a high rate of speed, so that he had perfect opportunity to do -it. - -Now, some people have raised the question: Why didn't he shoot the -President as the car came toward the storehouse where he was working? - -The reason for that is, I think, the fact there were some trees between -his window on the sixth floor and the cars as they turned and went -through the park. So he waited until the car got out from under the -trees, and the limbs, and then he had a perfectly clear view of the -occupants of the car, and I think he took aim, either on the President -or Connally, and I personally believe it was the President in view of -the twisted mentality the man had. - -But he had given no indication of that--we had interviewed him, I -think, three times. Of course, our interviews were predicated to find -out whether he had been recruited by the Russian intelligence service, -because they frequently do that. - -Representative BOGGS. And had he been? - -Mr. HOOVER. He had not been, so he said, and we have no proof that -he was. He had been over there long enough but they never gave him -citizenship in Russia at all. I think they probably looked upon him -more as a kind of a queer sort of individual and they didn't trust him -too strongly. - -But just the day before yesterday information came to me indicating -that there is an espionage training school outside of Minsk--I don't -know whether it is true--and that he was trained at that school to -come back to this country to become what they call a "sleeper," that -is a man who will remain dormant for 3 or 4 years and in case of -international hostilities rise up and be used. - -I don't know of any espionage school at Minsk or near Minsk, and I -don't know how you could find out if there ever was one because the -Russians won't tell you if you asked them. - -They do have espionage and sabotage schools in Russia and they do have -an assassination squad that is used by them but there is no indication -he had any association with anything of that kind. - -Representative BOGGS. Now we have some people, including this man's -mother, talk about Oswald having been an agent of the Government of the -United States. I think his mother mentioned the CIA; she has made these -statements publicly for money, apparently. - -Mr. HOOVER. Yes; she has. - -Representative BOGGS. Just for the purpose of the record, I think it -would be well if you would comment on that, Mr. Director. - -Mr. HOOVER. Of course, we have interviewed his mother and his wife, and -all his relatives, and everybody that he is known to have associated -with. His mother I would put in a category of being emotionally -unstable. She has been around the country making speeches, and the -first indication of her emotional instability was the retaining of a -lawyer that anyone would not have retained if they really were serious -in trying to get down to the facts. But she has been in New York City; -she has been in Chicago; I think other parts of the country, always -speaking for money. - -Now, that kind of an individual is the type we have seen over the -years, who will say almost anything to draw a crowd. Just to be able to -say something sensational. Many times we have gone out to such people -and asked them specifically, "Now, what is your basis for this?" And -they will say, "Well, I just had a feeling that that was true, so I -said it." - -She has never made that statement to us, but we have many other -instances where that kind of statement is made. They don't have the -legal evidence that you must have if you are going to take any positive -action. I would put very little credence in anything that his mother -said. - -I think his wife was a far more reliable person in statements that she -made, so far as we were able to ascertain, than his mother. I think the -mother had in mind, naturally, the fact she wanted to clear her son's -name, which was a natural instinct, but more importantly she was going -to see how much money she could make, and I believe she has made a -substantial sum. - -Representative BOGGS. And the allegations she has made about this man -being an agent either of the CIA or the FBI are false? - -Mr. HOOVER. Well, I can certainly speak for the FBI that it is false, -and I have discussed the matter, naturally, with Mr. McCone, the -Director of CIA, and he, of course, will no doubt appear himself, -but there is no indication at all that he was employed by them. We -frequently get that kind of a story from individuals who, when they get -into some kind of difficulty, will claim they were working for the CIA -or they were working for the FBI. - -Representative BOGGS. Surely. - -Mr. HOOVER. Now, no one can work for the FBI without the approval being -given at Washington and a record kept of it, even of the confidential -informants. That is very tightly controlled. We have no so-called lump -sum that we can use to hire people. So there has to be a voucher and -specific details of payment. And I know at no time was he an informant -or agent or a special employee or working in any capacity for the FBI. - -As to the interviews we had with him in which he gave us some -information, some of it was not the truth, but this was not -particularly significant. The interviews we had with him I would not -term as talking with an informant. He was interviewed while under -arrest by the New Orleans police, and then after he had committed this -act of assassination we interviewed him in police headquarters in -Dallas. But they were the only contacts we had, I think four contacts -altogether, and he received no money of any kind, no promise of any -kind, and there was no indication that he was rendering assistance -to the U.S. Government. We looked upon him as a criminal after the -assassination, of course, and prior to that time we looked upon him -as an individual who we suspected might become an agent of the Soviet -government. There was no proof of that, and we checked him carefully. - -We knew of his contact with the Soviet Embassy here at Washington, his -contact with the Fair Play for Cuba Committee in New York, and his -contact with the Worker publication in New York. And none of those -contacts gave any indication of any tendency to commit violence. - -There are many people who read the Daily Worker, or what is now the -Worker, and you certainly can't brand them as hazards to the security -of the country or as potential assassins. It is in that area that I -am particularly concerned that we don't become hysterical and go too -far in restricting the citizens of our country from exercising their -civil and constitutional rights. The mere fact a person disagrees with -you in a matter on communism doesn't mean he should be arrested. Many -Communists make very violent speeches, and we know them, but I don't -feel that the time has come that they should be arrested. If they have -violated the laws of the United States, we will, then, proceed with -prosecution, and the cases can then go through the courts. Such cases -last for years before they get to the Supreme Court, and even then such -cases often start over on some legal angle. But, all in all, I think -that the enforcement of security and the enforcement of laws dealing -with subversion ought to be handled in the American manner. - -I am criticized by the extreme right for that. They put me in the -category, I guess, along with General Eisenhower. But the extreme -left criticizes me, saying I believe that any person who has on a -red necktie may be addicted to communism, and, therefore, is a great -danger. That is why I say the extremists at both ends are bad, and I -have repeated that several times publicly. - -Representative BOGGS. No doubt about the problem being a difficult one. -I remember some years back when these fanatics started shooting up the -House of Representatives. - -Mr. HOOVER. I recall that. - -Representative BOGGS. I happened to be there on the occasion and there -were many suggestions that we build a bulletproof glass enclosure -around the Members of Congress and so on. Of course, all of us -rejected those ideas because it would be totally incompatible with our -democratic institutions and this, obviously, becomes a problem in the -security of the President; that is what you are telling us, isn't it? - -Mr. HOOVER. That is the great problem. We have participated in the -protection of the President since the assassination. The Secret -Service indicates how many agents it needs when the President is -traveling somewhere or going somewhere in Washington, and then I assign -that number of agents to the Secret Service. They are not under my -direction. They are under the direction of the Secret Service because -under law they are charged with the protection of the President. We -have never done that before, but I felt that it was something we must -do if the Secret Service desired it. Sometimes, such as at the funeral -of the late President Kennedy, the procession walked up Connecticut -Avenue, which created a very, very grave security problem because they -were walking with these tall building on either side. As I recall, -we had the responsibility for the Cathedral, and we had 43 agents in -the Cathedral during the services. I was more concerned about these -tall buildings, because all the small buildings have been torn down -along Connecticut Avenue, and there were about six or seven blocks to -walk. Not only the high officials of this Government, including the -President, but the Queen of Greece, General de Gaulle, Emperor Haile -Selassie, and many Prime Ministers were present. They were a perfect -target for someone in some window. - -Now, you can't empty these buildings. It is impossible to do that, -because you can't go to the Mayflower Hotel and say all front rooms -must be vacated. Other office buildings are there, even taller than -the Mayflower, and you can't make them keep everybody out of the front -offices because then you get into a police state. - -The Secret Service does try to check to find out who have these various -offices. We also check so if there is anything in our files on those -individuals the Secret Service is at once advised. When the President -goes to a banquet or a social occasion, all of the employees in the -hotel, the cooks, waiters, and busboys, and so forth, are all checked -by Secret Service to be certain there is no one with a background -that would indicate a hazard to the President. But that is as far as -I think you can go. You can't put in a whole new staff of waiters and -you can't make people move out. People going to a Presidential function -are generally invited by card or by list, and that is very carefully -checked at the entrance by the Secret Service. - -We suggested a few more things that possibly could be done, and some of -which I have doubts about. You speak about this matter of glass around -the galleries in the House. One of the suggestions that we made was -that there be bulletproof glass in front of the President's lectern. In -my own mind, I question whether that is wise. Knowing this President as -this President is, he wants to get close to the audience; he wants to -reach over and shake hands with people. That concerns me because you -never know when an emotionally unstable person may be in that crowd. -As you noted, he has frequently brought groups into the White House -gardens and walked around with people he didn't know. I know the Secret -Service people are concerned about it. I am concerned about it. - -President Truman last week expressed his concern that the President was -taking unnecessary chances. - -But the governmental agency having the responsibility for guarding him, -the Secret Service, has a natural hesitancy to say, "You can't do this." - -Representative BOGGS. Of course, for the record, President Kennedy had -the same difficulty. - -Mr. HOOVER. That is right. It was best expressed at Parkland Hospital. -One of President Kennedy's staff made the statement that the whole -fault in this matter was that, in the choice between politics and -security, politics was chosen. That is exactly what happened. It was an -open car. I am thoroughly opposed to the President riding in an open -car. - -They did not have any armored car in the Secret Service at that time. I -have now sent one of our armored cars over for the President, but it is -a closed limousine. But on occasion, such as at Gettysburg and Atlanta -the other day, the President got out of the armored car which had been -flown there for his use, and commandeered the car of the Secret Service -which is wide open, so he could wave and see the people. Now, that is -a great hazard. I think he should always be in an armored car that is -closed, that can't have the top put down. But as you recall, President -Kennedy had the bubble top off of the car that he was in. It was not -armored and the bubble top was made of plastic so a bullet could have -gone through it very easily. - -Representative FORD. Mr. Hoover, you have categorically testified that -the FBI never at any time had Oswald as an agent, as an informant, or -in any other way. - -Mr. HOOVER. That is correct. I couldn't make it more emphatic. - -Representative FORD. And Mr. Belmont testified to the same last week -when he was before us. - -Mr. HOOVER. Yes, sir. - -Representative FORD. Both you and he would be fully familiar with all -of the records of the FBI in this regard? - -Mr. HOOVER. We would, and we would not only be fully familiar with it -because while Mr. Belmont is in charge of the Investigative Branch of -the Bureau--we have two assistants to the Director, one in charge of -administrative work and the other in charge of investigative work--we -have also checked the administrative records where vouchers or payments -would have been made and there is no indication that any money was -ever paid to Oswald. We have obtained, and they are on file with the -Commission, the affidavits of the agents, who at various times were -in contact with Oswald, to the effect that he was not an informant; -that they had never paid him anything; that he was being questioned as -to possible recruitment by the Soviet intelligence; so there was no -evidence at any time indicating employment by the FBI. - -Representative FORD. And you were not under any limitation or -restriction from any other authority in this regard? - -Mr. HOOVER. Absolutely not. I have the entire control of whether a -man shall be an informant or shall not be an informant. That comes -under my chain of command from the local office which has the matter -at hand. They can't just put on an informant without our approval. The -recommendation on security informants comes to the Bureau; it goes -through the Assistant Director of the Domestic Intelligence Division, -and, in significant cases, goes to Mr. Belmont, and then to my desk for -my specific approval. So I, or my seat-of-government staff, have to -approve every one of those who are used as informants in all classes -of cases, not only in intelligence cases but in white-slave cases, -automobile thefts, and all of these cases. - -Representative FORD. There is no limitation on what you can tell us -about this situation? - -Mr. HOOVER. None whatsoever. - -Representative FORD. No limitation; no restrictions? - -Mr. HOOVER. No restriction. So far as the record of vouchers in -the Bureau are concerned, they are open to the inspection of this -Commission at any time going back as far as you may want to go. - -Senator COOPER. May I ask just one question there? I think you have -answered it, but in your examination of this aspect as to whether or -not Oswald was an informer or employee or held any relationship to -the FBI, you, yourself, have looked into all of the means you have of -determining that fact when you make the statement to us? - -Mr. HOOVER. I have personally looked into that for two reasons: Because -the President asked me personally to take charge of this investigation -and to direct it, and I knew that the report ultimately would be made -to him. For that reason I became familiar with every step and every -action that was taken. Then when the allegation was made by someone--I -think it was the mother of Oswald first, if I recall correctly--that -he was employed by some Government agency, the CIA, or FBI, and maybe -both, I insisted upon a check being made and any record showing any -indication of that being brought to me. When they could find none, I -then asked for affidavits from the field force that had dealt with -Oswald as to whether they had hired him or paid him anything or given -him anything, and the affidavits are on file here that they had not. - -Senator COOPER. I think you have said there is no sum available to the -FBI which would enable these men, these agents, to employ him out of -any funds that are made available to them. - -Mr. HOOVER. Oh, no; it must be done by voucher, and those vouchers are -examined by the General Accounting Office every year or so. We have -no lump sum in the field offices for employment of informants as such -which is not supported by vouchers. - -Senator COOPER. I have just about two questions, I may have to go in a -few minutes to the Senate. I would like to direct your attention to -that period of time when Oswald was a defector, beginning when he left -the United States and when he returned. - -Mr. HOOVER. Yes, sir. - -Senator COOPER. During that period, did the FBI have any jurisdiction -over intelligence regarding him, or any capacity to know? - -Mr. HOOVER. While he was in Russia? - -Senator COOPER. Yes. - -Mr. HOOVER. No; we did not. We were interested in knowing what he might -say in Russia that appeared in the press. That was our first intimation -that this man had defected, when we read it in a newspaper article. We -were, of course, interested in knowing when he would return or if he -would return. We had no jurisdiction as to what he was doing in Russia -after he had gone there. - -Senator COOPER. As I understand it, you had no capacity at that time to -follow his activities? - -Mr. HOOVER. That is true. We have no agents in Russia. Foreign -intelligence is handled by the Central Intelligence Agency, and our -responsibility is domestic. We work very closely together. - -Senator COOPER. Have you had the jurisdiction since the assassination -or the occasion to examine persons connected with the State Department -concerning the activities of Oswald in Russia? - -Mr. HOOVER. Well---- - -Senator COOPER. Would that be a matter for some other agency? - -Mr. HOOVER. That could be a matter for CIA or for us after Oswald had -returned here. - -Senator COOPER. Yes. - -Mr. HOOVER. Then he becomes a civilian in the country here. Now, -there is what we call a delimitation agreement among the Government -intelligence agencies. For instance, the military branches of the -Government have their own intelligence services and they handle all -military deviations in regard to espionage or things of that kind. If -they want our assistance and ask for it we, of course, will always -cooperate. In regard to CIA, there are many cases which CIA and the -FBI work jointly on, of individuals that may have been recruited over -in Europe by the CIA, not by us, because we don't have authority to do -that abroad, but when that man comes to this country, the best ends of -intelligence are served by having the two agencies work very closely -together, conduct joint interviews, and exchange information very, -very freely. That has been going on ever since I can recall CIA being -existence. - -Mr. DULLES. I would like to testify to the fact that that cooperation -existed during the whole period I was Director, and I am sure it has -continued now with great cooperation on both sides. - -Mr. HOOVER. It is a very necessary thing, because the intelligence -agency of many of these foreign countries will cover the whole world -and the country itself. Whereas in this country you have separate -agencies covering espionage activities. CIA covers the foreign -activity, and the FBI the domestic activities, and they must be -interlocking. An espionage agent of the Soviet Government can arrive -in New York today by plane from Paris and he can be in Mexico City -tomorrow. Then, CIA would pick him up there. We would not pick him up -there. We would watch him while in this country, but as soon as he -takes that plane and leaves the United States CIA moves in on him. If -he comes back to the United States, we move in on him. Therefore, we -have a very close liaison. - -As a matter of fact, what we have done in government agencies is -to have a liaison agent in our Bureau assigned to contact CIA, the -Pentagon, State Department, and various other agencies to cut out -the red tape of writing letters back and forth. In order to orally -relay information which has come to his attention, our representative -can immediately phone it over to the FBI, and if there is need, for -instance, to meet a plane coming in to New York or a boat that is -docking at New York, it is all accomplished within a matter of 45 -minutes or an hour. - -If you went through this letter-writing process and the paper war that -goes on so often in the Government it might take a week or 10 days. - -The FBI does have 10 legal attaches attached to 10 embassies abroad. -Their purpose is not operational. They don't investigate in those -countries any matters that have to be investigated. That, if it is to -be done, is handled by CIA. Our purpose in being there is to maintain -liaison with our opposite number such as the Surete Nationale in -France and with the national police in the Philippines, to exchange -information that is vital to our internal security, and also vital to -the internal security of the other country. - -Senator COOPER. May I ask one other question? - -Is there any, considering the number of defectors in the United States -to Communist countries, which cannot be large, I would assume---- - -Mr. HOOVER. I think there are about 36. - -Senator COOPER. Which would indicate, I would think either a lack of -reliability on their part and stability or beyond that a dedicated -purpose to become Communists, then upon their return, wouldn't it seem -to you they should be given some special attention? - -Mr. HOOVER. We have now---- - -Senator COOPER. To determine whether they are a risk to become Soviet -or Communist espionage agents or in fact become dangerous? - -Mr. HOOVER. We have taken steps to plug that gap. - -Prior to the assassination of the President, a defector, before he came -back was always cleared for return by a representative of the State -Department or the military abroad. When he came back we immediately -interviewed him if he was a civilian. It had to be done promptly to -determine whether he could be a potential intelligence agent. - -Now, in December of last year, following the assassination, we expanded -the criteria of what should be furnished to the Secret Service, and all -defectors automatically go on the list to be furnished to the Secret -Service. - -There are 36 defectors that we know of in this country who have been -under investigation. Some of those men may have changed their views -sincerely. Some of them may not have. But as a matter of general -precaution, as a result of the Oswald situation, we are seeing that all -go to the Secret Service. - -Mr. DULLES. That includes military defectors, does it not? - -Mr. HOOVER. Military defectors and defectors from any private agency, -after they return to the U.S. and become civilians. Some have defected -to China, to the satellite nations and to Russia. - -Senator COOPER. Just one other question, because I have to go. - -In the course of this investigation, as you know so well, there -have been a number identified who were very close, at least to Mrs. -Oswald, and a few, I can't say that were close to Oswald yet they had -association with him, such as the man who drove him back and forth, -Mrs. Paine, with whom Mrs. Oswald lived, and others, has there been -any credible, I won't say credible because if you had you would have -presented it to us in your report, has there been any claims by persons -that these people are in any way related to the Communist Party? - -Mr. HOOVER. We have had no credible evidence that they have been -related to the Communist Party in this country. - -Now, as to Mrs. Oswald, the wife of Oswald, there is no way of knowing -whether she belonged to the Russian Communist Party in Russia. She -is a rather intelligent woman, and notwithstanding that you have to -talk with her through an interpreter, we have had no indication of her -association with Communists in this country, nor have any of her close -friends or relatives. - -As to his mother, we found no indication she is associated or closely -associated with the Communists. She is the only one of the group that -we have come in contact with that I would say is somewhat emotionally -unstable. Our agents have interviewed her. She sometimes gets very -angry and she won't answer questions. As to the rest of the group who -had been friends of his, or worked with him in the Texas School Book -Depository, none of them have indicated any Communist associations of -any kind. - -Senator COOPER. Thank you. - -Mr. HOOVER. Thank you. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Hoover, I hand you Exhibit 863 and ask you to examine -that and state whether or not that is the letter that you referred -to in which you answered questions of the Commission concerning the -National Enquirer magazine or newspaper? - -Mr. HOOVER. This letter of May 8 addressed to the Commission is -the letter that dealt with our interview with Chief Curry and was -predicated upon the article which appeared in the National Enquirer of -May 17, 1964. - -Mr. RANKIN. I ask you if you would care to add anything to that letter -except what you have already testified to? - -Mr. HOOVER. No; I have nothing to add to that. Chief Curry was very -specific, I am told by my agent in charge at Dallas, that this article -is an absolute lie; that none of these things set forth in the article -occurred; that he received no phone call or any request of any kind -oral or by phone or in writing from the Department of Justice or from -the FBI. As I stated earlier, the report from the Department of Justice -indicated that they made no request. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Chairman, I offer in evidence Exhibit 863, being the -letter just referred to. - -The CHAIRMAN. It may be admitted. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 863 for -identification and received in evidence.) - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Hoover, is Exhibit 837 the article that you referred to -in the National Enquirer? - -Mr. HOOVER. Yes; that is the one. - -Mr. RANKIN. I call your attention to Exhibit 836 and ask you if that -is the letter that you referred to which describes the criteria in the -handling of the security of the President that you have described in -your testimony. - -Mr. HOOVER. This is the letter. It sets forth the criteria which were -adopted, originally about 1942 and later incorporated in the manual -of instructions in 1954. It also includes the amended instructions to -our field offices, prepared in December of 1963, which extended the -criteria. - -Mr. RANKIN. Does that Exhibit correctly set forth the information you -had in regard to those matters? - -Mr. HOOVER. It does. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you care to add anything to it? - -Mr. HOOVER. No; I have nothing to add to it at all. - -Mr. RANKIN. Now, in light of what happened. Mr. Hoover, I think the -Commission would desire to have your comments or whatever you care -to tell them, concerning the reasons why you did not furnish the -information you had concerning Lee Harvey Oswald to the Secret Service -prior to the time of the President's assassination. - -Mr. HOOVER. Well, I have gone into that very thoroughly because that -was obviously one of the questions that I had in my mind when the -tragedy occurred in Dallas. - -In going back over the record, and I have read each one of the reports -dealing with that and the reports of Mr. Hosty who had dealt with -the Oswald situation largely in Dallas, we had the matter that I -have previously referred to, the report of the State Department that -indicated this man was a thoroughly safe risk, he had changed his -views, he was a loyal man now and had seen the light of day, so to -speak. - -How intensive or how extensive that interview in Moscow was, I don't -know. But, nevertheless, it was in a State Department document that was -furnished to us. - -Now, we interviewed Oswald a few days after he arrived. We did not -interview him on arrival at the port of entry because that is always -undesirable by reason of the fact it is heavily covered by press, and -any relatives generally are there, so we prefer to do it after the man -has settled down for two or three days and become composed. We do it -in the privacy of our office or wherever he may be, or in his own home -or apartment. We interviewed him twice in regard to that angle that we -were looking for. We had no indication at this time of anything other -than his so-called Marxist leanings, Marxist beliefs. - -We wanted to know whether he had been recruited by the Soviet -government as an intelligence agent, which is a frequent and constant -practice. There is not a year goes by but that individuals and groups -of individuals, sometimes on these cultural exchanges, go through -Russia and recruits are enlisted by the Russian intelligence, usually -through blackmail. The individual is threatened that if he doesn't come -back to this country and work for them they will expose the fact that -he is a homosexual or a degenerate or has been indiscrete. - -Pictures are usually taken of individuals who become implicated in that -sort of thing, so the individual is really desperate. Such blackmail -has occurred year after year for some time. - -In Oswald's case we had no suspicion that any pressure like that had -been brought to bear on him because he had gone voluntarily and had -obviously wanted to live in Russia and had married a Russian woman. - -After those interviews had been completed, the next incident was the -difficulty he had at New Orleans. We were concerned there as to whether -he was functioning officially for the Fair Play for Cuba Committee -which was financed and supported by Castro and Castro's government, and -if he was, where he obtained money and with whom he had dealt. - -He apparently had the leaflets printed himself on plain ordinary paper. -There was no reason for us, then, to have any suspicion that he had any -element of danger in him. - -However, we did not ignore or forget the fact that he was still in the -country. We kept track of him when he went from New Orleans to Dallas, -and that was one of the reasons why Hosty went to the home of Mrs. -Paine. She told us where Oswald was working, at the Texas book house. -Hosty gave her his telephone number and his name so that if there was -any information or any contact she wanted to make she could phone him -at the Dallas office. - -Mrs. Oswald, the wife, took down the license number of Hosty's car -which was incorrect only in one digit. The name, the telephone number, -and the automobile license were later found in Oswald's memorandum book. - -However, that in itself was not significant because many times we will -go to see a person and tell him now, "If you think of anything you want -to tell us or you have any information you want to give us, here are my -name and address, telephone number, and call me," and that is what was -done with Mrs. Paine because Hosty wasn't there at the time. He was at -work. - -Incidentally, those items in Oswald's notebook requiring investigative -attention were first set out in an investigative report of our Dallas -Office dated December 23, 1963. This report was not prepared for this -Commission but rather for investigative purposes of the FBI and, -therefore, the information concerning Hosty's name, telephone number -and license number was not included in the report as the circumstances -under which Hosty's name, et cetera, appeared in Oswald's notebook were -fully known to the FBI. - -After our investigative report of December 23, 1963, was furnished to -the Commission, we noted that Agent Hosty's name did not appear in the -report. In order that there would be a complete reporting of all items -in Oswald's notebook, this information was incorporated in another -investigative report of our Dallas Office, dated February 11, 1964. -Both of the above-mentioned reports were furnished to the Commission -prior to any inquiry concerning this matter by the President's -Commission. - -There was nothing up to the time of the assassination that gave any -indication that this man was a dangerous character who might do harm to -the President or to the Vice President. Up to that time, as has been -indicated. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Hoover, may I interrupt, you said Hosty was not there -at the time, he was at work--did you mean Mr. Oswald? - -Mr. HOOVER. That was my mistake. I meant Mr. Oswald. Hosty talked with -Mrs. Paine and Mrs. Oswald. Mrs. Paine speaks Russian and she could -interpret for her. - -Oswald was at the Texas Book Co., and then, as I say, Hosty left his -telephone number and name, and Mrs. Oswald for some reason took down -the license number. I don't know whether she was convinced this was an -agent of the FBI, or why she did it. - -But, anyway, that was in the book that was later found, and which -contained many other things that Oswald had entered in the book. - -Now, as I say, up to that time, there had been no information that -would have warranted our reporting him as a potential danger or hazard -to the security or the safety of the President or the Vice President, -so his name was not furnished at the time to Secret Service. - -Under the new criteria which we have now put into force and effect, -it would have been furnished because we now include all defectors. As -to the original criteria, which we felt were sound and sufficient and -which we felt no one, not even the most extreme civil rights proponent -could take exception to, we limited the furnishing of names to S.S. -to persons potentially dangerous to the physical well being of the -President. We included emotionally unstable people who had threatened -the President or Vice President. - -At my office during the course of a week there are sometimes three or -four callers who have to be taken to a Hospital because of their mental -condition. They claim they are being persecuted by radio beams and they -want to see me or the President to have those beams stopped. Now you -never know what tangent they are going to take. If such a person is -living in some part of the country where the President may be going his -name would be furnished to the Secret Service. - -One car last year, I think, crashed through the gates of the White -House; the person driving wanted to see the President. The guard -wouldn't let him in and so the car crashed through and got within 20 -feet of the first door. The guards, by that time, had their revolvers -out and took him into custody. - -Last year a gentleman drove all the way from Arizona to see me. He -drove up the marble steps of the Department of Justice, and by that -time the guards had come out and took him into custody. I think he was -incarcerated in Arizona. - -People of this type are among those we would have furnished to the -Secret Service. They have the potential to harm somebody. - -We get names from members of Congress, of people who come to the -Capitol and try to threaten them or harass them. They let us know about -it, and we make the investigation or advise the police. If we can get -the family to have the person put into an institution, we try to do so. -If they don't, we may take steps to have him incarcerated through other -legal means. - -Mr. DULLES. How many names, Mr. Director, in general, could the Secret -Service process? Aren't their facilities limited as to dealing with -vast numbers of names because of their limited personnel? - -Mr. HOOVER. I think they are extremely limited. The Secret Service is a -very small organization and that is why we are fortifying them, so to -speak, or supplementing them by assigning agents of our Bureau which -is, of course, quite a burden on us. Our agents are assigned about 24 -to 25 cases per agent and cover such involved matters as bankruptcy and -antitrust cases. - -Now, the Secret Service has a very small group and I would estimate -that the names we have sent over number some 5,000. I would guess there -are about another 4,000 that will go over in the next month to them. -Frankly, I don't see how they can go out and recheck those names. We -keep the records up to date; if additional information comes in on -these names we furnish it to the Secret Service. They will have to call -upon the local authorities, unless the Secret Service force is enlarged -considerably so that they can handle it entirely on their own. I think -the Secret Service is entirely too small a force today to handle the -duties that they are handling. The great crowds that are at the White -House all the time, around the gates, that go to church where the -President goes, all of those things, of course, have to be checked over -by them. They always check in advance and just recently, a few Sundays -ago, they found some individuals in the basement of St. Mark's church -in Washington, where he was going to attend on Sunday morning. His -arrival was held up until they could ascertain who they were. They were -deaf mutes whose identity had not been cleared with the Secret Service. - -Now, the Presidential party was delayed about 5 or 10 minutes in -reaching the church by reason of the radio call to the White House to -hold it up. - -We are giving to Secret Service more and more names. The total, in -addition to the names they already had, will reach 10,000. I don't see -how they are going to be able to handle the situation as they would -want to handle it. They have to depend upon local police organizations. -Many local police departments are capable and efficient; some are -not. Many have good judgment and some have not. Wherever you have a -police department of 10,000, 15,000, 20,000 men you are bound to find -a few who will just barge in and do something which better judgment -would dictate should not be done, as in the incident which occurred in -the Midwest where they placed people practically under house arrest. -I think it was very bad judgment and should not have been done but -the Secret Service, of course, turned the names over to the local -authorities, and the local authorities do what they think is right. - -Now, I guess their attitude with all justice to them is. "Well, we -will resolve the risk in our favor. If we keep these people under -surveillance and keep them in the house until the President gets out -of town nothing can happen from them." That is what you would call -totalitarian security. I don't think you can have that kind of security -in this country without having a great wave of criticism against it. -There is a great tendency for people to expect the intelligence forces -and the law enforcement agencies to be able to go out and arrest -people and bring them in and hold them endlessly and talk to them. We -can't arrest a person, without probable cause, or unless he commits a -crime in our presence. We have to arraign him promptly and if not done -promptly, the confession that he may have made generally cannot be used -against him. - -Just as a collateral matter we faced that problem in California in the -case of the kidnapping of Frank Sinatra, Jr. One of the kidnappers we -arrested near San Diego confessed but we didn't arraign him because -the other kidnappers would have left California and it would have been -difficult to find them. However, the next day after arraignment he made -changes in the confession and signed it so the court held that it was -admissible. - -The Secret Service, of course, is faced with the same problem. They -just can't arrest people because they may not like their looks. They -have to have facts justifying detention but the public conception is -that you have a full right to go out and do these things. We have -stressed in the FBI that there must be full compliance with the laws of -this country and with the decisions of the Supreme Court. That is the -law of the country. Now, whether a person likes it or not and there are -some groups that are very violent against the decisions of the court -while others are very much in favor of them, it is not for the FBI to -take sides. We have a job to do and we do it under the rulings of the -courts and we have been able to do it effectively. - -I know when the ruling came down on the prompt arraignment, there -was great shouting and some strong editorials claiming that it was -going to wreck law enforcement. It hasn't wrecked us. It has made it -more difficult but I think we have to face up to the fact that law -enforcement in a free country must abide by the laws of that country -irrespective of how difficult it is. Some persons talk about putting -handcuffs on the law enforcement officers and taking them off the -criminals. That is a nice catch phrase to use in a speech or article -but operating within the law has not interfered with our work. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Hoover, I ask you about Exhibit 825 which is first a -letter and then encloses certain affidavits of your agents. - -Mr. HOOVER. Yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. You are familiar with that? - -Mr. HOOVER. I am familiar with that. I read all of that and signed it. - -Mr. RANKIN. You know those are the affidavits in regard to whether Lee -Harvey Oswald was an agent or connected in anyway with the Bureau that -you have just testified to? - -Mr. HOOVER. That is correct; and the affidavits of all agents, who had -any contact with him. - -Mr. RANKIN. I call your attention to Exhibits 864 and 865, and ask you -if you have seen those before or, you have seen the original of 864 and -865 is a photostatic copy of your letter to us in answer to 864, is -that correct? - -Mr. HOOVER. That is correct; yes. I recall very distinctly. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you recall those letters involved an inquiry as to any -connections of Lee Harvey Oswald with Communists or any criminal groups -or others that might be conspiratorial? - -Mr. HOOVER. That is correct; and my letter of April 30 states the facts -as they are in our files. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Chairman, we offer in evidence Exhibits 864 and 865. - -The CHAIRMAN. They may be admitted. - -(Commission Exhibit Nos. 864 and 865 were marked for identification and -received in evidence.) - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Hoover, do you have any suggestions that you would -like to tell the Commission about of your ideas that might improve -the security of the President, and you might comment upon information -the Commission has received. You have a special appropriation that is -related to that area. - -Mr. HOOVER. Well, I, at the request of---- - -The CHAIRMAN. Director, before you get into that question, and may -I ask something that I would like to hear you discuss in this same -connection? - -Mr. HOOVER. Yes. - -The CHAIRMAN. You have told us that you had no jurisdiction down there -in Dallas over this crime. - -Mr. HOOVER. That is correct. - -The CHAIRMAN. Because there is no Federal crime committed. And I assume -that that caused you some embarrassment and some confusion in doing -your work? - -Mr. HOOVER. It most certainly did. - -The CHAIRMAN. Because of the likelihood of your being in conflict with -other authorities. Do you believe there should be a Federal law? - -Mr. HOOVER. I am very strongly in favor of that. - -The CHAIRMAN. Against an attempt to assassinate the President? - -Mr. HOOVER. I am very strongly in favor of legislation being enacted -and enacted promptly that will make a Federal crime of attempts upon -the life of the President and the Vice President, and possibly the next -two persons in succession, the Speaker and the President pro tempore -of the Senate. In the Oswald case, we could not take custody of him. -If we had had jurisdiction we would have taken custody of him and I -do not believe he would have been killed by Rubenstein. The failure -to have jurisdiction was extremely embarrassing. I think the killing -of Oswald has created a great fog of speculation that will go on for -years, because of the things that Oswald might have been able to tell -which would have been of assistance in pinning down various phases of -this matter. This must be done now by collecting evidence from third -parties, and not from Oswald himself. - -Now, as to the publicity that took place in Dallas, I was very -much concerned with that. We have in the FBI a crime laboratory -that furnishes free service to all law enforcement agencies of the -country. Any law enforcement agency can send to our laboratory here -in Washington any evidence--blood, dirt, dust, guns, anything of -that kind--and our laboratory examines it and then reports back to -the contributing police department. This was being done in the early -stages of the Oswald case, and almost as soon as the report would -reach the Dallas Police Department, the chief of police or one of the -representatives of the department would go on TV or radio and relate -findings of the FBI, giving information such as the identification of -the gun and other items of physical evidence. - -Now, that concerned me for several reasons. In the first place, I don't -think cases should be tried in the newspapers. I think a short and -simple statement can be made when a person is arrested, but the details -of the evidence should be retained until you go into court to try the -case. Secondly, it creates a great deal of speculation on the part of -the press. There was very aggressive press coverage at Dallas. I was -so concerned that I asked my agent in charge at Dallas, Mr. Shanklin, -to personally go to Chief Curry and tell him that I insisted that he -not go on the air any more until this case was resolved. Until all -the evidence had been examined, I did not want any statements made -concerning the progress of the investigation. Because of the fact the -President had asked me to take charge of the case I insisted that he -and all members of his department refrain from public statements. - -There was an officer in his department who was constantly on the -radio or giving out interviews. The chief concurred in my request and -thereafter refrained from further comment but of course by that time -the identification of the gun was known, the caliber of the gun, where -it had come from, where it had been bought and the information we had -run down in Chicago and had furnished to the Dallas Police Department. - -If the case had been in the hands of the FBI none of that information -would have been given out. Because of the publicity you had to face the -charge that the prejudice of the community would require a change of -venue. With the publicity, I don't know where you could have changed -the venue to, since newspapers all over the State covered it. I think -a Houston reporter was the first one who wrote that Oswald was an -informant of the FBI. We went to the newspaper reporter. He refused to -tell us his source. He said he had also heard it from other persons. -We asked him the names of these persons and we interviewed them but -none of them would provide the source. In other words, I was trying -to nail down where this lie started. That, of course, is always the -result where you are daily giving out press interviews because the -press wants stories desperately. We have always adopted the policy in -the Bureau of no comment until we have the warrant and make the arrest. -Then a release is prepared briefly stating what the facts are, what -the written complaint says, the fact. The complaint was filed with the -Commissioner, and that ends it. We don't try to run it out for a week -or 10 days. It is up to the U.S. attorney thereafter and the court to -try the case. - -I was concerned about the demand for change of venue, because all the -evidence was being given out. At that time, of course, we didn't know -that Oswald was going to be killed, and there was a possibility that -he might be confronted with some of this evidence. If it had been kept -secret and used in the interrogation of him, just confronting him -with what was found, such as his picture with the gun might have been -helpful. - -A small thing can often make a man break and come forward with a full -confession. If he knows in advance that you have certain evidence he -will be on guard against answering questions. Of course, he is always -advised of his rights and that he can have an attorney. We always -make a point of this. We generally have a reputable physician of -the community present in our office while the prisoner is there, to -administer to him and be able to testify that he has not been subjected -to third degree methods. He is examined when he comes in and he is -examined before we take him to the commissioner. Taking him before the -commissioner in a case like Oswald's would probably have been done -within 4 or 5 hours. Generally we try to arraign a prisoner within an -hour. - -That makes it more difficult; you have to work faster. But again I say -I am in favor of having the procedures of law enforcement officers as -tightly bound down as we can, with due respect for the interests of -society. - -Of course, there must be an equal balance. For years we have had a rule -against third degree methods, but years ago many police departments -used the third degree. I think very few of them use it now because if -they use it they violate the civil rights statutes and we investigate -them for having brutally handled a prisoner. Many allegations are made -unfairly against police officers that they have used third degree -methods and we are able to prove they haven't in our investigations. -That is particularly true where civil rights matters are involved. We -have such cases in many areas where civil rights agitation is going on. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Hoover, to remind you of my question, any suggestions -that you may have concerning the protection of the President, and -the information that the Commission has that you have a special -appropriation in that connection for the Bureau? - -Mr. HOOVER. We do not have a special appropriation for the -protection of the President. The Secret Service, of course, has that -responsibility. On December 2, I prepared this memorandum for the -President, and for the chief of the Secret Service at the request of -the President, outlining suggestions that I felt should be considered -to tighten up on the security of the President. If the Commission -desires I will be glad to leave this or I will be glad to read it to -the Commission. - -Representative BOGGS. Why don't you ask the Director just to summarize -it. - -Mr. RANKIN. Will you summarize it? - -Mr. DULLES. Can we have a copy of it? - -Mr. HOOVER. Oh, yes. - -Representative FORD. Could the copy be put in the record as an exhibit? - -Mr. HOOVER. Yes, sir; that is all right with me. I have no objection to -it. - -Regarding travel, first, advise the Secret Service as far in advance as -possible of the President's travel plans and proposed itinerary. The -reason for that is there have been Presidents who suddenly decide they -are going somewhere and the Secret Service does not have the chance -always to cover the area and check the neighborhood and check the hotel -or place where it may be. - -Representative BOGGS. You have one like that right now, Mr. Director. - -Mr. HOOVER. I know from experience. - -Second, avoid publicizing exact routes of travel as long as possible. -Again, it has been the practice in the past to announce the President -is going along a certain route and, therefore, great crowds will gather -along that route. And, therefore, I thought that was something that -should not be given out and the President should be taken along some -routes which are not announced. At the present time, he goes to cities -and he wants to see people and the crowd wants to see him. In Dallas, -the route was publicized at least 24 hours before so everybody knew -where he would be driving. - -Third, use a specially armored car with bulletproof glass and have such -cars readily available in locations frequently visited. The President, -as I observed earlier in my testimony, had no armored car. He has one -now which I supplied to Secret Service and they will have one made no -doubt in due time for the President's use. But if it had been armored, -I believe President Kennedy would be alive today. - -Fourth, avoid setting a specific pattern of travel or other activity -such as visiting the same church at the same time each Sunday. - -Regarding public appearances. First, use maximum feasible screening of -persons in attendance including use of detection devices sensitive to -the amount of metal required in a firearm or grenade. - -Second, use a bulletproof shield in front of the entire rostrum in -public appearances such as the swearing in ceremony at the Capitol on -inauguration day, the presidential reviewing stand in front of the -White House on the same day and on the rear of trains. - -Third, keep to a minimum the President's movements within crowds, -remain on the rostrum after the public addresses rather than mingling -with the audience. Again, there is great difficulty in that field. - -Fourth, in appearances at public sporting events such as football -games, remain in one place rather than changing sides during half-time -ceremonies. - -(Discussion off the record.) - -Mr. DULLES. About the armored car you said if Kennedy had an armored -car that might have saved him. Would the back of the armored car have -some protection to protect his head? - -Mr. HOOVER. Oh, yes. - -Mr. DULLES. Because if the armored car had been open---- - -Mr. HOOVER. He must never ride in an open car; that has been my -recommendation. - -Mr. DULLES. The back never comes down? - -Mr. HOOVER. The back never comes down, and it is bulletproof. The top, -sides, and underpart are all of bulletproof construction. So that -except by opening a window and waving through the window the occupant -is safe. A person can shoot through the window if the glass window is -lowered. - -Fifth, limit public appearances by use of television whenever possible. - -Sixth, avoid walking in public except when absolutely necessary. - -Now, on legislation. First, I recommended that the President and the -Vice President be added to the list of Federal officers set out in -section 1114, title 18 of the U.S. Code which deals with assaults which -are punishable under Federal law. - -Mr. RANKIN. You would add to that I understood from your prior remarks, -the Speaker and the President Pro Tempore? - -Mr. HOOVER. In view of the situation which prevails at the present time -the Speaker and President pro tempore, in other words, the line of -succession under the Constitution but not below that. - -(Discussion off the record.) - -Mr. HOOVER. Second, furnish the Secret Service authority to request -assistance and cooperation from other U.S. agencies including the -military, particularly in connection with foreign travel. - -Now, my reason for that is that sometimes requests for assistance have -to clear through red-tape channels here at Washington through some -high official of Government. If an emergency arises abroad, or even in -this country, it may be of such character that you do not have time to -telephone back to Washington or to telephone back to the Pentagon. Aid -ought to be immediately available by calling on the local authorities -and the nearest military authority. - -Third, improve control of the sale of firearms requiring as a -minimum registration of every firearm sold together with adequate -identification of the purchaser. The problem of firearms control is -under extensive debate, in both the House and Senate at the present -time. - -The gun that Oswald used was bought by mail order from a mail-order -house in Chicago, no license for it, no permit for it, no checkup on -it. The only way we were able to trace it was to find out where in this -country that Italian-made gun was sold. We found the company in Chicago -and later the mail-order slip that had been sent by Oswald to Chicago -to get the gun. Now, there are arguments, of course---- - -Mr. DULLES. In a false name. - -Mr. HOOVER. In a false name. - -There is argument, of course, that by passing firearms legislation you -are going to take the privilege of hunting away from the sportsmen of -the country. I don't share that view with any great degree of sympathy -because you have to get a license to drive an automobile and you have -to get a license to have a dog, and I see no reason why a man shouldn't -be willing, if he is a law-abiding citizen, to have a license to get a -firearm whether it be a rifle or revolver or other firearm. - -It is not going to curtail his exercise of shooting for sport because -the police make a check of his background. If he is a man who is -entitled to a gun, a law-abiding citizen, a permit will be granted. - -Of course, today firearms control is practically negligible, and I -think some steps should be taken along that line. - -Fourth, a ban on picketing within the vicinity of the White House as is -now done at the U.S. Capitol and Supreme Court. Some of these pickets -are well-meaning and law-abiding individuals, some are for peace and -some are more or less dedicated Communists. - -Representative BOGGS. It is illegal to picket a Federal court now, Mr. -Director, I happen to be the author of that law. - -Mr. HOOVER. Yes; I am glad you had that law passed. Of course, they -picket public buildings, they march around the Department of Justice -Building, now and then, but the principal places they prefer to go are -the Supreme Court Building, the Capitol and its grounds and the White -House. - -I think such picketing at the White House, of large or small groups, -should be forbidden. I think at the White House they tried to get -the pickets to walk across the street along Lafayette Park. That at -least takes them away from being close to the gates at the White -House. I think there ought to be some control. Picketing, of course, -is legitimate if it is orderly. Many times it doesn't continue to be -orderly, and sometimes pickets, as in this city, have thrown themselves -on the pavement and the police have to come and pick them up or drag -them away. Then, of course, the charge is made of brutality right away. - -Delegations of colored groups have visited me and asked why I don't -arrest a police officer for hitting some Negro whom he is arresting in -a sit-in strike, lay-in strike or demonstration in some southern cities. - -We have no authority to make an arrest of that kind. Under the -authority the Bureau has we have to submit those complaints to the -Department of Justice and if they authorize us to make an arrest we -will do it. - -Those in general are the recommendations I made and I will furnish the -committee with a copy of this memorandum. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Hoover, I would like to ask you in regard to your -recommendations, do you think you have adequately taken into account -that the President is not only the Chief Executive but also necessarily -a politician under our system? - -Mr. HOOVER. I have taken that into account, and I would like to say -this off the record. - -(Discussion off the record.) - -Mr. RANKIN. That is all I have, Mr. Chairman. - -The CHAIRMAN. Any other questions, gentlemen? - -Representative BOGGS. I would just like to thank the Director again for -all the help he has given us. - -Mr. HOOVER. I am happy to. - -The CHAIRMAN. I would, too, on behalf of the Commission, Mr. Director, -I would not only like to thank you for your testimony but for your -cooperation that your people have given us throughout this entire -investigation. - -Mr. HOOVER. Thank you very much. - -The CHAIRMAN. I also want to add one other thing, having in mind the -testimony you gave that this is still an open investigation, that -should anything come to your attention that you believe this Commission -has either overlooked or should look into you feel free to ask us to do -it. - -Mr. HOOVER. I would most certainly do that. - -The CHAIRMAN. You do it. - -Mr. HOOVER. I want to give all the cooperation I can to this most -difficult task you have. - -Representative FORD. One question. The other day when we had the State, -Justice, Judiciary Appropriation bill before the full Committee on -Appropriations---- - -Mr. HOOVER. Yes. - -Representative FORD. And I am not a member of that subcommittee, I -noticed a provision in the bill, as I recall, to the effect funds -for or something of that content, of FBI responsibilities for the -protection of the President. - -Mr. HOOVER. There is a provision for funds that we can use for the -apprehension of a man who has been declared a fugitive from justice, -that is where a man has committed a crime, a warrant is out for him and -he has fled or where he has escaped from a penitentiary. I don't recall -offhand any specific appropriation for the protection of the President. -I will look at the appropriation bill. I may be wrong there but I am -quite certain that is so. - -Representative FORD. It was my recollection as I was looking at the -bill in committee there was a phrase to this effect in the language of -the bill. I think it might be helpful for the record to get whatever -the history is of that if it is still a matter of the bill or the law. - -Mr. HOOVER. I remember that at the time Mr. Curtis was Vice President, -he was Senator and then Vice President, at that time he insisted that -he wanted FBI agents with him and nobody else. When Mr. Nixon took -office as Vice President he was protected by the Secret Service and -with Mr. Johnson, it was the same thing. - -Secret Service asked us to let them have additional manpower, as a -matter of assistance, and we have done so. - -Representative FORD. I think it would be helpful if you would have a -memorandum prepared. - -Mr. HOOVER. I will be glad to. - -Representative FORD. Showing the history of this provision from its -inception and whether or not it is in the bill or the proposed law for -fiscal 1965. - -Mr. HOOVER. Yes, sir. - -Representative FORD. And the justification you have indicated. - -Mr. HOOVER. That was not taken up, I know, in the testimony before the -Appropriations Committee. I gave the testimony before the committee in -January, and the testimony wasn't released until 2 weeks ago when the -bill was reported out. It was not discussed in the hearings. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Chairman, in order to complete the record, may I ask -to have the number 866 assigned to the memo that Mr. Hoover is going -to send about protection of the President, and have it admitted to this -record under that number. - -The CHAIRMAN. Yes; it may be. - -Representative FORD. Also a number for this letter Mr. Hoover is going -to submit. - -Mr. RANKIN. May I assign 867? - -The CHAIRMAN. Yes. - -(Commission Exhibit Nos. 866 and 867 were marked for identification and -received in evidence.) - - -TESTIMONY OF JOHN A. McCONE AND RICHARD M. HELMS - -The CHAIRMAN. The Commission will be in order. - -Director McCone, it is customary for the Chairman to make a short -statement to the witness as to the testimony that is expected to be -given. I will read it at this time. - -Mr. McCone will be asked to testify on whether Lee Harvey Oswald was -ever an agent, directly or indirectly, or an informer or acting on -behalf of the Central Intelligence Agency in any capacity at any time, -and whether he knows of any credible evidence or of any conspiracy -either domestic or foreign involved in the assassination of President -Kennedy, also with regard to any suggestions and recommendations he -may have concerning improvements or changes in provisions for the -protection of the President of the United States. - -Would you please rise 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. McCONE. I do. - -The CHAIRMAN. Will you be seated, please? Mr. Rankin will conduct the -examination. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. McCone, will you state your name? - -Mr. McCONE. My name is John Alex McCone. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you have an official position with the U.S. Government? - -Mr. McCONE. Yes, sir; I am Director of Central Intelligence. - -Mr. RANKIN. Have you been Director for some time? - -Mr. McCONE. Yes; a little over 2-1/2 years. - -Mr. RANKIN. Where do you live, Mr. McCone? - -Mr. McCONE. I live at 3025 Whitehaven Street in Washington. - -Mr. RANKIN. Are you familiar with the records and how they are kept by -the Central Intelligence Agency as to whether a man is acting as an -informer, agent, employee, or in any other capacity for that Agency? - -Mr. McCONE. Yes; I am generally familiar with the procedures and the -records that are maintained by the Central Intelligence Agency. Quite -naturally, I am not familiar with all of the records because they are -very extensive. - -Mr. RANKIN. Have you determined whether or not Lee Harvey Oswald, the -suspect in connection with the assassination of President Kennedy, -had any connection with the Central Intelligence Agency, informer or -indirectly as an employee, or any other capacity? - -Mr. McCONE. Yes; I have determined to my satisfaction that he had no -such connection, and I would like to read for the record---- - -Mr. RANKIN. Will you tell us briefly the extent of your inquiry? - -Mr. McCONE. In a form of affidavit, I have gone into the matter in -considerable detail personally, in my inquiry with the appropriate -people within the Agency, examined all records in our files relating to -Lee Harvey Oswald. We had knowledge of him, of course, because of his -having gone to the Soviet Union, as he did, putting him in a situation -where his name would appear in our name file. However, my examination -has resulted in the conclusion that Lee Harvey Oswald was not an agent, -employee, or informant of the Central Intelligence Agency. The Agency -never contacted him, interviewed him, talked with him, or received or -solicited any reports or information from him, or communicated with -him directly or in any other manner. The Agency never furnished him -with any funds or money or compensated him directly or indirectly in -any fashion, and Lee Harvey Oswald was never associated or connected -directly or indirectly in any way whatsoever with the Agency. When -I use the term "Agency," I mean the Central Intelligence Agency, of -course. - -Representative FORD. Does that include whether or not he was in the -United States, in the Soviet Union, or anyplace? - -Mr. McCONE. Anyplace; the United States, Soviet Union, or anyplace. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. McCone, is that the affidavit you are going to supply -the Commission in connection with our request for it? - -Mr. McCONE. Yes; this is the substance of the affidavit which I will -supply to you. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Chairman, I ask leave to mark that Exhibit 870 and have -it introduced in evidence as soon as we receive it from Mr. McCone as a -part of this record. - -The CHAIRMAN. It may be admitted. - -(Commission Exhibit No. 870 was marked for identification and received -in evidence.) - -Mr. RANKIN. Would you tell us about your procedures in regard to having -an agent or informer or any person acting in that type of capacity? -Does that have to pass through your hands or come to your attention in -the Agency? - -Mr. McCONE. No; it does not have to come through my personal hands. - -Mr. RANKIN. Without disclosing something that might be a security -matter, could you tell us how that is handled in a general way in the -Agency? - -Mr. McCONE. Mr. Helms, who is directly responsible for that division of -the Agency's activities as a Deputy Director, might explain. Would that -be permissible? - -Mr. RANKIN. Could we have him sworn then? - -The CHAIRMAN. Yes. - -The CHAIRMAN. Would you 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. HELMS. I do. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Helms, you heard the inquiry just directed to Mr. -McCone. Could you answer the question directly? - -Mr. HELMS. Yes; we have a specific procedure which we follow in all -cases where the Agency is in contact, for the purposes of acquiring -intelligence or whatever the case may be, with an individual. We not -only have a record of the individual's name, but we also usually get -information of a biographical nature. We then check this individual's -name against our record. At that point we make a determination as to -whether we desire to use this man or not to use him. It varies from -case to case as to how many officers may be involved in approving a -specific recruitment. May I go off the record? - -(Discussion off the record.) - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Helms, did you have anything to do on behalf of your -Agency with determining whether or not Lee Harvey Oswald was acting in -any of the capacities I have described in my questions to Mr. McCone? - -Mr. HELMS. Yes; I did. - -Mr. RANKIN. Will you tell us what you did in that regard? - -Mr. HELMS. On Mr. McCone's behalf, I had all of our records searched -to see if there had been any contacts at any time prior to President -Kennedy's assassination by anyone in the Central Intelligence Agency -with Lee Harvey Oswald. We checked our card files and our personnel -files and all our records. - -Now, this check turned out to be negative. In addition I got in touch -with those officers who were in positions of responsibility at the -times in question to see if anybody had any recollection of any contact -having even been suggested with this man. This also turned out to be -negative, so there is no material in the Central Intelligence Agency, -either in the records or in the mind of any of the individuals, that -there was any contact had or even contemplated with him. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Helms---- - -Mr. DULLES. Could I ask one question there? Do you recall or do you -know at what time the name of Lee Harvey Oswald was carded, first came -to your attention so it became a matter of record, in the Agency? - -Mr. HELMS. Sir, I would want to consult the record to be absolutely -accurate, but it is my impression that the first time that his name -showed up on any Agency records was when he went to the Soviet Union. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Helms, in connection with your work you have supplied -information to the Commission and we have requested many things from -your Agency. Can you tell the Commission as to whether or not you have -supplied us all the information the Agency has, at least in substance, -in regard to Lee Harvey Oswald? - -Mr. HELMS. We have; all. - -Representative FORD. Has a member of the Commission staff had full -access to your files on Lee Harvey Oswald? - -Mr. HELMS. He has, sir. - -Representative FORD. They have had the opportunity to personally look -at the entire file? - -Mr. HELMS. We invited them to come out to our building in Langley and -actually put the file on the table so that they could examine it. - -The CHAIRMAN. I was personally out there, too, and was offered the same -opportunity. I did not avail myself of it because of the time element, -but I was offered the same opportunity. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Helms, can you explain, according to the limitations of -security, the reasons why we examined materials but did not always take -them, in a general way? - -Mr. HELMS. Yes; I can. - -In our communications between individuals working overseas and in -Washington, we for security reasons have a method of hiding the -identities of individuals in telegrams and dispatches by the use of -pseudonyms and cryptonyms. For this reason, we never allow the original -documents to leave our premises. However, on the occasion when the -representatives of the Commission staff looked at these files, we sat -there and identified these pseudonyms and cryptonyms and related them -to the proper names of the individuals concerned, so that they would -know exactly what the correspondence said. - -Mr. RANKIN. By that you mean the representatives of the Commission were -able to satisfy themselves that they had all of the information for the -benefit of the Commission without disclosing matters that would be a -threat to security; is that right? - -Mr. HELMS. It is my understanding that they were satisfied. - -Representative FORD. Mr. McCone, do you have full authority from higher -authority to make full disclosure to this Commission of any information -in the files of the Central Intelligence Agency? - -Mr. McCONE. That is right. It is my understanding that it is the desire -of higher authority that this Commission shall have access to all -information of every nature in our files or in the minds of employees -of Central Intelligence Agency. - -Representative FORD. On the basis of that authority, you or the Agency -have made a full disclosure? - -Mr. McCONE. That is correct. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Helms, I have handed you Exhibits 868 and 869 directed -to you acting for the Agency, the first one being from the Commission -to you and the second one, 869, being your answer in regard to your -full and complete disclosure in regard to your records; isn't that -correct? - -Mr. HELMS. That is correct. May I say, Mr. Rankin, that any -information, though, subsequent to this correspondence which we may -obtain we will certainly continue to forward to the Commission. - -Mr. RANKIN. Thank you. Mr. Chief Justice, I ask leave to have those two -exhibits, 868 and 869, received in evidence at this time. - -The CHAIRMAN. They may be admitted under those numbers. - -(Commission Exhibits Nos. 868 and 869 were marked for identification -and received in evidence.) - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. McCone, if I may return to you, I will now ask you if -you have any credible information that you know of or evidence causing -you to believe that there is any or was any conspiracy either domestic -or foreign in connection with the assassination of President Kennedy? - -Mr. McCONE. No; I have no information, Mr. Rankin, that would lead me -to believe or conclude that a conspiracy existed. - -Representative FORD. Did the CIA make an investigation of this aspect -of the assassination? - -Mr. McCONE. We made an investigation of all developments after the -assassination which came to our attention which might possibly have -indicated a conspiracy, and we determined after these investigations, -which were made promptly and immediately, that we had no evidence to -support such an assumption. - -Representative FORD. Did the Central Intelligence Agency have any -contact with Oswald during the period of his life in the Soviet Union? - -Mr. McCONE. No; not to my knowledge, nor to the knowledge of those who -would have been in a position to have made such contact, nor according -to any record we have. - -Representative FORD. Did the Central Intelligence Agency have any -personal contact with Oswald subsequent to his return to the United -States? - -Mr. McCONE. No. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. McCone, your Agency made a particular investigation in -connection with any allegations about a conspiracy involving the Soviet -Union or people connected with Cuba, did you not? - -Mr. McCONE. Yes, we did. We made a thorough, a very thorough, -investigation of information that came to us concerning an alleged -trip that Oswald made to Mexico City during which time he made contact -with the Cuban Embassy in Mexico City in an attempt to gain transit -privileges from Mexico City to the Soviet Union via Havana. We -investigated that thoroughly. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you also include in your statement that you found no -evidence of conspiracy in all of that investigation? - -Mr. McCONE. That is correct. - -Mr. RANKIN. And also the investigation you made of the period that Lee -Harvey Oswald was in the Soviet Union? - -Mr. McCONE. That is right. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. McCone---- - -Mr. DULLES. Could I ask one question there? Does your answer, Mr. -McCone, include a negation of any belief that Oswald was working for or -on behalf of the Soviet Union at any time when you were in contact with -him or knew about his activities? - -Mr. McCONE. As I have already stated, we were never in contact with -Oswald. We have no evidence that he was working for or on behalf of the -Soviet Union at any time. According to his diary, Oswald did receive a -subsidy from the Soviet Red Cross which we assume had the approval of -the authorities. Such a payment does not indicate to us that he even -worked for the Soviet intelligence services. Furthermore, we have no -other evidence that he ever worked for Soviet intelligence. - -Representative FORD. Is the Central Intelligence Agency continuing any -investigation into this area? - -Mr. McCONE. No, because, at the present time, we have no information in -our files that we have not exhaustively investigated and disposed of to -our satisfaction. Naturally, any new information that might come into -our hands would be investigated promptly. - -Mr. HELMS. I simply wanted to add that we obviously are interested in -anything we can pick up applying to this case, and anything we get will -be immediately sent to the Commission, so that we haven't stopped our -inquiries or the picking up of any information we can from people who -might have it. This is on a continuing basis. - -Representative FORD. In other words, the case isn't closed. - -Mr. HELMS. It is not closed as far as we are concerned. - -Mr. RANKIN. Would that be true, Mr. Helms, even after the Commission -completed its report, you would keep the matter open if there was -anything new that developed in the future that could be properly -presented to the authorities? - -Mr. HELMS. Yes. I would assume the case will never be closed. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. McCone, do you have any ideas about improving the -security provisions for the President that you would like to relate to -the Commission? - -Mr. McCONE. Well, this is, in my opinion, a very important question -which I am sure this Commission will--has and will--devote a -considerable amount of thought to, and undoubtedly have some -recommendations as part of its report. - -Mr. RANKIN. Your Agency does have an important function in some aspects. - -Mr. McCONE. We have a very important function in connection with the -foreign travels of the President, and I would like to inform the -Commission as to how we discharge that responsibility by quickly -reviewing the chronology of the Central Intelligence Agency's support -of President Kennedy's visit to Mexico City from the 29th of June to -the 2d of July 1962. - -Mr. RANKIN. Will you please do that. - -The CHAIRMAN. Director, is that a security matter? - -Mr. McCONE. No. I think I can handle this for the record. - -The CHAIRMAN. Very well. - -Mr. McCONE. If I have to make a remark or two off the record I will ask -that privilege. - -That visit, as I said, started on the 29th of June. On the 28th of -April, in anticipation of the visit, instructions were transmitted to -Mexico for the Ambassador to coordinate planning and informational -guidance for the advance party of the Secret Service. - -We asked that the Secret Service be given information on local groups -and persons who would cause disturbances, embarrassments or physical -harm, an estimate of the determination and ability of the Mexican -government to prevent incidents, and preparation for special briefings -to the Embassy officials and the Secret Service, and such additional -support and communications personnel that might be required. - -These instructions were given two months before the trip. - -On the 15th of May, we received confirmed information that the -President would visit Mexico on the specific dates. On the 1st of June -the Secret Service was supplied by the Agency with the detailed survey -of Mexican security forces that would be called upon to protect the -President. - -Friendly and allied governments were informed of the visit and their -cooperation and pertinent informational support was solicited. From -this date through the 2d of July daily information reports were -furnished to the State Department, the Secret Service, the FBI and the -military services. - -That is from the 1st of June to the 2d of July, a period of 31, -32 days. On the 8th of June the Secret Service advance party was -briefed in detail by a group of officers of the Agency on the Mexican -government's plans for the protection of the President, including -current information on the size, strength and capabilities of potential -troublemakers. - -Hazardous locations and times in the planned itinerary were identified, -political and economic issues that might be invoked by hostile elements -for demonstrations were specified. - -On the 11th of June, the Secret Service advance party left for Mexico -supported by additional security personnel to assist in coordinating an -informational report and the followup activity required. - -Especially prepared national intelligence estimates on the current -security conditions in Mexico was approved by the United States -Intelligence Board on the 13th of June. - -On the 15th of June arrangements were completed to reenforce -communications facilities. On the 24th of June a conference at the -State Department was held at the request of the President for reviewing -security measures, and this meeting I attended personally, and reported -to the State Department on the essence of all that had gone before. - -Emergency contingency plans were discussed and a consensus was reached -that the President should make the visit as scheduled. - -On the 27th of June, a final updated special national intelligence -estimate was prepared, and this indicated no basic changes in the -security assessment that Mexican government was prepared to cope with -foreseeable security contingencies. - -On the 28th of June, a final briefing report was prepared for the -Director's use which indicated the security precautions of the Mexican -government had effectively forestalled major organized incidents, and -our informed estimate was that the President would receive a great -welcome. - -The report was presented to the President personally by the Director at -noon in a final meeting prior to departure on this trip. - -From the 29th of June to the 2d of July in Washington headquarters, -headquarters components remained on a 24-hour alert for close support -of the embassy and the Secret Service. - -So, not only was the Central Intelligence Agency and its various -components involved in this for a period of 2 months in close -collaboration with the Secret Service, but by bringing in the United -States Intelligence Board we brought in all of the intelligence assets -of the United States Government in connection with this particular -trip. I thought this procedure which is followed regularly on all trips -that the President makes out of the country would be of interest to the -Commission. - -The CHAIRMAN. That is the normal format of your procedures? - -Mr. McCONE. Yes. - -The CHAIRMAN. When the President goes abroad? - -Mr. McCONE. Yes, I selected this one. The same was true of his trip to -Caracas or Paris or elsewhere. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. McCone, in your investigation of the Oswald matter -did you use the same approach or a comparable approach to a liaison -with the other intelligence agencies of government to try to discover -anything that might involve your jurisdiction. - -Mr. McCONE. Yes. We were in very close touch with the Federal Bureau -of Investigation and with the Secret Service on a 24-hour basis at all -points, both domestic and foreign, where information had been received -which might have a bearing on this problem. - -Mr. RANKIN. Assassination? - -Mr. McCONE. Assassination. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you have an opinion, Mr. McCone, as to whether or not -the liaison between the intelligence agencies of the United States -Government might be improved if they had better mechanical, computer or -other facilities of that type, and also some other ideas or methods of -dealing with each other? - -Mr. McCONE. There is a great deal of improvement of information that -might be of importance in a matter of this kind through the use of -computers and mechanical means of handling files, and you, Mr. Chief -Justice, saw some of our installations and that was only a beginning of -what really can be done. - -The CHAIRMAN. Yes; I did. - -Mr. McCONE. I would certainly urge that all departments of government -that are involved in this area adopt the most modern methods of -automatic data processing with respect to the personnel files and other -files relating to individuals. This would be helpful. - -But I emphasize that a computer will not replace the man, and -therefore, we must have at all levels a complete exchange of -information and cooperation between agencies where they share this -responsibility, and in going through this chronology, it points out the -type of exchange and cooperation that the Central Intelligence Agency -tries to afford both the Secret Service and the Federal Bureau of -Investigation in matters where we have a common responsibility. - -I would like to emphasize the very great importance of this exchange, -which is not always easily accomplished because it is cumbersome. - -Sometimes it becomes involved in distracting people from other duties, -and so on and so forth. - -I have given a good deal of thought to the matter of some incentives to -bring out informers, thinking about the old informer statutes in which -some of them are still on the books, in which people were rewarded for -informing when others conducted themselves in a damaging way. - -Mr. DULLES. Smuggling cases? - -Mr. McCONE. Smuggling cases. But I believe that something could be -done. I call to the attention of this Commission one of the laws -relating to atomic energy, namely the Atomic Weapons Reward Act of 15 -July 1955 wherein a substantial reward is offered for the apprehension -of persons responsible for the clandestine introduction or manufacture -in the United States of such nuclear material or atomic weapons. It -is suggested that the Commission may wish to recommend that original -but similar legislation be enacted which would induce individuals to -furnish information bearing on Presidential security by offering a -substantial reward and preferential treatment. Substantial reward could -represent a significant inducement even to staff officers and personnel -of secret associations and state security organs abroad who are -charged with assassination and sabotage. We have information that such -personnel and police state apparatuses have expressed and, in certain -cases, acted upon their repugnance for such work and for the political -system which requires such duties to be performed. - -Mr RANKIN. Is it your belief, Mr. McCone, that the methods for exchange -of information between intelligence agencies of the Government could be -materially improved. - -Mr. McCONE. I think the exchange between the Central Intelligence -Agency and the Federal Bureau of Investigation or the Secret Service -is quite adequate. I am not informed as to whether the exchanges -between the Secret Service and the FBI are equally adequate. I have not -gone into that. I would have no means to know. Certainly it is most -important that it be done. - -Mr. DULLES. Looking back now that you have the full record, do you feel -that you received from the State Department adequate information at the -time that they were aware of Oswald's defection and later activities -in the Soviet Union, did you get at the time full information from the -State Department on those particular subjects? - -Mr. McCONE. Well, I am not sure that we got full information, Mr. -Dulles. The fact is we had very little information in our files. - -Mr. HELMS. It was probably minimal. - -Representative FORD. Why did that happen? - -Mr. HELMS. I am not sure, Mr. Ford. I can only assume that the State -Department had a limited amount. Interestingly enough, it is far enough -back now so that it's very hard to find people who were in the Moscow -Embassy at the time familiar with the case, so in trying to run this -down one comes to a lot of dead ends and I, therefore, would not like -to hazard any guess. - -Representative FORD. Whose responsibility is it; is it CIA's -responsibility to obtain the information or State Department's -responsibility to supply it to Central Intelligence and to others. - -Mr. McCONE. With respect to a U.S. citizen who goes abroad, it is the -responsibility of the State Department through its various echelons, -consular service and embassies and so forth. - -For a foreigner coming into the United States, who might be of -suspicious character, coming here for espionage, subversion, -assassination and other acts of violence, we would, and we do exchange -this information immediately with the FBI. - -Representative FORD. But in this particular case, Oswald in the Soviet -Union, whose responsibility was it to transmit the information, -whatever it was, to the Central Intelligence Agency? - -Mr. McCONE. Well, it would be the State Department's responsibility -to do that. Whether there really exists an order or orders that -information on an American citizen returning from a foreign country be -transmitted to CIA, I don't believe there are such regulations which -exist. - -Mr. HELMS. I don't believe they do, either. - -Mr. McCONE. I am not sure they should. - -Representative FORD. It wouldn't be your recommendation that you, the -head of Central Intelligence Agency, should have that information? - -Mr. DULLES. In a case of an American defecting to a Communist country, -shouldn't you have it? - -Mr. McCONE. Certainly certain types of information. What we ought to -be careful of here, would be to rather clearly define the type of -information which should be transmitted, because after all, there are -hundreds of thousands or millions of Americans going back and forth -every year, and those records are the records of the Immigration -Service, the Passport Division. - -Mr. DULLES. I was thinking of a person who having defected might, of -course, have become an agent and then reinserted into the United States -and if you were informed of the first steps to that you might help to -prevent the second step. - -Mr. McCONE. Well, certainly information on defectors or possible -recruitments should be, and I have no question is being, transmitted. - -Representative FORD. What I was getting at was whether the procedures -were adequate or inadequate, whether the administration was proper -or improper in this particular case, and if some files you have that -started when he attempted to defect are inadequate why we ought to -know, and we ought to know whether the basic regulations were right or -wrong, whether the administration was proper or improper, that is what -I am trying to find out. - -I would like your comment on it. - -Mr. McCONE. Well, I think the basic regulations should be examined -very carefully to be sure that they are copper-riveted down and -absolutely tight. What I am saying, however, is because of the vast -number of Americans who go abroad and stay in foreign countries for -indefinite periods of time, it would be an impossible task to transmit -all information available in the State Department and Immigration -Service as files to the Central Intelligence Agency. It would not be a -productive exercise. What must be transmitted and is being transmitted, -while I cannot recite the exact regulations is information that is, -becomes, known to the various embassies of suspicious Americans that -might have been recruited and defected, and then returned so that they -would be agents in place. - -Representative FORD. In this case, Oswald attempted to defect, he did -not, he subsequently sought the right to return to the United States, -he had contact with the Embassy. Was the Central Intelligence Agency -informed of these steps, step by step, by the Department of State? - -Mr. McCONE. You might answer that. - -Mr. HELMS. Mr. Ford, in order to answer this question precisely I -would have to have the file in front of me. I have not looked at it -in some time so I don't have it all that clearly in mind. But it is -my impression that we were not informed step by step. When I say that -there is no requirement that I am aware of that the State Department -should inform us and when I said a moment ago that we had minimal -information from them, this was not in any sense a critical comment but -a statement of fact. - -But an American going to the American Embassy would be handled by -the Embassy officials, either consular or otherwise. This would be a -matter well within the purview of the State Department to keep all -the way through, because we do not have responsibility in the Central -Intelligence Agency for the conduct or behavior or anything else of -American citizens when they are abroad unless there is some special -consideration applying to an individual, or someone in higher authority -requests assistance from us. So that the State Department, I think, -quite properly would regard this matter as well within their purview -to handle themselves within the Embassy or from the Embassy back to -the Department of State without involving the Agency in it while these -events were occurring. - -Representative FORD. I think it could be argued, however, that the -uniqueness of this individual case was such that the Department of -State might well have contacted the Central Intelligence Agency to -keep them abreast of the developments as they transpired. This is -not--and when I say this, I mean the Oswald case--is not an ordinary -run-of-the-mill-type of case. It is far from it. Even back in the time, -well, from the time he went, and particularly as time progressed, and -he made application to return, there is nothing ordinary about the -whole situation. - -Mr. McCONE. That is quite correct; there is no question about that. - -Representative FORD. And I am only suggesting that if the regulations -were not adequate at the time and are not now, maybe something ought to -be done about it. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. McCone, when you said that supplying all of the -information about U.S. citizens who went abroad and came back to -the country would not be a profitable exercise, did that comment -include the thought that such an intrusion upon all citizens would be -questionable? - -Mr. McCONE. Such an intrusion? - -Mr. RANKIN. Upon their right to travel. - -Mr. McCONE. Well, I think this would have a bearing on it. I did -not have that particular matter in mind when I made that statement, -however. I was just thinking of the---- - -Mr. RANKIN. Burden? - -Mr. McCONE. Of the burden of vast numbers involved. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you you have any thought in regard to whether it would -be an intrusion upon their rights? - -Mr. McCONE. Well, that would be a matter of how it was handled. -Certainly, if it was handled in a way that the counterpart of providing -the information was to impose restrictions on them, then it would be an -intrusion on their rights. - -Mr. RANKIN. Yes. - -Senator COOPER. May I inquire? - -The CHAIRMAN. Senator Cooper. - -Senator COOPER. I missed the first part of Mr. McCone's testimony; I -went to answer a quorum call. Perhaps the question has been asked. - -It has been brought into evidence that a number of people in the -Embassy talked to Oswald when he first defected, and the various -communications with the Embassy and, of course, when he left to come -back to the United States. Have we been able to ascertain the names of -officials in the Embassy or employees with whom Oswald talked on these -various occasions? - -Mr. McCONE. I am not familiar with them; no. - -Mr. HELMS. Neither am I, sir. - -Mr. McCONE. I presume that the Department's inquiries have covered it. - -Senator COOPER. Is it possible to ascertain the names of those -employees? - -Mr. RANKIN. Senator Cooper, I can answer that. We have inquired of -the State Department for that information, and are in the process of -obtaining it all. - -Senator COOPER. Taking into consideration your answers to the previous -question, would it have been possible in your judgment to have secured -more comprehensive information about the activities of Oswald in Russia? - -Mr. McCONE. It would not have been possible for the Central -Intelligence Agency to have secured such information because we do not -have the resources to gain such information. - -The CHAIRMAN. Anything more? Congressman Ford? - -Representative FORD. Did the Central Intelligence Agency investigate -any aspects of Oswald's trip to Mexico? - -Mr. McCONE. Yes; we did. - -Representative FORD. Can you give us any information on that? - -Mr. McCONE. Yes; we were aware that Oswald did make a trip to Mexico -City and it was our judgment that he was there in the interest of -insuring transit privileges and that he made contact with the Cuban -Embassy while he was there. - -We do not know the precise results of his effort, but we assumed, -because he returned to the United States, he was unsuccessful. We have -examined to every extent we can, and using all resources available to -us every aspect of his activity and we could not verify that he was -there for any other purpose or that his trip to Mexico was in any way -related to his later action in assassinating President Kennedy. - -Representative FORD. Did the Central Intelligence Agency make any -investigation of any alleged connection between Oswald and the Castro -government? - -Mr. McCONE. Yes; we investigated that in considerable detail, because -information came to us through a third party that he had carried on -a rather odd discussion with Cuban officials in the Cuban Embassy in -Mexico City. The allegation was that he had received under rather odd -circumstances a substantial amount of money in the Cuban Embassy, and -the statement was made by one who claimed to have seen this transaction -take place. After a very thorough and detailed examination of the -informer, it finally turned out by the informer's own admission that -the information was entirely erroneous, and was made for the purpose -of advancing the informer's own standing with the Central Intelligence -Agency and the U.S. Government and it was subsequently retracted by the -informer in its entirety. - -Representative FORD. Was there any other evidence or alleged -evidence---- - -Mr. McCONE. Parenthetically, I might add a word for the record that -the date that the informer gave as to the date in time of this -alleged transaction was impossible because through other, from other, -information we determined that Oswald was in the United States at that -particular time. - -Representative FORD. Did the Central Intelligence Agency ever make an -investigation or did it ever check on Mr. Ruby's trip to Cuba or any -connections he might have had with the Castro government? - -Mr. McCONE. Not to my knowledge. - -Mr. HELMS. We had no information. - -Mr. McCONE. We had no information. - -Representative FORD. Central Intelligence Agency has no information of -any connections of Ruby to the Castro government? - -Mr. McCONE. That is right. - -Representative FORD. Did you ever make a check of that? - -Mr. HELMS. We checked our records to see if we had information and -found we did not. - -Representative FORD. What would that indicate, the fact that you -checked your records? - -Mr. HELMS. That would indicate that if we had received information -from our own resources, that the Cubans were involved with Mr. Ruby in -something which would be regarded as subversive, we would then have -it in our files. But we received no such information, and I don't, -by saying this, mean that he did not. I simply say we don't have any -record of this. - -Representative FORD. That is all. - -The CHAIRMAN. Director, thank you very much, sir, for coming and being -with us and we appreciate the help your department has given to us. - -(Whereupon, at 12:30 p.m., the President's Commission recessed.) - - - - -_Thursday, June 4, 1964_ - -TESTIMONY OF THOMAS J. KELLEY, LEO J. GAUTHIER, LYNDAL L. SHANEYFELT, -AND ROBERT A. FRAZIER - -The President's Commission met at 2:10 p.m., on June 4, 1964, at 200 -Maryland Avenue NE., Washington, D.C. - -Present were Chief Justice Earl Warren. Chairman; Senator John Sherman -Cooper, Representative Gerald R. Ford, Allen W. Dulles, and John J. -McCloy, members. - -Also present were J. Lee Rankin, general counsel; Norman Redlich, -assistant counsel; Arlen Specter, assistant counsel; Waggoner Carr, -attorney general of Texas; and Charles Murray, observer. - - -TESTIMONY OF THOMAS J. KELLEY - -(Members present at this point: The Chairman, Representative Ford, Mr. -Dulles, and Mr. McCloy.) - -Mr. SPECTER. Mr. Chief Justice, we have witnesses today who are Thomas -J. Kelley of the Secret Service; Leo J. Gauthier, Lyndal L. Shaneyfelt, -and Robert A. Frazier of the FBI. They are going to testify concerning -certain onsite tests made in Dallas at the scene of the assassination, -and of preliminary studies which were made prior to the onsite tests at -Dallas. - -May we have them sworn in as a group? - -The CHAIRMAN. Yes. Will you rise and raise your right hands, please? - -Do you solemnly swear that 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. KELLEY. I do. - -Mr. GAUTHIER. I do. - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. I do. - -Mr. FRAZIER. I do. - -The CHAIRMAN. You may be seated, gentlemen. Mr. Kelley, will you take -the witness chair, please? Mr. Specter will conduct the examination. - -Mr. SPECTER. Will you state your full name for the record, please? - -Mr. KELLEY. Thomas J. Kelley. - -Mr. SPECTER. By whom are you employed? - -Mr. KELLEY. I am employed by the U.S. Secret Service. - -Mr. SPECTER. In what capacity? - -Mr. KELLEY. I am an inspector. - -Mr. SPECTER. In a general way, of what do your duties consist, Mr. -Kelley? - -Mr. KELLEY. As an inspector, I am part of the chief's headquarters -staff. I conduct office inspections of our field and protective -installations, and report on their actions to the chief. - -Mr. SPECTER. How long have you been with the Secret Service? - -Mr. KELLEY. Twenty-two years. - -Mr. SPECTER. Did you participate in the planning of the onsite tests at -Dallas, Tex.? - -Mr. KELLEY. I did. - -Mr. SPECTER. And did you participate in the making of those tests? - -Mr. KELLEY. Yes, sir. - -Mr. SPECTER. On what date was the onsite testing made? - -Mr. KELLEY. It was a week ago Sunday. - -Mr. SPECTER. That would be May 24, 1964? - -Mr. KELLEY. Yes, sir. - -Mr. SPECTER. What car was used for testing purposes? - -Mr. KELLEY. The car that was used was a 1956 specially built Cadillac, -open, a convertible, seven-passenger Cadillac. It has a termination -of 679-X, the Secret Service calls it. It is a car that is used as a -followup car to the President's car when he is in a motorcade. - -Mr. SPECTER. Was that car actually in the motorcade on November 22, -1963, in Dallas? - -Mr. KELLEY. Yes; it was. - -Mr. SPECTER. Was there any special reason why the car in which the -President rode on November 22 was not used? - -Mr. KELLEY. Yes; the car in which the President rode has been modified -by a body builder in Cincinnati, the Hess & Eisenhardt Co. of -Cincinnati. - -Mr. SPECTER. And do you have a diagram showing the dimensions of the -Secret Service followup car which was used during the onsite tests? - -Mr. KELLEY. I have. It was felt that the best simulation of the test -could be presented by having a car that was similar to the car in which -the President was riding, which was also an open Lincoln convertible. - -Mr. SPECTER. May it please the Commission, I would like to mark the -diagram of the followup car as Commission Exhibit No. 871 and move its -admission into evidence. - -The CHAIRMAN. It may be admitted. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 871 for -identification, and received in evidence.) - -Mr. SPECTER. Do you have diagrams showing the dimensions of the -Presidential car? - -Mr. KELLEY. I have. - -Mr. SPECTER. I would like to have that marked as Commission Exhibit No. -872 and move for its admission into evidence. - -The CHAIRMAN. It may be admitted. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 872 for -identification, and received in evidence.) - -Mr. SPECTER. Without specifying all of the details, Inspector Kelley, -are the followup car and the Presidential car generally similar in -dimensions? - -Mr. KELLEY. Yes; they are. There are very few, of course, -seven-passenger convertible cars in existence, and these are -specially--these cars are specially built for us by the Lincoln--the -Ford Motor Co. and the followup car by the General Motors Co. - -Mr. SPECTER. Would you describe what seating arrangements are present -in each of those cars in between the permanent front seat and the -permanent rear seat? - -Mr. KELLEY. There are two jump seats that can be opened up for riders -in each of the cars. In the Presidential followup car, these jump seats -are usually occupied by Secret Service agents. - -In the President's car, they are occupied by the President's guests. - -On the day of the assassination, of course, the jump seats were -occupied by Mrs. Connally and Governor Connally. - -Mr. SPECTER. Mr. Kelley, have you brought with you two photographs -depicting the interior of the President's car? - -Mr. KELLEY. I have. These are photographs of the interior of the -President's car which is known to us as 100-X. - -Mr. SPECTER. May it please the Commission, I would like to mark one of -these photographs as Commission Exhibit No. 873, and move its admission -into evidence. - -The CHAIRMAN. It may be admitted. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 873 for -identification, and received in evidence.) - -Mr. SPECTER. I would like to mark the second photograph as Commission -Exhibit No. 874 and move, also, its admission into evidence. - -The CHAIRMAN. It may be admitted. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 874 for -identification, and received in evidence.) - -Mr. SPECTER. Would you describe briefly what Exhibit No. 873 depicts, -please? - -Mr. KELLEY. Exhibit No. 873 is a photograph of the interior of the -rear section of the 100-X, the President's car, showing the seating -arrangement in the car and the jump seats are in an open position. - -Mr. McCLOY. As of what time were these photographs taken? - -Mr. KELLEY. I am sorry, Commissioner. I don't know just when those -photographs were taken. They were taken some time in the last 2 years. - -Mr. SPECTER. As to Exhibits Nos. 873 and 874, do they accurately depict -the condition of the President's car as of November 22, 1963? - -Mr. KELLEY. They do, sir. - -Mr. SPECTER. Would you describe briefly what Exhibit No. 874 shows? - -Mr. KELLEY. Exhibit No. 874 is another photograph of the car taken from -the rear, and it shows the relative positions of the jump seats in an -open position as they relate to the back seat of the car. - -Mr. SPECTER. So that the record may be clear, which Commission number -has been given to the diagram of the President's car? - -Mr. KELLEY. The President's car is Exhibit No. 872. - -Mr. SPECTER. And the followup car diagram is what? - -Mr. KELLEY. Exhibit No. 871. - -Mr. McCLOY. Do you know whether these photographs were taken before or -after the assassination? - -Mr. KELLEY. Before the assassination. - -Mr. DULLES. Did the car that you used for this test--did that car have -the seat lifting capacity that I understand the President's car had? - -Mr. KELLEY. No; it did not, sir. I might say that there is in the -Commission's records photographs of the President's car after the -assassination, showing the condition of it after the assassination, at -the garage. - -Mr. SPECTER. On the President's car itself, what is the distance on the -right edge of the right jump seat, that is to say from the right edge -of the right jump seat to the door on the right side? - -Mr. KELLEY. There is 6 inches of clearance between the jump seat and -the door. - -Mr. SPECTER. And what is the relative position of the jump seat to the -rear seat on the Presidential automobile? - -Mr. KELLEY. There is 8-1/2 inches between the back of the jump seat and -the front of the back seat of the President's car, the rear seat. - -Mr. SPECTER. And what is the relative height of the jump seat and the -rear seat? - -Mr. KELLEY. The jump seat is 3 inches lower than the back seat in its -bottom position. That is, the back seat of the President's car had a -mechanism which would raise it 10-1/2 inches. But at the time of the -assassination, the seat was in its lowest position. - -Mr. SPECTER. And what is the differential between the jump seats and -the rear seat on the Secret Service followup car? - -Mr. KELLEY. The jump seat of the Secret Service car is a little closer -to the right door. - -However, the seating arrangement is not exactly the same in these cars, -in that there is a portion of a padding that comes around on the rear -seat. - -But relatively, when two persons are seated in this car, one in the -rear seat and one in the jump seat, they are in the same alinement as -they were in the President's car. - -Mr. DULLES. Could I ask one question in response to your statement -that the back seat was in its lowest position at the time of the -assassination? How do you know that? - -Mr. KELLEY. That is a result of questioning of the people who took the -car, the driver who took the car from the hospital to the plane. This -was one of the drivers of the Presidential car. There was nobody who -touched the car until it got back to the White House garage. It was in -his custody all the time. And he did not move it. - -When it was in the White House garage, it was at its lowest point. - -Mr. DULLES. And there would be no opportunity to lower it from the time -the President was shot? - -Mr. KELLEY. No, sir. The President, of course, operates that thing -himself. But when it was examined, at the time it was examined, and it -was in the custody of this man all the time, it had not been touched. - -Mr. SPECTER. What was the height of President Kennedy? - -Mr. KELLEY. He was 72-1/2 inches. - -Mr. SPECTER. And were you present when a man was placed in the same -position in the Secret Service followup car as that in which President -Kennedy sat in the Presidential car when the tests were simulated on -May 24th of this year? - -Mr. KELLEY. I was. - -Mr. SPECTER. Do you know the name of that individual? - -Mr. KELLEY. He was an FBI agent by the name of James W. Anderton. - -Mr. SPECTER. And what was the height of Mr. Anderton? - -Mr. KELLEY. He was 72-1/2 inches. - -Mr. SPECTER. Do you know the height of Governor Connally? - -Mr. KELLEY. Governor Connally was 6 foot 4. - -Mr. SPECTER. Was that the height of the Governor himself or the -Governor's stand-in? - -Mr. KELLEY. It was my understanding that Governor Connally was--6 foot -2, I guess. The Governor's stand-in, Mr. Doyle Williams, was 6 foot 4. - -Mr. SPECTER. Were you present when those two individuals were seated in -the Secret Service followup car? - -Mr. KELLEY. Yes, sir. - -Mr. SPECTER. And what adjustment was made, if any, so that the relative -positions of those two men were the same as the positioning of -President Kennedy and Governor Connally on November 22, 1963? - -Mr. KELLEY. The officials at Hess Eisenhardt, who have the original -plans of the President's car, conducted a test to ascertain how high -from the ground a person 72-1/2 inches would be seated in this car -before its modification. And it was ascertained that the person would -be 52.78 inches from the ground--that is, taking into consideration the -flexion of the tires, the flexion of the cushions that were on the car -at the time. - -Mr. SPECTER. When you say 52.78 inches, which individual would that be? - -Mr. KELLEY. That would be the President. - -Mr. SPECTER. And what part of his body? - -Mr. KELLEY. The top of the head would be 52.78 inches from the ground. - -When Mr. Anderton was placed in the followup car, it was found that the -top of his head was 62 inches from the ground. There was an adjustment -made so that there would be--the stand-in for Governor Connally would -be in relatively the same position, taking into consideration the -3-inch difference in the jump seat and the 2-inch difference in his -height. - -Mr. SPECTER. Considering the 3-inch difference in the jump seat--and -I believe it would be an inch and a half difference in height between -President Kennedy and Governor Connally--how much higher, then, -approximately, was President Kennedy sitting than the Governor on -November 22? - -Mr. KELLEY. I am not---- - -Mr. SPECTER. Would the President have been about an inch and half -higher than the Governor on the day of the assassination? - -Mr. KELLEY. The day of the assassination, yes. - -Mr. SPECTER. And were---- - -The CHAIRMAN. Wouldn't the height of these men depend upon the length -of their torso? - -Mr. KELLEY. Well,---- - -The CHAIRMAN. You have some people who are shortwaisted, some people -who are longwaisted. I don't know which either of these men were who -were of the same height. But I know there is a lot of difference in -men. We sometimes see the--a man who looks large sitting down, when he -stands up he is small, because he has a long torso, and vice versa. - -Mr. KELLEY. Of course the relative positions are apparent from the -films that were taken at the time of the assassination. It would be, of -course, that judgment--and it would have to be a judgment. But I think -the films indicate there was just about that much difference in their -height when both were seated. - -Mr. SPECTER. Inspector Kelley, I hand you a photograph marked as -Commission Exhibit No. 697, which has heretofore been admitted into -evidence, and identified by Governor Connally as depicting the -President and the Governor as they rode in the motorcade on the day of -the assassination, and I ask you if the stand-ins for the President and -the Governor were seated in approximately the same relative positions -on the reconstruction on May 24. - -Mr. KELLEY. Yes, sir; in my judgment that is very close. - -Mr. SPECTER. What marking, if any, was placed on the back of President -Kennedy--the stand-in for President Kennedy? - -Mr. KELLEY. There was a chalk mark placed on his coat, in this area -here. - -Mr. SPECTER. And what did that chalk mark represent? - -Mr. KELLEY. That represented the entry point of the shot which wounded -the President. - -Mr. SPECTER. And how was the location for that mark fixed or determined? - -Mr. KELLEY. That was fixed from the photographs of a medical drawing -that was made by the physicians and the people at Parkland and an -examination of the coat which the President was wearing at the time. - -Mr. SPECTER. As to the drawing, was that not the drawing made by the -autopsy surgeons from Bethesda Naval Hospital? - -Mr. KELLEY. Bethesda Naval. - -Mr. McCLOY. Not Parkland, as I understand it? - -Mr. SPECTER. No, sir; not Parkland, because as the record will show, -the President was not turned over at Parkland. - -Mr. KELLEY. I was shown a drawing of--that was prepared by some medical -technicians indicating the point of entry. - -Mr. SPECTER. Permit me to show you Commission Exhibit No. 386, which -has heretofore been marked and introduced into evidence, and I ask you -if that is the drawing that you were shown as the basis for the marking -of the wound on the back of the President's neck. - -Mr. KELLEY. Yes. - -Mr. SPECTER. And the record will show, may it please the Commission, -that this was made by the autopsy surgeons at Bethesda. - -And was there any marking placed on the back of Governor Connally? - -Mr. KELLEY. Yes; there was a marking placed on the back of his coat -in the area where the medical testimony had indicated the bullet had -entered Governor Connally. - -Mr. SPECTER. And what coat was worn by the stand-in for Governor -Connally? - -Mr. KELLEY. It was the coat that Governor Connally was wearing at the -time he was injured. - -Mr. SPECTER. And was the chalk circle placed around the hole which -appeared on the back of that coat garment? - -Mr. KELLEY. It was. - -Mr. SPECTER. Were certain tests made by the Secret Service shortly -after the day of the assassination? - -Mr. KELLEY. Yes. - -Mr. SPECTER. And were those tests reduced to photographs which were -compiled in an album? - -Mr. KELLEY. Yes; in Commission Document No. 88, we took some -photographs of the scene of the assassination on December 5, 1963, from -the window of the Texas Book Depository, and from the street. - -Mr. SPECTER. The number which you refer to bears Commission No. 88, -which is an index number which was given for internal Commission -document filing, but it has not been marked as a Commission exhibit. - -I would now like to mark it Commission Exhibit No. 875 and move for its -admission into evidence. - -The CHAIRMAN. It may be admitted. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 875 for -identification, and received in evidence.) - -Mr. SPECTER. Does a photograph in that group show the condition of the -foliage of the trees in the vicinity where the assassination occurred? - -Mr. KELLEY. Yes. - -Mr. SPECTER. And is there---- - -Mr. DULLES. One question. This photograph was taken, though, several -weeks later, wasn't it? - -Mr. KELLEY. On December 5. - -Mr. DULLES. That was 2 weeks later. - -Mr. KELLEY. Two weeks later; yes, sir. - -Mr. DULLES. So the foliage would presumably be somewhat less in that -picture, would it not, than it was on November 22? - -Mr. KELLEY. No; actually, the foliage hadn't changed very much even in -the latest tests we are making. - -The CHAIRMAN. It was an evergreen? - -Mr. KELLEY. It was an oak tree, Mr. Chief Justice, I have been told the -foliage doesn't change much during the year. They call it pine oak. -Some people call it a life oak. But the people down there I talked to -said it was called a pine oak. - -Mr. SPECTER. And did you observe the foliage on the tree on May 24? - -Mr. KELLEY. I did, sir. - -Mr. SPECTER. And would you state the relative condition of that -foliage, as contrasted with the photographs you have before you taken -on December 5? - -Mr. KELLEY. It was very similar, practically the same. - -Mr. SPECTER. And the description which you have just given applies to -a large oak tree which intervened between a point on the sixth floor -of the Texas School Book Depository Building and any automobile which -would have been driven down the center lane of Elm Street in a westerly -direction? - -Mr. KELLEY. Yes, sir. - -Mr. SPECTER. Mr. Chief Justice, the purpose of having Inspector Kelley -testify was just to set the scene. That completes our questioning of -him. - -The CHAIRMAN. Very well. Thank you, Inspector Kelley. - -Mr. SPECTER. The next witness will be Inspector Gauthier. - - -TESTIMONY OF LEO J. GAUTHIER - -Mr. SPECTER. Would you state your full name for the record, please? - -Mr. GAUTHIER. Leo J. Gauthier. - -Mr. SPECTER. And by whom are you employed, sir? - -Mr. GAUTHIER. The Federal Bureau of Investigation. - -Mr. SPECTER. And what is your rank with the Federal Bureau of -Investigation? - -Mr. GAUTHIER. Inspector. I am in charge of the Bureau's exhibit -section, where we prepare investigative aids, consisting of diagrams, -charts, maps, three-dimensional exhibits, in connection with the -presentation of cases in court. - -Mr. SPECTER. How long have you been employed by the Federal Bureau of -Investigation? - -Mr. GAUTHIER. Twenty-nine years. - -Mr. SPECTER. Did you have occasion to reconstruct certain models to -scale in connection with the investigation on the assassination of -President Kennedy? - -Mr. GAUTHIER. Yes; I did. - -Mr. SPECTER. And what model reproduction, if any, did you make of the -scene of the assassination itself? - -Mr. GAUTHIER. The data, concerning the scene of the assassination, -was developed by the Bureau's Exhibits Section, including myself, at -the site on December 2, 3, and 4, of 1963. From this data we built -a three-dimensional exhibit, one-quarter of an inch to the foot. It -contained the pertinent details of the site, including street lights, -catch basin, concrete structures in the area, including buildings, -grades, scale models of the cars that comprised the motorcade, -consisting of the police lead car, the Presidential car, the followup -car, the Lincoln open car that the Vice President was riding in, and -the followup car behind the Vice-Presidential car. - -Mr. SPECTER. On the model of the scene itself, Mr. Gauthier, did you -reproduce a portion of the scene which is depicted in Commission -Exhibit No. 876? - -Mr. GAUTHIER. Yes; I did. - -Mr. SPECTER. Handing you that Commission Exhibit No. 876, I will ask -you to describe what it represents in toto. - -Mr. GAUTHIER. This is an aerial view of the site known as Dealey Plaza, -in Dallas, Tex. - -It indicates the large buildings that surround this area. They are -numbered 1 through 11. It indicates the main streets--Commerce, Main, -and Elm Streets, and the roadways through the plaza, including the -triple underpass. - -Mr. SPECTER. I now hand you a document which has been marked as -Commission Exhibit No. 877 and ask you if that document was obtained by -you in connection with the survey for the model which you prepared. - -Mr. GAUTHIER. Yes; this is a description of Dealey Plaza stating the -historical background and the physical description. - -Mr. SPECTER. I move at this time for the admission into evidence of -Commission Exhibits Nos. 876 and 877. - -The CHAIRMAN. They may be admitted. - -(The documents referred to were marked Commission Exhibits Nos. 876 and -877 for identification, and received in evidence.) - -Mr. SPECTER. Inspector, I now hand you two photographs marked as -Commission Exhibits Nos. 878 and 879 and ask you to state what those -depict. - -(The documents referred to were marked Commission Exhibits Nos. 878 and -879 for identification.) - -Mr. GAUTHIER. Commission Exhibit No. 878 is a view of the scale model -looking toward the northeast with the Texas School Book Depository -Building in the background, together with the Daltex Building, and a -portion of the Dallas County Courthouse. It includes the pergola to the -left, and the pericycle structure on the right with the reflecting pool -in the immediate background. - -It also shows the roadway through the plaza, which is an extension of -Elm Street, upon which appears miniature scale models of the vehicles -in the motorcade. - -Mr. DULLES. What motorcade is this? - -Mr. GAUTHIER. We are depicting the Presidential motorcade at the time -of the assassination, the motorcade that passed that area. - -Mr. DULLES. And this was done on what day? - -Mr. GAUTHIER. Our data to build this were compiled on December 2, 3, -and 4. It took about 5 weeks to prepare this exhibit in Washington. - -Mr. SPECTER. Would you now describe what is shown on the photograph? - -Mr. GAUTHIER. Commission Exhibit No. 879 is a view of the scale model -looking toward the southwest, in the direction of the Triple Underpass, -from a position on the sixth floor in the southeast corner window. - -Mr. SPECTER. I now hand you two additional photographs marked as -Commission Exhibits Nos. 880 and 881, and ask you to state what they -represent. - -(The documents referred to were marked Commission Exhibits Nos. 880 and -881 for identification.) - -Mr. GAUTHIER. Commission Exhibit No. 880 is a scale dimension view of -the sixth floor looking toward the southeast corner of the Texas School -Book Depository Building. - -Mr. SPECTER. And in the corner of that photograph is the area depicted -which has been described as the possible site of the rifleman? - -Mr. GAUTHIER. That is correct. - -Mr. SPECTER. Will you now describe what Exhibit No. 881 shows? - -Mr. GAUTHIER. Commission Exhibit No. 881 is a three-dimensional view of -leading down from Main Street and Commerce Street. Positioned on the -ramps are scale models of an armored van and two police squad cars. -There are also miniature mockups of individuals--representing position -of people in this area of the basement garage. - -Mr. SPECTER. And what event is depicted in that model, if any? - -Mr. GAUTHIER. This represents the arrangement, physical arrangement, in -the basement at the time Lee Harvey Oswald walked out from the elevator -through the jail office onto the basement ramp. - -Mr. SPECTER. And where have these models been maintained since the time -they were prepared by the FBI? - -Mr. GAUTHIER. The models were delivered to the Commission's building -and installed in the exhibits room on the first floor, on January 20, -1964. - -Mr. SPECTER. Mr. Chief Justice, I now move for the admission into -evidence of the photographs 878, 879, 880, and 881. - -The CHAIRMAN. They may be admitted. - -(The documents heretofore marked for identification as Commission -Exhibits Nos. 878, 879, 880, and 881, were received in evidence.) - -Mr. SPECTER. Did you participate in the onsite tests made in Dallas? - -Mr. GAUTHIER. I did. - -Mr. SPECTER. Was a survey made of the scene used to record some of the -results of that onsite testing? - -Mr. GAUTHIER. Yes. - -Mr. SPECTER. And by whom was the survey made? - -Mr. GAUTHIER. The survey was made on May 24, 1964, by Robert H. West, -county surveyor, a licensed State land surveyor, located at 160 County -Courthouse, Dallas, Tex. - -Mr. SPECTER. Have you brought the tracing of that survey with you today? - -Mr. GAUTHIER. I have; yes. - -Mr. SPECTER. And have you brought a cardboard reproduction of that? - -Mr. GAUTHIER. A copy made from the tracing; yes. - -Mr. SPECTER. Would you produce the cardboard copy made from the tracing -for the inspection of the Commission at this time, please? - -Mr. GAUTHIER. Yes. - -Mr. SPECTER. Would you produce the tracing at this time, please? - -Mr. GAUTHIER. Yes; the tracing is wrapped, and sealed in this container. - -Mr. SPECTER. Without breaking the seal, I will ask you if the cardboard -which has been set up here--may the record show it is a large -cardboard. I will ask you for the dimensions in just a minute. - -Does the printing on the cardboard represent an exact duplication of -the tracing which you have in your hand? - -Mr. GAUTHIER. Yes. - -Mr. SPECTER. May it please the Commission, we will mark the tracing -Commission Exhibit No. 882, and not take it out, since the cardboard -represents it, and place Commission Exhibit No. 883 on the cardboard -drawing itself, and I would like to move for the admission into -evidence of both Exhibits Nos. 882 and 883. - -The CHAIRMAN. They may be admitted. - -(The documents referred to were marked Commission Exhibits Nos. 882 and -883 for identification, and received in evidence.) - -Mr. SPECTER. Will you now describe what Exhibit No. 883 is, Inspector -Gauthier, indicating, first of all, the approximate size of the -cardboard? - -Mr. GAUTHIER. This is a copy of the tracing measuring 40 inches in -width, 72 inches in length. It is made to a scale of 1 inch equals 10 -feet. - -From the data compiled on that day by the surveyor, this tracing was -prepared. - -The area is bounded on the north by the Texas School Book Depository -Building, and on further here by railroad property. - -Mr. SPECTER. Indicating a general westerly direction from the School -Book Depository Building? - -Mr. GAUTHIER. Yes; I am pointing towards the west. - -On the east it is bounded by Houston Street. - -On the south by Main, which is a roadway going through Dealey Plaza. - -And on the west by the triple underpass. - -Located on this plat map are street lights accurately located, a -catch basin, certain trees, location of trees, the delineation of the -concrete pergola, which you see here on the photograph, the outer -boundaries of the pericycle, and the reflecting pool--locating exactly -the window in the Texas School Book Depository Building, in the -southeast corner, and also a tabulation of the measurements and angles -that the surveyor has compiled from certain positions identified for -him on the street by an observation from this window, an observation -from the position of Mr. Zapruder---- - -Mr. SPECTER. When you say this window, which window did you mean? - -Mr. GAUTHIER. The window on the sixth floor of the Texas School Book -Depository Building, the one in the southeast corner, the farthest -window. - -Mr. SPECTER. And when you identify the Zapruder position, what did you -mean by that? - -Mr. GAUTHIER. This is a concrete abutment of the pergola, located in -the area upon which Zapruder was standing at the time the movies were -made. - -(At this point, Senator Cooper entered the hearing room.) - -(At this point, Representative Ford withdrew from the hearing room.) - -Mr. SPECTER. Are there any other positions noted on the diagram that -you have been describing showing where other movies were made? - -Mr. GAUTHIER. Yes. - -(At this point, Chief Justice Warren withdrew from the hearing room.) - -Mr. GAUTHIER. We also locate the position of Mr. Nix, who also made -movies of the motorcade at certain points on the roadway. - -Mr. SPECTER. On what street was Mr. Nix standing? - -Mr. GAUTHIER. I am pointing now to the south side of Main Street, -approximately in front of the concrete pylon of the south pericycle -structure. That is a short distance from the intersection of Main and -Houston. - -Mr. SPECTER. A short distance west of the intersection? - -Mr. GAUTHIER. West. - -Mr. SPECTER. And what other position is shown of the situs of a movie -photographer? - -Mr. GAUTHIER. We have another position here by Mrs. Mary Muchmore, who -made movies of the motorcade movement along the Elm Street roadway on -November 22, 1963. - -Mr. SPECTER. I now hand you a schedule which I have marked as -Commission Exhibit No. 884 and ask you what figures are contained -thereon. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 884 for -identification.) - -Mr. GAUTHIER. This is a copy of a tabulation which appears on the -plat map. It contains certain positions marked as frame numbers. It -indicates elevations and a column dealing with angle of sight from the -frame positions to the window and to a horizontal line. - -It also contains angels of sight the degree of sight and distances from -these positions to a point on the top of the bridge, handrail height. - -Mr. SPECTER. May it please the Commission, that concludes the -description of the general setting. - -I would like to move now at this time for the admission into evidence -of Exhibit No. 884, which completes all of the exhibits used heretofore. - -Mr. McCLOY. It may be admitted. - -(The document heretofore marked for identification as Commission -Exhibit No. 884, was received in evidence.) - -Mr. SPECTER. May it please the Commission, that completes the testimony -of Inspector Gauthier. - -I would like to call Mr. Shaneyfelt. - -Mr. McCLOY. Mr Shaneyfelt? - - -TESTIMONY OF LYNDAL L. SHANEYFELT - -Mr. SPECTER. Would you state your full name for the record, please? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; Lyndal L. Shaneyfelt. - -Mr. SPECTER. By whom are you employed? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. I am employed as a special agent of the Federal Bureau -of Investigation. - -Mr. SPECTER. And how long have you been so employed? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Fourteen years. - -Mr. SPECTER. What are your duties, in a general way? - -Mr SHANEYFELT. I am assigned to the FBI Laboratory, as a document -examiner, and photographic expert. - -Mr. SPECTER. During the course of those duties, have you had occasion -to make an analysis of certain movies which purport to have been taken -of the assassination? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; I have. - -Mr. SPECTER. What movies have you examined? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. I have examined a roll of 8-mm. motion pictures made by -Mr. Abraham Zapruder of Dallas, Tex., that he took on November 22, of -the assassination of President Kennedy. - -Mr. SPECTER. Can you outline in a general way how the movies taken by -Mr. Zapruder came into your possession? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; Mr. Zapruder, on realizing what he had in his -photographs, took them immediately to a local Dallas processing plant, -had them processed, and had three copies made. He turned two copies of -those movies over to representatives of the Secret Service. - -The original and other copy he sold to Life magazine. - -The FBI was given one of the copies by the Secret Service. The Secret -Service loaned a copy to us long enough for us to make a copy for our -use, which we did, and this copy is the one that I have been examining. - -Mr. SPECTER. At any time in the course of the examination of the -Zapruder film, was the original of that movie obtained? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; it was. On February 25, Mr. Herbert Orth, who -is the assistant chief of the Life magazine photographic laboratory, -provided the original of the Zapruder film for review by the Commission -representatives and representatives of the FBI and Secret Service here -in the Commission building. - -Mr. SPECTER. And what was the reason for his making that original -available? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Life magazine was reluctant to release the original -because of the value. So he brought it down personally and projected -it for us and allowed us to run through it several times, studying the -original. - -Mr. SPECTER. Was that because the copies were not distinct on certain -important particulars? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. The original had considerably more -detail and more there to study than any of the copies, since in the -photographic process each time you copy you lose some detail. - -Mr. SPECTER. And subsequently, were slides made from the original of -the Zapruder film? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes. Since it was not practical to stop the projector -when using the original of the Zapruder film, because of the -possibility of damage to the film, Mr. Orth volunteered to prepare -35-mm. color slides directly from the original movie of all of the -pertinent frames of the assassination which were determined to be -frames 171 through 434. - -Mr. SPECTER. Would you outline what you mean by frames, please? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes. In motion picture films, the actual motion -picture film consists of consecutive pictures that are made in rapid -succession, each one being a separate exposure. And as the camera runs, -it films these, and they are projected fast enough on the screen when -you do not have the sensation of them being individual pictures, but -you have the sensation of seeing the movement--even though they are -individual little pictures on the film. So each one of those little -pictures on the film is called a frame. - -Mr. SPECTER. And how did you number the frames? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. I numbered the frames on the Zapruder film beginning -with No. 1 at the assassination portion of his film. - -He did have on his film some photographs of a personal nature that we -disregarded, and started at the first frame of his motion picture that -was made there on Elm Street of the assassination. - -Mr. SPECTER. And what was happening at the time of frame 1? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. At the time of frame 1, the police motorcycle lead -portion of the parade is in view, and that goes for several frames. -Then he stopped his camera, feeling that it might be some time before -the Presidential car came into view. Then when the Presidential car -rounded the corner and came into view, he started his camera again, and -kept it running throughout the route down Elm Street until the car went -out of sight on his right. - -Mr. SPECTER. What other movies have been examined by you in the course -of this analysis? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. An amateur 8-mm. motion picture film made by a Mr. -Orville Nix of Dallas, Tex., has been examined. Mr. Nix was standing on -the corner of Houston and Main Streets, photographing the motorcade as -it came down Main Street and turned right into Houston Street. - -Mr. SPECTER. Would you explain briefly how you ascertained the location -of Mr. Nix when he took those movies? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes. At the time Mr. Nix took his movies of the -motorcade coming down Main Street, he was standing on the corner, and -photographed them turning the corner and going down Houston Street. - -Mr. SPECTER. You are now indicating the southwest corner of Houston and -Main? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; southwest corner. After he heard the shots, he -hurried down along the curb of Main Street, but did not remember -exactly where he was standing. On the basis of his motion pictures, we -were able to analyze the pictures using his camera, and on the 23d of -May of this year, during the survey, preparatory to the reenactment, -we reestablished this point by viewing pictures taken from his motion -picture camera, at varying angles across here, in order to reestablish -the point where he was standing, based on the relationship of this -street light to other items in the background of the photograph. - -Mr. SPECTER. When you say this point, you mean the point of the Nix -position? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes. - -Mr. SPECTER. And when you say this street light, you are referring to a -street lamp on the opposite side of Main Street? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. - -Mr. SPECTER. Would you outline in a general way how you obtained the -copy of the Nix film? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes. - -The Nix film was obtained as a result of a notice that the FBI gave to -processing plants in the Dallas area, that the FBI would be interested -in obtaining or knowing about any film they processed, that had -anything on it, relating to the assassination. - -And, as a result of this, we learned of the Nix film and arranged to -obtain a copy of it. - -Mr. SPECTER. Did you analyze any other film in connection with this -inquiry? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes. I analyzed a film that was 8-mm. motion picture -film taken by Mrs. Mary Muchmore of Dallas, Tex. - -Mr. SPECTER. How did you obtain a copy of that film? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Our first knowledge of this came as a result of a -review of the book "Four Days" which covers the assassination period, -in which representatives of the FBI noted a colored picture taken from -a motion picture film that did not match either the Nix film or the -Zapruder film. - -Once we established that, then we investigated and learned that it was -made by Mrs. Mary Muchmore, and was at that time in the possession of -United Press International in New York, and made arrangements for them -to furnish us with a copy of the Muchmore film. That is the copy that I -used for examination. - -Mr. SPECTER. Where was Mrs. Muchmore standing at the time she took -those movies? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Mrs. Muchmore was standing along Houston Street, -close to the corner of Main, on the west side of Houston Street, and -photographed the motorcade as it came down Main, turned into Houston, -and proceeded down Houston. She says that when she heard the shots, she -panicked, and did not take any further pictures. But a review of her -film shows pictures of the assassination route, the motorcade going -down Elm Street, beginning just before the shot that hit the President -in the head, and continuing a short period after that. - -Since she did not remember taking the pictures, we then, in the same -manner we established Mr. Nix's position, by checking the photograph in -relation to objects in the background, established her position along -this structure that is marked on the map and found that she had come -from the curb over to this point---- - -Mr. SPECTER. Indicating a position on Exhibit No. 883 marked "Muchmore -Position." - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. - -And this we established as her position when she photographed a portion -of the assassination--motorcade. - -Mr. SPECTER. Would you elaborate just a bit more on how you ascertained -that position from fixed points in the background of the movie? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; we took a frame of the motion picture that is -close to the beginning and a picture that is close to the end, and made -a still photograph of those. We then establish a position and try to -line up the relationship of objects close to where we are standing with -objects in the background, so that they are in relation to each other -as they are in the picture. - -Then we take the other picture from farther along the motion picture -film, and do the same thing, and where those two lines intersect is -where she had to be standing. - -Mr. SPECTER. You draw two straight lines through two objects that you -line up on each of those pictures, and the intersection point of those -two lines is the calculated position of the camera. - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. - -Mr. SPECTER. And was that same system used to ascertain the position of -Mr. Nix? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. - -Mr. SPECTER. And how did you ascertain the position of Mr. Zapruder? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Mr. Zapruder's position was known, as he was on the top -of the abutment along Elm Street--he stated that he was standing on the -abutment. And there is relatively no room to move around there, other -than to stand there. It is about 2 feet wide by 3 to 4 feet deep. - -(At this point, Representative Ford entered the hearing room.) - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. And aside from that, we checked that position against -his photographs and determined that that was in fact correct. - -Mr. SPECTER. Was the position of Mr. Zapruder confirmed through the use -of any other film? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; in Mr. Nix's motion picture films you can see Mr. -Zapruder standing on the abutment. - -Senator COOPER. May I ask a question there? - -After you had made those calculations to establish the position of -Mrs. Muchmore and Mr. Nix and Mr. Zapruder, did you then identify -those positions to the three and ask them whether or not it -corresponded--your findings corresponded with their recollection as to -where they were standing? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. We did not do that; no. Mr. Nix, I might say, did state -that he went down along this side--the south side of Main Street, along -the curb, and it generally conforms to where he stated he went, but he -could not place the exact position. We did, by this study. - -Senator COOPER. Mr. Zapruder's position was established by another -photograph? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. - -Mr. DULLES. Do I understand you correctly that Mrs. Muchmore didn't -realize she had taken the later pictures that appear? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. According to her statement, she said after hearing the -shots, she panicked, and didn't take any more pictures. - -Mr. DULLES. You think she did? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. On the film there are pictures. - -Mr. SPECTER. Was the position of Mrs. Muchmore and Mr. Nix ascertained -through a geometric calculation, lining up various points as you have -just described? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Well, it is actually a geometric calculation, although -no strings were drawn or no lines were drawn. It is a matter of -standing in a position out there with Mr. Nix's camera, and viewing the -two different photographs we had selected, until we arrived at a point -that matched. - -Mr. SPECTER. Was there reasonable mathematical certainty in that -alinement, within the limits of your observations of their pictures? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes. - -Mr. SPECTER. Did Mr. Zapruder himself point out his location on the -abutment as depicted on Exhibit No. 883? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. - -Mr. SPECTER. Now, how many occasions were you a participant in an -analysis of these various films which you have just described? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Seven. - -Mr. SPECTER. And when was the first time that you were a participant in -such an analysis? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. On January 27, 1964. - -Mr. SPECTER. And who else has been with you at the time you analyzed -those films--just stating in in a general way without identifying each -person present on each of the occasions? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. On most occasions, Mr. Gauthier of the FBI was present, -I was present, Mr. Malley of the FBI was present. Inspector Kelley from -Secret Service, and Mr. John Howlett from Secret Service. - -Representatives of the Commission were always present--normally Mr. -Redlich, Mr. Specter, or Mr. Eisenberg were present. - -On several occasions Mr. Ball and Mr. Belin were present. Mr. Rankin -was present on some occasions. - -I believe Mr. McCloy was present on one occasion. - -Various representatives of the Commission were present. - -Mr. SPECTER. And how long did those analysis sessions ordinarily last? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. They would normally last most of the day, about all -day. - -Mr. SPECTER. And what would be done during the course of those -analytical sessions? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. In each case we would take the film and run it through -regular speed, slow motion, we would stop it on individual frames and -study it frame by frame, trying to see in the photographs anything that -would give any indication of a shot hitting its mark, a reaction of the -President, a reaction of Mr. Connally or Mrs. Connally, reaction of the -Secret Service agents, reaction of people in the crowd, relating it to -all the facts that we felt were important. - -When we obtained the slides from Life magazine, we went through those -very thoroughly, because they gave so much more detail and were so -much clearer and analyzed again all these things about the reaction -of the President and Mr. Connally, trying to ascertain where he was -reacting--whether either one was reacting to being hit. - -Of course the only shot that is readily apparent in any of the films, -and it appears in the Zapruder, the Nix, and the Muchmore films, is the -shot that hit the President in the head. - -Mr. SPECTER. Why do you say that is readily apparent? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Because on the film there is practically an explosion -of his head and this is obviously the shot that hit the President in -the head. It is very apparent from the photograph. - -Mr. SPECTER. Now, were any others present at any time, such as -witnesses who appeared before the Commission, during the analysis -sessions on these films and slides? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes. - -On April 14, representatives of the Commission, FBI, and doctors--Dr. -Hume of the Navy, who is at Bethesda, Commander Boswell from the U.S. -Navy Medical School at Bethesda, Colonel Finck, Chief of the Wound -Ballistics Pathology of the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology. - -Mr. SPECTER. Are those the autopsy surgeons? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; that is my understanding. Dr. Olivier, from -Edgewood Arsenal, Dr. Light, from Edgewood Arsenal, were present also -with Dr. Humes and the others, on April 14. - -Mr. SPECTER. Did any individuals who were present at the motorcade -itself ever have an opportunity to view the films and slides? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; on April 21, films were again viewed by -representatives of the Commission and the FBI, and at that time Drs. -Gregory and Shaw, from Parkland Hospital in Dallas, were available, -Drs. Light and Olivier, and a Dr. Dolce, and Governor and Mrs. Connally -were present. - -And at all of the viewings, they were again reviewed frame by frame, -studied by the doctors to tie it in with their findings, studied by the -Parkland doctors, and studied by the Connallys, to try to tie in where -the shots occurred along the film. - -Mr. SPECTER. I now hand you an album which has been marked as -Commission Exhibit No. 885. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 885 for -identification.) - -Mr. SPECTER. I ask you to state what that album depicts. - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. This is an album that I prepared of black and white -photographs made of the majority of the frames in the Zapruder film---- - -Mr. SPECTER. Starting with what frame number? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Starting with frame 171, going through frame 334. - -Mr. SPECTER. And why did you start with frame 171? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. This is the frame that the slides start from. This was -an arbitrary frame number that was decided on as being far enough back -to include the area that we wanted to study. - -Mr. SPECTER. Is that a frame where President Kennedy comes into full -view after the motorcade turns left off of Houston onto Elm Street? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes, yes. - -Mr. SPECTER. And how was the ending point of that frame sequence, being -No. 334, fixed? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. It was fixed as several frames past the shot that hit -the President in the head. Frame 313 is the frame showing the shot to -the President's head, and it ends at 334. - -Mr. SPECTER. Are there any other photographs in that album in addition -to the Zapruder frames? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; there are. There are six photographs selected -at random from the Nix film, including frame 24, which is a frame -depicting the shot to the head of the President, and there are three -photographs picked at random from the Muchmore film, including frame -42, which is the frame depicting the head shot. These are the pictures -that were used in establishing the location of the Nix and Muchmore -cameras on location in Dallas. Frame 10, which is the first one of the -Nix series, is the one showing Mr. Zapruder standing on the projection. - -Mr. SPECTER. And where was the viewing of the films and slides -undertaken? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. They have been viewed here at the Commission--all those -in addition to the ones I have made personally in the FBI Laboratory. - -Mr. SPECTER. And was that down on the first floor of the VFW Building -here? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. - -Mr. SPECTER. And was there any model available adjacent to the area -where the films were shown, for use in re-creating or reconstructing -the assassination events? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; the model was available and used. - -Mr. SPECTER. Is that the model which has been described earlier this -afternoon by Inspector Gauthier? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. - -Mr. SPECTER. Were you present on May 24 in Dallas, Tex.? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes. - -Mr. SPECTER. And what, if anything, was done at the site of the -assassination on that date? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. On May 24, 1964, representatives of the Commission, -Secret Service, and FBI reenacted the assassination, relocated specific -locations of the car on the street based on the motion pictures, and in -general staged a reenactment. - -Mr. SPECTER. Who was present at that time representing the Commission? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. The Commission was represented by Mr. Rankin, Mr. -Specter, and Mr. Redlich. - -Mr. SPECTER. And who was present at that time from the FBI? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. I was present, Inspector Gauthier was present, -Inspector J. R. Malley was present, Special Agent R. A. Frazier was -present, with some aids, assistants. - -Mr. SPECTER. Other aids from the FBI were also present? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; in addition, there were several agents from the -Dallas office of the Federal Bureau of Investigation who assisted. - -Mr. SPECTER. And were there representatives of the Secret Service -participating in that onsite testing? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; there were. Inspector Kelley was present, Agent -John Howlett was present, the driver of the car, or the Secret Service -agent whose name I do not recall---- - -Mr. SPECTER. George Hickey? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. - -Mr. SPECTER. And at what time did the onsite test start? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. They started at 6 o'clock Sunday morning. - -Mr. SPECTER. Why was that time selected? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. The time was selected because of the traffic in the -area. The Dallas Police Department recommended that that would be the -most logical time to do it, causing the least problem with traffic. - -Mr. SPECTER. At what time did the onsite tests conclude? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. They concluded about 1 o'clock, 12:45 to 1 o'clock. - -Mr. SPECTER. Was there any subsequent testing done in Dallas on that -day? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; there was. - -Mr. SPECTER. And where was that testing undertaken? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. There was some testing done in a railway express agency -garage nearby the assassination site. - -Mr. SPECTER. At what time did that start? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That started at 3 p.m., and lasted until 5:30 p.m. - -Mr. SPECTER. Where were the various individuals positioned who -participated in these onsite tests at the outset, at, say, 6 a.m., on -the 24th of May? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. At the very beginning, at 6 a.m., Mr. Rankin and -Mr. Specter were in the sixth floor window of the Texas School Book -Depository Building, which is the southeast corner of the building, -sixth floor window, which was referred to as our control point, and -where we had the master radio control for the other units. - -Mr. Redlich was on the street with the car. At the car on the street -were the occupants of the car, the Secret Service driver, Mr. Hickey, -an agent from the FBI, who handled radio contact with control, Agents -Anderton and Williams in the President's and Connally's seats, Mr. -Gauthier and his aids, a surveyor, and I, were all on the ground in the -vicinity of the car. - -Agent Frazier was in the window of the Book Building at the control -point with the rifle that was found at the window following the -assassination. - -Mr. SPECTER. Now, was that rifle found at the window or in another -location on the sixth floor? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. In another location on the sixth floor. - -Mr. SPECTER. And that is the Mannlicher-Carcano rifle which was -heretofore identified as Commission Exhibit No. 139? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. - -Mr. SPECTER. And where were you positioned on most of the occasions at -the time of the onsite tests? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. For the first portion of them, I was at the car in the -street, and at the position of Mr. Zapruder, the position from which he -took his pictures. - -Mr. SPECTER. What communications were available, if any, among the -participants at the various locations heretofore described? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. We had radio contact between all points. - -Mr. SPECTER. What was the starting position of the car at the most -easterly position on Elm Street, immediately after turning off Houston -Street? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. The first position we established that morning was -frame 161. - -Mr. SPECTER. Was there not a position established prior in sequence to -frame 161, specifically that designated as position A? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That was actually established later. But the first one -to be actually located was 161. And we went back later and positioned -point A. - -Mr. SPECTER. Well, let's start with the position which is the most -easterly point on Elm Street, which I believe would be position A, -would it not? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes. - -Mr. SPECTER. Have you a photographic exhibit depicting that position? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; in each of the positions that we established, -we used, insofar as possible, the Zapruder pictures to establish the -position, or we established it from the window, and made photographs -from the position Mr. Zapruder was standing in. - -Mr. SPECTER. This chart has been marked as Commission Exhibit No. 886. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 886 for -identification.) - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. This shows the photograph that was made from the point -where Zapruder was standing looking toward the car, and is a point that -we have designated as position A because it is in a position that did -not appear on the Zapruder film. - -The Zapruder film does not start until the car gets farther down Elm -Street. - -Mr. SPECTER. What is that exhibit number? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Exhibit No. 886. - -Mr. SPECTER. And why was that location selected for the position of the -car? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. This location was selected as the first point at which -a person in the sixth floor window of the Book Building at our control -point could have gotten a shot at the President after the car had -rounded the corner from Houston to Elm. - -Mr. SPECTER. And what position is station C? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Station C is on a line drawn along the west curb line -of Houston Street in a direct line, and station C is at a point along -that line that is in line with where the car would have turned coming -around that corner. It is on a line which is an extension of the west -curb line of Houston Street. - -Mr. DULLES. Where is position A on that chart? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Position A is here. - -Mr. McCLOY. That is before you get to the tree? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; he isn't under the tree yet. - -Mr. SPECTER. And what occupant, if any, in the car is position A -sighted on for measuring purposes? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. All of the photographs made through the rifle sight -that are shown on the exhibit in the lower left-hand corner were -sighted on the spot that was simulating the spot where the President -was wounded in the neck. The chalk mark is on the back of the coat. - -Mr. SPECTER. When you say that position A is the first position at -which President Kennedy was in view of the marksman from the southeast -window on the sixth floor of the School Book Depository Building, you -mean by that the first position where the marksman saw the rear of the -President's stand-in? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. - -Mr. SPECTER. So that would be the first position where the marksman -could focus in on the circled point where the point of entry on the -President was marked? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. - -Mr. SPECTER. Could the marksman then have taken a shot at the President -at any prior position and have struck him with the point of entry on -that spot, on the base of the President's neck? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. I don't quite understand the question. - -Mr. SPECTER. Was there any prior position, that is a position before -position A, where the marksman from the sixth floor could have fired -the weapon and have struck the President at the known point of entry at -the base of the back of his neck? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. No; because as the car moves back, you lose sight of -the chalk mark on the back of his coat. - -Mr. SPECTER. And what is the distance between that point on the -President and station C? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is 44 feet from station C--91.6 feet to the rifle -in the window from the actual chalk mark on the coat. All measurements -were made to the chalk mark on the coat. - -Mr. SPECTER. On the coat of the President? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. - -Mr. SPECTER. The President's stand-in? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Right. The angle to the rifle in the window was 40 deg.10'. - -Mr. SPECTER. And what is the other data? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. The distance to the overpass was 447 feet, and -the angle to the overpass was minus O deg.27'; that is, 27' below the -horizontal. - -Senator COOPER. May I ask a question there? How did you establish the -location of the rifle in making those calculations? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. The location of the rifle was established on the basis -of other testimony and information furnished to us by the Commission, -photographs taken by the Dallas Police Department immediately after the -assassination, and the known opening of the window. - -It was an estimation of where the rifle most likely was based on the -knowledge that the Commission has through testimony. - -Mr. SPECTER. Senator Cooper, Mr. Frazier is present and has been sworn, -and he is going to identify that. He could do it at this time, to -pinpoint that issue. - -Senator COOPER. I think we can just make a note of that, and go ahead -with this witness. - -Mr. SPECTER. Fine. We will proceed then with this witness and Mr. -Frazier will testify in due course. - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. I might say that this position was determined by Mr. -Frazier in the window. We moved the car around until he told us from -the window, viewing through the rifle, the point where he wanted the -car to stop. And he was the one in the window that told us where the -point A was. Once we established that, we then photographed it. - -Mr. DULLES. Could he see the mark on the back of the coat from the -window? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; through the rifle scope, he could see the mark. - -Mr. SPECTER. Does the picture designated "photograph through rifle -scope" depict the actual view of the rifleman through the actual -Mannlicher-Carcano weapon? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. At point A. - -Senator COOPER. When Mr. Frazier testifies, then, will he correlate -this photograph with a frame from photographs taken of the actual -motorcade at the time of the assassination? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. No; we cannot correlate this with a frame from the -motion picture because Mr. Zapruder didn't start taking pictures until -the car had passed this point. - -So we, therefore, on this frame and for the next two or three points, -have no picture from Mr. Zapruder, since he wasn't taking pictures at -that time. - -Mr. DULLES. Off the record. - -(Discussion off the record.) - -Mr. DULLES. Back on the record. - -Do I understand that you are not suggesting that a shot was necessarily -fired at this point A, but this was the first point where this -particular vision of the President's back could have been obtained? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. It is only an arbitrary point showing -the first possible shot that could have entered the President's coat at -this chalk mark. - -Representative FORD. What criteria did you use for determining that you -could see the chalk mark? Was the criteria a part or the whole of the -chalk mark? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. The actual manner in which it was set up--let me see if -this answers your question. As we moved the car around, Mr. Frazier was -in the window looking through the actual scope of the rifle, and could -see very clearly the President or the man taking the President's place, -as the car moved around. - -And the instant that he could first see that chalk mark is the point -where he radioed to us to stop the car, and is the first point at which -a shot could be fired that would go in where the chalk mark is located. - -Mr. DULLES. And that is point A? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is point A. Does that answer your question? - -Representative FORD. I think it does. Is that picture in the lower -left-hand corner of Exhibit No. 886 an actual photograph taken through -the sight of the weapon that was allegedly used in the assassination? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. - -Representative FORD. And the chalk mark we see there is through that -sight? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. And that is exactly what an individual -looking through the sight would see. - -Mr. SPECTER. Then at point A, could the rifleman see the entire back -of the President's stand-in as well as the specific chalk mark, as -depicted on the exhibit? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. He could see only a portion of the back. - -Mr. SPECTER. And the portion, which he could not see, is that which is -below the seat level? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes. - -Mr. DULLES. You didn't say the President's stand-in, did you? - -Mr. SPECTER. Yes; stand-in. - -Mr. Shaneyfelt, for purposes of illustration would you produce the -photograph at this time showing the mounting of the motion picture -camera on the weapon found on the sixth floor? - -I now hand you a photograph which is being marked as Commission Exhibit -No. 887 and ask you to state for the record who that is a picture of, -and what else is in the photograph. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 887 for -identification.) - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Commission Exhibit No. 887 is a picture of me that was -taken on May 24, 1964. My location was at the sixth floor window of the -Texas School Book Depository that we have designated as our control -point. I have the rifle that is the assassination rifle mounted on a -tripod, and on the rifle is mounted an Arriflex 16-mm. motion picture -camera, that is alined to take photographs through the telescopic sight. - -This Arriflex motion picture camera is commonly known as a reflex -camera in that as you view through the viewfinder a prism allows -you to view directly through the lens system as you are taking your -photographs so that as I took the photographs looking into the -viewfinder I was also looking through the scope and seeing the actual -image that was being recorded on the film. - -Mr. SPECTER. Was the view recorded on the film as shown on Exhibit No. -886 the actual view which would have been seen had you been looking -through the telescopic sight of the Mannlicher-Carcano itself? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes. - -Mr. SPECTER. How did you determine the level and angle at which to hold -the rifle? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. I placed the rifle in the approximate position based -on prior knowledge of where the boxes were stacked and the elevation -of the window and other information that was furnished to me by -representatives of the Commission. - -Mr. DULLES. You used the same boxes, did you, that the assassin had -used? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. No; I did not. - -Mr. SPECTER. Were those boxes used by Mr. Frazier. - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. They were used by Mr. Frazier and used in making the -measurements. I had to use a tripod because of the weight of the camera -and placed the elevation of the rifle at an approximate height in a -position as though the boxes were there. - -Mr. SPECTER. Was Mr. Frazier present at the time you positioned the -rifle on the tripod? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; he was. - -Mr. SPECTER. Did he assist in describing for you or did you have -an opportunity to observe the way he held a rifle to ascertain the -approximate position of the rifle at that time? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. - -Mr. SPECTER. May it please the Commission, we will, with Mr. -Frazier, indicate, the reasons he held the rifle in the way he did -to approximate the way we believe it was held at the time of the -assassination. - -What is the next position which has been depicted on one of your -exhibits, please. - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. The next position that we established during the -reenactment is frame 161 of the Zapruder motion picture film. - -Mr. SPECTER. Permit me to mark that if you would as Commission Exhibit -No. 888. - -(Commission Exhibit No. 888 was marked for identification.) - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. This position which has been designated by us as frame -161 and as Commission Exhibit No. 888, was established as the last -position that the car could be in where the rifleman in the window -could get a clear shot of the President in the car before the car went -under the covering of the tree. - -Mr. SPECTER. How was that position located, from the ground or from the -sixth floor? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. This was positioned by Mr. Frazier in the sixth floor -window. In addition we knew from the Zapruder photographs the relative -position of the car in the street as related to the curb and the -guidelines or the lane lines. - -Following those lane lines we then moved the car down to a point where -Mr. Frazier radioed to us that it was the last point at which he could -get a clear shot and we stopped the car there. - -Mr. SPECTER. How did you then select the appropriate frame from the -Zapruder film? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. After Mr. Frazier had stationed the car at this -point, I then went to the position of Mr. Zapruder. Based on his -motion pictures, a comparison of the photograph that we made with the -photograph from the film, I was able to state that because of the -relative position of the car in the street and in relation to other -objects in the background, it corresponded to frame 161 of the motion -picture. - -Mr. SPECTER. Do you have on Exhibit No. 888 a reproduction of frame 161? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; the upper left-hand corner is a reproduction of -the frame 161 of the Zapruder motion picture. The picture on the upper -right is a photograph that I made with a speed graphic camera from -Zapruder's position of the car reestablished in that location. The -photograph in the lower left-hand corner, is a photograph of the view -through the rifle scope that Mr. Frazier saw at the time he positioned -the car there. This is the view that you would obtain from looking -through the rifle scope from the sixth floor window. - -Mr. SPECTER. Was the automobile in exactly the same position at the -time of the taking of the "photograph through rifle scope" and the -"photograph from reenactment"? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; approximately the same. We went through all -stations with Mr. Frazier in the window and I took photographs from Mr. -Zapruder's position, and once establishing a frame position, we marked -it clearly in the street. After we had taken all of the photographs -from Zapruder's position, we then took the car back, and went to the -sixth floor window and mounted the motion picture camera on the rifle. -These photographs were made by rolling the car in the same position -based on the marks we had in the street so it was as accurate as could -be done in the same position. - -Mr. DULLES. There is no one sitting in that right-hand corner of the -rear seat, is there in that picture? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; the person taking President Kennedy's place is -sitting in the back seat. - -Mr. DULLES. Yes; I see it. It is rather hard to see through the trees. - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; we moved it up to a point where the chalk mark was -just about to disappear on the street. - -Mr. DULLES. I don't think I see the chalk mark maybe someone else can. - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. It may be covered by the crosshair of the rifle scope. - -Representative FORD. In that picture photographed through the rifle -scope on Exhibit No. 888 a man standing in for Governor Connally is -also in the car, is he not? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. He is mostly hidden by the tree. - -Mr. DULLES. Yes; I see. - -Mr. SPECTER. Was there any difference between the position of President -Kennedy's stand-in and the position of President Kennedy on the day of -the assassination by virtue of any difference in the automobiles in -which each rode? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; because of the difference in the automobiles there -was a variation of 10 inches, a vertical distance of 10 inches that -had to be considered. The stand-in for President Kennedy was sitting -10 inches higher and the stand-in for Governor Connally was sitting 10 -inches higher than the President and Governor Connally were sitting and -we took this into account in our calculations. - -Mr. SPECTER. Was any allowance then made in the photographing of the -first point or rather last point at which the spot was visible on the -back of the coat of President Kennedy's stand-in before passing under -the oak tree? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; there was. After establishing this position, -represented by frame 161, where the chalk mark was about to disappear -under the tree, we established a point 10 inches below that as the -actual point where President Kennedy would have had a chalk mark on his -back or where the wound would have been if the car was 10 inches lower. -And we rolled the car then sufficiently forward to reestablish the -position that the chalk mark would be in at its last clear shot before -going under the tree, based on this 10 inches, and this gave us frame -166 of the Zapruder film. - -Mr. SPECTER. What Commission Exhibit number has been affixed to that? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. This is Commission Exhibit No. 889. - -(Commission Exhibit No. 889 was marked for identification.) - -Mr. DULLES. Is that 10 inches difference due to the difference in the -two cars? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. - -Mr. DULLES. That is the President's--the car the President was in and -the car you had to use for this particular test? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. - -Mr. SPECTER. On Exhibit No. 889, is the car in the same position on -the "photograph through rifle scope" as it is on "photograph from -reenactment"? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct, the same position. - -Mr. SPECTER. And what is the comparison between the photograph -from Zapruder film on that Exhibit No. 889 and the photograph from -reenactment? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. The car is in the same position relative to the -surrounding area in both the reenactment photograph and the Zapruder -photograph. - -Incidentally, the position that was used throughout all of the -positioning of the car was the President's. His placement in the -photograph, and this will be clearer in some of the later photographs, -if the President's head was directly under a stop sign or a street sign -or whatever, in the background, this was then the way we positioned the -car with the person standing in for the President directly below or -slightly to the side or directly below the stop sign and so on; so all -of the calculations were based upon the position of the President. - -Mr. SPECTER. Before leaving frame 161, finally, would you recite the -distances which appear from the various points on that exhibit? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes. - -At the position that has been designated as frame 161, and appears -on Commission Exhibit No. 888, the distance from the wound mark on a -stand-in for President Kennedy to station C was 94.7 feet. - -The distance to the rifle in the window was 137.4 feet, the angle to -the window was 26 deg.58' based on the horizontal line, the distance to the -overpass was 392.4 feet, and the angle to the overpass was minus 0 deg.7'. - -Mr. SPECTER. Are all angles calculated thereon based on the horizontal? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes. - -Mr. SPECTER. Was there any street angle taken into consideration in the -calculations here? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; there is a 3 deg. street grade that has to be deducted -from the angle to the window to determine the actual angle from the -street to the window as opposed to the horizon. - -Mr. SPECTER. Will you now---- - -Mr. DULLES. Frame 161 is 3 deg. on 161? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Three degrees all along Elm Street. - -Mr. DULLES. All along. That applies to all of these different pictures, -is that correct? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. - -Mr. SPECTER. Would you now read the same statistical data from frame -166 on Exhibit No. 889, please? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes. - -From the chalk mark on the back of the stand-in for President Kennedy, -to station C is 95.6 feet, the distance to rifle in window, 138.2 feet, -the angle to rifle in window based on the horizontal, is minus 26 deg.52'. - -Distance to overpass is 391.5 feet. The angle to the overpass is 0 deg.7'. - -Mr. SPECTER. Did the back of President Kennedy ever come into view at -any time while he was passing through the foliage of the oak tree? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes. - -Mr. SPECTER. What frame number was ascertained with respect to that -position? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. This was determined to be frame 185. There is a slight -opening in the tree, where the car passed under the tree, where a shot -could have been fired that would have passed through this opening in -the tree. This again was positioned on the basis of Mr. Frazier in the -window looking through the rifle scope and telling us on the street -where to stop the car at the point where he could get a shot through -the trees. - -Mr. SPECTER. What Commission Exhibit number has been assigned to frame -185? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. This is Commission Exhibit No. 890, frame 185. - -Mr. SPECTER. Is the "photograph through rifle scope" taken with the -position of the car at the same place as "photograph from reenactment"? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. - -Mr. SPECTER. And is the "photograph from reenactment" in the same -position, as close as you could make it to the "photograph from -Zapruder's film"? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. - -Mr. SPECTER. Will you read the statistical data from frame 185? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; from the point of the chalk on the back of the -stand-in for the President at position 185 to station C is 114.8 feet, -the distance to rifle on window is 154.9 feet. - -The angle to rifle in window based on horizontal is 24 deg.14', distance -to overpass is 372.5 feet. The angle to the overpass is 0 deg.3' above -horizontal. - -Mr. SPECTER. Was there any adjustment made for the difference in -the height of the automobiles on the location where the back of the -President's stand-in was visible through the tree? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; there was an adjustment made for the 10 inch -differential in the heights because of the different cars, and this was -established as frame 186. - -Mr. SPECTER. What Commission Exhibit number is affixed to frame 186? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Commission Exhibit No. 891. - -Mr. SPECTER. On Exhibit No. 891 is the car in the same position in -"photograph through rifle scope" and "photograph from reenactment"? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. - -Mr. SPECTER. Are the cars on those two pictures in the same positions -on all of the frames which you are going to show this afternoon? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. - -Mr. SPECTER. In the "photograph from Zapruder film", does that -"photograph from Zapruder film" show the Presidential automobile to be -in the same position or as close to the same position as you could make -it as is the replica car in the "photograph from reenactment"? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. - -Mr. SPECTER. Will you read the statistical data from frame 186, please? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes. - -At frame 186 position the distance from the chalk mark on the back of -the stand-in for the President was 116.3 feet from the station C. It -was 156.3 feet to the rifle in the window. - -The angle to the rifle in the window was 24 deg.3' based on the horizontal. -Distance to the overpass was 371.7 feet. The angle to the overpass is -0 deg.3'. - -Mr. SPECTER. Was that position ascertained where the chalk spot on the -back of President Kennedy's coat was first visible from the sixth floor -window through the telescopic sight? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. - -Mr. DULLES. This is after passing the tree. - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes. - -Mr. SPECTER. After passing out from under the oak tree. - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes. - -Mr. SPECTER. What frame did that turn out to be? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That was frame 207. - -Mr. SPECTER. Do you have an exhibit depicting the same photographic -sequence on frame 207? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; I do. - -Mr. SPECTER. What Commission Exhibit number has been affixed to that -frame? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Commission Exhibit No. 892. - -Mr. SPECTER. Is the car in the same position on "photograph through -rifle scope" and "photograph from reenactment" on that exhibit? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes. - -Mr. SPECTER. Is the car in the same position, as closely as you could -make it, on the "photograph from reenactment" and "photograph from -Zapruder film"? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. - -Mr. SPECTER. Will you now read the statistical data from that exhibit? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes. Distance from the chalk mark on the back of the -stand-in for the President to the station C is 136.6 feet. - -Distance to rifle in the window is 174.9 feet. The angle to the rifle -in the window based on the horizontal is 21 deg.50'. The distance to the -overpass is 350.9 feet, and the angle to the overpass is 0 deg.12'. - -This is on frame 207, Commission Exhibit No. 892. - -Mr. SPECTER. Was an adjustment made on that position for the heights of -the automobiles? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes. - -Mr. SPECTER. What was the adjusted frame for the first view that the -marksman had of the President's stand-in coming out from under the tree? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is frame 210 and has been marked as Commission -Exhibit No. 893 and represents the 10-inch adjustment for the -difference in the height of the car as compared with frame 207. - -Mr. SPECTER. Is the layout of frame 210 exactly the same as that for -frames 207 and 185 that you have already testified about? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. - -Mr. SPECTER. In viewing the films on the frames preceding 210, what was -President Kennedy doing? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. He is waving to the crowd, and in some frames it is -obvious that he is smiling, you can actually see a happy expression on -his face and his hand---- - -Mr. DULLES. Which way is he turning, to the left or to the right? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. He is looking toward the crowd to his right during most -of that area, he is looking slightly to his right. His arm is up on -the side of the car and his hand is in a wave, in approximately this -position and he appears to be smiling. - -Mr. SPECTER. What is the latest frame count where, to your eye, it -appears that he is showing no reaction to any possible shot? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Approximately--I would like to explain a little bit, -that at frames in the vicinity of 200 to 210 he is obviously still -waving, and there is no marked change. - -In the area from approximately 200 to 205 he is still, his hand is -still in a waving position, he is still turned slightly toward the -crowd, and there has been no change in his position that would signify -anything occurring unusual. I see nothing in the frames to arouse my -suspicion about his movements, up through in the areas from 200 on and -as he disappears behind the signboard, there is no change. - -Now, 205 is the last frame, 205 and 206 are the last frames where we -see any of his, where we see the cuff of his coat showing above the -signboard indicating his hand is still up generally in a wave. - -From there on the frames are too blurry as his head disappears you -can't really see any expression on his face. You can't see any change. -It is all consistent as he moves in behind the signboard. - -Mr. SPECTER. When you say "signboard" what do you mean by that, Mr. -Shaneyfelt? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. I refer to the sign that is between the photographer, -Mr. Zapruder, and the Presidential car. - -Representative FORD. Not any sign post between the rifleman and the -President? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. No; this is a sign between the cameraman and the -President. So that we are unable to see his reaction, if any. - -Mr. SPECTER. What is the frame at which Governor Connally first emerges -from behind the sign you just described? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is frame 222. - -Mr. SPECTER. Have you prepared a model demonstration on frame 222? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; I have. - -Mr. SPECTER. What Commission Exhibit number has just been affixed on -that frame? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Frame 222 has been given Commission Exhibit No. 894. - -Mr. SPECTER. Was the location of the automobile fixed from the window -or from the street on frame 222? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. On frame 222, the position of the automobile was fixed -from the street, based on the photograph from the Zapruder film. - -Mr. SPECTER. Are the various photographs on that frame and the various -distances the same in terms of general layout as the prior exhibit you -testified to? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. - -Mr. SPECTER. What is the first frame at which President Kennedy is -visible coming out from behind that sign? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. This is frame 225. - -Mr. SPECTER. What Commission Exhibit has been affixed to frame 225? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Frame 225 has been assigned Commission Exhibit No. 895. - -Mr. SPECTER. What, if anything, is detectable from a view of the -Zapruder film frame 225 as to the positions or reaction of President -Kennedy? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Frame 225 there appears to be a reaction on the part of -the President. This is---- - -Mr. SPECTER. Describe specifically what movement he is making in that -picture or what his position is? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. At frame 225 his hand is down, his right hand that was -waving is down, and has been brought down as though it were reaching -for his lapel or his throat. The other hand, his left hand is on his -lapel but rather high, as though it were coming up, and he is beginning -to go into a hunched position. - -Mr. SPECTER. When you say beginning to go into a hunched position is -that apparent to you from viewing the motion picture and slides from -the frames which succeed frame 225? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is primarily apparent from the motion picture -because of the two or three or four frames that show as he emerges -from the sign; that is, in the motion picture, you see the President -reaching for his coat lapels and going into a hunched position, leaning -forward and lowering his head. - -Mr. McCLOY. That doesn't exist in frame 225 yet, does it? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. It is just beginning in frame 225. That is frame 225 is -the first view we have of the President. - -Mr. McCLOY. Out past the sign. - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. As he comes out from behind the sign that obstructs the -cameraman from the President. - -Mr. DULLES. But there is no obstruction from the sixth floor window? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT, No; no obstruction at this point. There is no -obstruction from the sixth floor window from the time they leave the -tree until they disappear down toward the triple overpass. - -Mr. SPECTER. Do the photographs on frame 225 depict the same -circumstances as those depicted on the prior exhibits? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. - -Mr. SPECTER. And do the measurements on frame 225 cover the same -subjects as those covered on prior exhibits? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. - -Mr. SPECTER. What is the angle from the rifle to the spot on the -President's back on frame 210, please? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. On frame 210, the angle from the rifle to the window, -based on the horizon is 21 deg.34'. - -Mr. SPECTER. That is from the rifle to what, Mr. Shaneyfelt. - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. From the rifle to the chalk mark on the back of the -stand-in for the President. - -Mr. SPECTER. What is the same angle at frame 225? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. It is 20 deg.11'. - -Mr. SPECTER. Those angles are computed to the horizontal? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. - -Mr. SPECTER. What is the range of distance from the position of the car -in frame 210 to the position of the car in frame 225? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is 14.9 feet between frame 210 and frame 225. - -Mr. SPECTER. What is the position of President Kennedy at frame 210 -with respect to position C. - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. President Kennedy is 138.9 feet from station C at frame -210. - -Mr. SPECTER. Station C. - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; station C to President Kennedy on frame 210 is -138.9 feet. - -Mr. SPECTER. What is the distance between station C and President -Kennedy at frame 225? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is 153.8 feet. - -Mr. SPECTER. Was the car further positioned at frame 231? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; it was. - -Mr. SPECTER. What Commission exhibit number are we affixing to that? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is Commission Exhibit No. 896. - -Mr. SPECTER. Are the photographs and measurements on 896 the same -layout as those affixed to prior exhibits? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. - -Mr. SPECTER. Was the automobile stopped at frame 235 and similar -photographs and measurements taken? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. - -Mr. SPECTER. What Commission exhibit number is affixed to frame 235. - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Exhibit No. 897. - -Mr. SPECTER. Was the automobile again stopped at frame 240 with -measurements and photographs taken similar to those in prior exhibits? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; it was. That is correct. - -Mr. SPECTER. What Commission exhibit number is affixed to that frame? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Exhibit No. 898. - -Mr. SPECTER. Was the automobile again stopped at frame 249 with similar -photographs and measurements taken? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. - -Mr. SPECTER. And what Commission exhibit number is given to those -calculations and photographs on frame 249? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Commission Exhibit 899. - -Mr. SPECTER. Now, as to frame 249, that is how many frames beyond the -first point at which the spot on President Kennedy's back was visible -after he passed out from under the oak tree? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is 249? - -Mr. SPECTER. Yes. - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. It is 42 frames. - -Mr. SPECTER. And does a 42-frame count have any significance with -respect to the firing time on the Mannlicher-Carcano rifle? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; we have established that the Zapruder motion -picture camera operates at an average speed of 18.3 frames per second. -And we have been advised that the minimum time for firing the rifle in -successive shots is approximately two and a quarter seconds. So this -gives us then a figure of two and a quarter seconds of frames; at 18.3, -this gives us this figure of 41 to 42 frames. - -Representative FORD. Would you repeat that again, please? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. The camera operates at a speed of 18.3 frames per -second. So that in two and a quarter seconds it would run through about -42--41 to 42 frames. - -Representative FORD. Then the firing of the rifle, repeat that again? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. As to the firing of the rifle--we have been advised -that the minimum time for getting off two successive well-aimed shots -on the rifle is approximately two and a quarter seconds. That is the -basis for using this 41 to 42 frames to establish two points in the -film where two successive quick shots could have been fired. - -Representative FORD. That is with one shot and then the firing. - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Work the bolt and fire another one. - -Mr. SPECTER. At frame 249 was Governor Connally in a position where -he could have taken a shot with the bullet entering at the point -immediately to the left under his right armpit with the bullet then -going through and exiting at a point immediately under his right nipple? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. No; Governor Connally has begun to turn in his seat -around in this manner, in such a way, turn to his right so that his -body is in a position that a shot fired from the sixth floor window -could not have passed through the path that it reportedly took through -his body, if the bullet followed a straight, undeflected path. - -Mr. DULLES. I don't quite get that. You mean because of his having -turned this way, the shot that was then--had then been fired and -apparently had hit the President could not have gone through him at -that point? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct under the stated conditions. Even a -shot, independent of the shot that hit the President, could not have -gone through in that manner, coming from the sixth floor window, -because the window was almost directly behind the automobile at that -time and the Governor was in a position where the bullet couldn't have -gone through his body in the manner that it reportedly did. - -It would have come in through his shoulder and out through the other -shoulder, in the way that he was lined up with the window. - -Mr. SPECTER. So you say it could have gone through him, but it could -not have passed through him with the angle of entry as disclosed in the -Parkland Hospital records and described by Dr. Shaw? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct, if it followed a straight path. - -Mr. SPECTER. And exiting immediately under his right nipple, again as -described in the hospital records at Parkland and by Dr. Shaw. - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. - -Mr. SPECTER. Have those points of entry and exit been made available to -you in your analysis of this situation? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; they have. - -Mr. SPECTER. Could you elaborate just a little further on the -observations and reasoning which you have undertaken to come to the -conclusion which you have just expressed? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. We are speaking of frame 249, are we? - -Mr. SPECTER. Yes, sir, frame 249. - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Could I see that exhibit? The photograph in the lower -left corner of Commission Exhibit No. 899 is the photograph taken -through the scope of the rifle on the sixth floor window when the car -was stationed in this frame number position. It is noted from this -photograph that the rifle is not quite directly behind the car but very -nearly directly behind the car. - -Governor Connally's body is turned. We have duplicated the position in -the Zapruder photographs of Governor Connally and the President in the -reenactment photograph, as nearly as possible, duplicated the same body -position, and from the sixth floor window then you can see from the -photograph that the Governor's body is turned to the Governor's right -in such a fashion that an undeflected shot would not go through in the -path as described by the Parkland doctors. - -Mr. McCLOY. I don't quite follow that yet. The President has been shot -at frame 249, according to your theory. - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes. - -Mr. McCLOY. Might he not also have been shot at some earlier frames -in--the indications are the reactions are shown considerably ahead of -that frame. - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. - -Mr. McCLOY. So, for example, at frame 237 and at frame 237 Governor -Connolly hasn't turned to the right. - -Mr. DULLES. But a shot has been fired at this time. - -Mr. McCLOY. But a shot has been fired at that time. - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes. - -Mr. McCLOY. So at that point he could have been hit; Governor Connally -could have been hit. - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; Governor Connally could have been hit by frame 238. - -Mr. McCLOY. But your point is when he gets farther along, he couldn't -have been hit, let's say at frame 249 in the same spot where he was hit. - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. - -Mr. McCLOY. Yes. - -Mr. DULLES. He made the turn later than those frames you have been -discussing at the time apparently of the first shot at the President. - -Mr. McCLOY. Yes; the first shot, but according to these frames, the -first shot hit the President considerably before this. - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes, sir. - -Mr. McCLOY. And at a time again when Governor Connally's back was -square to the window. - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Well, not exactly square. I believe he was turned -slightly to the right as he went behind the sign. - -Mr. McCLOY. Take frame 231. - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes. - -Mr. McCLOY. There the President has got his hands up as you put it to -his throat. - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes. - -Mr. McCLOY. And here is Connally facing to the front. - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes. - -Mr. McCLOY. So at that point a bullet coming through the President's -throat could have hit Connally in the spot where it did hit Connally. - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. I am going to defer that question to Mr. Frazier who is -in the window with the rifle scope and made a more thorough study of -the possible path of the bullet. But he is straight in the car in frame -231. - -Mr. McCLOY. But your testimony is in frame 248--frame 249 Connally -couldn't have been hit from this window in the position where he was -sitting. - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct, on the basis stated. - -Mr. DULLES. But, you would have then the problem you would think if -Connally had been hit at the same time, would have reacted in the same -way, and not reacted much later as these pictures show. - -Mr. McCLOY. That is right. - -Mr. DULLES. Because the wounds would have been inflicted. - -Mr. McCLOY. That is what puzzles me. - -Mr. DULLES. That is what puzzles me. - -Senator COOPER. Would you identify the frame in which Governor Connally -started turning to the right? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. I might say that as--in the motion picture--as the car -comes out from behind the signboard, the Governor is turned slightly to -his right in this manner. This would be in the first frame, in frame -222, he is turned just slightly to his right, and from there on he -turns almost square, straight on with the car momentarily, and there is -a jerking motion there at one point in the film about there, at which -time he starts to turn this way and continues to turn. - -Mr. DULLES. Jerky motion in Connally in the film. - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. There is--it may be merely where he stopped turning and -started turning this way. It is hard to analyze. - -Mr. DULLES. What I wanted to get at--whether it was Connally who made -the jerky motion or there was something in the film that was jerky. You -can't tell. - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. You can't tell that. - -Mr. McCLOY. Certainly the film is jerky at that point. I mean there is -a big blur. - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. He does turn. - -Mr. McCLOY. Just before and after that. - -Representative FORD. But isn't it apparent in those pictures that after -a slight hesitation Governor Connally's body turns more violently than -the President's body? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes. - -Representative FORD. The President's only reaction is a motion to his -throat or to his neck with his hands. - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. - -Representative FORD. Whereas Governor Connally actually turns his body -rather sharply? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; he turns as they go behind the signboard, he turns -this way and he is turning a little bit this way and as he comes out of -the signboard he is facing slightly to the right, comes around straight -on and then he turns to his left straight on, and then he turns to his -right, continues to turn around and falls over in Mrs. Connally's lap. - -But in the motion picture it is a continuous movement as he goes around -and falls. - -Senator COOPER. Will you again answer my question which I asked and -hasn't been answered and I say with all respect, in what frame did -Governor Connally begin to turn to the right after he had placed his -position straightforward as you have testified. - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. I am sorry. That starts approximately at frames 233 to -234. - -Senator COOPER. In what frame does the photograph show or in what frame -is it shown that President Kennedy had moved his hands to his throat? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That shows on frame--it is clearer on frame 226, 225 is -the frame where you first see him, and frame 226. - -Mr. DULLES. How many frames between those two? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. From 26 to 33, eight. That would be a fraction of a -second in time. - -That is less than half second. - -Representative FORD. It can be contended that based on these -photographs of films that the first shot apparently was fired in frames -220 to 224, in that area. - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; I think you have to go back even to 210 because of -reaction times; we don't know reaction times. But I would say between -210 and 225 because at 225 we have the President reacting. - -So, in that 15 frames there it is behind the signboard, we can't see -what is happening. - -Mr. DULLES. What frame first shows him with his hands at his throat? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. 225, 226. - -Mr. McCLOY. 225, it is not too clear. It is much more pronounced in the -next frame is where he puts his both hands to his throat, such as that. - -Mr. DULLES. And Mrs. Kennedy has apparently turned around and looking -at him. - -Mr. McCLOY. One hand may be coming down from waving in 225. - -Mr. DULLES. That is his left hand there--no; it is his right hand, your -right. His right hand. - -Representative FORD. Then based on the mathematics of how quickly -a second shot could be fired, the second shot would be fired in -approximately what frame? - -If you assume it, the first shot is from 210 to 224. - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. It would be 252 to 266, down in there. - -Representative FORD. That would be the elapsed time of what? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Two and a quarter seconds. - -Representative FORD. Two and a quarter seconds. - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is the very quickest. - -Mr. SPECTER. On fixing the range from frames 210 to 225, where the -President was first struck, did you take frame 210 because that was the -first point after the President had passed out from under the oak tree? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; that is the first point from this, and although we -are able to see in the films that there is no apparent reaction from -the President from 203 to 210, and as he disappears from behind the -signboard, we cannot estimate the reaction time. - -Mr. SPECTER. When you say reaction time you mean? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Of the President? - -Mr. SPECTER. Reaction time from 205---- - -Representative FORD. To 210? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes. - -Representative FORD. But there at frame 210, that is the first point at -which the marksman had a clear shot after the President passed out from -under the tree. - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. - -Representative FORM. Then you select frame 225 as the outside limit of -the shot which struck the President because that is where you first -observe a reaction by the President when he comes out from behind the -sign. - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. - -Mr. DULLES. What frames are blanked out because of the sign? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. The President, the last we get any scene of him at all, -and this is just the very top of his head is 210. - -Mr. DULLES. 210 to what is blanked out? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. 225. - -Mr. DULLES. To 225 is blanked out? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes, that is 15 frames. - -Mr. McCLOY. 224 he just begins to appear. - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes. - -Mr. McCLOY. I don't think if you assume the President was hit at 225 -and I don't think that is clear at all. I think it begins to get clear -about 227 that he had been hit, that the reaction really develops. But -I think that 225 it may very well be that he has not been hit because -his hand isn't at his throat, he may be just moving from the position -of waving. - -Mr. DULLES. But that is about a tenth of a second. - -Mr. McCLOY. Yes; it is a very short time entirely, but I don't think -the frame unequivocally shows the reaction to the bullet at 225. I -think it does unequivocally show it at 226 and 227. - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. - -Mr. SPECTER. Perhaps an additional question on the clarity of the slide -itself as a point of reaction would be in order for Mr. Shaneyfelt, and -then, may I say parenthetically, we want to have the Commission see -these slides this afternoon. - -We have prepared them to show to you so that you can observe for -yourself what we are bringing to you through the witness to give you a -frame of reference and an orientation. - -Mr. Shaneyfelt, then what was your impression by frame 225, as you -viewed it most recently this morning, with respect to a possible -reaction on that frame made from the original Zapruder film? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. It is my feeling that at frames 225, 226 and 227 you -are having a reaction. You have a split second there, and at 225 the -reaction is barely discernible, more discernible on the film and the -slides than the reproduction you have here but it has to be considered -in the light of the motion picture you see as he starts this reaction, -and the reaction is by frame--in either the slides or pictures--is -clearly apparent in 226, and barely apparent in 225. - -Mr. SPECTER. Now, was frame 249 selected as a situs for calculations -on the possible construction that President Kennedy was struck in the -back at the first point unadjusted at which he emerged from the tree, -to wit: frame 207, with an additional calculation of 42 frames giving -the approximately two and a quarter seconds for the firing of a second -shot to determine through this one means whether there was time for the -rifleman to have operated the bolt, assuming he made a shot at 207, and -to have made another shot at the earliest possible time at 249. - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That was the basis for the selection of frame 249, yes. - -Mr. SPECTER. Now, going back just a moment, was frame 231 selected as -a basis for analysis as the first frame after 225 because Governor -Connally expressed the opinion when he viewed the frames that he -thought he was hit by or at frame 231. - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. - -Mr. SPECTER. And was frame 235 selected as a basis of analysis because -that was one point at which a number of the viewers, including staff -and agents of the FBI and Secret Service thought that might be the last -frame at which Governor Connally had turned enough to the right to -still take a shot and have the bullet pass through his body from the -sixth floor window at the angle described in the medical reports and by -his doctors. - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct on the basis of an undeflected path. -That is the frame that the doctors selected as the frame beyond which -he could not have received this shot and have it travel in the path -that it reportedly traveled. - -Mr. SPECTER. Was frame 240 selected for analysis as being the -absolutely last time, based on the observations of those whom you have -described as seeing the films, that the Governor could have conceivably -taken a shot from the sixth floor window and have it pass through the -body of the Governor in the way described in the medical reports and by -the Governor's doctors? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. - -Mr. SPECTER. Was the analysis, made on the ability of the Governor to -take the shot at each of the positions, based on the position he had -at that particular frame in accordance with the amount of turn to the -right which he had made at that particular time? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes. - -Mr. SPECTER. Was there a still photograph known as AP photograph, -which was taken at the time of the assassination or a view seconds -thereafter, studied by you and others in connection with the analysis -that you have been describing? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; there was. - -Mr. SPECTER. Was the simulated automobile placed in the same position -that the Presidential automobile was in when the photograph was made by -the AP photographer, as closely as it could be positioned at the time -of the reenactment? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. - -Mr. SPECTER. What Commission exhibit number is attached to the -photographs of that AP shot and the reenactment picture? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is Commission Exhibit No. 900. - -Mr. SPECTER. Would you describe what photographs appear then on -Commission Exhibit No. 900? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. On Commission Exhibit No. 900, the top photograph is a -photograph purportedly made by an AP photographer shortly after one of -the shots. It depicts the side of the Governor's head, the left side of -the Governor's head, his ear is visible, he has turned considerably. It -depicts the President's hand touching his lapels, and a portion of the -President's face. - -Secret Service agents on the followup car are seen also. The Texas -School Book Building in the background. - -The reenactment photograph was made after positioning the car by -looking at the photograph, based on the position of the car as related -to the lane line in the street, as related to the position of the -building, the column of the building and so on to reestablish the -location. - -We also reestablish in reenactment the position of the agent taking -Governor Connally's position in the car used in the reenactment and -the position of President Kennedy to closely approximate the actual -photograph made by the AP, Associated Press. This was then studied, the -car in this position was then studied, from the Zapruder position, and -was determined to be frame 255. - -Mr. SPECTER. Was an exhibit prepared then on frame 255? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. - -Mr. SPECTER. What Commission exhibit number is affixed to frame 255? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Exhibit No. 901. - -Mr. SPECTER. Does that have the same layout of photographs and -measurements as on frames 225, 222 and those which preceded them. - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; it has. It has the Zapruder photographs, the -matching reenactment photograph, and the photograph through the rifle -scope along with the measurements and the angles. - -Mr. SPECTER. On the AP photograph shown on Commission Exhibit No. 900, -what reaction, if any, do you observe by the Secret Service agents on -the followup car? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. The Secret Service agents on the right-hand side of -the followup car are looking back and to their right. The one to the -front on the left-hand side of the car is looking generally toward the -President. - -The one in back of him on the left fender is looking slightly to his -right. - -Representative FORD. What is the distance on frame 255 between the -President and the rifle? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. The distance to the rifle in the window is 218 feet. -This is frame 255, which is well past the signboard, well past 249 -which is the last frame we considered. - -Mr. McCLOY. Well past the first evidence of reaction? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes. - -Mr. McCLOY. On the part of the President to a shot. - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Well past, and past the point in the film where -Governor Connally states he has been hit. - -Mr. SPECTER. Was that simulated car placed in any other position to -duplicate still a subsequent frame? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; the frame No. 313, which is the frame that records -the shot to the President's head, was recorded as frame 313 and was -reestablished during reenactment. - -Mr. SPECTER. What Commission number has been affixed to frame 313? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Commission Exhibit No. 902. - -Mr. SPECTER. Is this exhibit organized in a somewhat different fashion -from the prior frame exhibits? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. - -Mr. SPECTER. Will you start with the photograph in the upper left-hand -corner and describe for the Commissioners, please, each photograph or -picture which appears thereon and what it represents? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; I might state first that all of the other -photographs were reestablished on the basis of the Zapruder film using -reference points in the background of the pictures. - -As is apparent here from the photograph of the Zapruder frame 313 there -are no reference points. There is just a grassy plot. So there is no -reference point on which we can reestablish the position of the car in -the roadway. - -For this reason it was necessary to use the Nix film of the head shot -and the Muchmore film of the head shot to establish this position in -the road. - -The right-hand photograph represents frame 24 from the Nix film, and is -the frame that depicts the shot to the head. We used Mr. Nix's camera -and a print of this picture and stood in the previously determined -position of Mr. Nix when he took his photographs, and had them roll the -car down to a position so that the President's head was directly under -the point where Mr. Zapruder is standing on the projection. - -Mr. SPECTER. You are describing the photograph on which side---- - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. On the--- - -Mr. SPECTER. Of the viewer. - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. On the upper left-hand side. - -Mr. McCLOY. I think you said right. - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. The upper left-hand photograph is the photograph from -the--taken from the frame 24 of the Nix film. - -The photograph on the right, upper right, is the photograph taken at -the reenactment from the position where Mr. Nix was standing. We then -proceeded over to the point that we had established as the position -of Mrs. Muchmore, and using frame 42, which is a frame in her film -depicting the shot to the head, and using the steps and their relation -to the President and the objects in the background in relation to the -President as shown in this lower left-hand photograph, which is the -Muchmore frame 42, we reestablished, we checked the position we had -placed the car in, based on the Nix photographs, and found that it -conformed and checked out as being in a closely accurate position. - -This is the basis used for establishing the position of the car. After -we had established that, through the Nix and Muchmore films, we then -checked it against the Zapruder photograph, which is the second from -the top on the left of Commission Exhibit No. 902, frame 313, which -shows the explosion from the top of the President's head. Just to the -right of that second picture down from the right, is the photograph -made at the reenactment from Zapruder's position. - -We know from studying the films that just two or three frames before -frame 313 we can see a little bit of yellow along the curb, and this -checks out because along this area of the photograph from the Zapruder -position of the reenactment is a yellow strip. - -Mr. SPECTER. When you say this area you are referring to the yellow -area which appears on the left-hand curb immediately to the rear of the -simulated car? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct, and this, therefore, checks out this -as being a fairly accurate position for the car in frame 313. - -This photograph then, the third down on the left, is a photograph -through the telescope of the rifle of the car positioned in frame 313. - -Mr. McCLOY. Would you read off those dimensions from that? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. The dimensions from the surveyor on frame 313 of the -distance from the wound mark on the President's stand-in to station C -is 230.8 feet. - -Distance to the rifle in the window is 265.3 feet. The angle to rifle -in window is 15 deg.21' and this is based on the horizontal. - -Distance to the overpass is 260.6 feet, the angle to the overpass is -1 deg.28'. - -Mr. SPECTER. What would the angle be considering the adjustment on the -angle of the street? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. It would be less 3 deg. or 12 deg.21', approximately. - -Mr. SPECTER. When you say approximately is that because the adjustment -is somewhat greater than 3 deg.? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes. - -Mr. SPECTER. How much is it exactly, if you know? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. It is 3.9. It is almost 4. - -Mr. SPECTER. Three degrees nine minutes? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Three degrees nine minutes, I am sorry. - -Mr. DULLES. Would you have to make a similar adjustment to the overpass? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; because the angle to the overpass is based on the -horizontal. The overpass, you would have to add the 3 deg.9'. - -Mr. DULLES. From the overpass, is this an angle up or angle down? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. This is an angle down. - -Mr. DULLES. So it is an angle down in both cases? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. - -Mr. SPECTER. When you say that you are reducing the angle of 15 deg.21' by -3 deg.9' to an angle of 12 deg.12', is that as the shot passes through the body -of the President? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. It is at that point. - -Mr. SPECTER. How was the speed of the camera ascertained, Mr. -Shaneyfelt? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. We obtained from Mr. Zapruder, Mr. Nix, Mrs. Muchmore; -their cameras for examination, and in the FBI laboratory exposed film -in all three cameras, aiming, focusing the camera on a clock with -a large sweep-second hand. We then ran the camera at the speed and -conditions as described by the people who used the cameras. We ran -through several tests of film, and then after the film was developed it -was studied under magnification, and frames were counted for a period -of 2 to 3 seconds or for the full running time, and averages were taken. - -Mr. Zapruder has stated that his camera was fully wound. Most of the -others have stated their cameras were fully wound, so we were able to -more or less eliminate the very slow time that occurs when the cameras -are approximately run down, and all of these things were taken into -consideration and were averaged. - -The Zapruder camera was found to run at an average speed of 18.3 frames -per second. - -The Nix and Muchmore cameras were both found around 18.5 frames per -second. - -Mr. SPECTER. Were you able to ascertain the speed of the Presidential -limousine at the time of the assassination? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; because we were able to determine the speed of the -camera, and thereby accurately determine the length of time it takes -for a specific number of frames to run through the camera at this 18.3 -frames per second, and having located these frame positions in the -street, we took the farthest distance point we had in the Zapruder film -which was frame 161 through frame 313. - -This was found to run elapsed time from the film standpoint which runs -at 18.3 frames a second, runs for a total of 8.3 seconds. - -This distance is 136.1 feet, and this can be calculated then to 11.2 -miles per hour. - -Mr. SPECTER. Is that a constant average speed or does that speed -reflect any variations in the movement of the car? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is the overall average from 161 to 313. It does -not mean that it was traveling constantly at 11.2, because it was more -than likely going faster in some areas and slightly slower in some -areas. It is only an average speed over the entire run. - -Mr. DULLES. Over the entire run between what points? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Between frame 161 and 313. - -Mr. DULLES. Yes; but where, could you place that on that chart, for -example? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes. - -Mr. DULLES. And describe the points? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. This is frame 161 which is the frame where they have -just gone under the tree, to frame 313 which is the shot to the head. -So that it is that distance there which is 136.1 feet. - -Mr. SPECTER. In referring to those points, will you specify what -exhibit number you are referring to there? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is---- - -Mr. DULLES. I wonder if we could mark those points on that exhibit? - -Mr. SPECTER. Of course, Mr. Dulles. - -That is Commission Exhibit No. 883, is it not, Mr. Shaneyfelt? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes. - -Mr. SPECTER. Will you take the first point Mr. Dulles has referred -to and mark it as point X. I think we already have some letter -designations in the early part of the alphabet. - -Mr. McCLOY. Where is that point? What significance is that point? The -first point? - -Mr. SPECTER. This frame 161---- - -Mr. McCLOY. Yes. - -Mr. SPECTER. Is the first frame we have on the Zapruder film. - -Mr. DULLES. It is only to get the speed and distance here. - -Mr. McCLOY. It has no relation to any shots. - -Mr. DULLES. No relation to shots. Speed and distance. - -Mr. SPECTER. It is the first frame we have where the marksman has his -last clear shot of the back of the President's neck before it passes -under the tree without adjustment. Is that correct, Mr. Shaneyfelt? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. What letter designations did you want? - -Mr. SPECTER. Mark 161, frame 161, with the letter designation X, if you -will, please. - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. And 313? - -Mr. SPECTER. With the letter designation Y. - -Mr. McCLOY. The record ought to show the two points are the point which -you merely calculated the speed at which the car is going, isn't that -right? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. - -Mr. McCLOY. Yes. - -Mr. DULLES. Between those two points the car went at an average speed -of 11.2 miles an hour? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. Between point X and Y on Exhibit No. -883 the speed of the car was determined to be an average speed of 11.2 -miles per hour. - -Mr. DULLES. How long did the car take to go that distance, do you know, -translated into time? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. 8.3 seconds. - -Mr. DULLES. 8.3 seconds. - -Mr. SPECTER. What motion pictures, if any, were taken during the -reenactment? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. During the reenactment the black-and-white photographs -were made from Zapruder's position with a Speedgraphic camera and we -also took motion pictures with Mr. Zapruder's camera from Zapruder's -position with the car in the fixed locations as they were established -with the car just stationary in those locations. - -After establishing all those points and making these film records -of it, we then had the car proceed along that Elm Street route at -approximately 11 miles per hour, and filmed it with Mr. Zapruder's -camera loaded with color film from Mr. Zapruder's position and -simultaneously photographed it with Mr. Nix's camera from Mr. Nix's -position, and Mrs. Muchmore's camera from Mrs. Muchmore's position, and -this was done twice. - -(Off the record.) - -Mr. SPECTER. The last question was about what movies and stills you -took? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. We haven't discussed them all yet. - -Mr. SPECTER. Were any other movies taken or photographs taken in -addition to those which you heretofore described? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; after positioning the car in the street at the -specific locations and making the movies with the Zapruder, Nix, and -Muchmore cameras with the car running at 11 miles an hour on the route, -I then went to the sixth-floor window and mounted the camera on the -rifle, and photographs were made with black and white film motion -pictures of the car in the fixed positions from frame 161 through frame -positions 313. The car was stopped at each position. The individuals -and the car were positioned by Mr. Gauthier on the street using the -Zapruder pictures to reposition the individuals in the car, and motion -pictures were made of the car sitting in those various positions. -After this the car was driven at 11 miles an hour along the route and -photographs were made through the rifle scope with a 16-mm. motion -picture camera following the car as a target, as the car drove down the -assassination route. - -Following this, there were three runs made on black and white film. -Then color film was loaded in the camera and it was again photographed -on color film, 16 mm. with the car traveling at 11 miles an hour and -the scope of the rifle following the car as the target. - -This completed all the photographs that were made at the assassination -site. - -Mr. SPECTER. Was a subsequent photograph taken in the garage which you -previously identified as the railway express garage? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. - -Mr. SPECTER. Will you repeat, even though you have heretofore mentioned -them, the angles between the spot on the back of President Kennedy's -neck which was marked with a white chalk mark and the muzzle of the -rifle when the car was positioned at frame 210? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. The angle, based on the horizontal at frame 210, to the -rifle in the window was 21 deg.34'. - -Mr. SPECTER. What was the comparable angle at frame 225? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. 20 deg.11'. - -Mr. SPECTER. So what would be the average angle then between those two -points? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. The average angle, allowing for the 3 deg.9' street -grade results in an average angle between frame 210 and frame 225 of -17 deg.43'30''. - -Mr. SPECTER. And that is the average angle from the muzzle to President -Kennedy as he sat in the car or President Kennedy's stand-in as he sat -in the car? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. To the wound entrance. - -Mr. SPECTER. Is the average angle of 17 deg.43'30'' measured from the -muzzle to the President's body as the President would be seated in the -car? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is out on the street in those frame positions, -yes. It is measured to the point of the wound on the back of the -President. - -Mr. SPECTER. I now hand you a photograph which has been marked as -Commission Exhibit No. 903 and ask you if you know who the photographer -was? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; I took this photograph. - -Mr. SPECTER. When was that photograph taken? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. It was taken Sunday afternoon, May 24, 1964. - -Mr. SPECTER. Is there a white string which is apparent in the -background of that photograph? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. - -Mr. SPECTER. What is the angle of declination of that string? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That string was placed along the wall by the surveyor -at an angle of 17 deg.43'30''. - -Mr. SPECTER. Did the surveyor make that placement in your presence? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. He did. - -Mr. SPECTER. Were the stand-ins for President Kennedy and Governor -Connally positioned in the same relative positions as those occupied by -President Kennedy and Governor Connally depicted in the Zapruder films? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; these positions were approximately the position of -the President and Governor Connally in the Zapruder films in the area -around frame 225 as they go behind the signboard and as they emerge -from the signboard. - -Mr. SPECTER. Was the rod which is held in that photograph positioned -at an angle as closely parallel to the white string as it could be -positioned? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes. - -Mr. SPECTER. And through what positions did that rod pass? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. The rod passed through a position on the back of -the stand-in for the President at a point approximating that of the -entrance wound, exited along about the knot of the tie or the button of -the coat or button of the shirt, and the end of the rod was inserted -in the entrance hole on the back of Governor Connally's coat which was -being worn by the stand-in for Governor Connally. - -Mr. SPECTER. And was Governor Connally's stand-in seated in the -position where the point of exit would have been below the right nipple -at the approximate point described by Governor Connally's doctors? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. - -Senator COOPER. May I ask a couple of questions? - -Am I correct in assuming that you have made these determinations about -the degree of the angle of the trajectory of the bullet at the time the -President was struck, locating the position of the President in the car -on the one hand, and the location of the rifle at the time the shots -were fired? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. The location of the wound, you mean the angle of the -wound? - -Senator COOPER. Yes. - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. The angle---- - -Senator COOPER. You had to establish the position of the President at -the time the bullet struck him and the position of the rifle to make a -determination about the degree of the angle of the direction? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. The positions in the car, their -positions in the car, were based on the Zapruder film. - -Senator COOPER. And you were able to determine what you think very -accurately the position of the President in the car by the films that -you have examined? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes. - -Senator COOPER. Then the factor then, which is not determinate, -exactly, then is the location of the rifle, is that correct? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. - -Senator COOPER. Upon what did you determine the location of the -rifle--upon what factors? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. The rifle was positioned in the sixth floor window of -the Book Building where the cartridges were found, and was determined -from information furnished by representatives of the Commission. - -Senator COOPER. Did you have information about the location of certain -boxes that were seen--were found--at the window after the shooting -occurred? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. Yes; we had photographs of the boxes -and we were advised, of the approximate position in the window and how -far down the window was, the fact that some observers noted the rifle -sticking out the window. - -Senator COOPER. I want to ask you--you did have information from the -testimony of witnesses who said they saw the rifle protruding from the -window? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. We had this information furnished to us by the -Commission. - -Senator COOPER. And those facts, those locations were made known to -you, and upon that evidence did you locate the rifle, in making these -calculations? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That was the basis for the location of the rifle in all -of our calculations. - -Senator COOPER. Just one other question. Assuming that there might have -been some variation in the location of the rifle, length of the window, -the breadth of the window, or that the rifle you used was held higher -than the rifle might have been, would it have made--how much variation -would it have made, in your judgement, in these calculations you made? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. I don't believe that any movement of the rifle in -that specific window would alter our calculations to any appreciable -degree if you stay within that window, because our reenactment and our -repositioning of the bodies in the car based on the photographs is -subject to some variation, too, so we have variations throughout. - -And the variations from the position of the rifle at that particular -window, I feel would be negligible. - -Senator COOPER. At every point where you made it, hypothetically, at -least, made the determination that at a particular point the President -was struck by a bullet, at that point the car and the President could -be seen from the window? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. - -Senator COOPER. That is all I want to ask. - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Even under the tree you still could see the car and the -President through the tree. - -Mr. SPECTER. Mr. Shaneyfelt, did the surveyors calculate the angle and -distance from each position where the simulated car was stopped from -the President to the triple underpass? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. - -Mr. SPECTER. And are those figures reproduced in terms of distance to -overpass, and angle to overpass on every one of the exhibits which also -depict distance to window, referring to the sixth floor window, and -angle to rifle in window? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; they do. They are on all the exhibits. - -Mr. SPECTER. Now; is there any point on the overpass where the angle -to the President's car or the angle to the President's stand-in seated -in the simulated car, would permit a shot to be fired and to create -the wound in the President's neck, which has an angle of decline of -approximately 17 deg., based on the information furnished to you by the -medical evidence, which we have asked you to assume, where that wound -could be inflicted on the President's neck without regard to the point -of entry? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. No; none of the angles from the overpass are anywhere -near 17 deg. They range from frame 161 at a minus 7', from horizontal, to -frame 313 which is 1 deg.28'. None of them are even close to 17 deg. - -Senator COOPER. From the exhibit that has been introduced, showing -the position of the car and the President at the time of the first -shot--what was the distance from that point to the overpass? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. The approximate location of the first shot---- - -Senator COOPER. Frame what? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Well, the exact frame has not been established, but -it would be in the range from frames 207 to 225. At frame 207, the -distance to the handrail on a line of sight vision to the wound on the -President is 350.9 feet. - -At frame 225 the line of sight distance from the handrail of the -overpass to the wound on the President is 334 feet. - -Senator COOPER. What is the distance at those points to the window in -the Texas School Book Depository? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Frame 207 line of sight distance from the wound to the -window is 174.9 feet. This distance to the overpass from there is 350.9. - -On frame 225, line of sight to the window is 190.8 feet as opposed to -the distance to the handrail on the overpass of 334.0 feet. - -Senator COOPER. Did you yourself stand at the handrail of the overpass? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Did I? - -Senator COOPER. Yes. - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. No; I did not. - -Mr. SPECTER. What do you mean, Mr. Shaneyfelt, by line of sight? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Straight line distance. - -Representative FORD. Is that what is calculated by the surveyor? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct; by Mr. West. - -Mr. SPECTER. Were there members of the testing teams that did go to the -handrail at the triple underpass to make observations? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; there were. - -Mr. SPECTER. Who were they? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. I am not real sure. - -Mr. SPECTER. Mr. Chairman, those conclude my questions for Mr. -Shaneyfelt. If it please the Commission, I would like to call Mr. -Frazier at this time. - -Mr. McCLOY. Thank you very much, Mr. Shaneyfelt. - - -TESTIMONY OF ROBERT A. FRAZIER RESUMED - -Mr. SPECTER. Would you state your full name for the record, please? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Robert A. Frazier. - -Mr. SPECTER. Mr. Frazier, you have appeared before to testify, but will -you at this juncture again give us the outline of your occupation and -experience? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes; I am a special agent of the Federal Bureau of -Investigation assigned to the FBI Laboratory, Washington, D.C. - -I work in the firearms identification unit in the laboratory, -making examinations of firearms, bullets, the effects of bullets, -trajectories, firing tests, powder pattern tests, and various other -types of examinations. - -(At this point Senator Cooper left the hearing room.) - -Mr. SPECTER. Have you appeared heretofore before the Commission to -testify about examinations which you have conducted of the clothing -worn by President Kennedy, the clothing worn by Governor Connally, -the examination of the Presidential limousine and certain ballistics -information? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes; I have. - -Mr. SPECTER. Did you participate in the onsite tests at Dallas on May -24, 1964? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes. - -Mr. SPECTER. What was your position during most of the time of those -onsite tests? - -Mr. FRAZIER. I was stationed at the window on the sixth floor of the -Texas School Book Depository Building at the southeast corner of the -building. - -Mr. SPECTER. How far was that window open at the time the tests were -being conducted? - -Mr. FRAZIER. I estimated it as approximately one-third. It was somewhat -less than halfway open. - -Mr. SPECTER. Is that the distance depicted on Commission Exhibit No. -492, which has heretofore been introduced in evidence? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir. - -Mr. SPECTER. Is the distance open on that window about the same as that -which you had it open at the time these tests were run? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes; I would say that this is very close. The window was -placed according to information already furnished to the Commission as -to how much it had been opened at that time. - -Mr. SPECTER. Did you handle the Mannlicher-Carcano rifle during the -course of the onsite tests? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir. - -Mr. SPECTER. The rifle previously identified as Commission Exhibit No. -139? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir; I did. - -Mr. SPECTER. At what position--what was the basis for your positioning -of that rifle during those tests? - -Mr. FRAZIER. To position the rifle, we selected boxes of the same -size and contour as boxes shown in a photograph or rather in two -photographs, reportedly taken by the police department at Dallas -shortly after the assassination. - -We placed these boxes in their relative position in front of the window -spacing them from left to right, according to the photographs which -were furnished to us, and also placing them up against the window, -with one of them resting on the window ledge as it was shown in the -photographs. - -Mr. SPECTER. In addition to the placement of the boxes, were there any -other guides which you had for reconstructing the position of the rifle -to the way which you believed it to have been held on November 22, 1963? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir; there was one physical obstruction in the -building which could not be moved consisting of two vertical pipes -located just at the left side of the sixth floor window. These -prevented me or anyone who was shooting from that window from moving -any further to the left. - -The position of the rifle, of course, had to be such that it could be -sighted out through the window, using the telescopic sight high enough -above the window ledge so that the muzzle of the weapon would clear -the window ledge, and low enough in position so that the bottom of -the window, which was only partially raised, would not interfere with -a view through the telescopic sight, which is approximately 2 inches -higher than the actual bore of the weapon. - -Mr. SPECTER. Did you position the rifle further, based on information -provided to you concerning the testimony of certain eyewitnesses at the -assassination scene concerning what they observed? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir; we attempted to put the muzzle of the weapon -sufficiently far out the window so it would have been visible from -below. - -Mr. SPECTER. Mr. Frazier, referring to Commission Exhibit No. 886, did -you view through the sight that depicted in "photograph through rifle -scope" on the positioning of the Presidential limousine or the car to -simulate the limousine at position A? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir; this would be the first position that an -individual in that sixth floor window could sight at the car due to the -interference of the window ledge of the building and the fact that the -angle downward is limited by the partially lowered window. - -Mr. SPECTER. I now hand you Commission Exhibit No. 888 and ask you if -you had the view depicted on the "photograph through the rifle scope" -shown on that exhibit? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir; this Exhibit No. 888 is frame 161, and is -the position at which I had the car stopped just before the spot, -indicating the entrance wound on the back of the President's stand-in, -passed into the foliage of the tree. - -Mr. SPECTER. I now hand you Exhibits Nos. 889, 890, and 891, and ask -you if you had the view on each of those depicted in the "photograph -through rifle scope"? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir; Commission No. 889 represented by frame 166 is -the adjusted position to account for the fact that the Presidential -stand-in on May 24 was actually 10 inches higher in the air above the -street than the President would have been in the Presidential limousine. - -Mr. DULLES. Would you explain to us simply how you made those -adjustments? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir. - -Mr. DULLES. I mean how did you get him down 10 inches as a practical -matter. - -Mr. FRAZIER. They had marked on the back of the President's coat the -location of the wound, according to the distance from the top of his -head down to the hole in his back as shown in the autopsy figures. They -then held a ruler, a tape measure up against that, both the back of -the Presidential stand-in-and the back of the Governor's stand-in, and -looking through the scope you could estimate the 10-inch distance down -on the automobile. - -You could not actually see it on the President's back. But could -locate that 10-inch distance as a point which we marked with tape on -the automobile itself, both for the Presidential and the Governor's -stand-in. - -Mr. DULLES. Thank you. - -Mr. FRAZIER. Continuing with Commission Exhibit No. 890, represented by -frame---- - -Mr. McCLOY. Hold that around so I can see it. - -Mr. FRAZIER. Represented by frame 185, this is the first or rather the -only position through the foliage of the tree at which a person from -the sixth floor could get a clear shot at the back of the President, -and I had the car stopped at this position and then we determined that -this was frame 185 from the Zapruder films. - -Mr. DULLES. There are no heavy limbs in there of any kind, are there---- - -Mr. FRAZIER. No, sir. - -Mr. DULLES. That would obstruct a bullet? - -Mr. FRAZIER. No, sir. The tree--it is a live oak tree which retains its -leaves all year around and the limbs at that point are relatively small. - -Mr. DULLES. All right. - -Mr. SPECTER. Did you compare the appearance of the foliage on the -pictures taken by the Secret Service, about which Inspector Kelley -earlier testified, with the appearance of the foliage on May 24? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes; I did. - -Mr. SPECTER. What was that comparison? - -Mr. FRAZIER. They are so nearly identical that you could not really -pick out any difference between the foliage and the photograph taken -previously in November. - -In Commission Exhibit No. 891, which is marked frame 186, this is the -adjusted position to which the car was moved to accommodate the 10-inch -distance at which the actual wound in the President would have been -located had the car been the actual Presidential limousine rather than -the stand-in car. - -Mr. SPECTER. Were you standing, seated, or kneeling at the time when -these photographs were taken and the sighting of the rifle was made by -you. - -Mr. FRAZIER. I was actually sitting on a carton with my left elbow -resting on the boxes stacked in front of the window. - -Mr. SPECTER. Did that position represent to you the most likely -position which the rifleman assumed on November 22, 1963, based upon -the positioning of the various boxes? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir. - -Mr. SPECTER. And the eyewitness accounts as to how far the rifle -protruded? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir; it was. - -Mr. SPECTER. Now, in all of the frames that you have described up to -now, did you position the automobile on the street or give instructions -over the radio as to where the automobile ought to be stopped for those -various sightings? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir. - -Mr. SPECTER. I now hand you Commission Exhibits Nos. 892 and 893, and -ask you if you observed the views depicted in the "photograph through -rifle scope" on each of those exhibits? - -Mr. FRAZIER. On Commission Exhibit No. 892, also marked frame No. 207, -the car was moved forward under the tree to the point where the spot -on the Presidential stand-in's back just became visible beyond the -foliage of the tree. I had the car stopped at that point so that this -photograph could be made there. - -On Commission Exhibit No. 893, also marked frame 210, we have the -photograph made at the adjusted position to accommodate the 10-inch -difference in height between the stand-in and the actual position of -the wound above the street and on the President's body. - -Mr. SPECTER. What was the alinement of President Kennedy's stand-in -with Governor Connally's stand-in at frames 207 and 210? - -Mr. FRAZIER. They both are in direct alinement with the telescopic -sight at the window. The Governor is immediately behind the President -in the field of view. Was that your question? - -Mr. SPECTER. Yes. - -Mr. FRAZIER. Alinement of people? - -Mr. SPECTER. Yes, sir. - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir. - -Mr. SPECTER. Could Governor Connally have taken a shot in the range of -frames 207 to 210 which would have traversed his body with the entry -and exit points being approximately what they were shown to be through -the medical records? - -Preliminarily, let me ask you if, for the record, you had seen or had -made available to you the contents of the medical records showing the -point of entry on the back of the Governor and the point of exit on the -front side of his chest? - -Mr. FRAZIER. No, sir; I don't recall having seen the medical testimony. -However, information has been furnished to me by Commission members as -to the relative positions on the back and the front of the Governor. - -Mr. SPECTER. Have you in addition had an opportunity to examine -personally the clothing worn by the Governor consisting of his jacket -and shirt? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes; I have. - -Mr. SPECTER. Based on the Governor's position then in frames 207 and -210, was he lined up so that a bullet fired from the sixth floor would -have passed through his body in about the way that the entry and exit -holes were described to you? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes; I would say that this could have happened at these -two frames. - -However, this would assume that the path of the bullet through the -Governor's body was the same as the path of the bullet before it -struck, that is, there was no appreciable deflection in the body -itself. Since I have no actual technical evidence available to me that -there was no deflection, I can only say that it is a possibility under -the circumstances as set up in these photographs. - -Mr. SPECTER. You would state that as a possibility based upon the -observations you made and the facts provided to you? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir. - -Mr. SPECTER. All right. - -I now hand you Commission Exhibits Nos. 894 and 895 and ask you if you -saw the photograph as depicted on the "photograph through rifle sight" -on those exhibits? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir. - -Commission Exhibit No. 894 is marked frame 222, and the photograph -through the scope is the same field which I saw looking through the -telescope on May 24, 1964. - -This is similarly true of Commission Exhibit No. 895--895 being frame -No. 225. - -Mr. SPECTER. I now show you Exhibits Nos. 896 and 897 and ask you if -the picture shown on "photograph through rifle scope" is that which you -observed at the times those pictures were taken. - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir. This Exhibit No. 896 is also marked frame No. -231, and represents the relative positions of the President's and -Governor's stand-in on May 24. - -Commission Exhibit No. 897, which is marked frame 235, also represents -the positions of the Presidential and Governor's stand-in as I saw it -from the sixth floor on that date. - -Mr. SPECTER. I now hand you Exhibits Nos. 899, 898, and 901 and ask -if you saw the pictures or if your view was the same as "photograph -through rifle scope" depicted on those exhibits? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes; they are. In each case Commission Exhibit No. 898, -which is marked frame 240, Commission Exhibit No. 899, which is also -marked frame 249, and Commission Exhibit No. 901, which is also marked -frame 255. - -In the "photographs through the scope" the individuals representing the -President and the Governor are as they were positioned on May 24. - -Mr. SPECTER. Now, assuming certain factors, Mr. Frazier, to wit: That -the President and Governor Connally were seated in an open automobile -in the approximate positions taken by the President's stand-in and -the Governor's stand-in during the onsite tests, that a bullet passed -through President Kennedy entering at a velocity of 1,900 feet per -second striking 14 centimeters below the right mastoid process and 14 -centimeters to the left of the right acromion process which is the tip -of the right shoulder, that the bullet passed through a fascia channel, -hitting no bones, and proceeded in a straight line, exiting through the -lower one-third of his neck, passing out of his shirt at the position -which you observed personally from your inspection of the President's -shirt, nicking the knot on the President's tie in the way you observed -from your examination of that tie; do you have an opinion as to whether -it is probable, based on the fact which I have asked you to assume, -that a bullet could have gone through the President and missed the -interior of the limousine and all of its occupants between frames 207 -and 225? - -Mr. FRAZIER. I can give you my opinion based on this reconstruction, as -I understand your question. - -All of these things refer to the reconstruction and assuming -particularly that the path of the projectile to the President was also -the same path, the same angle as it went through his body and then on, -and in that connection, yes. - -In my opinion the bullet had to strike in the car, either the car -itself or an occupant of the car. - -Mr. SPECTER. And is that a probable opinion of yours based on what you -saw during the tests and the facts I have asked you to assume? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes; it is, and in fact, I think it is rather--it is -obvious when you look at the photographs themselves that the crosshair -of the telescopic sight actually would give you the point of impact of -the bullet if the weapon is sighted in and if there is no change in the -line of sight the bullet had to strike the cars shown in each of these -photographs which is frame 225 on this end of this series, and frame -207 on the other end of the series. - -It shows that there would be no chance for the bullet to miss the car -at all if it had no deviation in its--if it had no deflection in its -path. - -Mr. SPECTER. Did you have an opportunity to examine the car shortly -after the assassination? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes; I did, on the early morning of November 23, 1963. - -Mr. SPECTER. The record will show you have testified about it -heretofore, but will you again state at this juncture whether or not -you found any indication within the car that the interior of the car -was struck by a missile proceeding at a high velocity such as 1,775 -feet per second? - -Mr. FRAZIER. No, sir; we found none. - -We examined in particular the passenger's section, the rear seat area -of the back of the automobile clear up to the back of the rear seat, -the rear seat itself, the floorboards and the back of the front seat, -the backs primarily of the jump seats, and other areas in the front of -the car, the windshield and the chrome and the front hoods and fenders -and sides of the automobile and we found no evidence of a bullet impact -having those characteristics you mentioned. - -Mr. SPECTER. Did you also examine the windshield of the car, interior -and exterior? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir. - -Mr. SPECTER. And the chrome of the car on the interior and the exterior? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir. - -Mr. SPECTER. Did you also examine the front portion of the Presidential -limousine? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes; we did. That portion, the dashboard below the -windshield and the dashboard in the area immediately under that were -particularly examined, because the rest of it would have been shielded -from a shot due to the height of the dashboard and the height of the -back of the front seat. - -Mr. SPECTER. Did any of that area examined disclose any impact of such -a missile? - -Mr. FRAZIER. No, sir; not of a high velocity. Only the lead area -smeared on the inside of the windshield from a relatively light object -which struck the inside, and did not even break the inside surface of -the glass, and then there was a possible bullet impact area at the top -of the chrome to the right of the rearview mirror. This was made by a -projectile not having the weight or velocity of a whole bullet moving -at, in the range of a thousand to 1,500 feet per second or more. - -Mr. SPECTER. Based on the position of Governor Connally as depicted in -the Zapruder slides at frames 222 and 225, could he have taken a shot, -assuming the firing point to have been the sixth floor of the Texas -School Book Depository Building, which entered and exited from his body -in accordance with the known medical evidence? - -Mr. FRAZIER. I have not made a very thorough study of the Zapruder -film which I understand you mentioned in this particular question with -reference to the Zapruder film itself. - -Mr. SPECTER. We will take it with reference to the reconstructed -positions of Governor Connally in frames 222 and 225, which you have -testified you did observe at the time the measurements and photographs -were taken. - -Mr. FRAZIER. I would say, yes, under the conditions that I mentioned -previously, that the reconstruction would represent the Governor as it -was in November, then he could have been struck anywhere in that frame -area of from 207 to 225. - -Mr. SPECTER. How about the same question in frames 231, 235, 240 and -thereafter? - -Mr. FRAZIER. There is only one position beyond frame 225 at which the -Governor could have been struck according to the information furnished -to me and from my examination of his clothing that he was struck near -the right sleeve seam and that the bullet came out through the inside -pocket of his jacket. - -At frame 231 the Governor is, as I saw it from the window on that date, -turned to the front to such an extent that he could not have been hit -at that particular frame. - -Mr. SPECTER. Why not, Mr. Frazier? - -Mr. FRAZIER. The angle through his body, as I measured it on the coat -is approximately 20 deg. from the right toward the left. On May 24 in our -reconstruction I found that the Governor had turned farther to the -front from a position slightly facing the right than he was in at frame -225. He had turned back to the front so that a shot which struck him in -this shoulder in the back---- - -Mr. SPECTER. Indicating the right shoulder? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Indicating the right shoulder near the seam would have -come out much further to his right than the actual exit hole described -to me as being just under the right nipple. - -Mr. SPECTER. How would the bullet have passed through his body based on -his position as shown in frame 235? - -Mr. FRAZIER. In frame 235, which is Commission Exhibit No. 897, the -Governor in our reconstruction, according to the Zapruder film was also -facing too far, too much towards the front. The angle of the bullet -through his body, assuming no deflection, would not have corresponded -to the angle through his clothing or according to the information -furnished from the medical examiners. - -Mr. SPECTER. How about the Governor's position in frame 240? - -Mr. FRAZIER. In frame 240 the Governor again could not have been shot, -assuming no deflection of the bullet prior to its striking his body, -from the window on the sixth floor because he is turned in this case -too far to the right. - -Now, this obviously indicates that the Governor in between frame 235 -and frame 240 has turned from facing completely forward in the car -around to the right to the point that a bullet entering his back on the -right shoulder area would have exited in my opinion somewhere from his -left chest area rather than from his right chest area. - -Mr. SPECTER. How about the Governor's position at frame 249? - -Mr. FRAZIER. In frame 249 a similar situation exists in that the -Governor, as represented by his stand-in in our reconstruction, has -turned too far to the right, even further than frame 240, so that in -frame 249 represented by Commission Exhibit No. 899, he again could not -have been hit by a bullet which came from the window on the sixth floor -and struck him in an undeflected fashion and passed through his body -undeflected. - -Mr. SPECTER. How about frame 255? - -Mr. FRAZIER. On frame 255 which is in Commission Exhibit No. 901 the -Governor is turned again too far to the right, and the same situation -would hold true as to what we saw in frame 249. - -The bullet would have exited too far on his left side, provided there -was no deflection between the window and the point of exit from the -Governor's body. - -Mr. SPECTER. Mr. Frazier, based on the angles, distances, and speeds of -the car and bullet in this situation, what lead would a marksman have -to give to strike the moving target, allowing for all of those factors? - -Mr. FRAZIER. The lead would be approximately the same for all of these -positions represented by your frame or rather your Commission Exhibit -No. 888, which is frame 161, all the way up to frame 313 which I don't -have, the Commission's Exhibit is No. 902 on frame 313, a lead of 6 -inches above the point of impact would be sufficient to account for -the movement of the car during the flight of the bullet. - -The fact that the same lead would be necessary at each place is because -at the closer frame numbers, the lower frame numbers, 161, 166, 185, -and so forth, there is a relatively steep downward angle beginning at -40 deg., whereas the last shot, the downward angle is approximately 17 deg. or -20 deg., in that neighborhood. - -Just one thing more, it would require less apparent elevation of the -crosshair over the point of impact at the distant target to allow for a -further movement of the car of approximately 2 feet at the point where -the head shot occurred. - -So the lead would be constant between 5.9 inches above the point of -impact to 6.3 inches above the point of impact. - -Mr. DULLES. Have you asked the witness--I was studying these frame -pictures--at about what frame he thinks the body of Governor Connally -would have been in a position to receive a bullet that would go through -the body with this trajectory? - -Mr. SPECTER. Yes; I believe I did. - -Mr. DULLES. I wasn't quite clear. - -Mr. FRAZIER. I testified that it would have been in position from -anywhere from frames 207 to 225. - -However, I cannot limit it to 207 because at that point the car goes -back under the foliage and you can't actually see clearly enough. - -Mr. DULLES. Between frames 207 and 225? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir; approximately frame 207 to approximately frame -225. - -Mr. DULLES. Thank you. - -Mr. SPECTER. Looking at Exhibit No. 902, frame 313, on the view shown -on the "photograph through rifle scope," is that the way you saw it at -the time of the reconstruction, when the car was in that position as -shown in that exhibit? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes; it is. - -Mr. SPECTER. At this time I move for the admission into evidence of -Commission Exhibits Nos. 885 through 903 which constitute all of the -photographs referred to by Mr. Shaneyfelt and Mr. Frazier during their -testimony. - -(Commission Exhibits Nos. 855 through 903 were marked for -identification, and received in evidence.) - -Mr. McCLOY. They may be admitted. - -Mr. SPECTER. That completes the questioning. - -Mr. McCLOY. As I get it, Mr. Frazier, what you are saying is there -is only a certain point at which the bullet could pass through the -President, could have hit Mr. Connally, and that is at a point when he -is not sitting full face forward and at a point when he is not too far -turned around. - -Mr. FRAZIER. That is exactly right. - -Mr. McCLOY. Somewhere when he is turning to the right. - -Mr. FRAZIER. He was placed approximately 20 deg. to the right. - -Mr. McCLOY. To the right. - -Mr. FRAZIER. That is 20 deg. according to my examination of his clothing -but I don't know the exact figures of the angle through his body. - -Mr. SPECTER. I have one additional question. - -Mr. Frazier, assuming the factors which I have asked you to accept as -true for the purposes of expressing an opinion before, as to the flight -of the bullet and the straight line penetration through the President's -body, considering the point of entry and exit, do you have an opinion -as to what probably happened during the interval between frames 207 -and 225 as to whether the bullet which passed through the neck of the -President entered the Governor's back. - -Mr. FRAZIER. There are a lot of probables in that. First, we have to -assume there is absolutely no deflection in the bullet from the time it -left the barrel until the time it exited from the Governor's body. That -assumes that it has gone through the President's body and through the -Governor's body. - -I feel that physically this would have been possible because of the -positions of the Presidential stand-in and the Governor's stand-in, it -would be entirely possible for this to have occurred. - -However, I myself don't have any technical evidence which would permit -me to say one way or the other, in other words, which would support it -as far as my rendering an opinion as an expert. I would certainly say -it was possible but I don't say that it probably occurred because I -don't have the evidence on which to base a statement like that. - -Mr. SPECTER. What evidence is it that you would be missing to assess -the probabilities? - -Mr. FRAZIER. We are dealing with hypothetical situations here of -placing people in cars from photographs which are not absolutely -accurate. They are two dimensional. They don't give you the third -dimension. They are as accurate as you can accurately place the people -but it isn't absolute. - -Secondly, we are dealing with the fact that we don't know whether, I -don't know technically, whether there was any deviation in the bullet -which struck the President in the back, and exited from his front. If -there were a few degrees deviation then it may affect my opinion as to -whether or not it would have struck the Governor. - -We are dealing with an assumed fact that the Governor was in front of -the President in such a position that he could have taken. So when you -say would it probably have occurred, then you are asking me for an -opinion, to base my opinion on a whole series of hypothetical facts -which I can't substantiate. - -Mr. McCLOY. Let me put it to you in another way--from your best -judgment about what you know about this thing, what was the sequence of -the shots, and who was hit, and when in relation to---- - -Mr. FRAZIER. I will say this--I have looked at the film and have seen -evidence of one shot occurring which struck the President in the head. -That was at frame 313. - -Mr. SPECTER. Frame 313? Yes. - -Mr. FRAZIER. Commission Exhibit No. 902. I have seen evidence in the -film of the President with both arms up clutching at his throat, and -having examined his clothing and having seen the hole in his shirt and -his back, I might assume that he is clutching his throat because a -bullet exited from his throat. I don't have the technical knowledge to -substantiate that. There was no metal on this hole in front, and there -is no way for me to say from my own examination that it actually was a -bullet hole. Nowhere else in this film have I seen any indication of a -bullet striking. - -Mr. SPECTER. The President? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Either the President or the Governor. Because I do not -know the reaction time which would exist from the time a bullet struck -until someone made a move. It may be a half second, it may be a full -second. It may be a tenth of a second. It depends upon the intensity of -the pain, and actually what happened. - -And therefore, in looking at the film you can't say a bullet struck -right here because he started to move his hands here. It may have been -a full second, a half second behind that spot. I would say that two -bullets at least struck in the automobile. I cannot say that three -bullets did not strike in the automobile from my examination, but it -appears and due to the reconstruction at Dallas, it appears that if the -one bullet did strike the President, then it landed in the automobile, -and if it landed in the automobile, and we found no evidence of it -having hit the car itself, then I say it is possible that it struck the -Governor. - -Now, as to the sequence of the shots, that one obviously was before the -head shot. If there was a third shot fired, I could not tell you from -anything I know whether it was the first, the second, or the third. - -Mr. McCLOY. It is possible, according to your analysis of it, that the -first shot could have gone through the back of the President and exited -through the front of his neck, and the second shot could have hit -Connally, and the third shot could have hit the President. - -Mr. DULLES. Where would the first shot have gone under that thesis? - -Mr. McCLOY. I just say I don't know where it could have gone. - -Mr. FRAZIER. From what I know from my examination that is true, because -I have seen bullets strike small twigs, small objects, and ricochet for -no apparent reason except they hit and all the pressure is on one side -and it turns the bullet and it goes off at an angle. - -If there was no deviation from the time the bullet left the rifle -barrel until the time it exited from the Governor's body, then the -physical setup exists for it to have gone through the President, and -through the Governor. - -Mr. SPECTER. You mean from the time it exited through the Governor's -body? - -Mr. FRAZIER. That is right. Otherwise, you have nothing to base a -conclusion upon. If you have deviation anywhere along the line then -you both affect the position at which the Governor could have been -shot--for instance--if the bullet entered the Governor's back and -immediately took a 20 deg. leftward angle, then the Governor could have -been shot when he was facing straightforward in the automobile. - -Now, I can't tell that, and therefore I can only say that my opinion -must be based on your assumption that there was not a deviation of the -bullet through the President's body and no deviation of the bullet -through the Governor's body, no deflection. On that basis then you can -say that it is possible for both of them to have been hit with one -bullet. - -Representative FORD. Does that opinion rule out the possibility or cast -doubt on the possibility of a third shot? - -Mr. FRAZIER. It does not rule out the possibility of a third shot. -No, sir; because I can only base my opinion on what I saw and my own -experience, and that is that a bullet could have struck the President, -if it had deflection in the President's body it could have, and he -happened to be in a certain position in the car which would affect the -angle, the bullet may have exited from the automobile. - -Representative FORD. As I understood your assumptions there was no -deviation and no deflection, and I thought I phrased my question based -on your opinion under those facts, it might rule out a third shot. - -Mr. DULLES. Do you mean rule out a third shot entirely or just rule out -a third shot hitting in the car? - -Representative FORD. Rule out a third shot in one instance or establish -the possibility of a third shot that missed everything. - -Mr. FRAZIER. As I understand your question I am now assuming these -various factors to exist, that there was no deviation, no change in the -path of the bullet. - -Representative FORD. The bullet went through the President and through -the Governor. - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes; then under that premise and the reconstruction -showing the position of the car with reference to the path of the -bullet, then it is entirely possible that these two individuals were -hit with one bullet and that there was not another bullet that struck -in the car other than the one that struck the President in the back of -the head and exited from his head. - -Representative FORD. Under these assumptions there is a possibility -there was not a third shot or there was a third shot that missed -everything. - -Mr. FRAZIER. That missed everything; yes, sir. - -Mr. DULLES. Is there any way of correlating the time of the shot with -the position of the car so as to know whether possibly the first shot -was fired before the car was out from the tree and it might have hit a -branch of the tree and be deflected so it didn't hit the car? If he had -fired too soon. I guess it is impossible. - -Mr. FRAZIER. It is possible, I don't have any evidence to support it -one way or the other. - -Mr. DULLES. Yes. - -Mr. FRAZIER. As to whether or not a limb of the tree may have deflected -one shot. However, I think it should be remembered that the frame -207 is just as he exits under the tree; from there to frame 225 to -where the President shows a reaction is only a matter of 1 second. -He is under the tree in frames 166 until frame 207, which is about 2 -seconds. So somewhere in that 3-second interval there may have been -a shot--which deflected from a limb or for some other reason and was -never discovered. - -Representative FORD. Mr. Chairman, may I return to questions that I was -asking Mr. Frazier? - -Mr. McCLOY. Yes. - -Representative FORD. Again making those same assumptions we made a -moment ago, is there any evidence that a third shot hit the car or any -occupant of the car? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Assuming all those assumptions we had before; no. I would -say that, and again I have not the technical evidence to back this up -one way or the other but you make these assumptions and I would say -under those conditions only two shots hit the occupants of the car -because the one through the President had to cause Connally's wound -otherwise it would have struck somewhere else in the car and it did not -strike somewhere else. - -Therefore, it had to go through Governor Connally. - -And the second shot had to strike the President in the head. - -Mr. McCLOY. How about these shots you spoke of, one of the fragments, -at least, hitting the glass, the windshield and one possibly hitting -the chrome. Was there anything, could it have been any fragmentation -of the first shot which didn't hit, the first shot that hit the -President, let's say, but didn't hit Connally, might that again make -the possibility of three shots, one of them hitting the President and -fragmenting as you indicated, and a second one hitting Connally, and -the third one hitting the President for the lethal shot. - -Mr. FRAZIER. Under that circumstance the bullet exiting from the -President would have had to strike something else in the car to break -it up. - -Mr. McCLOY. Break it up inasmuch as it was broken up? - -Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir; there was no evidence that the bullet which -exited from the President was in any but complete condition, that is -there was only one hole through the shirt, there was only one hole -through his coat or shirt actually and the testimony of the medical -examiners was that it made a relatively straight path through the body. - -Mr. SPECTER. That completes my questions of Mr. Frazier. - -Mr. DULLES. Could I ask just one more question? - -Mr. SPECTER. Yes, sir; Mr. Dulles. - -Mr. DULLES. There has been a certain amount of testimony indicating -there was a longer pause between the report of the first shot or what -is believed to be the report, explosion of the first shot and the -second and third shots, that is not absolutely unanimous but I would -say it is something like 5 to 1 or something of that kind, what would -you say, 2 to 1, 3 to 1? - -(Discussion off the record.) - -Mr. DULLES. Is it possible that the assassin attempted to fire when the -car was behind the tree or going into the tree, that that shot went -astray, and that that accounts for, if there was a longer delay between -one and two, that would account for it, and then the lethal shots were -fired or the wound, the one shot that was fired that hit the two and -then the lethal shot was fired immediately after. It is speculation. - -Mr. McCLOY. I think that must be speculation because there certainly -is conflicting evidence as to the intervals between the first and the -second shot and the second and the third shot. - -Mr. DULLES. I think if you will read the testimony you will find it at -least 2 to 1 except for the people in the car. - -Mr. McCLOY. Maybe, but what weight do you give these, I don't know. I -think that is quite possible that a bullet was deflected by that tree, -but there is no evidence whatever of the bullet landing anywhere in the -street or among the crowd. - -And yet there seems to be no doubt at all that three shots were fired. - -Mr. DULLES. That seems to be the evidence. - -Mr. McCLOY. At least three shots were fired, and probably three shots -were fired because of the three shells that were found. - -Mr. DULLES. Three shells? - -Mr. McCLOY. Yes. - -Mr. DULLES. We probably won't settle that today. - -Mr. FRAZIER. I don't know how to answer that question except possibly -to go back to the frame numbers of the Zapruder film and you will find -they are about equally spaced from frame 161 just before the tree to -frame, say, 220, which is just a few frames after the tree, that is -59 or approximately 60 frames, from that point. But from frame 222 to -the last shot of frame 313 is 78 and 13, 91 frames, so there is more -time between the second and third than the first and second, assuming -that the second one actually occurred and that it occurred at about the -middle of that interval. - -Mr. McCLOY. In the middle of that frame, yes. I think that is pretty -persuasive. - -Mr. DULLES. I didn't quite follow that. - -Mr. McCLOY. There seemed to be more frames between, going backwards, -between the third shot, that is between the time that---- - -Mr. DULLES. The first shot went astray, you don't know whether it was -fired. You have no way of getting at that. - -(Discussion off the record.) - -Mr. McCLOY. Thank you very much, Mr. Frazier. - -Mr. SPECTER. I want to call Inspector Kelley for observations from the -underpass. - -May the record show that Inspector Thomas Kelley has returned to the -witness chair. - - -TESTIMONY OF THOMAS J. KELLEY RESUMED - -Mr. KELLEY. Yes, sir. - -Mr. SPECTER. Before we conclude the testimony, Inspector Kelley, I -want to ask you if on May 24 you had occasion to go over to the triple -underpass and observe the simulated car and occupants drive down Elm -Street from Houston Street? - -Mr. KELLEY. Yes; I accompanied Mr. Redlich and Mr. Specter from the -Commission on the point on the overpass. - -Mr. SPECTER. From the Commission or from where to the overpass--pardon -me. I understand your sequence there. - -What did you observe as to the position of the President's stand-in -concerning whether he could have been struck by a bullet which was -fired from the top of the triple underpass? - -Mr. KELLEY. I observed as the car came down Elm Street that the -President's stand-in was in our view all the time as he was coming -down the street from the right-hand side of the car. As the more you -moved over to the left of the underpass, the longer the stand-in was in -direct view of anybody standing on the overpass. - -Mr. SPECTER. And was the stand-in obstructed by the windshield at -anytime as the car drove down Elm Street? - -Mr. KELLEY. No; he was not. However, never at any time was he in a -position to take a wound in the throat which from the drawings that -have been given me, that I have been shown by the Commission, would -he take a wound in the throat which would have exited higher than the -throat or in the shoulder. - -From the evidence that has been shown previously, the wound in the -throat was lower on the President's body than the wound in the -shoulder, and---- - -Mr. SPECTER. By the wound in the shoulder do you mean the wound in the -back of the President's neck, the base of his neck? - -Mr. KELLEY. Yes. - -Mr. SPECTER. So, could a shot have been fired from the top of the -triple underpass which would have passed through the President's neck, -disregarding the medical evidence on point of entry, which traveled in -an upward direction from the front of his neck upward to the back of -his neck? - -Mr. KELLEY. In my judgment, no. - -Representative FORD. If a person were standing where you have indicated -you were on that triple overpass, on November 22, he would have been in -full view of anybody in the immediate vicinity. - -Mr. KELLEY. Yes; and there were people on the overpass. There was a -policeman on the overpass, there were a number of railroad workmen on -the overpass at that time. - -Representative FORD. There would have been no place where such a person -could have hidden himself and not been detected? - -Mr. KELLEY. Not on the overpass. - -Mr. DULLES. What were the railway workmen doing on the overpass, were -they helping to guard the overpass or just spectators? - -Mr. KELLEY. No; they were working. There are a great many tracks -indicated here. - -Mr. DULLES. Yes; I was up there and I remember it very well. - -Mr. KELLEY. They were doing some repairs on the tracks. - -Mr. DULLES. I see. - -Mr. McCLOY. I had the impression there was more than one policeman also -guarding up there, at least two, but maybe I am wrong. At least there -is some testimony. - -Mr. DULLES. Do you recall, Mr. Specter, what the testimony is on -that--the number of policemen on the overpass? - -Mr. SPECTER. I believe there were two officers on the overpass, who -said that no shots came from that direction. - -Mr. McCLOY. No shots came from that direction. Is that all you wanted? - -Mr. SPECTER. That completes the testimony of Mr. Kelley and all of the -individuals this afternoon. - -Mr. McCLOY. Thank you very much, Mr. Kelley. - -(Whereupon, at 6:40 p.m., the President's Commission recessed to view -the films.) - - -TESTIMONY OF LYNDAL L. SHANEYFELT RESUMED - -(Present were Mr. McCloy, Mr. Dulles, and Representative Ford) - -Mr. SPECTER. May the record now show that the Commission has now -reassembled on the first floor of the VFW Building where a motion -picture projector and slide projector and screen have been set up for -viewing of the films. - -Mr. Shaneyfelt, what are you going to show us first of all? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. The first film will be of the color motion picture made -through the rifle scope as the car drove down the assassination route -at approximately 11 miles an hour. It will give the view the rifleman -had as he aimed the rifle from the sixth floor window of the Book -Building. - -(Film) - -Mr. DULLES. Is that going 11 miles per hour? - -(Discussion off the record.) - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. This film will be the black and white photographs of -the car in the fixed still positions in each of the frame numbers -described in previous testimony. - -In addition the final portion of the film is a run through of the car -at 11 miles an hour on three separate runs filmed as the rifleman would -have seen the car looking through the rifle. - -On the first run of the car going down the assassination route I have -stained frames in the vicinity of frame 222 which is after the first -clear shot after the tree, I have stained the frame at the location of -shot 313, which is the second pink flash you will see. - -I found, in examining the film, that this is a shorter span of time -than in the actual film. It is a span on the reenactment of about three -and a half seconds between 222 and 313. - -The second frame stained is 313 but since it is running at a faster -speed I have also stained a spot that represents 5 seconds which is -what the time lapse was between frame 222 and frame 313 in the actual -assassination films. - -That will be after the car driving scene. - -(Film) - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. This is the last clear shot and this is an adjusted -last clear shot before going under the tree. This is the shot -approximately 185. This is frame 186 which is the adjusted shots which -would account for a 10-inch variance. - -Shot of frame 207, and the adjusted frame which was 210. This is frame -222 and you can see the tree is still in the background. - -This is 225 now. 231. At this point Governor Connally states he has -been hit by now. This is 235. 240--249--255--and the shot to the head -which is 313. - -Mr. SPECTER. What is this? Describe this, Mr. Shaneyfelt. - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. This is the run at 11 miles an hour containing the pink -stain. This is another run at 11 miles an hour. It will give you some -idea of the difficulty of tracking a car with a heavy camera mounted -on the rifle. - -Mr. McCLOY. You have to sight that with a camera? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Sighting through a camera. - -(Film) - -Mr. REDLICH. Just as a final thing, Mr. McCloy, would you like to see -the Zapruder film? - -Mr. McCLOY. I think we will take the original Zapruder again, I don't -know whether we have anything that is more significant in the black and -whites, I am talking about the particular movies of the frames, we have -not seen those. - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes. - -Mr. McCLOY. I think we have seen all we need to see with regard to -that. What have you got left? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. The original Zapruder film. - -Mr. McCLOY. We will see that. - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. We have the duplication of the Zapruder film -reenactment. The first portion of the reel is the still shots and the -last portion is the run through at 11 miles an hour. - -Mr. SPECTER. I think you would find that worth while to see. - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Then we have Nix and Muchmore of the same run. - -Mr. McCLOY. Let's do those, too. - -Representative FORD. First is the original Zapruder. - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Original Zapruder. This is not the original. This is -the first copy. - -(Film) - -Mr. SPECTER. Will you state for the record what film we just saw? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. This film we just viewed is a copy made directly from -the original Zapruder film of the actual assassination. - -Mr. SPECTER. Could you now show us the film which was taken at the -reconstruction from the Zapruder position? - -(Film) - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. These films we made in Dallas have been developed and -left intact and have not been edited in any way so there are a lot of -blank spaces where we run the leader off and turn the film. This is -position 161. This side-to-side jiggle is a camera malfunction. - -Mr. McCLOY. This is 16 mm.? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. No; 8 mm. - -Representative FORD. Is this from his camera? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; taken with his camera. Frame 222, frame 225. This -is frame 231. - -Representative FORD. He has a delayed reaction compared to what the -President did. - -Mr. SPECTER. What frame is this, Mr. Shaneyfelt? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. 313, the head shot. - -Mr. McCLOY. The head shot. - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. This is the position which is not duplicated on the -Zapruder film. This is running the film out to reload it. - -During that run at 11 miles an hour we made no effort to duplicate the -body position because it would have been most difficult to know just -when to turn. The only other films we have are the ones we shot with -the Nix and Muchmore cameras of this same run from their positions. - -Mr. McCLOY. Did Nix, Muchmore get a second shot of the head shot? - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Mrs. Muchmore got the head shot and Mr. Nix got the -head shot. - -Mr. McCLOY. They both got it. - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. We have both those films. - -Mr. McCLOY. We might take a look at it while we are here. I don't think -I have ever seen those. Those are 88 mm., too. - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes. - -(Film.) - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. This film is the film that was taken by Mr. Orville -Nix of the assassination. This is along Houston street going toward -Elm. There was the head shot. We will roll it back and run it at slow -motion. The head shot shows just a very faint pink. - -Mr. McCLOY. Very soon after this sequence begins. Just as the President -is directly under the white abutment in the background. I will try to -give you a clue about when it is going to happen, there. - -The next film is the film that was exposed in Mr. Nix's camera standing -in the position determined to be his camera position at the reenactment -in Dallas, with the car traveling at approximately 11 miles an hour -along Elm street. - -These films were compared with each other and found to be consistent -in the size of the car in the area of the picture and verified the -position as being that of Mr. Nix. - -(Film) - -Mr. SPECTER. Have you now shown us, Mr. Shaneyfelt, all of the movies -that we saw, we took in Dallas? - -Mr. McCLOY. Mrs. Muchmore. - -Mr. SPECTER. Mrs. Muchmore. - -(Film) - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. This is the motorcade coming down Main and turning into -Houston street. - -Mr. McCLOY. She didn't know she took that. - -Mr. SHANEYFELT. No. - -Mr. SPECTER. Have we now seen all the films from Dallas? That concludes -the films. - -Mr. McCloy, for the record, I would like to have the films marked with -Commission Exhibit No. 904 identifying the Zapruder copy. That is the -copy of the original Zapruder film. - -May I say here, parenthetically, that we do not intend to reproduce -all of this in the published record of the Commission since we have -extracted the key numbers on Exhibit 885 on the album which shows the -frames of the Zapruder film after the President's automobile turns left -off of Houston onto Elm, but for the permanent archives these films -should be made a part of the permanent record. - -I would like to have a copy of the original Nix film marked as -Commission Exhibit No. 905. I would like to have the copy of the -original Muchmore film marked as Commission Exhibit No. 906. I would -like to have all of the movies which we took at Dallas marked in a -group as Commission Exhibit No. 907. - -Mr. McCLOY. That is all the movies that were taken on May 24 in Dallas -by the test team, so to speak. - -Mr. SPECTER. Right, Commissioner McCloy. They are marked as Commission -Exhibit No. 907, and I would like to move formally for the admission -into evidence of Commission Exhibits Nos. 904 through 907 at this time. - -Mr. McCLOY. They may be admitted. - -(Commission Exhibits Nos. 904, 905, 906, and 907 were marked for -identification, and received in evidence.) - -(Whereupon, at 7:20 p.m., the President's Commission recessed.) - - - - -_Friday, June 5, 1964_ - -TESTIMONY OF MRS. JOHN F. KENNEDY - -The President's Commission met, at 4:20 p.m., on Friday, June 5, 1964, -at 3017 N Street NW., Washington, D.C. - -Present was Chief Justice Earl Warren, Chairman. - -Also present were J. Lee Rankin, general counsel; and Robert F. -Kennedy, Attorney General of the United States. - -The CHAIRMAN. The Commission will be in order. - - -Mrs. Kennedy, the Commission would just like to have you say in -your own words, in your own way, what happened at the time of -the assassination of the President. Mr. Rankin will ask you a few -questions, just from the time you left the airport until the time you -started for the hospital. And we want it to be brief. We want it to -be in your own words and want you to say anything that you feel is -appropriate to that occasion. - -Would you be sworn, please, Mrs. Kennedy? - -Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you give before the Commission -will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help -you God? - -Mrs. KENNEDY. I do. - -The CHAIRMAN. Would you be seated. - -Mr. RANKIN. State your name for the record. - -Mrs. KENNEDY. Jacqueline Kennedy. - -Mr. RANKIN. And you are the widow of the former President Kennedy? - -Mrs. KENNEDY. That is right. - -Mr. RANKIN. You live here in Washington? - -Mrs. KENNEDY. Yes. - -Mr. RANKIN. Can you go back to the time that you came to Love Field on -November 22 and describe what happened there after you landed in the -plane? - -Mrs. KENNEDY. We got off the plane. The then Vice President and -Mrs. Johnson were there. They gave us flowers. And then the car was -waiting, but there was a big crowd there, all yelling, with banners and -everything. And we went to shake hands with them. It was a very hot -day. And you went all along a long line. I tried to stay close to my -husband and lots of times you get pushed away, you know, people leaning -over and pulling your hand. They were very friendly. - -And, finally, I don't know how we got back to the car. I think -Congressman Thomas somehow was helping me. There was lots of confusion. - -Mr. RANKIN. Then you did get into the car. And you sat on the left side -of the car, did you, and your husband on your right? - -Mrs. KENNEDY. Yes. - -Mr. RANKIN. And was Mrs. Connally---- - -Mrs. KENNEDY. In front of me. - -Mr. RANKIN. And Governor Connally to your right in the jump seat? - -Mrs. KENNEDY. Yes. - -Mr. RANKIN. And Mrs. Connally was in the jump seat? - -Mrs. KENNEDY. Yes. - -Mr. RANKIN. And then did you start off on the parade route? - -Mrs. KENNEDY. Yes. - -Mr. RANKIN. And were there many people along the route that you waved -to? - -Mrs. KENNEDY. Yes. It was rather scattered going in. - -Once there was a crowd of people with a sign saying something like -"President Kennedy, please get out and shake our hands, our neighbors -said you wouldn't." - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you? - -Mrs. KENNEDY. And he stopped and got out. That was, you know, like a -little suburb and there were not many crowds. But then the crowds got -bigger as you went in. - -Mr. RANKIN. As you got into the main street of Dallas were there very -large crowds on all the streets? - -Mrs. KENNEDY. Yes. - -Mr. RANKIN. And you waved to them and proceeded down the street with -the motorcade? - -Mrs. KENNEDY. Yes. And in the motorcade, you know, I usually would be -waving mostly to the left side and he was waving mostly to the right, -which is one reason you are not looking at each other very much. And it -was terribly hot. Just blinding all of us. - -Mr. RANKIN. Now, do you remember as you turned off of the main street -onto Houston Street? - -Mrs. KENNEDY. I don't know the name of the street. - -Mr. RANKIN. That is that one block before you get to the Depository -Building. - -Mrs. KENNEDY. Well, I remember whenever it was, Mrs. Connally said, "We -will soon be there." We could see a tunnel in front of us. Everything -was really slow then. And I remember thinking it would be so cool under -that tunnel. - -Mr. RANKIN. And then do you remember as you turned off of Houston onto -Elm right by the Depository Building? - -Mrs. KENNEDY. Well, I don't know the names of the streets, but I -suppose right by the Depository is what you are talking about? - -Mr. RANKIN. Yes; that is the street that sort of curves as you go down -under the underpass. - -Mrs. KENNEDY. Yes; well, that is when she said to President Kennedy, -"You certainly can't say that the people of Dallas haven't given you a -nice welcome." - -Mr. RANKIN. What did he say? - -Mrs. KENNEDY. I think he said--I don't know if I remember it or I have -read it, "No, you certainly can't," or something. And you know then the -car was very slow and there weren't very many people around. - -And then--do you want me to tell you what happened? - -Mr. RANKIN. Yes; if you would, please. - -Mrs. KENNEDY. You know, there is always noise in a motorcade and there -are always motorcycles besides us, a lot of them backfiring. So I was -looking to the left. I guess there was a noise, but it didn't seem like -any different noise really because there is so much noise, motorcycles -and things. But then suddenly Governor Connally was yelling, "Oh, no, -no, no." - -Mr. RANKIN. Did he turn toward you? - -Mrs. KENNEDY. No; I was looking this way, to the left, and I heard -these terrible noises. You know. And my husband never made any sound. -So I turned to the right. And all I remember is seeing my husband, he -had this sort of quizzical look on his face, and his hand was up, it -must have been his left hand. And just as I turned and looked at him, I -could see a piece of his skull and I remember it was flesh colored. I -remember thinking he just looked as if he had a slight headache. And I -just remember seeing that. No blood or anything. - -And then he sort of did this [indicating], put his hand to his forehead -and fell in my lap. - -And then I just remember falling on him and saying, "Oh, no, no, no," I -mean, "Oh, my God, they have shot my husband." And "I love you, Jack," -I remember I was shouting. And just being down in the car with his head -in my lap. And it just seemed an eternity. - -You know, then, there were pictures later on of me climbing out the -back. But I don't remember that at all. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you remember Mr. Hill coming to try to help on the car? - -Mrs. KENNEDY. I don't remember anything. I was just down like that. - -And finally I remember a voice behind me, or something, and then I -remember the people in the front seat, or somebody, finally knew -something was wrong, and a voice yelling, which must have been Mr. -Hill, "Get to the hospital," or maybe it was Mr. Kellerman, in the -front seat. But someone yelling. I was just down and holding him. -[Reference to wounds deleted.] - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you have any recollection of whether there were one or -more shots? - -Mrs. KENNEDY. Well, there must have been two because the one that made -me turn around was Governor Connally yelling. And it used to confuse -me because first I remembered there were three and I used to think my -husband didn't make any sound when he was shot. And Governor Connally -screamed. And then I read the other day that it was the same shot -that hit them both. But I used to think if I only had been looking to -the right I would have seen the first shot hit him, then I could have -pulled him down, and then the second shot would not have hit him. But I -heard Governor Connally yelling and that made me turn around, and as I -turned to the right my husband was doing this [indicating with hand at -neck]. He was receiving a bullet. And those are the only two I remember. - -And I read there was a third shot. But I don't know. - -Just those two. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you have any recollection generally of the speed that -you were going, not any precise amount. - -Mrs. KENNEDY. We were really slowing turning the corner. And there were -very few people. - -Mr. RANKIN. And did you stop at any time after the shots, or proceed -about the same way? - -Mrs. KENNEDY. I don't know, because--I don't think we stopped. But -there was such confusion. And I was down in the car and everyone was -yelling to get to the hospital and you could hear them on the radio, -and then suddenly I remember a sensation of enormous speed, which must -have been when we took off. - -Mr. RANKIN. And then from there you proceeded as rapidly as possible to -the hospital, is that right? - -Mrs. KENNEDY. Yes. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you recall anyone saying anything else during the time -of the shooting? - -Mrs. KENNEDY. So; there weren't any words. There was just Governor -Connally's. And then I suppose Mrs. Connally was sort of crying and -covering her husband. But I don't remember any words. - -And there was a big windshield between--you know--I think. Isn't there? - -Mr. RANKIN. Between the seats. - -Mrs. KENNEDY. So you know, those poor men in the front, you couldn't -hear them. - -Mr. RANKIN. Can you think of anything more? - -The CHAIRMAN. No; I think not. I think that is the story and that is -what we came for. - -We thank you very much, Mrs. Kennedy. - -Mr. RANKIN. I would just like to ask if you recall Special Agent -Kellerman saying anything to you as you came down the street after you -turned that corner that you referred to. - -Mrs. KENNEDY. You mean before the shots? - -Mr. RANKIN. Yes. - -Mrs. KENNEDY. Well, I don't, because--you know, it is very hard for -them to talk. But I do not remember, just as I don't recall climbing -out on the back of the car. - -Mr. RANKIN. Yes. You have told us what you remember about the entire -period as far as you can recall, have you? - -Mrs. KENNEDY. Yes. - -The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Mrs. Kennedy. (Whereupon, at 4:30 -p.m., the President's Commission recessed.) - - - - -_Sunday, June 7, 1964_ - -TESTIMONY OF MR. JACK RUBY - -The President's Commission met at 11:45 a.m., on June 7, 1964, in the -interrogation room of the Dallas County Jail, Main and Houston Streets, -Dallas, Tex. - -Present were Chief Justice Earl Warren, Chairman; and Representative -Gerald R. Ford, member. - -Also present were J. Lee Rankin, general counsel; Joseph A. Ball, -assistant counsel; Arlen Specter, assistant counsel; Leon Jaworski and -Robert G. Storey, special counsel to the attorney general of Texas; Jim -Bowie, assistant district attorney; Joe H. Tonahill, attorney for Jack -Ruby; Elmer W. Moore, special agent, U.S. Secret Service; and J. E. -Decker, sheriff of Dallas County. - - -Mr. RUBY. Without a lie detector test on my testimony, my verbal -statements to you, how do you know if I am tell the truth? - -Mr. TONAHILL. Don't worry about that, Jack. - -Mr. RUBY. Just a minute, gentlemen. - -Chief Justice WARREN. You wanted to ask something, did you, Mr. Ruby? - -Mr. RUBY. I would like to be able to get a lie detector test or truth -serum of what motivated me to do what I did at that particular time, -and it seems as you get further into something, even though you know -what you did, it operates against you somehow, brainwashes you, that -you are weak in what you want to tell the truth about and what you want -to say which is the truth. - -Now Mr. Warren, I don't know if you got any confidence in the lie -detector test and the truth serum, and so on. - -Chief Justice WARREN. I can't tell you just how much confidence I have -in it, because it depends so much on who is taking it, and so forth. - -But I will say this to you, that if you and your counsel want any kind -of test, I will arrange it for you. I would be glad to do that, if you -want it. - -I wouldn't suggest a lie detector test to testify the truth, We will -treat you just the same as we do any other witness, but if you want -such a test, I will arrange for it. - -Mr. RUBY. I do want it. Will you agree to that, Joe? - -Mr. TONAHILL. I sure do, Jack. - -Chief Justice WARREN. Any kind of a test you want to verify what you -say, we will be glad to do. - -Mr. RUBY. I want it even if you put me into a sort of drowsiness so you -can question me as to anything pertaining to my involvement in this -particular act. - -Mr. TONAHILL. Jack, you have wanted to do that from the very beginning, -haven't you? - -Mr. RUBY. Yes; and the reason why I am asking for that is--are you -limited for time? - -Chief Justice WARREN. No; we have all the time you want. - -Mr. RUBY. As it started to trial--I don't know if you realize -my reasoning, how I happened to be involved--I was carried away -tremendously emotionally, and all the time I tried to ask Mr. Belli, I -wanted to get up and say the truth regarding the steps that led me to -do what I have got involved in, but since I have a spotty background -in the night club business, I should have been the last person to ever -want to do something that I had been involved in. - -In other words, I was carried away tremendously. - -You want to ask me questions? - -Chief Justice WARREN. You tell us what you want, and then we will ask -you some questions. - -Mr. RANKIN. I think he ought to be sworn. - -Mr. RUBY. Am I boring you? - -Chief Justice WARREN. Go ahead. All right, Mr. Ruby, tell us your story. - -Mr. RUBY. That particular morning--where is Mr. Moore--I had to go down -to the News Building, getting back to this--I don't want to interrupt. - -Chief Justice WARREN. What morning do you mean? - -Mr. RUBY. Friday morning, the starting of the tragedy. - -Mr. Belli evidently did not go into my case thoroughly, -circumstantially. If he had gone into it, he wouldn't have tried to -vindicate me on an insanity plea to relieve me of all responsibility, -because circumstantially everything looks so bad for me. - -It can happen--it happens to many people who happen to be at the wrong -place at the right time. - -Had Mr. Belli spent more time with me, he would have realized not -to try to get me out completely free; at the time we are talking, -technically, how attorneys operate. - -Chief Justice WARREN. I understand. - -Mr. RUBY. Different things came up, flashed back into my mind, that -it dirtied my background, that Mr. Belli and I tell the truth what I -went to say that I wanted to get on the stand and tell the truth what -happened that morning, he said, "Jack, when they get you on the stand, -you are actually speaking of a premeditated crime that you involved -yourself in." - -But I didn't care, because I wanted to tell the truth. - -He said, "When the prosecution gets you on the stand, they will cut you -to ribbons." - -So naturally, I had to retract, and he fought his way to try to -vindicate me out of this particular crime. - -You follow that? - -Chief Justice WARREN. Yes; I do indeed. - -Mr. RUBY. I want you to question me and requestion me on anything you -want, plus the fact I do want the tests when they are available. - -Chief Justice WARREN. Yes. - -Mr. RUBY. On Friday, the morning parade--this goes back to Thursday -night, because it has something to do with it. - -We were having dinner at the Egyptian Restaurant---- - -Chief Justice WARREN. Right now, Mr. Ruby, before we get started taking -your testimony, would you mind being sworn? - -(Chief Justice Warren and Jack Ruby stand and both raise their right -hand.) - -Chief Justice WARREN. Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are -about to give before the Commission will be the truth, the whole truth, -and nothing but the truth, so help you God? - -Mr. RUBY. I do. - -Chief Justice WARREN. Now will you please state whether the things you -have just told us are true under your oath? - -Mr. RUBY. I do so state they are the truth. - -Chief Justice WARREN. Now you complete whatever story you want to tell. - -Mr. RUBY. All right. Thursday night I was having dinner at the Egyptian -Restaurant on Mockingbird Lane, and a fellow comes over to the table. I -was sitting with a guy by the name of Ralph Paul. He tried to invite me -to the club a couple of doors down and I refused, because he had taken -a band away from me that had been engaged for 7 years, and I felt it -was a lost cause, that the club would be failing because of that, and I -sort of excused myself and I refused to go over to the club. - -We finished our dinner, and I went down to the club that I operated, -the Carousel, and this particular master of ceremonies happened to be -there at the time, and we discussed a few things. - -And there is a columnist by the name of Tony Zoppi--and prior to that, -I wrote out a full page copy of this build--I have the copies--as an -emcee, and I brought a picture and brochure, and Tony said, "I will -write a story." - -This was done 2 days prior to this Thursday night. - -So then I went down, so we discussed it and were very much disgusted -with Tony because he only gave us a build of one or two lines. - -Well, I retired that night after closing the club. Then I knew I wanted -to go back to the Morning News Building to get the brochure I left, -and also this complete page of longhand writing describing the various -talents of this Bill DeMar. - -I picked up the brochure that Friday morning, and I also had business -at the News Building on Friday because that is the start of the -weekend, which is very lucrative, the weekend. - -I have ways of making my ads of where they have a way of selling the -product I am producing or putting on on the show. - -So I went down there Friday morning to Tony Zoppi's office, and they -said he went to New Orleans for a couple of days. - -I picked up the brochure. I believe I got downtown there at 10:30 or 11 -o'clock that morning. And I took the brochure and then went into the -main room where we compose our ads. That is the sales room where we -placed our ads. - -And I remained there for a while. I started to write the copy of my ad. - -Now I go back to the same fellow that wanted me to come over to the -club when we were having our dinner on Mockingbird at the Egyptian -Lounge. - -I came to the desk and I wanted to apologize and explain why I didn't -accept his invitation last night. I wanted to explain, and that took -about 20 or 25 minutes. All this is pertaining to everything prior to -the terrible tragedy that happened. - -I started to explain to him why I didn't want to go there, because this -fellow mentioned--Tony, I think--I can't think of his last name--of me -having his band so many years, and I felt at the moment I didn't want -to go over to the club because I didn't care to meet this fellow. - -And he started to apologize, "Jack, I am sorry, I did work for the -fellow and we have been advertising him for that club, and I am -putting out a night club book." - -I remained with him for 20 or 25 minutes talking there. I don't know -whether my ad was completed or not. It was an ad on the Vegas and the -Carousel. - -My ads were completed, I believe, and after finishing my conversation -with him, he left. - -Suddenly the man that completes my ads for me, that helps me with it on -occasion--but I usually make it up myself--but the person that takes -the money for the ads--this is the reason it is so hard for me to meet -a deadline when I get downtown to the News Building. And as a rule, I -have to pay cash for my ads. - -When you are in debt, it is necessary, and they will not put it in -unless you pay cash. - -And consequently, the weekend, I had been to town on that particular -day. All this adds up later on, as I will state why I didn't go to the -parade. - -In the first place, I don't want to go where there is big crowds. I -can't explain it to you. If I was interested, I would have seen it on -television, our beloved President and all the parade that transpired. - -But all that adds up why it is important for me to be in the News -Building. - -I owe the Government quite a bit of money, and it is doing business out -of your pocket, supposedly, in the slang expression. - -Well, John Newnam comes in, and evidently he took it for granted I -finished my ad, and I don't recall if he paid for his ad, and suddenly -there is some milling around. I think it was 12, or 15 minutes after -12, I don't recall what, but John Newnam said someone had been shot. - -And I am sorry, I got carried away. It is the first time I got carried -away, because I had been under pressure. - -And someone else came running over and he said a Secret Service man was -shot, or something to that effect. - -And I am here in the middle with John Newnam, because Newnam isn't -paying any attention to anyone else, and there is a lot of going back -and forth. - -So someone must have made a statement that Governor Connally was shot. -I don't recall what was said. And I was in a state of hysteria, I mean. - -You say, "Oh my God, it can't happen." You carry on crazy sayings. - -There was a little television set in one office not far away from -where I had been sitting at the desk. I ran over there and noticed a -little boy and a little sister say, "I was standing right there when it -happened." I mean, different things you hear on the television. - -Then the phone started ringing off the desk and I heard John Newnam say -people were complaining about the ad, why they accepted this ad. - -(A tray of water and glasses was brought in.) - -Thank you. - -Has every witness been this hesitant in trying to explain their story? - -Chief Justice WARREN. You are doing very well. I can understand why you -have to reflect upon a story of that length. - -Mr. RUBY. The phones were ringing off the desk calling various ads, and -they were having a turmoil in that News Building because of a person by -the name of Bernard Weissman placing that particular ad, a full page -ad. I am sure you are familiar with the ad. - -Chief Justice WARREN. Yes; I am. - -Mr. RUBY. Criticizing a lot of things about our beloved President. Then -John Newnam and I and another gentleman walked over to another part of -the room, and I heard John Newnam say, "I told him not to take that -ad." Something to that effect. - -Then he said, "Well, you have seen him pay part cash and come back and -pay the balance." - -Now everything is very vague to me as to when this transpired; after -they heard the President had been shot, or prior to that. - -You know it's been a long time, and I am under a very bad mental strain -here. - -Chief Justice WARREN. Yes. - -Mr. RUBY. From the time that we were told that the President was shot, -35 minutes later they said he had passed away. In the meantime, I -became very emotional. I called my sister at home. She was carried -away terribly bad. And John Newnam happened to be there, and I know it -is a funny reaction you have, you want other people to feel that you -feel emotionally disturbed the same way as other people, so I let John -listen to the phone that my sister was crying hysterically. - -And I said to John, I said, "John, I will have to leave Dallas." I -don't know why I said that, but it is a funny reaction that you feel; -the city is terribly let down by the tragedy that happened. And I said, -"John, I am not opening up tonight." - -And I don't know what else transpired there. I know people were just -heartbroken. - -I left the room. I may have left out a few things. Mr. Moore remembers -probably more, but you come back and question me and maybe I can answer -those questions. - -I left the building and I went down and I got my car, and I couldn't -stop crying, because naturally when I pulled up to a stoplight and -other people would be adjacent to me, I wouldn't want them to see me -crying, because it looked kind of artificial. - -And I went to the club and I came up, and I may have made a couple of -calls from there. I could have called my colored boy, Andy, down at the -club. I could have--I don't know who else I would have called, but I -could have, because it is so long now since my mind is very much warped -now. - -You think that literally? - -I went up to the club, and I told Andy, I said, "Call everyone and tell -them we are not opening." - -We have a little girl in Fort Worth I wanted to make sure he called her. - -And a fellow by the name of Bell called and wanted to know if we were -open. - -And Kathy Kay called, and I said, "Definitely not." - -And I called Ralph Paul, that owns the Bull Pen. He said, "Jack, -being as everyone else is open"--because he knows I was pressed for -money--and I said, "No, Ralph, I can't open." - -He said, "Okay, if that is why, that is the way it's got to be." - -So in the meantime, I had gone with Alice Nichols for some time, and -I called her on the phone but she wasn't there, but I left the number -on the pay phone for her to return the call, because I didn't want to -keep the business phone tied up. And I hadn't spoken to her in maybe 9 -months or a year. I don't know what I said to her, not many words, but -just what happened. - -I still remained around the club there. I am sure I was crying pretty -bad. I think I made a long-distance call to California. This fellow had -just visited me, and I had known him in the days back in Chicago when -we were very young, in the real tough part of Chicago. His name is Al -Gruber. - -He was a bad kid in those days, but he is quite reformed. He is married -and has a family, and I am sure he makes a very legitimate livelihood -at this time. - -He happened to come through a couple of nights prior to that to try -to interest me, or 4 or 5 days prior to that, to interest me in a new -kind--you follow the story as I tell it? - -Chief Justice WARREN. Yes. - -Mr. RUBY. It is important, very important. It is on a new kind of -machine that washes cars. You pay with tokens. It is a new thing. I -don't know if it faded out or not. He tried to interest my brother, -Sammy, because Sammy sold his washateria. - -And my sister was in the hospital when he first came. I am going back -a little bit. Sammy didn't go to the hospital, and we needed to tell -Sammy about this particular thing, and that is the reason Al Gruber -came into the picture, because he came to try to interest my brother, -Sammy, in this new washateria deal to wash cars. - -He left and went to California, but before he went to California I -promised him my dachshund dog. - -When this thing happened, I called him. He said, "Yes, we are just -watching on television." And I couldn't carry on more conversation. I -said, "Al, I have to hang up." - -Then I must have called my sister, Eileen, in Chicago. - -Then a fellow came over to deliver some merchandise I had ordered over -the phone, or Andy ordered. And we said, "What is the use of purchasing -any merchandise of any kind, we are not interested in business." And I -don't recall what I said, but I told him whatever money he received, to -keep the change. I am not a philanthropist, but nothing bothered me at -the time. I wasn't interested in anything. - -Then I kept calling my sister, Eva, because she wanted me to come be -with her. - -Eva and I have a very complex personality. Very rarely can I be with -her, but on this particular occasion, since she was carrying on so, I -felt that I wanted to be with someone that meant something to me. I -wanted to be with her. - -And I kept calling her back, "I will be there." And so on. But I never -did get there until a couple of hours later. - -I finally left the club. I am sure you gentlemen can brief in all the -things that happened before. A kid by the name of Larry up there, I -think I told him to send the dog they crated, to find out about the -price--very implusive about everything. - -Then I left the club. And I had been dieting, but I felt I wanted some -food. I can't explain it. It would be like getting intoxicated at that -particular time. It is amusing, but it is true. - -I went over to the Ritz Delicatessen a block and a half away. Must have -bought out the store, for about $10 worth of delicacies and so on. Went -out to my sister's and stayed at her apartment. - -Oh, I called from the apartment--my sister knew more of my calls than I -did. I remember I think I called--I can't think of who I called. - -Anyway, I am sure I made some calls of what had happened there. -Somebody will have to piece me together from the time I got to my -sister's apartment where I had partaken of the food. - -Oh yes, I called Andy. This Andy Armstrong called me and said, "Don -Safran wants you to call him." - -This is rare for this gentleman, because he is a columnist for the -Dallas Times Herald, because he never could get out any copy for my -club. And he said, "Don Safran wants me to call him." - -I called him, and he said, "Jack, are you going to be closed tonight?" - -I said, "Yes." - -He said, "Well, the Cabana and the Adolphus, the Century Room, are -going to be closed." - -I said, "Don, I am not asking you about any clubs that are going to be -closed. I know I am going to be closed." - -And he said, "Jack, that is what I want to know." - -And I said, "You don't have to prompt me about who else is going to be -closed." - -I put the receiver down and talked to my sister, and I said, "Eva, what -shall we do?" - -And she said, "Jack, let's close for the 3 days." She said, "We don't -have anything anyway, but we owe it to"--(chokes up). - -So I called Don Safran back immediately and I said, "Don, we decided to -close for Friday, Saturday, and Sunday." - -And he said, "Okay." - -Then I called the Morning News and I wanted to definitely make sure -to change a copy of my ad to "Closed Friday, Saturday, and Sunday," -something to that effect. - -And it was a little late in the afternoon, but he said, "we will try to -get the copy in." - -Then I called Don back again but couldn't get him, and I spoke to one -of his assistants, and I said, I forget what I told him. Anyway, that -is one of the calls I had that had transpired. - -I lie down and take a nap. I wake about 7 or 7:30. In the meantime, I -think I called--the reason this comes back to me, I know I was going to -go to the synagogue. - -I called Coleman Jacobson and asked him what time services are tonight, -and he said he didn't know. - -And I said, "Are there going to be any special services?" - -And he said he didn't know of any. - -And I called the Congregation Shearith Israel and asked the girl, and -she said, "Regular services at 8 o'clock." - -And I said, "Aren't there going to be earlier services like 5:30 or 6? - -And about 7:30 I went to my apartment. I don't know if I went downtown -to the club. I know I went to my apartment--either to the club or to -the apartment. - -And I changed, showered and shaved, and I think I drove--and as I drove -down, there is a certain Thornton Freeway, and I saw the clubs were -still open going full blast, a couple of clubs there. - -Anyway, I went out to the synagogue and I went through the line and -I spoke to Rabbi Silverman, and I thanked him for going to visit my -sister at the hospital. She was in a week prior and had just gotten -out. I don't remember the date. - -Then he had a confirmation--this is the night prior to the -confirmation. They serve little delicacies. So in spite of the fact -of the mood I was in, I strolled into the place, and I think I had a -little glass of punch. Nothing intoxicating, just a little punch they -serve there. I didn't speak to anyone. One girl, Leona, said "Hello, -Jack," and I wasn't in a conversational mood whatsoever. - -I left the club--I left the synagogue and I drove by the Bali-Hai -Restaurant. I noticed they were open. I took recognition of that. - -I drove by another club called the Gay Nineties, and they were closed. - -And I made it my business to drive down Preston Road. In my mind -suddenly it mulled over me that the police department was working -overtime. And this is the craziest thing that ever happened in a -person's life. I have always been very close to the police department, -I don't know why. - -I felt I have always abided by the law--a few little infractions, but -not serious--and I felt we have one of the greatest police forces in -the world here, and I have always been close to them, and I visited in -the office. - -And over the radio I heard they were working overtime. - -I stopped at the delicatessen called Phil's on Oak Lawn Avenue, and -suddenly I decided--I told the clerk there I wanted him to make me some -real good sandwiches, about 10 or 12, and he had already started on the -sandwiches and I got on the phone. - -I called an officer by the name of Sims and I said, "Sims, I hear you -guys are working," and so on. I said, "I want to bring some sandwiches." - -And he said, "Jack, we wound up our work already. We wound up what we -were doing. We are finished what we were doing. I will tell the boys -about your thoughtfulness, and I will thank them for you." - -In the meantime, there is a fellow in town that has been very good to -me named Gordon McLendon. Do you know him, Mr. Warren? - -Chief Justice WARREN. I think I do not. - -Mr. RUBY. He had been giving me a lot of free plugs. And all the while -listening to the radio, I heard about a certain diskjockey, Joe Long, -that is down at the station, giving firsthand information--I want to -describe him--of Oswald. - -Very rarely do I use the name Oswald. I don't know why. I don't know -how to explain it--of the person that committed the act. [Pause to -compose self.] - -So before going down to the police station, I try to call KLIF but -can't get their number. - -I wanted to bring the sandwiches to KLIF so they would have the -sandwiches, since they already started to make them up. - -And I remember Russ Knight, a diskjockey--these names aren't familiar -to you, but I have to mention them in order to refresh my memory. - -His name was Moore, or something, and I tried to get information on the -telephone, but they couldn't give me the phone number of his home. - -I probably thought I could get the phone number, but after 6 p.m., you -cannot get into the premises unless you have a "hot" number that is -right to the diskjockey room. - -So I couldn't get a hold of that. - -But in the meantime, I called Gordon McLendon's home, because I know -he lives near the synagogue out there, and I got a little girl on the -phone, and I knew they had children, and I asked for the number for -KLIF. - -I said, "Anyone home?" - -She said, "No." - -I said, "Is your daddy or mommy home?" I forget what transpired. I -said, "I would like to get the number of the station so I can get in -the building at this time." - -She said she would go and see, and gave me a Riverside exchange. - -Mind you, this is 6 or 7 months back, gentlemen. - -And I asked her name. Her name was Christine, I think. I said, "I -wanted to bring some sandwiches." - -She said, "My mother already brought sandwiches." - -And I said, "I wanted to go there too." And that was the end of this -little girl's conversation with myself. - -I called that number, as I am repeating myself. There was no such -number. It was an obsolete number. - -I go down to the--I drive by--I leave the delicatessen--the clerk -helped me with the sandwiches out to my car, and I thanked him. I told -him, "These were going to KLIF, and I want you to make them real good." - -He helped me with the sandwiches in the car. I got in the car and drove -down toward town. I imagine it is about 4 or 5 miles to the downtown -section from this delicatessen. - -But prior to going into the station, I drove up McKinney Avenue to look -over a couple of clubs to see if they were activating. I knew the club -across from the Phil's Delicatessen and I knew the B. & B. Restaurant -was open. That is a restaurant and I know the necessity for food, but I -can't understand some of the clubs remaining open. It struck me funny -at such a tragic time as that happening. - -I drove down to Commerce and Harwood and parked my car with my -dog--incidentally, I always have my dog with me--on the lot there, -left the sandwiches in the car, went into the building of the police -station, took the elevator up to the second floor, and there was a -police officer there. - -This is the first time I ever entered the building, gentlemen. The -first time of that Friday. This time it must have been about--I -mean the time, the time of my entering the building, I guess, was -approximately 11:15 p.m. - -The officer was there, and I said, "Where is Joe Long?" - -I said, "Can I go and look for him?" - -Evidently I took a little domineering part about me, and I was able -to be admitted. I asked different reporters and various personalities -there, "Are you Joe Long?," and I couldn't locate him. - -I even had a police officer try to page him and he couldn't locate him. - -I recognized a couple of police officers, Cal Jones and a few others, -and I said "hello" to them. - -And I am still looking for Joe Long, but I am carried away with the -excitement of history. - -And one fellow then--I am in the hallway there--there is a narrow -hallway, and I don't recall if Captain Fritz or Chief Curry brings the -prisoner out, and I am standing about 2 or 3 feet away from him, and -there is some reporters that didn't know the various police officers, -and I don't know whether they asked me or I volunteered to tell them, -because I knew they were looking to find out who that was, and I said, -"That was Chief Curry" or "That is Captain Fritz," or whoever it was. - -I don't recall Henry Wade coming out in the hallway. He probably did. I -don't recall what happened. - -(To Joe Tonahill) Is that for me, Joe? - -Then suddenly someone asked, either the Chief or Captain Fritz, "Isn't -there a larger room we can go into?" - -They said, "Well, let's go down to the assembly room downstairs." - -I don't know what transpired in between from the time that I had the -officer page Joe Long up to the time I was standing about 3 feet -away from Oswald. All the things--I don't recall if I am telling you -everything that happened from that time, from the time I entered the -building to the time I went down to the assembly room. - -I went down to the assembly room down in the basement. I felt perfectly -free walking in there. No one asked me or anything. I got up on a -little table there where I knew I wasn't blocking anyone's view, -because there was an abutment sticking out, and I had my back to the -abutment, and I was standing there. - -Then they brought the prisoner out and various questions were being -shouted. - -I noticed there was a chief county judge--Davidson, I can't think of -his name, one of these precinct court judges, and they brought the -prisoner out. - -I don't recall if Chief Fritz, Captain Fritz was there, or Chief Curry. -I know Henry Wade was there. And they started shouting questions and he -said, "Is he the one?" And the question about the gun. - -And they questioned Henry Wade, "what organization did he belong to," -or something. And if I recall, I think Henry Wade answered, "Free Cuba." - -And I corrected Henry Wade, because listening to the radio or KLIF, -it stood out in my mind that it was "Fair Play Cuba." There was a -difference. - -So he said, "Oh yes, Fair Play Cuba," and he corrected that. - -I don't know how long we remained there. There was a lot of questions -thrown back and forth, and this District Attorney Henry Wade was -answering them to the best he could. - -From the way he stated, he let the reporters know that this was the -guilty one that committed the crime. - -He specifically stated that in that room, that he was the one. - -It didn't have any effect in my mind, because whether the person had -come out, whether he come out openly and publicly stated didn't have -any bearing in my mind, because I wasn't interested in anything. All I -knew, they had the prisoner. But the reporters like to know where they -stand, "is he the one?" - -We left out in the hallway, and I saw Henry Wade standing there, and -I went over to him and said, "Henry. I want you to know I was the one -that corrected you." I think it is a childish thing, but I met Henry -Wade sometime back, and I knew he would recognize me. - -By the way, it was "Fair Play Cuba," or something to that effect. - -In the meantime, as I leave Henry Wade, two gentlemen pass by and I -said, "Are you Joe Long?" He said, "No, why do you want Joe Long?" - -And I said, "I got to get into KLIF. I have got some sandwiches." - -And he said, "What about us?" - -And I said, "Some other time." - -And it so happened I found out Jerry Cunkle and Sam Pease, I found out -they were the names, so I did get the number, because these fellows -work for a rival radio station, and he gave me the number of KLIF. - -And in the testimony of John Rutledge, if I recall now--this is the -only time I had ever seen this person. When I went out the railing -where the phone was at, people felt free to walk in. - -In other words, I felt that I was deputized as a reporter momentarily, -you might say. - -So I called one of the boys at KLIF and I said to them, "I have -sandwiches for you. I want to get over there." I said, "By the way, I -see Henry Wade talking on the phone to someone. Do you want me to get -him over here?" - -And he said, "Yes, do that." - -That is when everyone was beckoning Henry Wade, and I called him over -and he talked on the phone to this boy. - -And after he finished; I didn't even tell him what station it was. -I said, "Here is somebody that wants to talk to you." And I felt he -wouldn't turn it down. - -And this fellow was very much elated that I brought him over there. - -And I said, "Now, will you let me in?" - -He said, "I will only leave the door open for 5 minutes." That was -after the conversation was finished with Henry Wade. - -I got ready to leave the building and I got up to the next floor and -there was another diskjockey at KLIF, Russ Knight. He said, "Jack, -where is everything happening?" And he had a tape recorder. - -And I said, "Come on downstairs", and led him downstairs. And there was -Henry Wade sitting there. And I said, "Henry, this is Russ Knight." And -I left him there with Henry Wade, and I went to my car and drove over -to KLIF, which is a block away from there. - -And it was a little chilly that night, as I recall, but by bringing -Russ Knight over to Henry Wade, I delayed too long to get to KLIF, and -I had to wait 15 minutes until Russ Knight came from finishing his -interview with Henry Wade. - -I had the sandwiches with me and some soda pop and various things, and -Russ Knight opened the door and we went upstairs. - -(Mr. Arlen Specter, a staff counsel, entered the room.) - -Chief Justice WARREN. This is another man on my staff, Mr. Specter. -Would you mind if he came in? - -(Chief Justice Warren introduced the men around the room.) - -Mr. RUBY. Is there any way to get me to Washington? - -Chief Justice WARREN. I beg your pardon? - -Mr. RUBY. Is there any way of you getting me to Washington? - -Chief Justice WARREN. I don't know of any. I will be glad to talk to -your counsel about what the situation is, Mr. Ruby, when we get an -opportunity to talk. - -Mr. RUBY. I don't think I will get a fair representation with my -counsel, Joe Tonahill. I don't think so. I would like to request that I -go to Washington and you take all the tests that I have to take. It is -very important. - -Mr. TONAHILL. Jack, will you tell him why you don't think you will get -a fair representation? - -Mr. RUBY. Because I have been over this for the longest time to get the -lie detector test. Somebody has been holding it back from me. - -Chief Justice WARREN. Mr. Ruby, I might say to you that the lateness of -this thing is not due to your counsel. He wrote me, I think, close to -2 months ago and told me that you would be glad to testify and take, I -believe he said, any test. I am not sure of that, but he said you would -be glad to testify before the Commission. - -And I thanked him for the letter. But we have been so busy that this is -the first time we have had an opportunity to do it. - -But there has been no delay, as far as I know, on the part of Mr. -Tonahill in bringing about this meeting. It was our own delay due to -the pressures we had on us at the time. - -Mr. RUBY. What State are you from, Congressman? - -Representative FORD. Michigan. Grand Rapids, Mich. - -Chief Justice WARREN. I will be glad to talk that over, if we can. You -might go right ahead, if you wish, with the rest of your statement. - -Mr. RUBY. All right. I remained at KLIF from that moment on, from the -time I got into the building, with Russ Knight. We talked about various -things. I brought out the thought of this ad that Bernard Weissman had -placed in the newspaper, and I also told Russ the one I admired by -Gordon McLendon. - -He came out with an editorial about the incident with Adlai Stevenson -and all those things. He is one person that will immediately go to bat -if anything is wrong. He will clarify it. - -And I told Russ Knight there were some other things that were occurring -at the time. So I remained there until about 2 a.m., and we all partook -of the sandwiches and had a feast there. - -And they spliced the various comments they got back and forth of Henry -Wade, of Russ Knight's copy--of Russ Knight's items of Henry Wade. - -Chief Justice WARREN. Mr. Ruby, this is the young man, Mr. Specter. He -is a member of our staff, and he comes from Philadelphia. - -(Ruby shakes hands with Mr. Specter.) - -Mr. RUBY. I am at a disadvantage, gentlemen, telling my story. - -Chief Justice WARREN. You were right at the point where you had it -about 2 o'clock in the morning, and you had had your feast, as you -mentioned, and had talked to these men, and so forth. That was the last -that you had told us. - -Mr. RUBY. Well, lots of things occurred up to that. They talked pro and -con about the tragedy. - -At 2 a.m., I left the building. I drove--I was going to go toward the -Times Herald Building, because as a result--I very rarely go there for -my weekend ad, because once I get the ad into the Morning News, which -is the earlier issue, all I have to do is call the newspaper and they -transpire the same ad that I had into the newspaper--into the Morning -News. - -And I promised one of the boys working in the Times Herald Building -there--I was in the act, in the business of a twist-board deal I was -promoting as a sales item by advertisement and mail order, and I had -been evading him, or didn't have time to go out there because it was -very late when I left the club, and I didn't want to stop, but because -this was an early morning, I thought this would be the right time to go -over there, plus the fact of changing my ad I had in the Morning News -to the closing of 3 days, that I would go over there and maybe add a -little more effectiveness to it in the way I wanted the ad placed. - -As I was driving toward the Times Herald with the intention of doing -these things, I heard someone honk a horn very loudly, and I stopped. -There was a police officer sitting in a car. He was sitting with this -young lady that works in my club, Kathy Kay, and they were very much -carried away. - -And I was carried away; and he had a few beers, and it is so bad, about -those places open, and I was a great guy to close; and I remained with -them--did I tell you this part of it? - -Mr. MOORE. I don't recall this part; no. - -Mr. RUBY. I didn't tell you this part because at the time I thought a -lot of Harry Carlson as a police officer, and either it slipped my mind -in telling this, or it was more or less a reason for leaving it out, -because I felt I didn't want to involve them in anything, because it -was supposed to be a secret that he was going with this young lady. He -had marital problems. - -I don't know if that is why I didn't tell you that. Anyway, I did leave -it out. His name is Harry Carlson. Her name is Kathy Kay. - -And they talked and they carried on, and they thought I was the -greatest guy in the world, and he stated they should cut this guy inch -by inch into ribbons, and so on. - -And she said, "Well, if he was in England, they would drag him through -the streets and would have hung him." I forget what she said. - -I left them after a long delay. They kept me from leaving. They were -constantly talking and were in a pretty dramatic mood. They were crying -and carrying on. - -I went to the building of the Times Herald. I went to the Times -Herald--may I read that, Joe? May I please? - -(Joe Tonahill hands paper to Jack Ruby.) - -Mr. TONAHILL. Sam ever get your glasses? - -Mr. RUBY. Not yet. [Reading.] "This is the girl that"--what?--"that -started Jack off." What is this other word? - -Mr. TONAHILL. Culminated? - -Mr. RUBY. That is untrue. That is what I wanted to read. (Throwing pad -on table.) - -Gentlemen, unless you get me to Washington, you can't get a fair shake -out of me. - -If you understand my way of talking, you have got to bring me to -Washington to get the tests. - -Do I sound dramatic? Off the beam? - -Chief Justice WARREN. No; you are speaking very, very rationally, -and I am really surprised that you can remember as much as you have -remembered up to the present time. - -You have given it to us in detail. - -Mr. RUBY. Unless you can get me to Washington, and I am not a crackpot, -I have all my senses--I don't want to evade any crime I am guilty of. -But Mr. Moore, have I spoken this way when we have talked? - -Mr. MOORE. Yes. - -Mr. RUBY. Unless you get me to Washington immediately, I am afraid -after what Mr. Tonahill has written there, which is unfair to me -regarding my testimony here--you all want to hear what he wrote? - -Chief Justice WARREN. Yes; you might read it. If you need glasses -again, try mine this time (handing glasses to Mr. Ruby). - -Mr. RUBY (putting on glasses). "This is the girl"---- - -Mr. TONAHILL. "Thing," isn't it? - -Mr. RUBY. "This is the thing that started Jack in the shooting." - -Mr. TONAHILL. Kathy Kay was talking about Oswald. - -Mr. RUBY. You are lying, Joe Tonahill. You are lying. - -Mr. TONAHILL. No; I am not. - -Mr. RUBY. You are lying, because you know what motivated me. You want -to make it that it was a premeditation. - -Mr. TONAHILL. No. - -Mr. RUBY. Yes; you do. - -Mr. TONAHILL. I don't think there was any premeditation, but you go -ahead and tell it your way. That is what we want you to do. That is -what the Chief Justice wants. - -Mr. RUBY. Not when you specify this. - -You are Senator Rankin? - -Mr. RANKIN. No; I am the general counsel for our Commission, Mr. Ruby. - -Mr. TONAHILL. You go on and keep telling it down to Caroline and the -truth. - -Chief Justice WARREN. Mr. Ruby, may I suggest this, that if we are to -have any tests, either a lie detector or, as you suggest, maybe a truth -serum--I don't know anything about truth serum, but if we are to have -it, we have to have something to check against, and we would like to -have the rest of your story as you started to tell us, because you are -now getting down to the crucial part of it, and it wouldn't be fair to -you to have this much of it and then not have the rest. - -Mr. RUBY. Because the reason why, Joe knows from the time that I told -Attorney Belli, and the story I wanted to tell on the stand, and Mr. -Tonahill knows this isn't the time. The thought never entered my mind. -He knows it. - -Mr. TONAHILL. I didn't say the thought entered your mind. I didn't say -that. - -Mr. RUBY. You are inferring that. - -Mr. TONAHILL. Unconsciously, maybe, is what I meant to say. - -Mr. RUBY. Why go back to Friday, Joe? - -Mr. TONAHILL. You are going to come right down---- - -Mr. RUBY. Why go back to Friday? That set me off. - -Then it is a greater premeditation than you know is true. - -Mr. TONAHILL. I don't say it is premeditation. I never have. I don't -think it is. - -Mr. RUBY. Because it never entered my mind when they talked about, the -officer, cutting him into bits. You would like to have built it up for -my defense, but that is not it. I am here to tell the truth. - -Mr. TONAHILL. The psychiatrist said that to me. - -Mr. RUBY. You want to put that into my thoughts, but it never happened. -I took it with a grain of salt what he said at that particular time. - -Well, it is too bad, Chief Warren, that you didn't get me to your -headquarters 6 months ago. - -Chief Justice WARREN. Well, Mr. Ruby, I will tell you why we didn't. -Because you were then about to be tried and I didn't want to do -anything that would prejudice you in your trial. And for that reason, I -wouldn't even consider asking you to testify until your trial was over. -That is the only reason that we didn't talk to you sooner. - -And I wish we had gotten here a little sooner after your trial was -over, but I know you had other things on your mind, and we had other -work, and it got to this late date. - -But I assure you, there is no desire on our part to let this matter go -to any late date for any ulterior purpose. I assure you of that. - -And as I told you at the beginning, if you want a test of some kind -made, I will undertake to see that it is done. - -Mr. RUBY. You have power to do it, even though the district attorney -objects to me getting the tests? - -Chief Justice WARREN. Yes; I do. - -Mr. RUBY. How soon can it be done? - -Chief Justice WARREN. Well, I am not familiar with those things, but we -will try to do it expeditiously, you may be sure, because we are trying -to wind up the work of this Commission. And I assure you we won't delay -it. - -Mr. RUBY. Are you staying overnight here, Chief Warren? - -Chief Justice WARREN. No; I have to be back, because we have an early -session of the Court tomorrow morning. - -Mr. RUBY. Is there any way of getting a polygraph here? - -Mr. DECKER. May I make a suggestion? - -Jack, listen, you and I have had a lot of dealings. Do you want my -officers removed from the room while you talk to this Commission? - -Mr. RUBY. That wouldn't prove any truth. - -Mr. DECKER. These people came several thousand miles to interview you. -You have wanted to tell me your story and I have refused to let you -tell me. Now be a man with a bunch of men that have come a long way to -give you an opportunity to. - -You asked me for permission to tell your story, and I told you "No." - -This is a supreme investigating committee at this particular time. Now -give them your story and be a man, if you want them to deal with you -and deal fairly with you. - -Mr. RUBY. It is unfair to me unless I get all the facilities to back up -what I say. - -Mr. DECKER. You tell him your story. Nobody is denying it. You tell -this man. He has come a thousand or more miles to listen to you. Now be -a man about it. - -Mr. MOORE. What I suggest--Jack, at one time I was a polygraph -operator, and you would not be able to go through the entire story the -way you have here. - -So, seriously, you should tell the story and the things you want -checked, you can be asked directly. Because you can only answer yes or -no on the polygraph examination. So I think in view of what you want, -you should tell your story first, and then the points that you want -verified, you can be questioned on. - -As the sheriff mentioned, the Commission has come a long way to have -the opportunity to listen to your story, and I am sure that they know -you are telling the truth, in any case. - -Mr. RUBY. I wish the President were right here now. It is a terrible -ordeal, I tell you that. - -Chief Justice WARREN. I am sure it is an ordeal for you, and we want to -make it just as easy as we can. That is the reason that we have let you -tell your story in your own way without being interrupted. - -If you will just proceed with the rest of your statement, I think it -would make it a lot easier for us to verify it in the way that you want -it to be done. - -Mr. RUBY. I don't know how to answer you. - -Chief Justice WARREN. Well, you have told us most of what happened up -to the time of the incident, and you are almost within, you are just -within a few hours of it now. - -Mr. RUBY. There is a Saturday. - -Chief Justice WARREN. Beg your pardon? - -Mr. RUBY. There is a Saturday night. There is a Friday night. This is -still only Friday night, Chief. - -Chief Justice WARREN. Yes; that is true. - -Mr. RUBY. Well, I will go into a certain point, and if I stop, you will -have to understand if I stop to get my bearings together. - -Chief Justice WARREN. Yes. - -Mr. RUBY. I am in the Times Herald Building. I go upstairs, naturally. - -Chief Justice WARREN. This is about what time? - -Mr. RUBY. This, I imagine, is--I left the KLIF at 2 a.m., and I spent -an hour with the officer and his girl friend, so it must have been -about 3:15 approximately. No; it wasn't. When you are not concerned -with time, it could have been 4 o'clock. - -Chief Justice WARREN. It doesn't make any difference. - -Mr. RUBY. Forty-five minutes difference. - -I am up there in the composing room talking to a guy by the name of -Pat Gadash. He was so elated that I brought him this twist board, and -I had it sealed in a polyethylene bag, but he wanted to see how it is -demonstrated, how it was worked. - -It is a board that is on a pivot, a ball bearing, and it has a tendency -to give you certain exercises in twisting your body. So not that I -wanted to get in with the hilarity of frolicking, but he asked me to -show him, and the other men gathered around. - -When you get into the movement of a ball bearing disk, your body is -free to move. I know you look like you are having a gay time, because -naturally if your body is so free of moving, it is going to look that -way. - -I am stating this in that even with my emotional feeling for our -beloved President, even to demonstrate the twist board, I did it -because someone asked me to. - -You follow me, gentlemen, as I describe it? - -Chief Justice WARREN. Yes; I do. - -Mr. RUBY. Then we placed the ad in, and if I recall, I requested from -Pat to put a black border around to show that the ad was in mourning, -or something, because we were, everything was in mourning. - -Bill, will you do that for me that you asked a minute ago? You said you -wanted to leave the room. - -Mr. DECKER. I will have everyone leave the room, including myself, if -you want to talk about it. You name it, and out we will go. - -Mr. RUBY. All right. - -Mr. DECKER. You want all of us outside? - -Mr. RUBY. Yes. - -Mr. DECKER. I will leave Tonahill and Moore. I am not going to have Joe -leave. - -Mr. RUBY. If you are not going to have Joe leave---- - -Mr. DECKER. Moore, his body is responsible to you. His body is -responsible to you. - -Mr. RUBY. Bill, I am not accomplishing anything if they are here, and -Joe Tonahill is here. You asked me anybody I wanted out. - -Mr. DECKER. Jack, this is your attorney. That is your lawyer. - -Mr. RUBY. He is not my lawyer. - -(Sheriff Decker and law enforcement officers left room.) - -Gentleman, if you want to hear any further testimony, you will have to -get me to Washington soon, because it has something to do with you, -Chief Warren. - -Do I sound sober enough to tell you this? - -Chief Justice WARREN. Yes; go right ahead. - -Mr. RUBY. I want to tell the truth, and I can't tell it here. I can't -tell it here. Does that make sense to you? - -Chief Justice WARREN. Well, let's not talk about sense. But I really -can't see why you can't tell this Commission. - -Mr. RUBY. What is your name? - -Mr. BALL. Joe Ball. - -Chief Justice WARREN. Mr. Joe Ball. He is an attorney from Los Angeles -who has been working for me. - -Mr. RUBY. Do you know Belli too? - -Mr. BALL. I know of him. - -Mr. RUBY. Ball was working with him. He knows Belli. You know Melvin -Belli? - -Mr. BALL. I am not acquainted with him. - -Chief Justice WARREN. No association of any kind. - -Mr. BALL. We practice in different cities. - -Chief Justice WARREN. Five hundred miles away. Mr. Ball practices -in Long Beach, and Mr. Belli practices in San Francisco. There is -positively no connection between anybody in this room, as far as I -know, with Mr. Belli. I can assure you of that. - -Mr. RUBY. Where do you stand, Moore? - -Mr. MOORE. Well, I am assigned to the Commission, Jack. - -Mr. RUBY. The President assigned you? - -Mr. MOORE. No; my chief did. And I am not involved in the -investigation. I am more of a security officer. - -Mr. RUBY. Boys, I am in a tough spot, I tell you that. - -Mr. MOORE. You recall when I talked to you, there were certain things -I asked you not to tell me at the time, for certain reasons, that -you were probably going to trial at that time, and I respected your -position on that and asked you not to tell me certain things. - -Mr. RUBY. But this isn't the place for me to tell what I want to tell. - -Mr. MOORE. The Commission is looking into the entire matter, and you -are part of it, should be. - -Mr. RUBY. Chief Warren, your life is in danger in this city, do you -know that? - -Chief Justice WARREN. No; I don't know that. If that is the thing that -you don't want to talk about, you can tell me, if you wish, when this -is all over, just between you and me. - -Mr. RUBY. No; I would like to talk to you in private. - -Chief Justice WARREN. You may do that when you finish your story. You -may tell me that phase of it. - -Mr. RUBY. I bet you haven't had a witness like me in your whole -investigation, is that correct? - -Chief Justice WARREN. There are many witnesses whose memory has not -been as good as yours. I tell you that, honestly. - -Mr. RUBY. My reluctance to talk--you haven't had any witness in telling -the story, in finding so many problems? - -Chief Justice WARREN. You have a greater problem than any witness we -have had. - -Mr. RUBY. I have a lot of reasons for having those problems. - -Chief Justice WARREN. I know that, and we want to respect your rights, -whatever they may be. And I only want to hear what you are willing to -tell us, because I realize that you still have a great problem before -you, and I am not trying to press you. - -I came here because I thought you wanted to tell us the story, and I -think the story should be told for the public, and it will eventually -be made public. If you want to do that, you are entitled to do that, -and if you want to have it verified as the thing can be verified by a -polygraph test, you may have that, too. - -I will undertake to do that for you, but at all events we must first -have the story that we are going to check it against. - -Mr. RUBY. When are you going back to Washington? - -Chief Justice WARREN. I am going back very shortly after we finish this -hearing--I am going to have some lunch. - -Mr. RUBY. Can I make a statement? - -Chief Justice WARREN. Yes. - -Mr. RUBY. If you request me to go back to Washington with you right -now, that couldn't be done, could it? - -Chief Justice WARREN. No; it could not be done. It could not be done. -There are a good many things involved in that, Mr. Ruby. - -Mr. RUBY. What are they? - -Chief Justice WARREN. Well, the public attention that it would attract, -and the people who would be around. We have no place there for you to -be safe when we take you out, and we are not law enforcement officers, -and it isn't our responsibility to go into anything of that kind. - -And certainly it couldn't be done on a moment's notice this way. - -Mr. RUBY. Well, from what I read in the paper, they made certain -precautions for you coming here, but you got here. - -Chief Justice WARREN. There are no precautions taken at all. - -Mr. RUBY. There were some remarks in the paper about some crackpots. - -Chief Justice WARREN. I don't believe everything I read in the paper. - -Mr. MOORE. In that respect, the Chief Justice is in public life. People -in public life are well aware they don't please everyone, and they get -these threats. - -Incidentally, if it is the part about George Senator talking about the -Earl Warren Society, the Chief Justice is aware of that phase, and -I am sure he would like to hear anything that you have to say if it -affects the security. - -Chief Justice WARREN. Before you finish the rest of your statement, may -I ask you this question, and this is one of the questions we came here -to ask you. - -Did you know Lee Harvey Oswald prior to this shooting? - -Mr. RUBY. That is why I want to take the lie detector test. Just saying -no isn't sufficient. - -Chief Justice WARREN. I will afford you that opportunity. - -Mr. RUBY. All right. - -Chief Justice WARREN. I will afford you that opportunity. You can't do -both of them at one time. - -Mr. RUBY. Gentlemen, my life is in danger here. Not with my guilty plea -of execution. - -Do I sound sober enough to you as I say this? - -Chief Justice WARREN. You do. You sound entirely sober. - -Mr. RUBY. From the moment I started my testimony, have I sounded as -though, with the exception of becoming emotional, have I sounded as -though I made sense, what I was speaking about? - -Chief Justice WARREN. You have indeed. I understood everything you have -said. If I haven't, it is my fault. - -Mr. RUBY. Then I follow this up. I may not live tomorrow to give any -further testimony. The reason why I add this to this, since you assure -me that I have been speaking sense by then, I might be speaking sense -by following what I have said, and the only thing I want to get out -to the public, and I can't say it here, is with authenticity, with -sincerity of the truth of everything and why my act was committed, but -it can't be said here. - -It can be said, it's got to be said amongst people of the highest -authority that would give me the benefit of doubt. And following that, -immediately give me the lie detector test after I do make the statement. - -Chairman Warren, if you felt that your life was in danger at the -moment, how would you feel? Wouldn't you be reluctant to go on -speaking, even though you request me to do so? - -Chief Justice WARREN. I think I might have some reluctance if I was in -your position, yes; I think I would. I think I would figure it out very -carefully as to whether it would endanger me or not. - -If you think that anything that I am doing or anything that I am asking -you is endangering you in any way, shape, or form, I want you to feel -absolutely free to say that the interview is over. - -Mr. RUBY. What happens then? I didn't accomplish anything. - -Chief Justice WARREN. No; nothing has been accomplished. - -Mr. RUBY. Well, then you won't follow up with anything further? - -Chief Justice WARREN. There wouldn't be anything to follow up if you -hadn't completed your statement. - -Mr. RUBY. You said you have the power to do what you want to do, is -that correct? - -Chief Justice WARREN. Exactly. - -Mr. RUBY. Without any limitations? - -Chief Justice WARREN. Within the purview of the Executive order which -established the Commission. We have the right to take testimony of -anyone we want in this whole situation, and we have the right, if we so -choose to do it, to verify that statement in any way that we wish to do -it. - -Mr. RUBY. But you don't have a right to take a prisoner back with you -when you want to? - -Chief Justice WARREN. No; we have the power to subpena witnesses to -Washington if we want to do it, but we have taken the testimony of -200 or 300 people, I would imagine, here in Dallas without going to -Washington. - -Mr. RUBY. Yes; but those people aren't Jack Ruby. - -Chief Justice WARREN. No; they weren't. - -Mr. RUBY. They weren't. - -Chief Justice WARREN. Now I want you to feel that we are not here to -take any advantage of you, because I know that you are in a delicate -position, and unless you had indicated not only through your lawyers -but also through your sister, who wrote a letter addressed either -to me or to Mr. Rankin saying that you wanted to testify before the -Commission, unless she had told us that, I wouldn't have bothered you. - -Because I know you do have this case that is not yet finished, and I -wouldn't jeopardize your position by trying to insist that you testify. - -So I want you to feel that you are free to refrain from testifying any -time you wish. - -But I will also be frank with you and say that I don't think it would -be to your advantage to tell us as much as you have and then to stop -and not tell us the rest. I can't see what advantage that would give -you. - -Mr. RUBY. The thing is this, that with your power that you have, Chief -Justice Warren, and all these gentlemen, too much time has gone by for -me to give you any benefit of what I may say now. - -Chief Justice WARREN. No; that isn't a fact, because until we make our -findings for the Commission, and until we make our report on the case, -it is not too late. - -And there are other witnesses we have who are yet to be examined. So -from our standpoint, it is timely. We are not handicapped at all by the -lateness of your examination. - -Mr. RUBY. Well, it is too tragic to talk about. - -Mr. RANKIN. Isn't it true that we waited until very late in our -proceedings to talk to Mrs. Kennedy? - -Chief Justice WARREN. Yes; I might say to you that we didn't take Mrs. -Kennedy's statement until day before yesterday. Mr. Rankin and I took -her testimony then. - -So we are not treating you different from any other witness. - -Mr. RUBY. I tell you, gentlemen, my whole family is in jeopardy. My -sisters, as to their lives. - -Chief Justice WARREN. Yes? - -Mr. RUBY. Naturally, I am a foregone conclusion. My sisters Eva, -Eileen, and Mary, I lost my sisters. - -My brothers Sam, Earl, Hyman, and myself naturally--my in-laws, Harold -Kaminsky, Marge Ruby, the wife of Earl, and Phyllis, the wife of Sam -Ruby, they are in jeopardy of loss of their lives. Yet they have, just -because they are blood related to myself--does that sound serious -enough to you, Chief Justice Warren? - -Chief Justice WARREN. Nothing could be more serious, if that is the -fact. But your sister, I don't know whether it was your sister Eva or -your other sister---- - -Mr. RUBY. Eileen wrote you a letter. - -Chief Justice WARREN. Wrote the letter to me and told us that you would -like to testify, and that is one of the reasons that we came down here. - -Mr. RUBY. But unfortunately, when did you get the letter, Chief Justice -Warren? - -Chief Justice WARREN. It was a long time ago, I admit. I think it was, -let's see, roughly between 2 and 3 months ago. - -Mr. RUBY. Yes. - -Chief Justice WARREN. I think it was; yes. - -Mr. RUBY. At that time when you first got the letter and I was begging -Joe Tonahill and the other lawyers to know the truth about me, certain -things that are happening now wouldn't be happening at this particular -time. - -Chief Justice WARREN. Yes? - -Mr. RUBY. Because then they would have known the truth about Jack Ruby -and his emotional breakdown. - -Chief Justice WARREN. Yes? - -Mr. RUBY. Of why that Sunday morning--that thought never entered my -mind prior to that Sunday morning when I took it upon myself to try to -be a martyr or some screwball, you might say. - -But I felt very emotional and very carried away for Mrs. Kennedy, that -with all the strife she had gone through--I had been following it -pretty well--that someone owed it to our beloved President that she -shouldn't be expected to come back to face trial of this heinous crime. - -And I have never had the chance to tell that, to back it up, to prove -it. - -Consequently, right at this moment I am being victimized as a part of a -plot in the world's worst tragedy and crime at this moment. - -Months back had I been given a chance--I take that back. Sometime back -a police officer of the Dallas Police Department wanted to know how -I got into the building. And I don't know whether I requested a lie -detector test or not, but my attorney wasn't available. - -When you are a defendant in the case, you say "speak to your attorney," -you know. But that was a different time. It was after the trial, -whenever it happened. - -At this moment, Lee Harvey Oswald isn't guilty of committing the crime -of assassinating President Kennedy. Jack Ruby is. - -How can I fight that, Chief Justice Warren? - -Chief Justice WARREN. Well now, I want to say, Mr. Ruby, that as far as -this Commission is concerned, there is no implication of that in what -we are doing. - -Mr. RUBY. All right, there is a certain organization here---- - -Chief Justice WARREN. That I can assure you. - -Mr. RUBY. There is an organization here, Chief Justice Warren, if it -takes my life at this moment to say it, and Bill Decker said be a man -and say it, there is a John Birch Society right now in activity, and -Edwin Walker is one of the top men of this organization--take it for -what it is worth, Chief Justice Warren. - -Unfortunately for me, for me giving the people the opportunity to get -in power, because of the act I committed, has put a lot of people in -jeopardy with their lives. - -Don't register with you, does it? - -Chief Justice WARREN. No; I don't understand that. - -Mr. RUBY. Would you rather I just delete what I said and just pretend -that nothing is going on? - -Chief Justice WARREN. I would not indeed. I am only interested in what -you want to tell this Commission. That is all I am interested in. - -Mr. RUBY. Well, I said my life, I won't be living long now. I know -that. My family's lives will be gone. When I left my apartment that -morning---- - -Chief Justice WARREN. What morning? - -Mr. RUBY. Sunday morning. - -Chief Justice WARREN. Sunday morning. - -Mr. RUBY. Let's go back. Saturday I watched Rabbi Seligman. Any of you -watch it that Saturday morning? - -Chief Justice WARREN. No; I didn't happen to hear it. - -Mr. RUBY. He went ahead and eulogized that here is a man that fought in -every battle, went to every country, and had to come back to his own -country to be shot in the back [starts crying]. - -I must be a great actor, I tell you that. - -Chief Justice WARREN. No. - -Mr. RUBY. That created a tremendous emotional feeling for me, the way -he said that. Prior to all the other times, I was carried away. - -Then that Saturday night, I didn't do anything but visit a little club -over here and had a Coca-Cola, because I was sort of depressed. A -fellow that owns the Pago Club, Bob Norton, and he knew something was -wrong with me in the certain mood I was in. - -And I went home and that weekend, the Sunday morning, and saw a letter -to Caroline, two columns about a 16-inch area. Someone had written a -letter to Caroline. The most heartbreaking letter. I don't remember the -contents. Do you remember that? - -Mr. MOORE. I think I saw it. - -Mr. RUBY. Yes; and alongside that letter on the same sheet of paper was -a small comment in the newspaper that, I don't know how it was stated, -that Mrs. Kennedy may have to come back for the trial of Lee Harvey -Oswald. - -That caused me to go like I did; that caused me to go like I did. - -I don't know, Chief Justice, but I got so carried away. And I remember -prior to that thought, there has never been another thought in my mind; -I was never malicious toward this person. No one else requested me to -do anything. - -I never spoke to anyone about attempting to do anything. No subversive -organization gave me any idea. No underworld person made any effort to -contact me. It all happened that Sunday morning. - -The last thing I read was that Mrs. Kennedy may have to come back to -Dallas for trial for Lee Harvey Oswald, and I don't know what bug got -ahold of me. I don't know what it is, but I am going to tell the truth -word for word. - -I am taking a pill called Preludin. It is a harmless pill, and it is -very easy to get in the drugstore. It isn't a highly prescribed pill. I -use it for dieting. - -I don't partake of that much food. I think that was a stimulus to give -me an emotional feeling that suddenly I felt, which was so stupid, that -I wanted to show my love for our faith, being of the Jewish faith, and -I never used the term and I don't want to go into that--suddenly the -feeling, the emotional feeling came within me that someone owed this -debt to our beloved President to save her the ordeal of coming back. I -don't know why that came through my mind. - -And I drove past Main Street, past the County Building, and there was a -crowd already gathered there. And I guess I thought I knew he was going -to be moved at 10 o'clock, I don't know. I listened to the radio; and I -passed a crowd and it looked--I am repeating myself--and I took it for -granted he had already been moved. - -And I parked my car in the lot across from the Western Union. Prior -to that, I got a call from a little girl--she wanted some money--that -worked for me, and I said, "Can't you wait till payday?" And she said, -"Jack, you are going to be closed." - -So my purpose was to go to the Western Union--my double purpose--but -the thought of doing, committing the act wasn't until I left my -apartment. - -Sending the wire was when I had the phone call--or the money order. - -I drove down Main Street--there was a little incident I left out, that -I started to go down a driveway, but I wanted to go by the wreaths, and -I saw them and started to cry again. - -Then I drove, parked the car across from the Western Union, went into -the Western Union, sent the money order, whatever it was, walked the -distance from the Western Union to the ramp--I didn't sneak in. I -didn't linger in there. - -I didn't crouch or hide behind anyone, unless the television camera can -make it seem that way. - -There was an officer talking--I don't know what rank he had--talking to -a Sam Pease in a car parked up on the curb. - -I walked down those few steps, and there was the person that--I -wouldn't say I saw red--it was a feeling I had for our beloved -President and Mrs. Kennedy, that he was insignificant to what my -purpose was. - -And when I walked down the ramp--I would say there was an 8-foot -clearance--not that I wanted to be a hero, or I didn't realize that -even if the officer would have observed me, the klieg lights, but I -can't take that. - -I did not mingle with the crowd. There was no one near me when I walked -down that ramp, because if you will time the time I sent the money -order, I think it was 10:17 Sunday morning. - -I think the actual act was committed--I take that back--was it 11 -o'clock? You should know this. - -Mr. MOORE. 11:21. - -Mr. RUBY. No; when Oswald was shot. - -Mr. MOORE. I understood it to be 11:22. - -Mr. RUBY. The clock stopped and said 11:21. I was watching on that -thing; yes. Then it must have been 11:17, closer to 18. That is the -timing when I left the Western Union to the time of the bottom of the -ramp. - -You wouldn't have time enough to have any conspiracy, to be -self-saving, to mingle with the crowd, as it was told about me. - -I realize it is a terrible thing I have done, and it was a stupid -thing, but I just was carried away emotionally. Do you follow that? - -Chief Justice WARREN. Yes; I do indeed, every word. - -Mr. RUBY. I had the gun in my right hip pocket, and impulsively, if -that is the correct word here, I saw him, and that is all I can say. -And I didn't care what happened to me. - -I think I used the words, "You killed my President, you rat." The next -thing, I was down on the floor. - -I said, "I am Jack Ruby. You all know me." - -I never used anything malicious, nothing like s.o.b. I never said that -I wanted to get three more off, as they stated. - -The only words, and I was highly emotional; to Ray Hall--he -interrogated more than any other person down there--all I believe I -said to him was, "I didn't want Mrs. Kennedy to come back to trial." - -And I forget what else. And I used a little expression like being of -the Jewish faith, I wanted to show that we love our President, even -though we are not of the same faith. - -And I have a friend of mine--do you mind if it is a slipshod story? - -Chief Justice WARREN. No; you tell us in your own way. - -Mr. RUBY. A fellow whom I sort of idolized is of the Catholic faith, -and a gambler. Naturally in my business you meet people of various -backgrounds. - -And the thought came, we were very close, and I always thought a lot of -him, and I knew that Kennedy, being Catholic, I knew how heartbroken -he was, and even his picture--of this Mr. McWillie--flashed across me, -because I have a great fondness for him. - -All that blended into the thing that, like a screwball, the way it -turned out, that I thought that I would sacrifice myself for the few -moments of saving Mrs. Kennedy the discomfiture of coming back to trial. - -Now all these things of my background, I should have been the last -person in the world to want to be a martyr. It happens, doesn't it, -Chief Warren? - -I mean, for instance, I have been in the night club business, a -burlesque house. It was a means of a livelihood. I knew persons of -notorious backgrounds years ago in Chicago. I was with the union -back in Chicago, and I left the union when I found out the notorious -organization had moved in there. It was in 1940. - -Then recently, I had to make so many numerous calls that I am sure you -know of. Am I right? Because of trying to survive in my business. - -My unfair competition had been running certain shows that we were -restricted to run by regulation of the union, but they violated all the -rules of the union, and I didn't violate it, and consequently I was -becoming insolvent because of it. - -All those calls were made with only, in relation to seeing if they can -help out, with the American Guild of Variety Artists. Does that confirm -a lot of things you have heard? - -Every person I have called, and sometimes you may not even know a -person intimately, you sort of tell them, well, you are stranded down -here and you want some help--if they know of any official of the -American Guild of Variety Artists to help me. Because my competitors -were putting me out of business. - -I even flew to New York to see Joe Glazer, and he called Bobby Faye. He -was the national president. That didn't help. He called Barney Ross and -Joey Adams. All these phone calls were related not in anyway involved -with the underworld, because I have been away from Chicago 17 years -down in Dallas. - -As a matter of fact, I even called a Mr.--hold it before I say -it--headed the American Federation of Labor--I can't think--in the -State of Texas--Miller. - -Chief Justice WARREN. I don't know. - -Mr. RUBY. Is there a Deutsch I. Maylor? I called a Mr. Maylor here in -Texas to see if he could help me out. - -I want to set you gentlemen straight on all the telephone calls I -had. This was a long time prior to what has happened. And the only -association I had with those calls, the only questions that I inquired -about, was if they could help me with the American Guild of Variety -Artists, to see that they abolished it, because it was unfair to -professional talent, abolish them from putting on their shows in -Dallas. That is the only reason I made those calls. Where do we go from -there? - -Chief Justice WARREN. Well, I will go back to the original question -that I asked you. Did you ever know Oswald? - -Mr. RUBY. No; let me add--you are refreshing my mind about a few -things. - -Can I ask one thing? Did you all talk to Mr. McWillie? I am sure you -have. - -VOICE. Yes. - -Mr. RUBY. He always wanted me to come down to Havana, Cuba; invited me -down there, and I didn't want to leave my business because I had to -watch over it. - -He was a key man over the Tropicana down there. That was during our -good times. Was in harmony with our enemy of our present time. - -Chief Justice WARREN. Yes? - -Mr. RUBY. I refused. I couldn't make it. Finally he sent me tickets to -come down, airplane tickets. - -I made the trip down there via New Orleans, and so I stayed at the -Volk's Apartments, and I was with him constantly. - -And I was bored with the gambling, because I don't gamble, and there is -nothing exciting unless you can speak their language, which is Spanish, -I believe. - -And that was the only environment. That was in August of 1959. - -Any thought of ever being close to Havana, Cuba, I called him -frequently because he was down there, and he was the last person to -leave, if I recall, when they had to leave, when he left the casino. - -As a matter of fact, on the plane, if I recall, I had an article he -sent me, and I wanted to get it published because I idolized McWillie. -He is a pretty nice boy, and I happened to be idolizing him. - -When the plane left Havana and landed in the United States, some -schoolteacher remarked that the United States is not treating Castro -right. When they landed in the United States, this Mr. Louis McWillie -slugged this guy for making that comment. - -So I want you to know, as far as him having any subversive thoughts, -and I wanted Tony to put it in the paper here. That is how much I -thought of Mr. McWillie. And that is my only association. - -The only other association with him was, there was a gentleman here -that sells guns. He has a hardware store on Singleton Avenue. - -Have I told this to you gentlemen? It is Ray's Hardware. His name is -Ray Brantley. - -This was--I don't recall when he called me, but he was a little worried -of the new regime coming in, and evidently he wanted some protection. - -He called me or sent me a letter that I should call Ray Brantley. He -wanted some four little Cobra guns--big shipment. - -So me, I should say myself rather, feeling no harm, I didn't realize, -because he wasn't sending them to me, and I thought there was no crime, -the man wanted protection, he is earning a livelihood. - -I called Ray Brantley and I said, "Ray, McWillie called me." I don't -remember if he sent me a letter or he called. He said he wants four -little Cobras, or something like that. - -He said "I know Mac. I have been doing business with him for a long -time." Meaning with reference to when he was living in Texas. He did a -lot of hunting and things like that. - -Chief Justice WARREN. Yes? - -Mr. RUBY. That was the only relationship I had of any mention, outside -of phone calls, to Mr. McWillie, or any person from Havana, Cuba. - -Chief Justice WARREN. When was that? - -Mr. RUBY. Now the guns--am I correct? Did you ever go to check on it? -On Ray Brantley? - -Mr. MOORE. No. - -Mr. RUBY. He denies I ever called. Evidently he feels, maybe he feels -it would be illegal to send guns out of the country. I don't know if -you gentlemen know the law. I don't know the law. - -Chief Justice WARREN. I don't know. - -Mr. RUBY. I kept--did I tell you this, Joe, about this? - -Mr. TONAHILL. Yes; you did. - -Mr. RUBY. That I wanted someone to go to Ray Brantley? - -Mr. TONAHILL. Yes. - -Mr. RUBY. When Phil Burleson came back with a letter signed, an -affidavit that Ray Brantley said he never did receive a call from me, -and the only gun he sent to McWillie was to the Vegas, but it came back -that they didn't pick it up because it was a c.o.d. order. - -This definitely would do me more harm, because if I tell my story that -I called Ray Brantley, and he denies that he ever got a call from me, -definitely that makes it look like I am hiding something. - -Haven't I felt that right along, Joe? - -Mr. TONAHILL. You sure have, Jack. - -Mr. RUBY. Now, the reason I am telling you these things, I never knew -Lee Harvey Oswald. The first time I ever have seen him was the time in -the assembly room when they brought him out, when he had some sort of a -shiner on his eye. - -Chief Justice WARREN. When was that little incident about the Cobras? -About what year? That is all I am interested in. - -Mr. RUBY. Could have been prior to the early part of 1959. - -Chief Justice WARREN. Yes; all right. - -Mr. RUBY. That is the only call I made. And as a matter of fact, I -didn't even follow up to inquire of this Mr. Brantley, whether he -received it or what the recourse was. That is why I tell you, Chief -Justice Warren--who is this new gentleman, may I ask? - -Mr. RANKIN. This is Mr. Storey from your community, a lawyer who is -working with the attorney general, and Mr. Jaworski, in connection with -watching the work of the Commission so that they will be satisfied -as to the quality of the work done insofar as the State of Texas is -concerned. - -(Pause for reporter to change paper, and Ruby asked about one of the -gentlemen, to which Chief Justice Warren replied as follows): - -Chief Justice WARREN (referring to Mr. Specter). He has been working -with us on the Commission since very close to the beginning now. - -Mr. RANKIN. How long did you spend in Cuba on this trip? - -Mr. RUBY. Eight days. A lot of your tourists were there. As a matter of -fact, a lot of group tourists were going down, students of schools. - -I mean, he had a way of purchasing tickets from Havana that I think he -purchased them at a lesser price. He bought them from the travel agent -in the Capri Hotel. - -He bought them--did you meet McWillie? - -Mr. MOORE. I didn't. - -Mr. RANKIN. He was checked by the Commission in connection with this -work. - -Chief Justice WARREN. There was some story in one of the papers that -you had been interested in shipping jeeps down to Cuba. Was there -anything to that at all? - -Mr. RUBY. No; but this was the earlier part, when the first time Castro -had ever invaded Cuba. There was even a Government article that they -would need jeeps. I don't recall what it was, but I never had the -facilities or the capabilities of knowing where to get jeeps. - -But probably in conversation with other persons--you see, it is a new -land, and they have to have a lot of things. As a matter of fact, the -U.S. Government was wanting persons to help them at that particular -time when they threw out the dictator, Batista. - -And one particular time there was a gentleman that smuggled guns to -Castro. I think I told you that, Mr. Moore; I don't remember. - -Mr. MOORE. I don't recall that. - -Mr. RUBY. I think his name was Longley out of Bay--something--Texas, on -the Bayshore. And somehow he was, I read the article about him, that he -was given a jail term for smuggling guns to Castro. This is the early -part of their revolution. - -Chief Justice WARREN. Before the Batista government fell? - -Mr. RUBY. Yes; I think he had a boat, and he lived somewhere in Bay -something, Bayshore, in the center part of Texas. Do you know him, Mr. -Storey? Do you know this man? - -Mr. STOREY. No; I don't know him. - -Mr. RUBY. How can I prove my authenticity of what I have stated here -today? - -Chief Justice WARREN. Well, you have testified under oath, and I don't -even know that there is anything to disprove what you have said. - -Mr. RUBY. No; because I will say this. You don't know if there -is anything to disprove, but at this moment, there is a certain -organization in this area that has been indoctrinated, that I am the -one that was in the plot to assassinate our President. - -Mr. RANKIN. Would you tell us what that is? - -Mr. RUBY. The John Birch Society. - -Mr. RANKIN. Can you tell us what basis you have for that, Mr. Ruby? - -Mr. RUBY. Just a feeling of it. Mr. Warren, you don't recall when -I--Friday night after leaving the Times Herald, I went to my apartment -and very impatiently awakened George Senator. As a matter of fact, used -the words, as I state, "You will have to get up, George. I want you to -go with me." - -And he had been in bed for a couple of hours, which was about, I -imagine, about 4:30 or a quarter to 5 in the morning. - -And I called the club and I asked this kid Larry if he knew how to pack -a Polaroid, and he said "Yes." - -And I said, "Get up." And we went down and picked up Larry. And in the -meantime, I don't recall if I stopped at the post office to find out -his box number of this Bernard Weissman. I think the box number was -1792, or something to that; and then there was, it came to my mind when -I left the Times Herald--I am skipping back--why I had awakened George. - -I recall seeing a sign on a certain billboard "Impeach Earl Warren." -You have heard something about that? - -Chief Justice WARREN. I read something in the paper, yes; that is all. - -Mr. RUBY. And it came from New Bedford, or Massachusetts; I don't -recall what the town was. - -And there was a similar number to that, but I thought at the time it -would be the same number of 1792, but it was 1757. - -That is the reason I went down there to take the Polaroid picture of -it, because of that remaining in the city at the time. - -What happened to the picture, I don't know. I asked Jim Bowie or -Alexander to tell you. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you know Weissman before that? - -Mr. RUBY. Never knew him. When I said Jim Bowie, no one says a word. - -Mr. BOWIE. We never have seen them. - -Mr. RUBY. They were in my person. - -Mr. BOWIE. But no evidence came? - -Mr. RUBY. No; it did not, never. As a matter of fact, I went to the -post office to check on box 1792. I even inquired with the man in -charge of where you purchase the boxes, and I said to him, "Who bought -this box?" - -And he said, "I can't give you the information. All I know is, it is a -legitimate business box purchase." - -And I checked the various contents of mail there. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you know Officer Tippit? - -Mr. RUBY. I knew there was three Tippits on the force. The only one -I knew used to work for the special services, and I am certain this -wasn't the Tippit, this wasn't the man. - -Mr. RANKIN. The man that was murdered. There was a story that you were -seen sitting in your Carousel Club with Mr. Weissman, Officer Tippit, -and another who has been called a rich oil man, at one time shortly -before the assassination. Can you tell us anything about that? - -Mr. RUBY. Who was the rich oil man? - -Mr. RANKIN. Can you remember? We haven't been told. We are just trying -to find out anything that you know about him. - -Mr. RUBY. I am the one that made such a big issue of Bernard Weissman's -ad. Maybe you do things to cover up, if you are capable of doing it. - -As a matter of fact, Saturday afternoon we went over to the Turf Bar -lounge, and it was a whole hullabaloo, and I showed the pictures -"Impeach Earl Warren" to Bellocchio, and he saw the pictures and got -very emotional. - -And Bellocchio said, "Why did the newspaper take this ad of Weissman?" - -And Bellocchio said, "I have got to leave Dallas." - -And suddenly after making that statement, I realized it is his -incapability, and suddenly you do things impulsively, and suddenly you -realize if you love the city, you stay here and you make the best of -it. And there were witnesses. - -I said, "The city was good enough for you all before this. Now you feel -that way about it." And that was Bellocchio. - -As far as Tippit, it is not Tippitts, it is not Tippitts it is Tippit. - -Mr. RANKIN. This Weissman and the rich oil man, did you ever have a -conversation with them? - -Mr. RUBY. There was only a few. Bill Rudman from the YMCA, and I -haven't seen him in years. - -And there is a Bill Howard, but he is not a rich oil man. He owns the -Stork Club now. He used to dabble in oil. - -Chief Justice WARREN. This story was given by a lawyer by the name of -Mark Lane, who is representing Mrs. Marguerite Oswald, the mother of -Lee Harvey Oswald, and it was in the paper, so we subpenaed him, and -he testified that someone had given him information to the effect that -a week or two before President Kennedy was assassinated, that in your -Carousel Club you and Weissman and Tippit, Officer Tippit, the one who -was killed, and a rich oil man had an interview or conversation for an -hour or two. - -And we asked him who it was that told him, and he said that it was -confidential and he couldn't tell at the moment, but that he would find -out for us if whether he could be released or not from his confidential -relationship. - -He has never done it, and we have written him several letters asking -him to disclose the name of that person, and he has never complied. - -Mr. RUBY. Isn't that foolish? If a man is patriotic enough in the first -place, who am I to be concerned if he wasn't an informer. - -I am incarcerated, nothing to be worried about anyone hurting me. - -Chief Justice WARREN. Mr. Ruby, I am not questioning your story at all. -I wanted you to know the background of this thing, and to know that it -was with us only hearsay. But I did feel that our record should show -that we would ask you the question and that you would answer it, and -you have answered it. - -Mr. RUBY. How many days prior to the assassination was that? - -Chief Justice WARREN. My recollection is that it was a week or two. Is -that correct? - -Mr. RUBY. Did anyone have any knowledge that their beloved President -was going to visit here prior to that time, or what is the definite -time that they knew he was coming to Dallas? - -Chief Justice WARREN. Well, I don't know just what those dates are. - -Mr. RUBY. I see. - -Chief Justice WARREN. I just don't know. Well, we wanted to ask you -that question, because this man had so testified, and we have been -trying ever since to get him to give the source of his information, but -he will not do it, so we will leave that matter as it is. - -Mr. RUBY. No; I am as innocent regarding any conspiracy as any of -you gentlemen in the room, and I don't want anything to be run over -lightly. I want you to dig into it with any biting, any question that -might embarrass me, or anything that might bring up my background, -which isn't so terribly spotted--I have never been a criminal--I have -never been in jail--I know when you live in the city of Chicago and -you are in the livelihood of selling tickets to sporting events, your -lucrative patrons are some of these people, but you don't mean anything -to those people. You may know them as you get acquainted with them at -the sporting events or the ball park. - -Chief Justice WARREN. The prizefights? - -Mr. RUBY. The prizefights. If that was your means of livelihood, -yet you don't have no other affiliation with them, so when I say I -know them, or what I have read from stories of personalities that -are notorious, that is the extent of my involvement in any criminal -activity. - -I have never been a bookmaker. I have never stolen for a living. I am -not a gangster. I have never used a goon squad for union activities. - -All I was was a representative to sound out applications for the -American Federation of Labor, and if the employees would sign it, we -would accept them as members. - -I never knew what a goon looked like in Chicago, with the exception -when I went to the service. - -I never belonged to any subversive organization. I don't know any -subversive people that are against my beloved country. - -Mr. RANKIN. You have never been connected with the Communist Party? - -Mr. RUBY. Never have. All I have ever done in my life--I had a very -rough start in life, but anything I have done, I at least try to do it -in good taste, whatever I have been active in. - -Mr. RANKIN. There was a story that you had a gun with you during the -showup that you described in the large room there. - -Mr. RUBY. I will be honest with you. I lied about it. It isn't so. I -didn't have a gun. But in order to make my defense more accurate, to -save your life, that is the reason that statement was made. - -Mr. RANKIN. It would be quite helpful to the Commission if you -could--in the first place, I want to get the trip to Cuba. Was that in -1959? - -Mr. RUBY. Yes; because I had to buy a $2 ticket, a pass to get through -Florida. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you have any other trip to Cuba? - -Mr. RUBY. Never; that is the only one that I made. - -I stayed at the Volk's Apartments with Mr. McWillie, lived in his -apartment. Ate directly in a place called Wolf's, downstairs. Wouldn't -know how to speak their language. I wouldn't know how to communicate -with them. - -I probably had two dates from meeting some young ladies I got to -dancing with, because my dinners were served in the Tropicana. - -One thing I forgot to tell you--you are bringing my mind back to a few -things--the owners, the greatest that have been expelled from Cuba, are -the Fox brothers. They own the Tropicana. - -Mr. RANKIN. Who are the Fox brothers? - -Mr. RUBY. Martin Fox and I can't think of the other name. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you know where they are located now? - -Mr. RUBY. They are in Miami, Fla. They know everything about McWillie, -I heard; and know the officials. - -I met McWillie because he came to the club, and he came to the club to -look over the show. And you get to talk to people and meet a lot of -different types of people. - -The Fox brothers came to Dallas--I don't know which one it was--to -collect a debt that some man owed the Cotton Gin Co. here. - -Do you know their name, Mr. Bowie? - -Mr. BOWIE. Murray, or something. - -Mr. RUBY. He gave some bad checks on a gambling debt, and they came to -visit me. The lawyer, I think, is Mark Lane. That is the attorney that -was killed in New York? - -Chief Justice WARREN. That is the fellow who represents, or did -represent Mrs. Marguerite Oswald. I think I read in the paper where he -no longer represents her. - -Mr. RANKIN. He is still alive though. - -Chief Justice WARREN. Oh, yes. - -Mr. RUBY. There was one Lane that was killed in a taxicab. I thought he -was an attorney in Dallas. - -Chief Justice WARREN. That was a Dave Lane. - -Mr. RUBY. There is a very prominent attorney in Dallas, McCord. McCord -represents the Fox brothers here. They called me because the Fox -brothers wanted to see me, and I came down to the hotel. - -And Mrs. McWillie--Mr. McWillie was married to her at that time--and if -I recall, I didn't show them off to the airport at that time. - -This is when they were still living in Havana, the Fox brothers. We had -dinner at--how do you pronounce that restaurant at Love Field? Luau? -That serves this Chinese food. - -Dave McCord, I was in his presence, and I was invited out to dinner, -and there was an attorney by the name of Leon. Is he associated with -McCord? - -And there was a McClain. - -Chief Justice WARREN. Alfred was killed in a taxi in New York. - -Mr. RUBY. He was at this dinner meeting I had with McCord. I don't know -if Mrs. McWillie was along. And one of the Fox brothers, because they -had just been awarded the case that this person owns, this Gin Co., -that was compelled to pay off. - -Mr. RANKIN. I think, Mr. Ruby, it would be quite helpful to the -Commission if you could tell, as you recall it, just what you said to -Mr. Sorrels and the others after the shooting of Lee Harvey Oswald. Can -you recall that? - -Mr. RUBY. The only one I recall Mr. Sorrels in, there were some -incorrect statements made at this time. - -Mr. RANKIN. Can you tell us what you said? - -Congressman FORD. First, tell us when this took place. - -Mr. RANKIN. How soon after the shooting occurred? - -Mr. RUBY. Well, Ray Hall was the first one that interrogated me. Wanted -to know my whole background. - -Mr. RANKIN. Can you tell us how soon it was? Within a few minutes after -the shooting? - -Mr. RUBY. No; I waited in a little room there somewhere upstairs in--I -don't know what floor it was. I don't recall. - -Mr. RANKIN. Where did this occur, on the third floor? - -Mr. RUBY. One of those floors. I don't know whether it was the third or -second. If you are up on an elevator---- - -Mr. RANKIN. Can you give us any idea of the time after the shooting? - -Mr. RUBY. I spent an hour with Mr. Hall, Ray Hall. And I was very much, -I was very much broken up emotionally, and I constantly repeated that -I didn't want Mrs. Kennedy to come back to trial, and those were my -words, constantly repeated to Mr. Hall. - -And I heard there was a statement made--now I am skipping--and then I -gave Mr. Hall my complete background about things he wanted to know, -my earlier background going back from the years, and I guess there -was nothing else to say to Hall because as long as I stated why I did -it--it is not like planning a crime and you are confessing something. I -already confessed, and all it took is one sentence why I did it. - -Now what else could I have said that you think I could have said? -Refresh my memory a little bit. - -Mr. RANKIN. There was a conversation with Mr. Sorrels in which you told -him about the matter. Do you remember that? - -Mr. RUBY. The only thing I ever recall I said to Mr. Ray Hall and -Sorrels was, I said, "Being of Jewish faith, I wanted to show my love -for my President and his lovely wife." - -After I said whatever I said, then a statement came out that someone -introduced Mr. Sorrels to me and I said, "What are you, a newsman?" Or -something to that effect. Which is really--what I am trying to say is, -the way it sounded is like I was looking for publicity and inquiring if -you are a newsman, I wanted to see you. - -But I am certain--I don't recall definitely, but I know in my right -mind, because I know my motive for doing it, and certainly to gain -publicity to take a chance of being mortally wounded, as I said before, -and who else could have timed it so perfectly by seconds. - -If it were timed that way, then someone in the police department is -guilty of giving the information as to when Lee Harvey Oswald was -coming down. - -I never made a statement. I never inquired from the television man what -time is Lee Harvey Oswald coming down. Because really, a man in his -right mind would never ask that question. I never made the statement -"I wanted to get three more off. Someone had to do it. You wouldn't do -it." I never made those statements. - -I never called the man by any obscene name, because as I stated -earlier, there was no malice in me. He was insignificant, to my -feelings for my love for Mrs. Kennedy and our beloved President. He was -nothing comparable to them, so I can't explain it. - -I never used any words--as a matter of fact, there were questions at -the hearing with Roy Pryor and a few others--I may have used one word -"a little weasel" or something, but I didn't use it. I don't remember, -because Roy said it. If he said I did, I may have said it. - -I never made the statement to anyone that I intended to get him. I -never used the obscene words that were stated. - -Anything I said was with emotional feeling of I didn't want Mrs. -Kennedy to come back to trial. - -Representative FORD. It has been alleged that you went out to Parkland -Hospital. - -Mr. RUBY. No; I didn't go there. They tried to ask me. My sisters asked -me. Some people told my sister that you were there. I am of sound mind. -I never went there. Everything that transpired during the tragedy, I -was at the Morning News Building. - -Congressman FORD. You didn't go out there subsequent to the -assassination? - -Mr. RUBY. No; in other words, like somebody is trying to make me -something of a martyr in that case. No; I never did. - -Does this conflict with my story and yours in great length? - -Mr. MOORE. Substantially the same, Jack, as well as I remember. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you say anything about people of your religion have -guts, or something like that? - -Mr. RUBY. I said it. I never said it up there. I said, I could have -said, "Weren't you afraid of getting your head blown off?" I said, -"Well, to be truthful, I have a little nerve." I could have said that. - -Now I could have said to the doctor that was sent to me, Bromberg, -because there is a certain familiarity you have, because it is like you -have an attorney representing you, it is there. I mean, it is there. - -But I did say this. McWillie made a statement about me, something to -the effect that "he is considered a pretty rough guy," this McWillie. -He said, "One thing about Jack Ruby, he runs this club and no one runs -over him." - -And you have a different type of entertainment here than any other part -of the country, our type of entertainment. - -But I don't recall that. I could have said the sentimental feeling that -I may have used. - -Representative FORD. When you flew to Cuba, where did you go from -Dallas en route? What was the step-by-step process by which you arrived -at Havana? - -Mr. RUBY. I think I told Mr. Moore I stopped in New Orleans. Sometime -I stopped in New Orleans, and I don't remember if I stopped in Florida -or New Orleans, but I know I did stop in New Orleans, because I bought -some Carioca rum coming back. - -I know I was to Miami on a stopover. It could have been on the way -back. I only went to Cuba once, so naturally, when I bought the -Carioca rum, there was a couple of fellows that sell tickets for Delta -Airlines, and they know me like I know you, and I am sure you gentlemen -have spoken to them, and they were to tell me where to go in Havana, -and have a ball, and I told them why I was going there, and who I was -going to look up, and everything else. - -Representative FORD. They were Delta Airlines employees in New Orleans -or Dallas? - -Mr. RUBY. No; in New Orleans. Evidently I went out to the Delta -Airlines at Love Field and caught the plane. I may have taken the -flight--here is what could have happened. I could have made a double -stop from Havana on the way back in taking in Miami, and then taking -another plane to New Orleans, I am not certain. - -But I only made one trip to Havana. Yet I know I was in Miami, Fla. and -I was in New Orleans. - -And the next time I went to New Orleans, when I tried to look up some -showgirl by the name of Jada, I stopped in to see the same fellows at -Delta Airlines. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you recall going up the elevator after the shooting of -Oswald? - -Mr. RUBY. That is so small to remember, I guess it is automatic, you -know. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you have this gun a long while that you did the -shooting with? - -Mr. RUBY. Yes. - -Mr. RANKIN. You didn't carry it all the time? - -Mr. RUBY. I did. I had it in a little bag with money constantly. I -carry my money. - -Chief Justice WARREN. Congressman, do you have anything further? - -Mr. RUBY. You can get more out of me. Let's not break up too soon. - -Representative FORD. When you got to Havana, who met you in Havana? - -Mr. RUBY. McWillie. Now here is what happened. One of the Fox brothers -came to visit me in Dallas with his wife. They came to the Vegas Club -with Mrs. McWillie, and we had taken some pictures. 8 x 10's. - -Evidently the Foxes were in exile at that time, because when I went to -visit McWillie, when he sent me the plane tickets, they looked through -my luggage and they saw a photograph of Mr. Fox and his wife. They -didn't interrogate, but they went through everything and held me up for -hours. - -Representative FORD. Castro employees? - -Mr. RUBY. Yes; because evidently, in my ignorance, I didn't realize I -was bringing a picture that they knew was a bitter enemy. At that time -they knew that the Fox brothers weren't going to jail, or something was -going to happen. - -Whether it was they were in exile at that time. I don't know. - -But they came to my club, the Vegas Club, and we had taken pictures. - -Mr. McWillie was waiting for me, and he saw me go through the customs -line for a couple of hours, and he said, "Jack, they never did this to -anyone before." Evidently, they had me pretty well lined up as to where -I come in the picture of Mr. Rivera Fox. I can't think of his name. - -Representative FORD. You spent 8 days there in Havana? - -Mr. RUBY. Yes; approximately. - -Representative FORD. And you stayed at the apartment of Mr.---- - -Mr. RUBY. Volk's Apartments. I never used the phone. I wouldn't know -how to use the phone. Probably to call back to Dallas. And the only -time, Mr. McWillie had to be at the club early, so I remained a little -later in town--not often--because I saved money when I rode with him, -because they charge you quite a bit. But I didn't want to get there too -early, because to get there at 7 o'clock wasn't very lively. - -Because I would always be with him for the complete evening. - -We leave the place and stop somewhere to get coffee, a little -dugout--I saw Ava Gardner down there at the time when I was there. She -was visiting there. - -Representative FORD. What prompted you to leave at the end of 8 days? - -Mr. RUBY. I was bored because gambling isn't my profession, and when -you have a business to run, and there weren't many tourists I could get -acquainted with there. - -I went to the Capri rooftop to go swimming, and went to the Nacional to -go swimming once. - -Representative FORD. Did you ever go to Mexico? Have you ever been to -Mexico? - -Mr. RUBY. The only time, 30 or 40 years ago, 1934. - -Representative FORD. This trip to Cuba was the only time you left the -country other than military service? - -Mr. RUBY. Actually I didn't leave in the military. I was stationed -three and a half years here in the States. Let's see, never out of the -United States except at one time to Havana, Cuba. - -Chief Justice WARREN. Now you said there were some other things. Would -you mind telling us anything you have on your mind? - -Mr. RUBY. No; because as I said earlier, you seem to have gotten the -juicy part of the story up to now in the various spasmodic way of my -telling it. - -How valuable am I to you to give you all this information? - -Chief Justice WARREN. Well, how valuable is rather an indefinite term, -but I think it is very helpful to our Commission report. I think the -report would have been deficient if it had not been for this interview -we have had with you. - -So we are interested in anything that you would like to tell us, in -your own language. - -Mr. RUBY. The only thing is this. If I cannot get these tests you give, -it is pretty haphazard to tell you the things I should tell you. - -Mr. Moore, you seem to have known more about my interrogation than -anybody else, right? - -Mr. MOORE. I think you have told us about everything you told me. - -Mr. RANKIN. It isn't entirely clear how you feel that your family -and you yourself are threatened by your telling what you have to the -Commission. - -How do you come to the conclusion that they might be killed? Will you -tell us a little bit more about that, if you can? - -Mr. RUBY. Well, assuming that, as I stated before, some persons are -accusing me falsely of being part of the plot--naturally, in all the -time from over 6 months ago, my family has been so interested in -helping me. - -Mr. RANKIN. By that, you mean a party to the plot of Oswald? - -Mr. RUBY. That I was party to a plot to silence Oswald. - -All right now, when your family believes you and knows your mannerisms -and your thoughts, and knows your sincerity, they have lived with you -all your life and know your emotional feelings and your patriotism--on -the surface, they see me only as the guilty assailant of Oswald, and by -helping me like they have, going all out. - -My brother who has a successful business, I know he is going to be -killed. And I haven't seen him in years. And suddenly he feels that he -wants to help me, because he believes that I couldn't be any further -involved than the actual---- - -When I told him I did it because of Mrs. Kennedy, that is all he had -to hear, because I would never involve my family or involve him in a -conspiracy. - -Everyone haven't let me down. Because they read the newspapers away -from Dallas that stated certain facts about me, but they are untrue, -because they wouldn't come out and put those things in the newspapers -that they should be putting in; and people outside of Dallas read -the Dallas newspapers and are all in sympathy with me, as far as the -country itself. - -That they felt, well, Jack did it. They probably felt they would do the -same thing. - -That sympathy isn't going to help me, because the people that have the -power here, they have a different verdict. They already have me as the -accused assassin of our beloved President. - -Now if I sound screwy telling you this, then I must be screwy. - -Chief Justice WARREN. Mr. Ruby, I think you are entitled to a statement -to this effect, because you have been frank with us and have told us -your story. - -I think I can say to you that there has been no witness before this -Commission out of the hundreds we have questioned who has claimed to -have any personal knowledge that you were a party to any conspiracy to -kill our President. - -Mr. RUBY. Yes; but you don't know this area here. - -Chief Justice WARREN. No; I don't vouch for anything except that I -think I am correct in that, am I not? - -Mr. RANKIN. That is correct. - -Chief Justice WARREN. I just wanted to tell you before our own -Commission, and I might say to you also that we have explored the -situation. - -Mr. RUBY. I know, but I want to say this to you. If certain people have -the means and want to gain something by propagandizing something to -their own use, they will make ways to present certain things that I do -look guilty. - -Chief Justice WARREN. Well. I will make this additional statement to -you, that if any witness should testify before the Commission that you -were, to their knowledge, a party to any conspiracy to assassinate the -President, I assure you that we will give you the opportunity to deny -it and to take any tests that you may desire to so disprove it. - -I don't anticipate that there will be any such testimony, but should -there be, we will give you that opportunity. - -Does that seem fair? - -Mr. RUBY. No; that isn't going to save my family. - -Chief Justice WARREN. Well, we can't do everything at once. - -Mr. RUBY. I am in a tough spot, and I don't know what the solution can -be to save me. - -And I know our wonderful President, Lyndon Johnson, as soon as he was -the President of his country, he appointed you as head of this group. -But through certain falsehoods that have been said about me to other -people, the John Birch Society, I am as good as guilty as the accused -assassin of President Kennedy. - -How can you remedy that, Mr. Warren? Do any of you men have any ways of -remedying that? - -Mr. Bill Decker said be a man and speak up. I am making a statement now -that I may not live the next hour when I walk out of this room. - -Now it is the most fantastic story you have ever heard in a lifetime. -I did something out of the goodness of my heart. Unfortunately, Chief -Earl Warren, had you been around 5 or 6 months ago, and I know your -hands were tied, you couldn't do it, and immediately the President -would have gotten ahold of my true story, or whatever would have been -said about me, a certain organization wouldn't have so completely -formed now, so powerfully, to use me because I am of the Jewish -extraction, Jewish faith, to commit the most dastardly crime that has -ever been committed. - -Can you understand now in visualizing, what happened, what powers, what -momentum has been carried on to create this feeling of mass feeling -against my people, against certain people that were against them prior -to their power? - -That goes over your head, doesn't it? - -Chief Justice WARREN. Well, I don't quite get the full significance of -it, Mr. Ruby. I know what you feel about the John Birch Society. - -Mr. RUBY. Very powerful. - -Chief Justice WARREN. I think it is powerful, yes I do. Of course, I -don't have all the information that you feel you have on that subject. - -Mr. RUBY. Unfortunately, you don't have, because it is too late. And -I wish that our beloved President, Lyndon Johnson, would have delved -deeper into the situation, hear me, not to accept just circumstantial -facts about my guilt or innocence, and would have questioned to find -out the truth about me before he relinquished certain powers to these -certain people. - -Chief Justice WARREN. Well, I am afraid I don't know what power you -believe he relinquished to them. I think that it is difficult to -understand what you have to say. - -Mr. RUBY. I want to say this to you. The Jewish people are being -exterminated at this moment. Consequently, a whole new form of -government is going to take over our country, and I know I won't live -to see you another time. - -Do I sound sort of screwy in telling you these things? - -Chief Justice WARREN. No; I think that is what you believe, or you -wouldn't tell it under your oath. - -Mr. RUBY. But it is a very serious situation. I guess it is too late to -stop it, isn't it? - -All right, I want to ask you this. All you men have been chosen by the -President for this committee, is that correct? - -Chief Justice WARREN. Representative Ford and I are the only members of -the Commission that are here. - -Mr. Rankin of the Commission is employed as our chief counsel. - -Mr. Rankin employed Mr. Specter and Mr. Ball as members of the staff. - -You know who the other gentlemen here are. - -You know that Mr. Moore is a member of the Secret Service, and he has -been a liaison officer with our staff since the Commission was formed. - -Representative FORD. Are there any questions that ought to be asked to -help clarify the situation that you described? - -Mr. RUBY. There is only one thing. If you don't take me back to -Washington tonight to give me a chance to prove to the President that I -am not guilty, then you will see the most tragic thing that will ever -happen. - -And if you don't have the power to take me back, I won't be around to -be able to prove my innocence or guilt. - -Now up to this moment, I have been talking with you for how long? - -Chief Justice WARREN. I would say for the better part of 3 hours. - -Mr. RUBY. All right, wouldn't it be ridiculous for me to speak sensibly -all this time and give you this climactic talk that I have? - -Maybe something can be saved, something can be done. - -What have you got to answer to that, Chief Justice Warren? - -Chief Justice WARREN. Well, I don't know what can be done. Mr. Ruby, -because I don't know what you anticipate we will encounter. - -Representative FORD. Is there anything more you can tell us if you went -back to Washington? - -Mr. RUBY. Yes; are you sincere in wanting to take me back? - -Representative FORD. We are most interested in all the information you -have. - -Mr. RUBY. All I know is maybe something can be saved. Because right -now, I want to tell you this, I am used as a scapegoat, and there is no -greater weapon that you can use to create some falsehood about some of -the Jewish faith, especially at the terrible heinous crime such as the -killing of President Kennedy. - -Now maybe something can be saved. It may not be too late, whatever -happens, if our President, Lyndon Johnson, knew the truth from me. - -But if I am eliminated, there won't be any way of knowing. - -Right now, when I leave your presence now. I am the only one that can -bring out the truth to our President, who believes in righteousness and -justice. - -But he has been told, I am certain, that I was part of a plot to -assassinate the President. - -I know your hands are tied; you are helpless. - -Chief Justice WARREN. Mr. Ruby. I think I can say this to you, that if -he has been told any such thing, there is no indication of any kind -that he believes it. - -Mr. RUBY. I am sorry. Chief Justice Warren. I thought I would be very -effective in telling you what I have said here. But in all fairness to -everyone, maybe all I want to do is beg that if they found out I was -telling the truth, maybe they can succeed in what their motives are, -but maybe my people won't be tortured and mutilated. - -Chief Justice WARREN. Well, you may be sure that the President and his -whole Commission will do anything that is necessary to see that your -people are not tortured. - -Mr. RUBY. No. - -Chief Justice WARREN. You may be sure of that. - -Mr. RUBY. No; the only way you can do it is if he knows the truth, that -I am telling the truth, and why I was down in that basement Sunday -morning, and maybe some sense of decency will come out and they can -still fulfill their plan, as I stated before, without my people going -through torture and mutilation. - -Chief Justice WARREN. The President will know everything that you have -said, everything that you have said. - -Mr. RUBY. But I won't be around, Chief Justice. I won't be around to -verify these things you are going to tell the President. - -Mr. TONAHILL. Who do you think is going to eliminate you, Jack? - -Mr. RUBY. I have been used for a purpose, and there will be a certain -tragic occurrence happening if you don't take my testimony and somehow -vindicate me so my people don't suffer because of what I have done. - -Chief Justice WARREN. But we have taken your testimony. We have it -here. It will be in permanent form for the President of the United -States and for the Congress of the United States, and for the courts of -the United States, and for the people of the entire world. - -It is there. It will be recorded for all to see. That is the purpose of -our coming here today. We feel that you are entitled to have your story -told. - -Mr. RUBY. You have lost me though. You have lost me, Chief Justice -Warren. - -Chief Justice WARREN. Lost you in what sense? - -Mr. RUBY. I won't be around for you to come and question me again. - -Chief Justice WARREN. Well, it is very hard for me to believe that. I -am sure that everybody would want to protect you to the very limit. - -Mr. RUBY. All I want is a lie detector test, and you refuse to give it -to me. - -Because as it stands now--and the truth serum, and any -other--Pentothal--how do you pronounce it, whatever it is. And they -will not give it to me, because I want to tell the truth. - -And then I want to leave this world. But I don't want my people to be -blamed for something that is untrue, that they claim has happened. - -Chief Justice WARREN. Mr. Ruby, I promise you that you will be able to -take such a test. - -Mr. RUBY. When? - -Chief Justice WARREN. You will have to let me see when we can figure -that out. But I assure you, it won't be delayed, because our desire -is to terminate the work of the Commission and make our report to the -public just as soon as possible, so there won't be any misunderstanding -caused by all of these rumors or stories that have been put out that -are not consistent with the evidence in the case. - -But it will not be unnecessarily delayed, and we will do it on behalf -of the Commission, I promise you. - -Mr. RUBY. All I want, and I beg you--when are you going to see the -President? - -Chief Justice WARREN. Well, I have no date with the President. I don't -know just when. But as soon as I do see him, I will be glad to tell him -what you have said. - -Mr. RUBY. All I want is to take a polygraph to tell the truth. That is -all I want to do. - -Chief Justice WARREN. Yes; that, I promise you you can do. - -Mr. RUBY. Because my people are going to suffer about things that will -be said about me. - -Chief Justice WARREN. Yes; well, I promise. - -Mr. RUBY. Hold on another minute. - -Chief Justice WARREN. All right. - -Mr. RUBY. How do you know if the facts I stated about everything I -said, statements with reference to, are the truth or not? - -Chief Justice WARREN. Well, if you want a test made to test those -principal questions, we will work them out so they can be tested. - -As I understand it, you can't use the polygraph to say now this is the -story. - -Mr. RUBY. I know that. - -Chief Justice WARREN. To say you have the story of Jack Ruby. You can't -do that. - -Mr. RUBY. I know that. You can clarify by questioning me when I -conceived the idea and what my answer would naturally be that Sunday -morning. - -Chief Justice WARREN. Maybe I can help the situation this way. Suppose -you list for us, if you can, the questions that you would like to have -asked of you on the polygraph to establish the truth of your testimony. - -What things do you consider vital in it, and what would you like to -have verified? - -Mr. RUBY. Yes; but you are telling me to do these things--these things -are going to be promised, but you see they aren't going to let me do -these things. - -Because when you leave here, I am finished. My family is finished. - -Representative FORD. Isn't it true, Mr. Chief Justice, that the same -maximum protection and security Mr. Ruby has been given in the past -will be continued? - -Mr. RUBY. But now that I have divulged certain information because I -want to be honest, all I want to take is a polygraph test and tell the -truth about things and combat the lies that have been told about me. - -Now maybe certain people don't want to know the truth that may come out -of me. Is that plausible? - -Representative FORD. In other words, the Chief Justice has agreed, and -I on the Commission wholeheartedly concur, that you will be given a -polygraph test as expeditiously as possible. - -And I am sure you can rely on what has been stated here by the Chairman. - -Mr. RUBY. How are we going to communicate and so on? - -Chief Justice WARREN. We will communicate directly with you. - -Mr. RUBY. You have a lost cause, Earl Warren. You don't stand a chance. -They feel about you like they do about me, Chief Justice Warren. - -I shouldn't hurt your feelings in telling you that. - -Chief Justice WARREN. That won't hurt my feelings, because I have had -some evidence of the feeling that some people have concerning me. - -Mr. RUBY. But you are the only one that can save me. I think you can. - -Chief Justice WARREN. Yes? - -Mr. RUBY. But by delaying minutes, you lose the chance. And all I want -to do is tell the truth, and that is all. - -There was no conspiracy. But by you telling them what you are going to -do and how you are going to do it is too late as of this moment. - -Chief Justice WARREN. You take my word for it and the word of -Representative Ford, that we will do this thing at the earliest -possible moment, and that it will be done in time. It will be done in -time. - -Mr. RUBY. Well, you won't ever see me again, I tell you that. And I -have lost my family. - -Chief Justice WARREN. Yes? - -Mr. RUBY. No, no; you don't believe me, do you? - -Chief Justice WARREN. To be frank with you, I believe that you are not -stating now what is the fact. - -I don't say you don't believe it, but I believe that I will be able to -see you again and that we will be able to take this test that you are -speaking of. - -Well, I think we have tired Mr. Ruby. We have had him here for close to -4 hours now, and I am sure our reporter must be equally tired, but we -appreciate your patience and your willingness to testify in this manner -for us. - -Mr. RUBY. All I want to do is tell the truth, and the only way you can -know it is by the polygraph, as that is the only way you can know it. - -Chief Justice WARREN. That we will do for you. - -(Whereupon, at 2:50 p.m., the President's Commission recessed.) - - - - -_Monday, June 8, 1964_ - -TESTIMONY OF HENRY WADE, PATRICK D. DEAN, AND WAGGONER CARR - -The President's Commission met at 9:25 a.m., on June 8, 1964, at 200 -Maryland Avenue NE., Washington, D.C. - -Present were Chief Justice Earl Warren, Chairman; Senator John Sherman -Cooper and Allen W. Dulles, members. - -Also present were J. Lee Rankin, general counsel; Norman Redlich, -assistant counsel; Dr. Alfred Goldberg, historian; Waggoner Carr, -attorney general of Texas, and Charles Murray, observers. - - -TESTIMONY OF HENRY WADE - -Senator COOPER. Will you raise your hand? - -Do you solemnly swear the testimony you are about to give this -Commission will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the -truth, so help you God? - -Mr. WADE. I do. - -Senator COOPER. You are informed about the purposes of this -investigation. - -Mr. WADE. I know it, generally. - -Senator COOPER. Do you desire a lawyer? - -Mr. WADE. No, sir. - -Senator COOPER. Thank you very much. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Wade, we are going to ask you generally about the time -of Mr. Oswald's, Lee Harvey Oswald's, arrest, what you had to do in -connection with the entire matter, and the press being there at the -jail, and the scene and seeing what happened there, and the various -things in regard to Mr. Dean and other witnesses in connection with the -matter. - -Will you state your name? - -Mr. WADE. Henry Wade. - -Mr. RANKIN. Where do you live? - -Mr. WADE. I am district attorney, or criminal district attorney of -Dallas, Tex.; my home is in Dallas. - -Mr. RANKIN. Will you tell us briefly your qualifications for your -position and profession? - -Mr. WADE. Well, I am a graduate of the University of Texas Law School, -1938, with highest honors. I was county attorney at Rock Wall, Tex., -another county for 1 year. I resigned on December 4, 1939, and became -a special agent of the FBI. As a special agent of the FBI--I was there -until August of 1943, these were rough months--when I resigned and -became an apprentice seaman in the Navy. - -Later I became a lieutenant, junior grade, served in the Pacific 2 -years, about 2 years. - -Then after the war I got out of the Navy on the 6th of February 1946, -ran for district attorney in Dallas and was not elected at that -time. I hadn't ever lived in Dallas prior to that. You see there was -another county. I was assistant district attorney and then was Federal -prosecutor from January 1, 1947, up until December 1949, when I -resigned and ran for district attorney. - -I was elected district attorney in 1950 and have been criminal district -attorney of Dallas County since January 1, 1951. - -Mr. RANKIN. Have you handled many of the prosecutions of that county -since that time? - -Mr. WADE. Well, my office or I have handled all of them since that -time. I have had quite a bit of experience myself. I have a staff of -41 lawyers and, of course, I don't try all the cases but I have tried -quite a few, I would say 40, 50 anyhow since I have been district -attorney. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you have any particular policy about which cases you -would try generally? - -Mr. WADE. Well, it varies according to who my first assistant has been. -It is varied. If I have a first assistant who likes to try cases, I -usually let him try a lot and I do the administrative. At the present -time I have a very fine administrative assistant, Jim Bowie, whom you -met and I try a few more cases. - -I guess I have tried four in the last year probably but two to five a -year are about all the cases I try myself personally. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you have any policy about capital cases as to whether -you should try them or somebody else? - -Mr. WADE. I don't try all of them. I try all the cases that are very -aggravated and receive probably some publicity to some extent, and -I don't try all the capital cases. I think we have had quite a few -death penalties but I don't imagine I have been in over half of them, -probably half of them. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you remember where you were at the time you learned of -the assassination of President Kennedy? - -Mr. WADE. Well, they were having a party for President Kennedy at -Market Hall and I was out at Market Hall waiting for the President to -arrive. - -Mr. RANKIN. How did you learn about the assassination? - -Mr. WADE. Well, one of the reporters for one of the newspapers told -me there had been a shooting or something, of course, one of those -things we were getting all kinds of rumors spreading through a crowd -of 3,000-5,000 people, and then they got the radio on and the first -report was they had killed two Secret Service agents, that was on the -radio, and then the press all came running in there and then ran out, -no one knew for sure what was going on until finally they announced -that President had been shot and from the rostrum there the chairman of -the---- - -Mr. DULLES. Who was the chairman of that meeting, do you recall? - -Mr. WADE. Eric Johnson. Eric Johnson. - -Mr. RANKIN. Was he mayor then? - -Mr. WADE. No; he wasn't mayor, he was the president of Texas Industries -and I believe was president of the Dallas Chamber of Commerce. I may -have been wrong on that but he has been president of the chamber -of commerce. He is president of Texas Industries, and this is not -particularly important but he is--that was sort of a bipartisan deal, -in that he is one of the leading Republicans of Dallas and he was -chairman of the meeting. - -Mr. RANKIN. What did you do after you heard of the assassination? - -Mr. WADE. Well, the first thing, we were set up in a bus to go from -there to Austin to another party that night for President Kennedy, a -group of us, 30 or 40. We got on a bus and went. I went back to the -office and sent my wife home, my wife was with me. - -And the first thing that I did was go check the law to see whether it -was a Federal offense or mine. I thought it was a Federal offense when -I first heard about it. We checked the law, and were satisfied that was -no serious Federal offense, or not a capital case, anyhow. - -There might be some lesser offense. I talked to the U.S. attorney. - -Mr. RANKIN. Who was that? - -Mr. WADE. Barefoot Sanders and he was in agreement it was going to be -our case rather than his and he had been doing the same thing. - -Mr. RANKIN. Where did you talk to him? - -Mr. WADE. On the telephone as I recall, in his office from my office. I -am not even sure I talked with him, somebody from my office talked to -him, because I think you can realize things were a little confused and -that took us, say, until 3:30 or 4. - -I let everybody in the office go home, but some of my key personnel who -stayed there. I let the girls or told them they could go home, because -they did close all the offices down there. The next thing I did--do you -want me to tell you? - -Mr. RANKIN. Yes. - -Mr. WADE. I will tell you what I can. - -The next thing I did was to go by the sheriff's office who is next door -to me and talked to Decker, who is the sheriff. Bill Decker, and they -were interviewing witnesses who were on the streets at the time, and I -asked him and he said they have got a good prospect. - -This must have been 3 o'clock roughly. - -Mr. RANKIN. The witnesses that were on the street near the Depository -Building? - -Mr. WADE. Yes, sir; and in the building, I am not sure who they were, -they had two court reporters there taking statements. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did they tell you anything about a suspect at that point? - -Mr. WADE. The Sheriff told me, he said, "Don't say nothing about it, -but they have got a good suspect," talking about the Dallas Police. - -He didn't have him there. John Connally, you know, was shot also--and -he was, he used to be a roommate of mine in the Navy and we were good -friends, and are now--and the first thing I did then was went out to -the hospital to see how he was getting along. - -I must have stayed out there until about 5 o'clock, and in case you all -don't know or understand one thing, it has never been my policy to make -any investigations out of my office of murders or anything else for -that matter. We leave that entirely to the police agency. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you have a reason for that? - -Mr. WADE. That is the way it is set up down there. We have more than we -can do actually in trying the cases. The only time we investigate them -is after they are filed on, indicted, and then we have investigators -who get them ready for trial and then lawyers. - -Mr. DULLES. Have you any personnel for that? - -Mr. WADE. No, sir; I have in my office 11 investigators but that is -just 1 for each court, and they primarily, or at least about all they -do is line up the witnesses for trial and help with jury picking and -things of that kind. - -Mr. RANKIN. At this point that you are describing, had you learned of -any arrest? - -Mr. WADE. No, sir; Mr. Decker says they have a good suspect. He said -that sometime around 3 o'clock. You see, I didn't have the benefit of -all that was on the air. I didn't even know Oswald had been arrested at -this time. As a matter of fact, I didn't know it at 5 o'clock when I -left the hospital. - -When I left the hospital, I went home, watched television a while, had -dinner, and a couple, some friends of ours came over there. They were -going to Austin with us on the bus, and we had dinner and started out -somewhere but I said we had better go by the police station. - -At that time they kept announcing they had Oswald or I believe they -named a name. - -Mr. RANKIN. Had you learned about the Tippit murder yet? - -Mr. WADE. Yes, sir; of course, it had been on the air that Tippit had -been killed. - -I went by the Dallas police, just to let us see what was kind of going -on. - -Mr. RANKIN. Was that unusual for you to do that? - -Mr. WADE. It was unusual because I hadn't been in the Dallas Police -Department, I won't be there on the average of once a year actually, I -mean on anything. I went by there and I went to Chief Curry's office. - -Mr. RANKIN. How did you happen to do that this time? - -Mr. WADE. Of course, this is not really, this was not an ordinary case, -this was a little bit different, and I mostly wanted to know how he was -coming along on the investigation is the main reason I went by. - -As I went in, and this is roughly 6:30, 7 at night--I said we ate -dinner at home, I believe the couple were out in the car with my wife -were waiting for me to go to dinner with them. - -Mr. DULLES. Did you go down to the airfield when President Johnson left? - -Mr. WADE. No, sir; no, sir. - -Mr. DULLES. You did not. - -Mr. WADE. I didn't go anywhere but to my office, then to Parkland -Hospital and then home, and then I was there a while and then I went by -the police station, mostly to see how they were coming along. Papers -were announcing, the radios, I mean, were announcing, television, that -they had a suspect and was even telling them what some of the evidence -was against him. - -Mr. RANKIN. About what time was this at the police station? - -Mr. WADE. I would say around 7 o'clock. This can vary 30 minutes either -way. - -Mr. RANKIN. Who did you see there? - -Mr. WADE. Chief Curry. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you talk to him? - -Mr. WADE. I talked to him. - -Mr. RANKIN. What did you say to him and what did he say to you? - -Mr. WADE. Well, it is hard to remember. I know the first thing he did -was pull out a memorandum that you all were interested in, signed by -Jack Revill, and showed it to me and I read it, and said, "What do you -think about that?" - -And I said---- - -Mr. DULLES. I wonder if you would identify this for the record? - -Mr. WADE. You can get it. Let me tell you the story. I read that thing -there hurriedly and I remember it mentioned that Agent Hosty had talked -to Revill---- - -Senator COOPER. Who was that? - -Mr. WADE. Hosty. - -Senator COOPER. Can you identify him as to what he does? - -Mr. WADE. He is a special agent of the FBI, but I don't think I would -know him if he walked in here actually. - -But that is his business. He showed me that, and I read it. Now, as far -as identifying it, I have seen--I have a copy of it in my files. - -You see, when they turned the records over to me and I read it and -looked it over and to the best of my knowledge was the same memorandum -he showed me, although all I did was glance at it and it said generally -they knew something about him and knew he was in town or something like -that. - -Senator COOPER. Who said that? - -Mr. WADE. This memorandum said that. - -Senator COOPER. Who is reported to be quoting the memorandum? - -Mr. WADE. Special Agent Hosty. Now, I have since looked at the -memorandum. So far as I know it is the same memorandum, but like I -say I read it there and I don't know whether it is the--I don't know -whether it said word for word to be the same thing but it appears to me -to my best knowledge to be the same memorandum. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you know when you first got the memorandum in your files -that you are referring to? - -Mr. WADE. It was a month later. You see the police gave me a record of -everything on the Ruby case, I would say some time about Christmas. - -Mr. RANKIN. I will hand you Commission Exhibit No. 709 and ask you if -that is the memorandum you just referred to? - -Mr. WADE. Yes; to the best of my knowledge that is the memorandum he -showed me there at 7 p.m. on the 22d day of November 1963. - -Jack Revill incidentally, you all have talked with him, but he is one -of the brightest, to my mind, of the young Dallas police officers. - -As a matter of fact, when we got into the Ruby trial, I asked that they -assign Jack Revill to assist us in the investigation and he assisted -with picking of the jury and getting the witnesses all through the Ruby -trial. - -Mr. RANKIN. Would your records show when you received a copy of this -document, Commission Exhibit No. 709? - -Mr. WADE. Well, I am sure it would. It would be the day--you can trace -it back to when the newspapers said he had turned all the files over to -me and it was around Christmas as I recall, and I believe actually it -was after Christmas, but probably 30 days, but you see they turned over -a file that thick to me, I imagine. It was of all of that, the same -thing they turned over to you, everything the police had on Jack Ruby. - -Mr. RANKIN. You put a receipt stamp on anything like that? - -Mr. WADE. I don't think it will show a date or anything like that on it -because they just hauled it in there and laid it on my desk. But this -was--it is in our files, and I am rather sure it is the same time. You -all got the same thing. - -Mr. RANKIN. We didn't receive anything like that until the time that -Chief Curry came to testify, just for your information. - -Mr. WADE. Well, I didn't know that, but now on this, this is the Ruby -matter---- - -Mr. DULLES. Could I ask one question there? - -Mr. WADE. Yes, sir. - -Mr. DULLES. Just to refresh my recollection of your testimony, did you -see this that afternoon around 5 or 6 o'clock? - -Mr. WADE. Around 7 o'clock I would say it was on Chief Curry's desk. - -Mr. DULLES. Of the 22d? - -Mr. WADE. Of the 22d. - -Senator COOPER. I don't want to interrupt too much, but looking at -this exhibit, I note it is written, you have seen this Commission, -Commission Exhibit No. 709 signed by Jack Revill? - -Mr. WADE. Yes; let me see it; yes. - -Senator COOPER. Is your recollection, was the memorandum that was shown -to you by--first, who did show you the memorandum on the 22d? - -Mr. WADE. Chief Curry of the Dallas police. - -Senator COOPER. Was the memorandum shown to you on the 22d by Chief -Curry in this same form? - -Mr. WADE. To the best of my knowledge that was it now. - -Now, like I said I read this memorandum, and I read the memorandum, and -asked the chief what he was going to do with it and he said, "I don't -know." - -And then the next morning I heard on television Chief Curry, I don't -know whether I heard him or not, he made some kind of statement -concerning this memorandum on television, and then later came back and -said that wasn't to his personal knowledge, and I think that was--he -said that what he said about it he retracted it to some extent but I -guess you all have got records of those television broadcasts or at -least can get them. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you remember whether he said just what was in this -Exhibit No. 709 or something less than that or more or what? - -Mr. WADE. I don't remember. You see, things were moving fast, and it is -hard, there are so many things going on. I will go on to my story. - -Mr. RANKIN. Yes. - -Mr. WADE. I will answer anything, of course. - -Mr. RANKIN. You can tell us the rest that you said to Chief Curry and -he said to you at that time, first. - -Mr. WADE. I asked him how the case was coming along and as a practical -matter he didn't know. You probably have run into this, but there is -really a lack of communication between the chief's office and the -captain of detective's office there in Dallas. - -Mr. RANKIN. You found that to be true. - -Mr. WADE. For every year I have been in the office down there. And -I assume you have taken their depositions. I don't know what the -relations--the relations are better between Curry and Fritz than -between Hanson and Fritz, who was his predecessor. But Fritz runs a -kind of a one-man operation there where nobody else knows what he is -doing. Even me, for instance, he is reluctant to tell me, either, but -I don't mean that disparagingly. I will say Captain Fritz is about as -good a man at solving a crime as I ever saw, to find out who did it -but he is poorest in the getting evidence that I know, and I am more -interested in getting evidence, and there is where our major conflict -comes in. - -I talked to him a minute there and I don't believe I talked to Captain -Fritz. One of my assistants was in Fritz's office. I believe I did walk -down the hall and talk briefly, and they had filed, they had filed on -Oswald for killing Tippit. - -Mr. DULLES. Which assistant was that? - -Mr. WADE. Bill Alexander. There was another one of--another man there, -Jim Allen, who was my former first assistant who is practicing law -there in Dallas and frankly I was a little surprised of seeing him -there, he is a real capable boy but he was there in homicide with -Captain Fritz. They were good friends. - -And I know there is no question about his intentions and everything -was good, but he was just a lawyer there, but he had tried many death -penalty cases with Fritz--of Fritz's cases. - -But he was there. Your FBI was there, your Secret Service were there in -the homicide. - -Mr. RANKIN. Who from the FBI, do you recall? - -Mr. WADE. Well, I saw Vince Drain, a special agent that I knew, -and Jim Bookhout, I believe, and there was Mr. Kelley and Mr. -Sorrels--Inspector Kelley of the Secret Service, Sorrels, Forest -Sorrels. - -I might tell you that also, to give you a proper perspective on this -thing, there were probably 300 people then out in that hall. - -You could hardly walk down the hall. You just had to fight your way -down through the hall, through the press up there. - -Mr. RANKIN. Who were they? - -Mr. WADE. The television and newsmen. I say 300, that was all that -could get into that hall and to get into homicide it was a strain to -get the door open hard enough to get into the office. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you say anything to Chief Curry about that? - -Mr. WADE. No, sir; I probably mentioned it but I assume you -want--whether I meant he ought to clean them out or not. I didn't tell -him he should or shouldn't because I have absolutely no control over -the police. They are a separate entity. They have a municipality, and -they work under a city manager. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you say anything to Chief Curry about what should be -told the press about investigation, how it was progressing or anything -of that kind? - -Mr. WADE. Yes; I think that is the brief conversation, that is the last -I talked to Curry that night. I may have talked to--but that is all I -recall. I left thereafter, and went on out to dinner. - -Mr. RANKIN. About what time did you leave? - -Mr. WADE. 7, 7:30, something like that. I got home, say, 9:30 or 10, -after eating dinner, and I believe I talked to the U.S. attorney or at -least I saw it come on the radio that they are going to file on Oswald -as part of an international conspiracy in murdering the U.S. President, -and I think I talked to Barefoot Sanders. He called me or I called him. - -Mr. RANKIN. I wanted to get for the record, Mr. Wade, who would be -trying to file like that. - -Mr. WADE. I don't know. All I know it wasn't me. It was told to me at -one time that the justice of the peace said something about it and -another one, one of my assistants, Alexander had said something about -it and I have talked to both of them since and both of them deny so I -don't know who suggested it or anything but it was on the radio and I -think on television. - -I know I heard it and I am not sure where. - -Mr. RANKIN. Can you tell us whether it was from your office or from a -Federal office that such an idea was developing as far as you know? - -Mr. WADE. Well, on that score it doesn't make any sense at all to me -because there is no such crime in Texas, being part of an international -conspiracy, it is just murder with malice in Texas, and if you allege -anything else in an indictment you have to prove it and it is all -surplusage in an indictment to allege anything, whether a man is a John -Bircher or a Communist or anything, if you allege it you have to prove -it. - -So, when I heard it I went down to the police station and took the -charge on him, just a case of simple murder. - -Mr. DULLES. Is that of Tippit or of the President? - -Mr. WADE. No; of the President, and the radio announced Johnston was -down there, and Alexander, and of course other things, and so I saw -immediately that if somebody was going to take a complaint that he -is part of an international conspiracy it had to be a publicity deal -rather--somebody was interested in something other than the law because -there is no such charge in Texas as part of--I don't care what you -belong to, you don't have to allege that in an indictment. - -Mr. RANKIN. What do you mean by the radio saying that Johnson was -there? Do you mean President Johnson? - -Mr. WADE. No; that is the justice of the peace whose name is Johnston. - -Mr. RANKIN. I see. - -Mr. WADE. Yes; Justice of the Peace David L. Johnston was the justice -of the peace there. - -So, I went down there not knowing--also at that time I had a lengthy -conversation with Captain Fritz and with Jim Alexander who was in the -office, Bill Alexander, Bookhout because another reason I thought maybe -they were going to want to file without the evidence, and then that put -everything on me, you know. - -If they didn't have the evidence and they said, "We file on him, we -have got the assassin" I was afraid somebody might take the complaint -and I went down to be sure they had some evidence on him. - -Mr. RANKIN. Have you told us all that you said to the U.S. attorney -when you talked to him at that time? - -Mr. WADE. So far as I know. I know that concerned that point, you know. - -Mr. RANKIN. Well, did he say anything to you about that point? - -Mr. WADE. Well, I think he asked me was that--I don't think Barefoot -was real conversant, I guess is the word with what the law is in a -murder charge. - -I told him that it had no place in it and he said he had heard it on -the radio and didn't know whether it would be--thought it might because -some--if it was not necessary, he did not think it ought to be done, -something to that effect so I went down there to be sure they didn't. - -I went over the evidence which they--when I saw the evidence, it was -the evidence as told to me by Captain Fritz. - -Mr. RANKIN. This conversation you have described you had when Jim -Alexander was there and the others? - -Mr. WADE. Yes; I first asked Jim Allen, a man whom I have a lot of -confidence in, do they have a case and he said it looks like a case, -you can try. - -Mr. RANKIN. Is that the case about the assassination? - -Mr. WADE. Yes; we are talking entirely about the assassination. - -On the Tippit thing, I didn't take the charge on that and I think they -had some witnesses who had identified him there at the scene, but I was -more worried about the assassination of them filing on somebody that we -couldn't prove was guilty. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you discuss the evidence that they did have at that -time with Captain Fritz? - -Mr. WADE. Yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. Will you tell us what evidence you recall? - -Mr. WADE. I have made no notes but roughly he gave the story about him -bringing the gun to work, saying it was window rods from the neighbor, -someone who had brought him to work. He also said there were three -employees of the company that left him on the sixth floor. He told -about, the part about, the young officer running in there right after -the assassination and Oswald leaving after the manager said that he was -employed there. Told about his arrest and said that there was a scuffle -there, and that he tried to shoot the officer. - -I don't know--I think I am giving you all this because I think a little -of it may vary from the facts but all I know is what Fritz told me. - -He said the Dallas police had found a palmprint on the underside of the -gun of Oswald. At that time, the FBI was standing by to fly the gun to -the laboratory here in Washington which incidentally, they didn't find, -but I assume the Commission has interviewed Senator--not Senator--Day, -the fingerprint man of the Dallas police but I have learned since that -he probably can't identify the palmprint under there but at that time -they told me they had one on it. - -They said they had a palmprint on the wrapping paper, and on the box, I -believe there by the scene. They did at least put Oswald there at the -scene. - -Mr. RANKIN. Will you clarify the palmprint that you are referring to on -the rifle? - -Was it on the underside of the rifle, was it between the rifle and the -stock or where was it as you recall? - -Mr. WADE. Specifically, I couldn't say because--but he said they had a -palmprint or a fingerprint of Oswald on the underside of the rifle and -I don't know whether it was on the trigger guard or where it was but I -knew that was important, I mean, to put the gun in his possession. - -I thought we had that all the time when I took the complaint on the -thing. - -Let me see what else they had that night. Well, they had a lot of the -things they found in his possession. They had the map, you know, that -marked the route of the parade. They had statements from the bus driver -and the taxicab driver that hauled him somewhere. - -I think they varied a little as to where they picked him up but -generally they had some type of statement from them. - -That is generally what they gave me now. - -Mr. RANKIN. That is all you recall as of that time? - -Mr. WADE. Yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you give any report to the press then about---- - -Mr. WADE. No; I will tell you what happened then. - -Mr. RANKIN. Yes, sir. - -Mr. WADE. As we walked out of the thing they started yelling, I started -home, and they started yelling they wanted to see Oswald, the press. - -And Perry said that he had put him in the showup room downstairs. Of -course, they were yelling all over the world they wanted a picture of -Oswald. And I don't know the mob and everybody ended up in the showup -room. It is three floors below there. - -Mr. RANKIN. Still Friday night? - -Mr. WADE. Yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. About what time? - -Mr. WADE. I would say around midnight roughly. It would--it could be -either way an hour because I went down there around 11 o'clock, 10:30 -or 11, some roughly and I don't know what the time element was but I -would say around midnight. - -So, they started interviewing Fritz and Curry, and I started to leave -and Fritz said, "Well, we will get--" either Fritz or Curry said, "We -will show him up down there," he said, "This is Mr. Wade, the district -attorney." - -He kind of introduced me to the press. I didn't say anything at that -time but down in the basement they started to put Oswald--I went down -there with them. They started to put Oswald in the lineup down there. - -Mr. RANKIN. Will you describe that briefly to the Commission? - -Mr. WADE. Well, I don't know whether you have seen--it is a room larger -than this and you have a glass here on this side. Behind that glass -they have a place out here where they walk prisoners in through there -and you can see through this side but you can't see through that side. -I think that is the way it is set up. - -Senator COOPER. You mean observers can see? - -Mr. WADE. Observers can see, but the defendants or suspects can't see -through or at least can't identify. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you remember who else besides Lee Harvey Oswald was in -the showup? - -Mr. WADE. No; I am just telling you about the showup room. Now, they -had had showups on him but I wasn't there at any of those, but this -was, the purpose of this, was to let the press see Oswald, if I -understand it. - -And the police were yelling, "Everybody wants to see him, wants a -picture of him." They started in the screened-in portion and a howl -went up that you can't take a picture through that screen. Then they -had a conference with, among some of them, and the next thing I knew -I was just sitting there upon a little, I guess, elevated, you might -say a speaker's stand, although there were 300 people in the room, you -couldn't even actually get out, you know. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did they ask you whether they should do this? - -Mr. WADE. I don't think I said yea or nay to the thing so far as I -know, because it was--and I actually didn't know what they were doing -until, the next thing I knew they said they were going to have to bring -him in there. - -Well, I think I did say, "You'd better get some officers in here or -something for some protection on him." - -I thought a little about, and I got a little worried at that stage. - -So about 12 officers came in and they were standing around Oswald, and -at this time I looked out in the audience and saw a man out there, -later, who turned out to be Jack Ruby. He was there at that scene. - -Mr. RANKIN. How did you happen to pick him out? - -Mr. WADE. Well, I don't know. He had--I had seen the fellow somewhere -before, but I didn't know his name, but he had a pad, and the reason I -remember him mostly---- - -Mr. RANKIN. You mean a scratch pad? - -Mr. WADE. He had some kind of scratch pad. The reason I mentioned -him mostly, I will get into him in a minute and tell you everything -about him. He was out there about 1 minute, I would say, and they took -pictures and everything else and Oswald was here and the cameras were -in a ring around him, and as they left---- - -Mr. RANKIN. Excuse me. Where was Ruby from where you told us where -Oswald was? - -Mr. WADE. Well, he was, I would say, about 12 feet. I am giving a -rough---- - -Mr. RANKIN. When you saw him---- - -Mr. WADE. We went all through this at the trial, and it varied on where -Ruby was, but when I saw him he was about four rows back in the aisle -seat, standing up in the seat. - -Mr. RANKIN. Were there press men around him? - -Mr. WADE. All kinds of press men around him, and also press men 10 deep -between him and Oswald. - -Now, one of their--you mentioned the gun awhile ago--one of their -defenses in the trial was if he had a gun, he had a gun there, he could -have killed him if he wanted to. It is the first I heard him say that -he didn't have a gun that you mentioned awhile ago. So when I got--when -they got through, they started asking him questions, the press. - -Senator COOPER. Wait a minute. How close were the nearest people in the -audience to Oswald? - -Mr. WADE. I would say they were that far from him. - -Senator COOPER. How far is that? - -Mr. WADE. Three feet. - -Senator COOPER. You mean some of the reporters and photographers were -within 3 feet of him? - -Mr. WADE. They were on the ground, they were on the ground, and they -were standing on top of each other, and on top of tables, and I assume -in that room there were 250 people. It was just a mob scene. - -Senator COOPER. I believe I have seen the room. Isn't it correct that -at the end where the showup is held that is an elevated platform? - -Mr. WADE. There is a platform up there where the microphone is. - -Senator COOPER. Was he standing up on the platform? - -Mr. WADE. No, he was not at the platform. - -Senator COOPER. Was he on the floor level? - -Mr. WADE. He was in the floor level in the middle. If I understand, -that was the first or second time I had ever been in the room. - -Senator COOPER. Were there people around him, surrounding him? - -Mr. WADE. People were on the floor in front of those desks. - -Senator COOPER. But I mean, were they, were people on all sides of him? - -Mr. WADE. No; they were all in front of him. They were all in front of -him, and you had a ring of policemen behind him, policemen on all sides -of him. It was just the front where they were, and that is the way I -recall it, but I knew they had a line of policemen behind him, and the -place was full of policemen, because they went up and it turns out -later they got all the police who were on duty that night. They were -plain clothes police, most of them, maybe they had a uniform or two, a -few of them. - -So they started---- - -Senator COOPER. Excuse me one moment. - -Mr. WADE. Yes, sir. - -Senator COOPER. Can I make a statement? I will have to go to my office -for a few minutes. I hope to return in about 20 minutes, and I will ask -Mr. Dulles to preside in my place, and I will return. - -Mr. WADE. Thank you, sir. - -(At this point, Senator Cooper withdrew from the hearing room.) - -Mr. DULLES. Proceed. - -Mr. RANKIN. Will you proceed? - -Mr. WADE. Yes, sir; so they said, "Have you filed on him?" At that -stage, started yelling has he been filed on, and I said yes, and -filed on for murder with malice, and they asked Judge Johnston, is -there--they asked him something. - -Then they started asking me questions everywhere, from all angles. - -Mr. RANKIN. Under your practice, what do you mean by file on him? Is -that something different than an arraignment? - -Mr. WADE. Well, of course, it is according to the terminology and what -you mean by arraignment. In Texas the only arraignment is when you get -ready to try him. Like we arraigned Ruby just before we started putting -on evidence. That is the only arraignment we have, actually. - -Mr. RANKIN. I see. You don't bring him before a magistrate? - -Mr. WADE. Well, that is called--you can have an examining trial before -the magistrate to see whether it is a bailable matter. At that time, I -don't believe he had been brought before the magistrate, because I told -David Johnston as we left there, I said, "You ought to go up before the -jail and have him brought before you and advise him of his rights and -his right to counsel and this and that," which, so far as I know, he -did. - -But at that meeting you had two attorneys from American Civil Liberties -Union. - -Mr. RANKIN. Which meeting? - -Mr. WADE. That Friday night meeting, or Friday night showup we had -better call it, midnight on Friday night. I believe it was Greer Ragio -and Professor Webster from SMU. I saw them there in the hall, and Chief -Curry told me that they had been given an opportunity or had talked -with Oswald. I am not sure. I was under the impression that they had -talked with them but, of course, I didn't see them talking with him. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you talk to them about it? - -Mr. WADE. Yes; I told them that he is entitled to counsel, that is what -they are interested in on the counsel situation, and anybody, either -them or anybody else could see him that wanted to. - -Mr. RANKIN. What did they say then? - -Mr. WADE. Mr. Rankin, I will tell you what, there was so much going on -I don't remember exactly. The only thing was I got the impression they -had already talked with them somewhere, but I don't know whether they -told me or the chief told me or what. Like I say, it was a mob scene -there, practically, and they were standing in the door when I--they -were in the meeting there. - -Let me get a little further and go back to--I don't know whether I -answered your question and if I don't it is because I can't, because I -don't know--I will tell you what happened the next day. - -Mr. RANKIN. Let's finish with the showup now. - -Mr. WADE. Yes. They asked a bunch of questions there. I think if -you get a record of my interview that you will find that any of the -evidence---- - -Mr. DULLES. Which interview is that? - -Mr. WADE. With the press, midnight, radio, television, and everything -else. I think if you will get a copy of that you will find they asked -me lots of questions about fingerprints and evidence. I refused to -answer them because I said it was evidence in the case. The only thing -that I told them that you might get the impression was evidence but is -really not evidence, I told them that the man's wife said the man had -a gun or something to that effect. The reason, maybe good or bad, but -that isn't admissible in Texas. You see a wife can't testify. It is not -evidence, but it is evidence but it is inadmissible evidence actually -is what it was. So I think if you find anything in that interview that -deals with the evidence you are going to feel that it dealt only with -that piece of testimony of Marina Oswald, which someone had told me she -said about the gun was missing from the house, which I think later was -corroborated. - -Mr. RANKIN. At that time, had you filed on the assassination? - -Mr. WADE. Yes, sir; we had filed upstairs prior to this. He had been -filed on for murder with malice. - -Mr. RANKIN. But he hadn't been brought before the justice of the peace -or magistrate yet on that complaint, had he? - -Mr. WADE. The justice of the peace was there in the office and took it -in the homicide. Oswald was in homicide, also, but he is in a separate -office. - -Like I told you, I never did see Oswald except in that lineup -downstairs. That was the first time I had seen him. - -Mr. RANKIN. Was that when you told the justice of the peace that he -ought to have him before him to tell him his rights and so forth? - -Mr. WADE. Yes; it was some time during that hour, this went on for -about an hour down there, everything. - -Well, during that interview somebody said, and the thing--Oswald -belonged to, was he a Communist, something generally to that effect. - -Mr. RANKIN. They asked you that? - -Mr. WADE. I was asked that. And I said, well, now, I don't know about -that but they found some literature, I understand, some literature -dealing with Free Cuba Movement. Following this--and so I looked up and -Jack Ruby is in the audience and he said, no, it is the Fair Play for -Cuba Committee. Well, he corrected me, you see, to show you why I got -attracted to his attention, why someone in the audience would speak up -and answer a question. - -Mr. DULLES. You hadn't known him before? - -Mr. WADE. I had never known him, to my knowledge. He is a man about -town, and I had seen him before, because when I saw him in there, and I -actually thought he was a part of the press corps at the time. - -Mr. RANKIN. Were any of your assistants or people working for you there -at that showup? - -Mr. WADE. I don't believe there were any of them there now. If there is -any of them, it is Alexander, because he is the only one down there, -but I think he is still up in homicide. - -I will go further on that, some of my assistants know him, but he was -in my office 2 days before this with a hot check or something where he -was trying to collect a hot check or pay someone. I think he was trying -to pay someone else's hot check off, I don't know what it was, I didn't -see him. He talked to my check section. I found this out later. - -Mr. RANKIN. By "he" you mean---- - -Mr. WADE. Ruby, Jack Ruby. - -Mr. RANKIN. Yes. - -Mr. WADE. He was in another office of mine, since this all came out, -he was in there with a bunch of the police, we were trying a case on -pornography, some of my assistants were, and my assistant came in his -office during the noon hour after coming from the court, this was 2 -or 3 days before the assassination and Ruby was sitting there in his -office with five or six Dallas police officers. In fact, he was sitting -in my assistant's desk and he started to sit down and asked who he was -and the officer said, "Well, that is Jacky Ruby who runs the Carousel -Club," so he had been down there. - -I don't know him personally--I mean I didn't know who he was. It was -one of these things I had seen the man, I imagine, but I had no idea -who he was, and I will even go further, after it was over, this didn't -come out in the trial, as they left down there, Ruby ran up to me and -he said, "Hi Henry" he yelled real loud, he yelled. "Hi, Henry," and -put his hand to shake hands with me and I shook hands with him. And -he said, "Don't you know me?" And I am trying to figure out whether I -did or not. And he said, "I am Jack Ruby, I run the Vegas Club." And -I said, "What are you doing in here?" It was in the basement of the -city hall. He said, "I know all these fellows." Just shook his hand and -said, "I know all these fellows." I still didn't know whether he was -talking about the press or police all the time, but he shook his hands -kind of like that and left me and I was trying to get out of the place -which was rather crowded, and if you are familiar with that basement, -and I was trying to get out of that hall. And here I heard someone -call "Henry Wade wanted on the phone," this was about 1 o'clock in the -morning or about 1 o'clock in the morning, and I gradually get around -to the phone there, one of the police phones, and as I get there it is -Jack Ruby, and station KLIF in Dallas on the phone. You see, he had -gone there, this came out in the trial, that he had gone over there -and called KLIF and said Henry Wade is down there, I will get you an -interview with him. - -Mr. RANKIN. Who is this? - -Mr. WADE. KLIF is the name of the radio station. - -You see, I didn't know a thing, and I just picked up the phone and they -said this is so and so at KLIF and started asking questions. - -But that came out in the trial. - -But to show that he was trying to be kind of the type of person who was -wanting to think he was important, you know. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you give him an interview over the telephone to KLIF? - -Mr. WADE. Ruby? - -Mr. RANKIN. No. - -Mr. WADE. I answered about two questions and hung up, but they had -a man down there who later interviewed me before I got out of the -building. But they just asked me had he been filed and one or two -things. - -Mr. DULLES. It was a KLIF reporter that you gave this to, not Ruby? - -Mr. WADE. Not Ruby. Ruby was not on the phone, he had just gone out -and called him and handed the phone to me. I thought I got a call from -somebody, and picked it up and it was KLIF on the phone. - -Mr. RANKIN. On the pornography charge, was Ruby involved in that? - -Mr. WADE. No, sir; I don't know why he was down there, actually. But -there were six or seven police officers, special services of the Dallas -police were officers in the thing and I don't know whether he was -just interested in it or what he was down there for but he was down -there, and I didn't know him. He has tried to leave the impression -that he had known me a long time but it is one of those things, I have -been in politics and sometimes there are a lot of faces I know that I -don't know actually who they are, but I didn't know who he was and he -actually introduced himself to me that night. - -Well, that is about all I can recall of that night. - -I went home then. - -Mr. RANKIN. You have told us all you remember about the showup? - -Mr. WADE. I told you all, and, of course, all I know about it as far as -my interview with the press. You can get more accurate, actually, by -getting a transcript of it because I don't remember what all was asked, -but I do remember the incident with Ruby and I know I told them that -there would be no evidence given out in the case. - -At that time, most of it had already been given out, however, by -someone. I think by the police. - -Now, the next morning, I don't know of anything else until the next -morning. I went to the office about 9 o'clock. - -Mr. DULLES. Could I ask a question? - -Mr. WADE. Yes, sir. - -(Discussion off the record.) - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you have any particular transcript that you are speaking -about? - -Mr. WADE. No; I don't have anything. The thing about it is this was -taken, this was on television and radio and all the networks. They had -everything there set up and that is the only--that is the first of, I -think, three times I was interviewed, but it was Friday night around -between 12 and 1 o'clock. It was actually Saturday morning between 12 -and 1. - -Mr. RANKIN. So there were a number of networks, possibly, and a number -of the radio stations and television stations from the whole area? - -Mr. WADE. The whole area and it actually wasn't set up for an interview -with me. It was an interview, what I thought, with Fritz and Curry, and -I thought I would stay for it, but when they got into the interviewing, -I don't know what happened to them but they weren't there. They had -left, or I was the one who was answering the questions about things I -didn't know much about, to tell you the truth. - -Has that got it cleared? Can I go to the next morning? - -I will try to go a little and not forget anything. - -The next morning I went to my office, probably, say, 9 o'clock Saturday -morning. Waiting there for me was Robert Oswald, who was the brother of -Lee Harvey Oswald. You probably have met him, but I believe his name is -Robert is his brother. - -I talked to him about an hour. - -Mr. RANKIN. What did you say to him and what did he say to you? - -Mr. WADE. Well, we discussed the history of Lee Harvey Oswald and -the--one of the purposes he came to me, he wanted his mother, Oswald's -mother, and wife and him to see Oswald. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did he say this to you? - -Mr. WADE. Yes; but we had already set it up, somebody, I don't know -whether my office or the police, but he was set up to see him that -morning at 11 o'clock, I believe, or 12 o'clock, some time. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you do anything about it? - -Mr. WADE. Yes, sir; I checked to see if it was arranged. I called -Captain Fritz and told him that he wanted to see him, and he said they -were going to let him see him. I don't know. I don't know the name, but -it was either 11 o'clock or 12 o'clock Saturday morning. - -I don't know whether he had requested or not, but that was the first -time I had seen him. I don't know why he came to my office, but I used -it to try to go into Lee Harvey Oswald's background some, and I also -told him that there is a lot involved in this thing from a national -point of view, and I said, "You appear to be a good citizen," which -he did appear to me, "and I think you will render your country a -great service if you will go up and tell Oswald to tell us all about -the thing." That was part of the deal of my working for a statement -from Oswald which didn't pan out, of course. Because I was going to -interview Oswald Sunday afternoon when we got him into the county jail -and I was going to attempt to get a statement from him. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did Robert tell you anything about Lee Harvey Oswald's -background at that time? - -Mr. WADE. He told me about in Europe, how in Russia, how they had had -very little correspondence with them and he wrote to them renouncing or -telling them he wanted to renounce his American citizenship and didn't -want to have anything else to do with him. He said later that one of -the letters changed some, I mean back, and then he said he was coming -home, coming back and he had married and kind of his general history -of the thing and he came back and I believe stayed with this Robert in -Fort Worth for 2, 3, or 4 months. Now I say this is from memory, like -I don't have--and they had helped him some, and said that Marina, the -thing that impressed her was most your supermarkets, I think, more than -anything else in this country, your A. & P. and the big, I guess you -call them, supermarkets or whatever they are. - -And he told me something about him going to New Orleans, but I gathered -that they were not too close. I believe he told me this, that he hadn't -seen him in close to a year prior to this, or a good while. - -Now, it seemed to me like it was a year, and he said their families, -they didn't have anything in common much, and he said, of course--I -said "Do you think"--I said, "the evidence is pretty strong against -your brother, what do you think about it?" He said, "Well, he is my -brother, and I hate to think he would do this." He said, "I want to -talk to him and ask him about it." - -Now, I never did see him. Roughly, that is about all I remember from -that conversation. We rambled around for quite a bit. - -I know I was impressed because he got out and walked out the front -of my office and in front of my office there were 15 or 20 press men -wanting to ask him something, and he wouldn't say a word to them, he -just walked off. - -I told him they would be out there, and he said, "I won't have anything -to say." - -Mr. DULLES. Was this the morning after the assassination? - -Mr. WADE. Yes, sir; Saturday morning. - -Mr. DULLES. About what time? - -Mr. WADE. I would say between 9 and 10 is when I talked with him. - -And so the main purpose in the office, we believed, the main purpose -of me and the lawyers in the office were briefing the law on whether -to try Oswald for the murder of the President, whether you could prove -the flight and the killing of Officer Tippit, which we became satisfied -that we could, I mean from an evidentiary point of view. - -Mr. RANKIN. By "we" who do you mean, in your office? - -Mr. WADE. Well, I think I had seven or eight in there, Bowie, and -Alexander, and Dan Ellis, Jim Williamson, but there was a legal point. - -My office was open, but that, with reference to this case, there were -other things going on, but in reference to this case, this is what we -spent our time trying to establish whether that would be admissible or -not. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you consult with any Federal officers in regard to how -you should handle the case or what you should say about it at any time? - -Mr. WADE. No; I didn't discuss, consult with any of them. I did talk to -some of the FBI boys and I believe there was an inspector. - -Mr. RANKIN. Secret Service? - -Mr. WADE. No. - -Mr. RANKIN. FBI? - -Mr. WADE. There was an inspector of the FBI who called me two or three -times. I don't remember. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did they tell you how to handle the case in any way? - -Mr. WADE. I don't think so. I mean it wasn't really up to them. - -Mr. RANKIN. The only time you ever talked to Barefoot Sanders about it -was in regard to this conspiracy, possibility of, that you have already -described? - -Mr. WADE. Frankly, that is hard to say. I think we talked off and on -every day or two about developments in it, because, you see, well, I -don't know whether we talked any more but before the killing by Ruby, -but we had nearly a daily conversation about the files in the Oswald -case, what we were going to do with them. You see, they were going to -give them all to me, and at that stage we didn't know whether it was -going to be a President's Commission or a congressional investigation -or what. After the President's Commission was set up, I arranged -through him and Miller here in the Justice Department that rather than -give the files to me, to get the police to turn them over to the FBI -and send them to you all, or photostat them and send them to you all. - -Barefoot and I talked frequently, but I don't know of anything -significant of the Oswald angle that we discussed, and we spent the -last 2 months trying to get some of the FBI files to read on the Ruby -trial. I mean we talked a lot but I don't know anything further about -Oswald into it or anything on Ruby of any particular significance. - -Mr. RANKIN. Was Barefoot Sanders suggesting how you should handle the -Oswald case except the time you already related? - -Mr. WADE. I don't recall him doing, suggesting that. - -Mr. RANKIN. Any other Federal officers suggesting anything like that to -you? - -Mr. WADE. The only thing I remember is the inspector of the FBI whom I -don't think I ever met. I was there in the police one time during this -shuffle, and I think it was some time Saturday morning, and he said -they should have nothing, no publicity on the thing, no statements. - -Now, I don't know whether that was after Ruby shot Oswald or before, I -don't know when it was, but I did talk with him and I know his concern -which was that there was too much publicity. - -Mr. RANKIN. And he told you that, did he? - -Mr. WADE. At some stage in it. I am thinking it was Sunday night which -I know I talked with him Sunday night, but we are not that far along -with it yet. But I don't know whether I talked to him previously or not. - -Mr. RANKIN. That is the only conversation of that type that you recall -with any Federal officer? - -Mr. WADE. That is all I recall. I am sure Barefoot and I discussed the -publicity angle on it some, but I don't remember Barefoot suggesting -how we handle it, but neither one of us knew whether it was his offense -or mine, to begin with, for 2 or 3 hours because we had to select it. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you know what Barefoot said about publicity when you did -discuss it with him? - -Mr. WADE. I don't recall anything. - -Mr. RANKIN. All right. - -What happened next, as you recall? - -Mr. WADE. I was going home. I went by the police station to talk to -Chief Curry. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you discuss the evidence then? - -Mr. WADE. Well, at that time--you see, Chief Curry knew very little of -the evidence at that stage. He should have known, but he didn't. But I -discussed the thing with him and I told him there was too much evidence -being put out in the case from his department, that I wish he would -talk to Fritz and have no further statements on it. - -Mr. RANKIN. What did he say about that? - -Mr. WADE. He said, "That is fine. I think that is so." - -Mr. RANKIN. Now, going back just a moment, you spoke out about a map -earlier that you had been told they had as evidence, do you recall, of -the parade route. Did you look at the map at the time? - -Mr. WADE. I don't think I ever saw the map. - -Mr. RANKIN. You don't know what it contained in regard to the parade -route? - -Mr. WADE. I was told by Fritz that it had the parade route and it had -an X where the assassination took place and it had an X out on Stemmons -Freeway and an X at Inwood Road and Lemon, is all I know, a circle or -some mark there. - -Mr. RANKIN. But you have never seen the map? - -Mr. WADE. So far as I know, I have never seen the map. I don't know -even where it was found, but I think it was found in his home, -probably. But that is my recollection. But I don't even know that. I -told Chief Curry this. - -Then I walked out, and Tom Pettit of NBC said, "We are all confused on -the law, where we are really on this thing." - -Mr. RANKIN. What did you say? - -Mr. WADE. At that time I said, "Well, I will explain the procedure, -Texas procedure in a criminal case," and I had about a 10-minute -interview there as I was leaving the chief's office, dealing entirely -with the procedure, I mean your examining trial and grand jury and jury -trial. I mean as to what takes place. You see, they had all kinds of -statements and other countries represented and they were all curious to -ask legal questions, when bond would be set and when it would be done. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you discuss the evidence at that time? - -Mr. WADE. No, sir; I refused. You will find that I refused to answer -questions. They all asked questions on it, but I would tell them that -is evidence and that deals with evidence in the matter. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you tell them why you wouldn't answer those questions? - -Mr. WADE. I told them we had to try the case, here, and we would have -to try the case and we wouldn't be able to get a jury if they knew all -the evidence in the case. - -You will find that in those interviews most, I think. I haven't seen -them. As a matter of fact, didn't see them myself even. But I went home -that day, and---- - -Mr. DULLES. That day is Saturday? - -Mr. WADE. Saturday; yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. About what time? Do you recall? - -Mr. WADE. I guess I got home 2:30 probably. I must have eaten on the -way home or somewhere. - -Mr. RANKIN. In the afternoon? - -Mr. WADE. Yes, sir; and I know I was amazed as I walked through the -television room there and saw Chief Curry with that gun. You see, -at that time they had not identified the gun as his gun, but he was -telling about the FBI report on it. - -Mr. RANKIN. Will you just describe what you saw there at that time? - -Mr. WADE. Well, I know he was in a crowd, and it seems to me like -he had the gun, but on second thought I am not even sure whether he -had the gun, but he was tracing the history of how that the gun was -bought under the name, under an assumed name from a mail-order house -in Chicago and mailed there to Dallas, and that the serial number -and everything that had been identified, that the FBI had done that, -something else. - -I believe they said they had a post office box here, a blind post -office box that the recipients of that had identified as Oswald as the -guy or something that received it. - -In other words, he went directly over the evidence connecting him with -the gun. - -Mr. RANKIN. You say there was a crowd there. Who was the crowd around -him? - -Mr. WADE. Newsmen. You see, I was at home. I was watching it on -television. - -Mr. RANKIN. I see. Did you do anything about that, then? Did you call -him and ask him to quit that? - -Mr. WADE. No; I felt like nearly it was a hopeless case. I know now why -it happened. That was the first piece of evidence he got his hands on -before Fritz did. - -Mr. RANKIN. Will you explain what you mean by that? - -Mr. WADE. Well, this went to the FBI and came to him rather than to -Captain Fritz, and I feel in my own mind that this was something new, -that he really had been receiving none of the original evidence, that -it was coming through Fritz to him and so this went from him to Fritz, -you know, and I think that is the reason he did it. - -So I stayed home that afternoon. I was trying to think, it seems like I -went back by the police station some time that night, late at night. - -Mr. RANKIN. This way of giving evidence to the press and all of the -news media, is that standard practice in your area? - -Mr. WADE. Yes; it is, unfortunately. I don't think it is good. We have -just, even since this happened we have had a similar incident with the -police giving all the evidence out or giving out an oral confession of -a defendant that is not admissible in court. You know, oral admissions -are not generally admissible in Texas. And they gave all the evidence -out in it. - -Mr. RANKIN. Have you done anything about it, tried to stop it in any -way? - -Mr. WADE. Well, in this actually, in the same story they quoted me as -saying, I mean the news quoted me as saying they shouldn't give the -information out, that is the evidence, we have got to try the case, -we will get a jury, it is improper to do this, or something to that -effect. So far as taking it up with--I have mentioned many times that -they shouldn't give out evidence, in talking to the police officers, I -mean in there in training things, but it is something I have no control -over whatever. It is a separate entity, the city of Dallas is, and I -do a little fussing with the police, but by the same token it is not -a situation where--I think it is one of your major problems that are -going to have to be looked into not only here but it is a sidelight, I -think, to your investigation to some extent, but I think you prejudice -us, the state, more than you do the defense by giving out our testimony. - -You may think that giving out will help you to convict him. I think it -works the other way, your jurors that read, the good type of jurors, -get an opinion one way or another from what they read, and you end -up with poor jurors. If they haven't read or heard anything of the -case--well, not generally the same type of juror. - -The only thing I make a practice of saying is that I reviewed the -evidence in this case in which the State will ask the death penalty, -which may be going too far, but I tell them we plan to ask the death -penalty or plan to ask life or plan to ask maximum jail sentence or -something of that kind. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you say that at any time about the Oswald case? - -Mr. WADE. Oh, yes, sir; I have said that about both Oswald and Ruby. - -Mr. RANKIN. When did you say it about the Oswald case? - -Mr. WADE. I guess it was Friday night probably. I was asked what -penalty we would ask for. - -Mr. RANKIN. When the police made these releases about the evidence, did -they ever ask you whether they should make them? - -Mr. WADE. No, sir; like I told you. I talked Saturday morning around -between 11 and 12, some time. I told him there was entirely too much -publicity on this thing, that with the pressure going to be on us to -try it and there may not be a place in the United States you can try -it with all the publicity you are getting. Chief Curry said he agreed -with me, but, like I said about 2 hours later, I saw him releasing this -testimony. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you consult any State officials about how you should -handle either the Oswald or the Ruby case? - -Mr. WADE. I don't know. It seems like I talked to Waggoner Carr that -night, but I don't remember. - -Didn't we talk some time about it? - -I don't know whether it was consulting about how to try it or anything. -But I know I talked to Waggoner's office some time within 2 or 3 days, -but I don't know whether it was before the Ruby assault or not. But he -doesn't actually---- - -Mr. RANKIN. Does the Texas attorney general have any jurisdiction to -tell you how to try such cases? - -Mr. WADE. No sir; I think Waggoner will agree with that. They don't -have any jurisdiction to try criminal cases other than antitrust, but -I assume we would ask for their assistance if we wanted it. We don't -generally, and I don't, the law doesn't contemplate that. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Carr didn't try to tell you in any way how to handle -either case? - -Mr. WADE. Not that I know of. - -Mr. CARR. Off the record. - -(Discussion off the record.) - -Mr. DULLES. May we proceed. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Wade, will you give us the substance of what Mr. Carr -said to you and what you said to him at that time? - -Mr. WADE. All I remember--I don't actually remember or know what night -it was I talked to him but I assume it was that night because he did -mention that the rumor was out that we were getting ready to file a -charge of Oswald being part of an international conspiracy, and I told -him that that was not going to be done. - -It was late at night and I believe that is---- - -Mr. DULLES. It must have been Saturday night, wasn't it? - -Mr. WADE. No; that was Friday night. - -Mr. DULLES. Friday night. - -Mr. WADE. And I told him, and then I got a call, since this happened, I -talked to Jim Bowie, my first assistant who had talked to, somebody had -called him, my phone had been busy and Barefoot Sanders, I talked to -him, and he--they all told that they were concerned about their having -received calls from Washington and somewhere else, and I told them -that there wasn't any such crime in Texas, I didn't know where it came -from, and that is what prompted me to go down and take the complaint, -otherwise I never would have gone down to the police station. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you say anything about whether you had evidence to -support such a complaint of a conspiracy? - -Mr. WADE. Mr. Rankin, I don't know what evidence we have, we had at -that time and actually don't know yet what all the evidence was. - -I never did see, I was told they had a lot of Fair Play for Cuba -propaganda or correspondence on Oswald, and letters from the Communist -Party, and it was probably exaggerated to me. - -I was told this. I have never seen any of that personally. Never saw -any of it that night. But whether he was a Communist or whether he -wasn't, had nothing to do with solving the problem at hand, the filing -of the charge. - -I also was very, I wasn't sure I was going to take a complaint, and a -justice of the peace will take a complaint lots of times because he -doesn't have to try it. I knew I would have to try this case and that -prompted me to go down and see what kind of evidence they had. - -Mr. RANKIN. Will you tell us what you mean by taking a complaint under -your law. - -Mr. WADE. Well, a complaint is a blank form that you fill out in the -name, by the authority of the State of Texas, and so forth, which I -don't have here, but it charged, it charges a certain person with -committing a crime, and it is filed in the justice court. - -The law permits the district attorney or any of his assistants to swear -the witness to the charge. The only place we sign it is over on the -left, I believe sworn to and subscribed to before me, this is the blank -day of blank, Henry Wade, district attorney. - -Over on the right the complainant signs the complaint. We mean when we -say take or accept a complaint is when we swear the witness and we draw -it up ourselves and word it and take it. - -Mr. RANKIN. Is that what you did in the Oswald-Ruby case? - -Mr. WADE. Yes, sir; we did that. Now, as a practical matter that is not -really filing the complaints. The complaint is not really legally filed -until a justice of the peace takes it and records it on his docket. - -Now, it goes to the justice of the peace court to clear the whole thing -up and his purpose, he has--the law says you shall take him immediately -before a magistrate, which is the justice of the peace. - -The courts have held that it is not necessary in Texas, but there -is a statute that says that, and then he--his purpose is to hold an -examining trial to see whether it is a bailable case or not. - -Then he sends it to the grand jury and the grand jury hears it and -returns an indictment or a no bill and then it is in a certain court -set with a docket number and then it is ours to try. - -Does that answer some of the questions? - -(At this point, Senator Cooper returned to the hearing room.) - -Mr. RANKIN. Which route did you follow in regard to the Oswald case? - -Mr. WADE. The same route. I accepted the complaint on him in the -homicide department, and gave it to David Johnston, the justice of the -peace who was there incidentally, or there in the homicide department. - -But I didn't actually type it up. I don't know who actually typed it -up, somebody typed it up, but we file about a 100 a year, murders "did -with malice aforethought." - -It was a straight murder indictment, murder with malice charge, and -that was the procedure we followed in the Oswald case. - -Mr. RANKIN. Why did you not include in that complaint a charge of an -international conspiracy? - -Mr. WADE. Well, it is just like I said, it is surplusage to begin with. -You don't need it. If you allege it you have to prove it. The U.S. -attorney and the attorney general had called me and said that if it -wasn't absolutely necessary they thought it shouldn't be done, and--- - -Mr. RANKIN. By the "attorney general" who do you mean? - -Mr. WADE. Mr. Carr. And actually it is never done. I mean, you see -that got clear, apparently you had the press writing that up, radio or -whoever was saying that was--had no idea about what murder was. - -Now, to write in there, assume he was, assume we could prove he was, -a Communist, which I wasn't able to prove because all I heard was he -had some literature there on him and had been in Russia, but assume I -knew he was a Communist, can I prove it, I still wouldn't have alleged -it because it is subject actually to be removed from the indictment -because it is surplusage, you know, and all a murder indictment, the -only thing that a murder indictment varies on is the method of what -they used, did kill John Doe by shooting him with a gun or by stabbing -him or by drowning him in water or how, the manner and means is the -only thing that varies in a murder indictment, all other wordage is the -same. Does that clear that up? - -(Discussion off the record.) - -Senator COOPER. As I understand it, under Texas law there is no crime -which is denominated under the term "international conspiracy." - -Mr. WADE. No, sir. - -Senator COOPER. I assume that conspiracy is a crime in Texas, isn't it, -conspiracy to commit a crime? - -Mr. WADE. Conspiracy is a crime. It is a joining together of a group, -your conspiracy where they enter into an agreement to commit a crime, -and that is usually the one is indicted as a conspirator, the one who -doesn't participate in the crime. - -Senator COOPER. My point is, though, that conspiracy is a crime under -Texas law? - -Mr. WADE. Yes, sir; conspiracy to commit murder is a crime. - -Senator COOPER. Yes. - -Let me ask this question. - -Mr. WADE. Yes, sir. - -Senator COOPER. As I understand it then, one of the reasons that no -warrant of indictment was rendered upon, touching upon an international -conspiracy is that there is just no such crime in Texas as an -international conspiracy? - -Mr. WADE. There was no such crime. If it was any such crime it would be -a Federal rather than a State offense. If there is such crime as being -a part of an international conspiracy it would deal with treason rather -than murder, I would think. - -But there is no such thing as being a part of any organization that -makes that it is a crime to commit murder. This was a straight murder -charge. - -If we would have had four or five co-conspirators who conspired with -him, planned the thing and could prove it we would have. That would -have been a conspiracy to, conspiracy to commit murder. - -Senator COOPER. But conspiracy is not essential to the crime, to -describe the person accused as belonging to any organization? - -Mr. WADE. No, sir; it is not necessary and it is entirely what they -call surplusage. - -Senator COOPER. Now the last question, was there any evidence brought -to you or any evidence of which you had knowledge upon which you could -base an indictment or a warrant for conspiracy to commit murder in this -case? - -Mr. WADE. No, sir; you mean parties other than Oswald? - -Senator COOPER. Yes. - -Mr. WADE. No. I might say on that score, to clear that up, I haven't -seen any evidence along that line. I haven't even seen any of the -correspondence that they had, allegedly had with the Communist Party -here in New York or the Fair Play for Cuba, I haven't seen his little -black book where he is supposed to have had the Russian Embassy's -telephone numbers in it which I am sure you all have gone into it. - -I never did see the book, none of that. - -Of course, I have been told by a lot of people and undoubtedly a lot of -it was exaggerated that he was a Communist, and you have had people say -he was a Communist who might say I was a Communist, you know, if they -didn't agree with me on something, so I have absolutely no evidence -that he was a Communist of my own knowledge, I have heard a lot, of -course. - -Mr. DULLES. What you are saying in this last answer relates to the -present time, not only the way your knowledge has---- - -Mr. WADE. At that time and up to the present. - -Mr. DULLES. Rather than the day of assassination. - -Mr. WADE. I have no evidence myself now that he was a Communist, or -ever was a Communist, and I never did see what evidence that they had -on him there gathered on him. I never saw any of the physical evidence -in the Oswald case other than one or two statements, and I think I -saw the gun while they were taking it out of there bringing it to -Washington, because I told them at that stage, they didn't want to take -it out, didn't want to let the FBI have it and I told them I thought -they ought to let them bring it on up here that night and get it back -the next night. - -There was arguing over that. I am getting off, rambling around, but -their argument over that was they were still trying to identify the gun -through a pawn broker or something like that and the police wanted to -keep it but I said, "Let it go up there and they said they would have -it back the next afternoon." - -Mr. RANKIN. Have you ever had any evidence that Oswald was involved -with anyone else in actually shooting the President? - -Mr. WADE. Well, I will answer that the same way. I have absolutely no -evidence myself. - -Now, of course, I might have some type of opinion or some connection -with reference to the Fair Play for Cuba and these letters that they -told me about. If that was so there may have been some connection or -may not, but I have no evidence myself on it. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you have any evidence as to whether Jack Ruby was -involved with anyone else in the killing of Oswald? - -Mr. WADE. No, sir; I have no evidence on that. We have some and I think -you have them all, some 8 or 10 witnesses who have said they had seen -Ruby and Oswald together at various times. - -Some of them were, I know one of them during the trial was a lawyer -there in Dallas, which I presume you all got his four-page statement, -said he heard them discussing killing Connally a week before then, came -out to my house and that had been sent to the FBI, and that was during -the trial, and I gave him a lie detector which showed that he didn't -have, this was a fanciful thing. - -That, I can't think of his name, some of you all may know it, but he is -a lawyer there in Dallas. - -Mr. RANKIN. You found that was not anything you could rely on. - -Mr. WADE. I didn't use him as a witness and after giving him the -polygraph I was satisfied that he was imagining it. I think he was -sincere, I don't think he was trying--I don't think he was trying to be -a hero or anything. I think he really thought about it so much I think -he thought that it happened, but the polygraph indicated otherwise. - -Mr. DULLES. Did you have any other evidence than the polygraph on this -point that he was not telling the truth or that this was a fiction? - -Mr. WADE. No, but I didn't--but I did see a report where the FBI -interviewed the girl that was allegedly with him in Ruby's place in -October, and she didn't corroborate all of it. I think she did say he -was in there but I am not even sure of that. I didn't interview her but -I just read a report on it. - -I read where they checked with the Department of Public Safety and -they did not, were not able to--he said he reported all this to the -Department of Public Safety, and I don't think they found any record of -him reporting it. It is very difficult to get him to come in to see me. -He didn't just walk in, this went on for a month, I kept hearing that -there was a certain person knew about it and I kept telling him to come -on and talk to me and he finally came out to my house late one night. - -The reason I think he actually must have thought it was so, but--I -wasn't too interested in that theory of the case on this thing because -I had a theory on this Ruby case from the start because I, even before -you are going to get into some of these officers' testimony in a -minute, but when this happened I was going home from church, and my own -mind I said I believe that was Jack Ruby who shot him because from that -Friday night, and from my theory has been from that Friday night, when -he saw him there he made up his mind to kill him if he got a chance and -I have had that--I didn't even know about Dean's testimony which you -are going to hear today, I didn't know about his testimony until the -day before I put him on the stand because I had not been preparing the -evidence, I had been picking a jury for 2 weeks but that was my theory -from the start. - -We had a waitress that I think you are all familiar with that was out -at B&B Cafe at 3 a.m. on the 22d who said she served Ruby and Oswald -there. - -B&B Cafe on Oak Lane, I know you have got that, I have seen it -somewhere. - -I don't think she was ever given a polygraph test. You have about four -homosexuals, I think that is probably the word, that have said they -have seen them together places. There was some indication that Ruby -was either bisexual or homosexual, but at least, I think they testified -to that in the trial, I think by mistake. - -Belli asked the man, meant to ask him another word and says, he meant -to say homicidal tendencies and he said homosexual tendencies and his -one witness said yes, sir. - -That is in the record which you will get of the trial, I guess. - -Mr. RANKIN. I understood you to say when you came home from church, -after the killing of Oswald that you thought it was Ruby before you had -heard that it was Ruby. - -Mr. WADE. You see, they announced Dallas businessman kills him. - -Mr. RANKIN. Yes. - -Mr. WADE. I took my family, I was in church with the family. I took -them on home and on the way down there they kept--they didn't say who -it was but this ran through my mind, a businessman. - -I said that must be Jack Ruby the way he looked. He looked kind of wild -to me down there Friday night the way he was running everywhere, you -know, and I said to myself that must be him. I didn't tell my wife. You -can't prove that. It is one of those things, that was my theory that -he was likely the one. I couldn't, you know, out of a million people I -couldn't say he was the one but when they announced his name I will say -it didn't surprise me. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Chairman, what do you want to do about Mr. Carr? - -Senator COOPER. Mr. Wade, can you name to the Commission the names of -the persons who told you or who stated in your presence that they had -seen Lee Oswald and Jack Ruby together? - -Mr. WADE. Well---- - -Senator COOPER. Start out with the first one, his name. - -Mr. WADE. If anybody would mention the lawyer's name, I know him--he -has run for the legislature a number of times. - -Senator COOPER. A lawyer who lives in Dallas? - -Mr. WADE. A lawyer in Dallas, and he has--we have, he made a four-page -affidavit about this thing, and mailed it to J. Edgar Hoover. - -Senator COOPER. You can supply his name. - -Mr. WADE. We can supply his name and I would supply you with copies of -his affidavit which I think you have. - -Don't you have it, isn't that up here? - -Senator COOPER. Without going into that in a moment, you can refresh -your recollection and supply to the Commission the name of this lawyer. - -Mr. WADE. Yes, sir. - -Senator COOPER. Had he talked to you? - -Mr. WADE. Yes, sir. - -Senator COOPER. What did he say? Did he make a written statement to you -or just talk to you? - -Mr. WADE. He handed me a written statement. He said, "The day after -this happened I made this," it was a copy of a written statement, he -said, "I sent this to J. Edgar Hoover in Washington." I am talking to -him, we will say, the 10th to the 20th of February, the first time I -talked with him. - -He said, "I sent this to the FBI, to J. Edgar Hoover, special delivery -air mail within a day or two after the assassination," and he left that -and as far as I know I have got a copy of that, he left it with me. - -He talked to me at length there at my house, just us, and I would say -at 11 o'clock at night, it was on a Sunday night I know, but what -Sunday night I don't know. It was on a Sunday night in February. I read -that statement over. It is a rather startling thing. It didn't ring -true to me. It all deals with a conversation between Oswald and Ruby -about killing John Connally, the Governor of Texas, over, he says, they -can't get syndicated crime in Texas without they kill the Governor. - -I know enough about the situation, the Governor has practically nothing -to do with syndicated crime. It has to be on a local, your district -attorney and your police are the ones on the firing line on that, and -they discussed at length killing him, how much they are going to pay -him, "He wants five thousand, I believe or half of it now, and half of -it when it is done." - -Don't you have this memorandum? - -Mr. RANKIN. Yes. - -Mr. WADE. There is no use of me trying to give it to you. - -Senator COOPER. I was just personally trying to get your recollection -about it. - -Mr. WADE. He told me this is what happened, and I said, "I can't put -you on the stand without I am satisfied you are telling the truth -because," I said, "We have got a good case here, and if they prove we -are putting a lying witness on the stand, we might hurt us," and I -said, "The only thing I know to do I won't put you on the stand but to -take a polygraph to see if you are telling the truth or not." - -He said, "I would be glad to." And I set it up and I later ran into -him in the lawyers' club there and he handed me another memorandum -which amplified on the other one, which all have been furnished to the -attorney general or if we didn't lose it in the shuffle. - -This was during the trial actually, and then when the man called me he -took a lie detector. There was no truth in it. - -That he was in the place. He was in the place, in Ruby's Carousel, but -that none of this conversation took place. He said he was in one booth -and Ruby was in another booth. - -Senator COOPER. Did anyone else tell you that they had seen Ruby and -Oswald talking together? - -Mr. WADE. No one else personally has told me this. - -Senator COOPER. You mentioned a girl. - -Mr. WADE. No, I never talked to her but we had the Dallas Police take -an affidavit from her and so did the FBI of that which is in all your -files. What her name is, I just know it is a waitress out at the B&B -Cafe. She lived in Mesquite, Tex., and some of my people interviewed -her and she told them the same thing she told the FBI. - -The other information was in your FBI reports of where people or -somebody who claimed he had seen them together in a YMCA, if I recall -correctly, and another one in a store. - -The report indicated these, all these people were homosexuals as I -believe, or there was an indication of that. - -I have an interview, in answering your question, in Lynn's first, but -this is the only one I have talked personally about it. But the rest of -them I got from reading the FBI and police files. - -Senator COOPER. Lynn? - -Mr. WADE. I believe that is his first name, and he is a lawyer there. - -Senator COOPER. He is the lawyer? - -Mr. WADE. That is the lawyer I am thinking about, I am trying to think -of his name while I sit here. - -Senator COOPER. Have you ever talked to anyone or has anyone ever -talked to you or in your presence about Oswald and named any other -person, other than Ruby, who they claimed were connected with Oswald in -the assassination of President Kennedy? - -Mr. WADE. Senator, I don't believe anyone has talked to me. I have -received, I guess 5,000 letters about this thing from all over the -country, which I have down there. I remember somebody wrote me from -West Virginia and said that in West Virginia that Oswald was in a used -car business and Ruby was across the street from him. - -Well, I furnished this information to the investigative agencies but -as far as personally, I don't know of any. I have had a lot of letters -that said they were connected but not based on anything. - -Senator COOPER. But leave Ruby out now for a moment, did anyone ever -tell you that Oswald was connected with persons other than Ruby in the -assassination of President Kennedy? - -Have you heard the names of any other persons who it is claimed had -something to do with the assassination of President Kennedy? - -Mr. WADE. I don't know of any names. Of course, like I said there -was the head of the Fair Play for Cuba, whatever his name was, was -mentioned. Everything I know on that score was from the police. When I -went up there Friday night and again I believe it was Saturday night -or Sunday, they told me that they just talked like he was the biggest -Communist, they had all kinds of evidence that he was a Communist, and -that he was working with other people. - -I believe Captain Fritz told me once that he showed at the time that -Oswald bristled most was when they would talk about Castro. Apparently -he was more friendly to Castro than he was for instance to Khrushchev, -I am using those in broad terms. - -Senator COOPER. Of course, once Oswald was killed, then your duties -were connected with the prosecution of Ruby. - -Mr. WADE. Yes, sir. - -Senator COOPER. And there wasn't any occasion for you then to search -out---- - -Mr. WADE. I had this, Senator. - -Senator COOPER. Other persons. - -Mr. WADE. I had this, Senator, I had this, when he was killed and they -tried to give me the files. I told them no, to give them to the FBI -because we couldn't try him, and I went to work on Ruby and actually -wouldn't know it. - -From what I picked up it appeared to me there was no question that he -received his inspiration on this and maybe other help from somewhere. - -Senator COOPER. That is what I am driving at here. You know there have -been statements made that other persons could have been connected with -Oswald in the assassination of President Kennedy. - -Do you have any facts to give the Commission which would bear upon that -question that any person other than Oswald was in any way connected -with the assassination of President Kennedy? - -Mr. WADE. I have no facts that I can give you on it. It is one of these -things, and the reason I gave you what my opinion on the thing was, I -have read what the U.S. World News and Report said the Commission is -going to say, and also this deal out in Japan, you know, where they -said that he was not instantaneous, impulsive, I believe, killer of the -President, which sounded silly to me. - -I mean he planned the thing. He practiced shooting, and he had his -inspiration from somebody else. Whether he had a--was working with -someone, I don't know. I never did know, it was rumored all over town -that they had an airplane there to carry him out of town. I am sure you -all have checked into that but I never know whether they did or not. - -There seemed to have been something misfired in the thing if there was -anybody tried to get it. I don't think there was anybody with him in -the shooting but what you are getting at is if there was anyone back of -him. - -I always felt that the minimum was an inspiration from some cause, and -the maximum was actual pay, but like you asked for evidence, I don't -have any. - -Senator COOPER. Did you ever hear about any evidence that there was an -airplane stationed any place there? - -Mr. WADE. They ran it in the newspapers that an airplane was supposedly -to pick him up but nobody ever found the airplane, so far as I know. -You have had every kind of rumor, this has been a thing that has been, -that the press has been most inaccurate in a lot of things they have -reported, and it is because of the pressure from their offices to get a -Ruby story. - -We have reporters down there coming down and said, "My office said to -write something on Ruby today, what are we going to write." - -And it has been so very irresponsible. - -Like I said, I have no evidence and the only thing where I get my -impression is reading and hearing people talking but I haven't actually -figured it wasn't any of my business on Oswald, that I had a problem, -a big one of trying Ruby and I have concentrated all of my efforts on -that and when we had anybody of this nature we would refer them to the -FBI or some other agency. - -Senator COOPER. Thank you. - -Mr. DULLES. You referred, Mr. Wade, to some testimony or some evidence -that Oswald was at one time in the Carousel when Ruby was there. - -Was that solely from this lawyer whose testimony you have mentioned? - -Mr. WADE. The only one of my personal knowledge that I talked with -was from the lawyer. He told me he was there with a certain girl, a -stripper, and Ruby and Oswald were in an adjoining booth. There is -lots of other people, I think your master of ceremonies, they had him -on television and said he had seen them there but later on said he -hadn't when they got to interviewing him. But my own personal knowledge -that you are all interested in was that one man who told me that. - -Mr. RANKIN. Was there anyone either from the State or Federal -Government that urged you not to state a crime of international -conspiracy if you found one was present? - -Mr. WADE. No; not in that light. It is like I mentioned to you what -Mr. Carr and Mr. Sanders both inquired, said they had heard on the -radio about this or talked with someone in Washington about it, and -I told them right off that whether it was so or not doesn't make any -difference. It wouldn't be alleged. I mean if I had known he was a -Communist I wouldn't have alleged it. I mean, suppose I knew he was a -Communist, and signed a statement he was a Communist. That was a time -when the press blew up when they had nothing else to talk about at the -time, actually. - -The answer to your question is "No." - -Mr. RANKIN. Was any statement made by you as to whether or not there -was any international conspiracy, conspiracy with Oswald about the -assassination? - -Mr. WADE. No, sir; I don't think there was. I think in one of those -interviews you will find that I said they found some literature or -something from the Fair Play for Cuba at his home, something to that -effect. If I did anything, that was all that was said, in one of those -interviews. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did anybody ask you to say anything one way or another -about that? - -Mr. WADE. If they did I don't remember it. I am sure they asked that, -but I am talking about, I mean in all these interviews, that was the -thing where they were trying to prove a connection or something, you -know, and I told them I knew nothing about it. - -Mr. RANKIN. But no officials asked you to say anything about it -publicly or otherwise? - -Mr. WADE. No, sir; not that I recall. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did anybody ask you at any time not to say that a foreign -government was involved if you found it was or anything about that? - -Mr. WADE. Your FBI man may have. I don't know. I talked to him two or -three times. I wish I could think of his name because I don't think I -ever met him. He was an inspector out of Washington. - -Mr. DULLES. He is not our FBI man, he is the FBI. We are an independent -commission. - -Mr. WADE. I see. But he had talked with me something, I think his -conversation, as I recall, largely dealt with the giving out of -information. He was concerned about it and so was I, and where we had -the longest conversation was, I will run through Sunday, and get me -up to it real fast because I talked to him Sunday night. We haven't -covered one of my television interviews. - -After I went down to the police station and I will take this real fast -if it is all right with you all, they told me that Oswald had been shot -and I was there in the Chief's office when he died, when Oswald died -and the Chief says I have got to go out here and announce it. - -So as he went out for a press conference, I went down the back door, -went home and went to bed because I was tired and disappointed actually -because we got even interested in trying Oswald, and I didn't mean to -have anything else further to say. - -I woke up about 5 o'clock and a national commentator was giving the -Dallas police hell, me hell, and just about everybody hell, and saying -that I had said that the case, there would be nothing further on the -case, it would be closed, in which I had never even had a television -interview, I don't know where they got it. - -Somebody might have said that. I don't know but it wasn't me because I -hadn't talked to anybody. - -And then I went out to dinner and got to thinking, I said, well now, -the Dallas police did have a breakdown in security here, and they -are taking a beating and I am taking a beating, but they did have -the right man according to my thinking, so I went down to the police -station and got all the brass in there but Chief Curry and I said this -stuff, people are saying on there you had the wrong man and you all -were the one who killed him or let him out here to have him killed -intentionally, I said somebody ought to go out in television and lay -out the evidence that you had on Oswald, and tell them everything. - -It had been most of it laid out but not in chronological order. - -Mr. RANKIN. When was this now? - -Mr. WADE. This was 8 o'clock roughly on the 24th. Sunday night. I sat -down with Captain Fritz and took a pencil and pad and listed about -seven pieces of evidence from my own knowledge and I was going to write -it down. They got hold of Chief Curry and he said no, that he had told -this inspector of the FBI that there would be nothing further said -about it. - -I asked Chief Batchelor and Lumpkin, they were all there, I said you -all are the ones who know something about it, I said if you have at -least got the right man in my opinion the American people ought to know. - -This is evidence you can't use actually, because he is dead. You can't -try him. And the upshot of that was the police wouldn't say a word and -refused actually to furnish me any more of the details on this. - -I mean what the seven points. I went on out there in from front of -the cameras and ran them through those points. Actually my purpose -in it was, good or bad was, because the Dallas police were taking a -beating because they had solved the crime and had good evidence and -I told them it was good but I did leave out some things and I was -a little inaccurate in one or two things but it was because of the -communications with the police. - -I didn't have the map, incidentally. I wanted the map at that time but -forgot all about it, and I ran through just what I knew, which probably -was worse than nothing. - -It probably would have been better off without giving anything, because -we didn't give what all we had. - -Mr. DULLES. Do you remember the elements of inaccuracy that got into -this statement of yours? - -Mr. WADE. I think I told them about the palmprint on the bottom of the -gun, that Lane has made a great issue of and I still think I was right -on it but he has made an issue. I think Oswald snapped the pistol over -there in the jail or at least in the theater where they arrested him. -There was a question of whether the gun had been snapped or not and I -was told it was, you all may have seen the gun; I never have seen the -gun. You had--I might have at that stage said what bullets are supposed -to hit whom. That might have been somewhat inaccurate then but that is -all I can think of. - -I don't think there is any basic thing. But my purpose in that, and I -know the minute I got off that television, inspection called me and -said please say nothing further about this case. - -Well, you see, at that stage---- - -Mr. DULLES. Who was it that called you? - -Mr. WADE. The inspector at FBI called me in the police station. He -was the one the police had talked to. He was the man from Dallas down -there. It wasn't Shanklin, Shanklin was in charge of the office. - -But I told him what my purpose was but apparently someone told him. I -gathered since he had delivered a message, apparently someone had told -him to have me quit talking about it. But my purpose on that was, I -never did think that the people or the television were giving the right -facts on the thing and they were making believe that probably they -didn't have the right one, that the Dallas police had him in there to -kill him, they even had commentators saying practically that, don't you -know. - -So, I did that entirely--not anything for me. You may think I wanted to -be on television. I didn't care a thing about being because I don't run -for office in New York and Washington and other places, but I thought -the police needed, because their morale was awfully low and they were -at fault in Ruby killing him. - -There was undoubtedly a breakdown on security there in the basement. - -Mr. RANKIN. On the seven points were any of them that were new that -hadn't already been told to the public? - -Mr. WADE. To tell you the truth, I don't know. I think there were some -of them that hadn't been but I think most of them had. But I couldn't -see at this stage the evidence on this thing, nobody, the situation -where you had an assassination, and a dead person and another case -pending, and it was against my interest actually, to trying Ruby, it -would be a whole lot better trying Ruby if he killed the wrong man -than if he killed the assassin of the President, but I was trying to -establish that this was the assassin of the President. - -And I didn't give all the evidence, and I don't know whether there was -anything new or not because I didn't see much of television during all -this time. I don't actually know everything that was given out, and -there was so much in the papers that I didn't have time to read them, -so I didn't know for sure what all the police had given out. - -Senator COOPER. Substantially then, you were laying out to the public -the facts which had led you to issue a warrant for Oswald as the killer -of President Kennedy? - -Mr. WADE. That was the purpose of that interview. - -You also have to--I don't know where you gentlemen were, but you have -to get a picture of what was going on. You had, of course, there in -Dallas, you had threats on people's lives everywhere. - -As a matter of fact, it ran over the radio that I had been -assassinated, for 2 hours, on Monday morning. I wasn't listening to the -radio. My wife called me up--called me up and I denied it. [Laughter.] - -Mr. WADE. But you had lots of things of that kind. And I thought you -needed some type of, somebody--and your whole thing was wrong with this -whole deal, you had no one in charge of the thing. You had the police, -the FBI, the Secret Service, the Department of Justice, my Department, -Waggoner Carr's department, but no one had any say to offer the rest of -them. - -Mr. RANKIN. Tell us how that affected it. You had the jurisdiction of -the crime itself. - -Mr. WADE. Of the trial of the case. - -Mr. RANKIN. And the police department, what jurisdiction did they have? - -Mr. WADE. They had the jurisdiction, the primary responsibility for the -investigation of the assassination, and--they had the primary job of -finding out who did it and getting the evidence. They were assisted, -the Secret Service, of course, had the job of protecting the President. -The FBI, they have criminal, pretty general, investigation, I am not -sure, but they were in on it, they were all there, and assisting. It -was a deal where nobody had any actual control over another person. - -Mr. RANKIN. Had the State authorities any jurisdiction or effect on the -operation? - -Mr. WADE. You mean the State? - -Mr. RANKIN. Of Texas. - -Mr. WADE. They actually had none. They had no authority. The Governor -has no authority in a situation like this nor the attorney general -other than in a vague sort of way, as the police, I guess they had -the police powers to some extent of maintaining order but you didn't -need the National Guard or anything. I mean this was more dealing with -a situation of information. I think this situation is true in many -States, in practically all of them. - -Mr. RANKIN. Was that confusing, did that make it harder to try to solve -the crime and handle the problems? - -Mr. WADE. It did; very much so. Your press was the most confusing -thing. I mean you couldn't get in the police station. I mean I just -barely could get into the police station myself for stomping over the -press and you had a lot of reporters, not like the reporters we usually -deal with down there. I mean we don't have trouble usually with the -local press, people we pretty well know. - -We would tell them what is going on, and they will go on, but these -people just followed everybody everywhere they went, and they were -throwing policemen on the corner, if he made a statement about he saw -someone running that way dressed maybe like the killer--they ran all -that on. They were just running everybody. There was no control over -your public media. It made it worse since all television networks were -on the assassination all--24 hours, I mean all day. And there was no -central thing from--there was no central person who had any control -of handling the thing that information was given out. You see they -interviewed some of your patrolmen who were giving out evidence, you -know, some of your foot patrolmen on the corner, they were interviewing -anybody. - -Mr. RANKIN. Would it help or hinder the handling of such a crime of the -killing of the President if it was a Federal crime, in your opinion? - -Mr. WADE. Well, offhand, I think probably it would, but---- - -Mr. RANKIN. It would help? - -Mr. WADE. I think it would help, but you are going to have the same -situation. I am thinking if you had, if it is a Federal crime, for -instance, it is still murder in Texas. If Captain Fritz and the Dallas -police had arrested this man, the FBI wouldn't have had him. I don't -care if it was a Federal crime. We have bank robberies where there is -joint jurisdiction. The one that gets him, if it is the State police or -the city police gets them, they file with me and if the FBI gets them -they file with the Federal. - -Mr. RANKIN. You need more control over the police investigation in -order to carry out your duties, is that---- - -Mr. WADE. Of course; my idea if you had it to do over, it is easy to -do that, but I think you need someone where all the information is -channeled through one person. If anything is given out and getting an -intelligent person, not just a police officer, you know. Now, your -city manager of Dallas is a newspaper man, Elgin Crull, he would have -been an ideal person and he was there but I don't think he ever said -anything in any way. He was there in the middle of all that thing. - -Mr. RANKIN. Is the lawyer that you referred to in answer to Senator -Cooper's questions Carroll Jarnegan? - -Mr. WADE. Carroll Jarnegan is his name; yes, sir. Let me mention -another thing for the record here. I don't know whether it is -mentioned. Saturday, most of my day was spent in talking to Dean R. G. -Storey, and the dean of the Harvard Law School, raising, wondering what -the situation was with reference to attorneys for Oswald. - -Mr. RANKIN. What Saturday are you talking about? - -Mr. WADE. Saturday the 23d, 1963; November 23. I told them that, all -of them, we had calls from various people, and most of them was from -people here in the East calling lawyers there in Dallas rather than me, -and them calling me. - -Mr. RANKIN. What were they saying to you about that? - -Mr. WADE. Well, they were very upset, one, in looking at American -justice where the man didn't have an attorney, as apparently, and two, -that too much information was being given to the press too, by the -police and by me, some of them had said, and that is what prompted me -probably to talk to Chief Curry about the thing, because I had received -some of those calls. - -I told them they ought to appoint the president of the bar association -and the president of the Criminal Bar Association to represent him. - -Mr. RANKIN. Who did you tell that to? - -Mr. WADE. Told that to Mr. Paul Carrington and also to Mr. Storey, I -believe. - -I believe they are the two that discussed it more at length with me. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you know whether anything was done about that? - -Mr. WADE. Yes. - -Mr. RANKIN. What? - -Mr. WADE. They got ahold of Louis Nichols who is the president of -the Dallas Bar Association. They got ahold of the president of the -Criminal Bar Association, but they had started a Tippit fund in the -meantime, and practically every lawyer was scared they were going to be -appointed, you know, and they had gone and subscribed to that fund so -they were having much trouble getting a lawyer appointed. - -Now, I must go a little further and tell you that under Texas law that -is an improper time to appoint them. The only one who can actually -appoint him is the judge after indictment under the Texas law, no one -else has really authority. - -Louis Nichols, I talked to him, the president of the bar, and he was -trying to get some criminal lawyer to go down there with him, and I -said, "Go down there yourself and talk to him because they are raising -just so much cain about it and see what they want and tell him you will -get him a lawyer." - -Senator COOPER. You are speaking now about a lawyer for Oswald? - -Mr. WADE. Yes; for Oswald. - -This was around noon or some time on Saturday, noon, early afternoon. -This went on all day. He called me back and said, "I have talked to -him and told him I would get him a lawyer, that I would represent him -or get him a lawyer." Louis Nichols is a civil lawyer, not actually a -criminal lawyer. - -He says, "He doesn't want but one lawyer, John Abt, in New York." - -Mr. RANKIN. Who is he? - -Mr. WADE. He is an attorney in New York. - -Mr. RANKIN. You said he didn't want any attorney? - -Mr. WADE. Lee Harvey Oswald told Nichols and Nichols told me this. He -said that. Nichols then said he told him, along with the police they -would try to get ahold of Mr. Abt, which they did. I think, I think -maybe the press found him before the lawyers found him. But he says -something that he didn't have time or something, as I understand it. -This was all reported in the press. He had said the second person he -wanted, Lee Harvey Oswald told Nichols the second person he wanted, was -some lawyer out in Chicago with the American Civil Liberties Union, his -name I don't know what it was, but Nichols would know. - -He said, "If I can't get either one of those I will help get a local -lawyer," because that was all done Saturday, with reference to his -obtaining a lawyer. - -I wanted to get that because I think you probably knew it and get it in -the record anyhow. - -Mr. RANKIN. Now going back to this telephone conversation with Mr. Carr -that you referred to, do you remember anything else that Mr. Carr said -to you at that time? - -Mr. WADE. I don't actually even remember, you know, he said that he had -had a call from Washington, I don't actually remember anything about -that. I remember he said that about this charge that this is going. -"This would be a bad situation, if you allege it as part of a Russian, -the Russian conspiracy, and it may affect your international relations, -a lot of things, of the country," and I said it was silly because I -don't know where the rumor started but I will see even if it was so we -could prove it, I wouldn't allege it. Isn't that about it, the way you -recall it, Mr. Carr? - -Senator COOPER. We will call him in a minute. - -Mr. WADE. O.K. - -Mr. RANKIN. Was he during that conversation saying anything to you -about not alleging it if it were true? - -Mr. WADE. No, sir; it was a question of, he had heard we were going to -allege it and he asked me about it and I said it is silly. I had heard -something, I think, about it, about the same time. - -And to no one, if it was part of it, no one said they necessarily -wanted to hush the thing up, but it was a situation where the minute -they mentioned what their problem was, it sounded silly to me, I said -whether he is a member of the Communist Party or not is not important -in this charge. - -Senator COOPER. Was there any official, anyone on your staff or any -persons charged with law enforcement in Dallas, or any U.S. district -attorney in Dallas or anyone connected with his office, to your -knowledge ever suggest that there should be a charge of conspiracy? - -Mr. WADE. None to my knowledge. - -Now, I will say in some of these conversations, like I said, I don't -know whether it was with Waggoner Carr or Barefoot Sanders, they said, -one said, "Well, David Johnston, the J. P. has said this," and the -other one has said, "Bill Alexander, one of your assistants who was up -at the police department said it." - -I asked them both about it and they both denied it. - -Senator COOPER. Did anyone ever say to you in the event there was a -charge of conspiracy who would be named other than Oswald? - -Mr. WADE. No; there is no other names, there is no other name that -I know of that has ever been mentioned to me as being part of the -conspiracy. - -The question we are talking about here, if I understand it, being that -Oswald, as a part of an international conspiracy, did murder John -Fitzgerald Kennedy. And there is no other names of co-conspirators, we -have had lots of leads run down upon it. Somebody at the penitentiary -down there, a colored person, at least the word to us, that he had told -the guard he had hauled Oswald away from there, you all probably got -this, but we interviewed him down there. - -He was just talking and wanting to come back to Dallas. But there had -been lots of things of that kind but to my knowledge none of them have -actually been proven out. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Wade, I don't think you have quite finished the--all of -your--hour-by-hour description of what happened up through the killing -of Mr. Oswald. - -Mr. WADE. I thought I had hit it. The only thing I can't remember now -is the Saturday night. - -It seemed like I was down at the police station Saturday night. Why I -don't know and maybe for a short while and don't recall everything that -happened. That was Saturday, 23d of November, and there is nothing, the -charge had already been taken, and I think probably I was on my way -home and just stopped by to see what was going on. - -At that time there wasn't anything going on and I went home. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you do anything more about the press and TV and radio -people crowding into the police station than you have already described? - -Mr. WADE. No; you see--I have been in that building probably once every -2 years. - -It is the other end of town from my building. I never go up there -and I don't think it is my business what goes on up there. Maybe it -should be, but I have never been considering it. I think I have enough -problems down at my end of the street. - -Mr. RANKIN. In any event you didn't do anything. - -Mr. WADE. I didn't tell them anything, I could see the confusion they -were getting into but I don't know of anything that I told about, but -what if I did, I had no control over it. It was one of those things I -just figured I was the one who didn't have the say in it. - -Mr. RANKIN. What did you do on Sunday, the 25th? - -Mr. WADE. Well, went to church. - -Mr. RANKIN. The 24th. - -Mr. WADE. I went to church, my family and I went to Dr. W. J. Martin's -nondenominational church. It has 27 different denominations, very -bright fellow, if you are in Dallas you ought to go and hear him. - -And as I walked out somebody said they shot Oswald. So I took--turned -on the radio and took my wife and kids home, and went down to the -police station. - -There were still fragments of the story coming in, and we would still -get every kind of story out of them, and we got down there at I guess -1:30. He died and then like I said, I think all I told the press, they -asked me as I left there, a few of them what we would do on Ruby and I -said we would ask the death penalty on him, and then I left and I went -home and then I followed it that night and giving them what evidence I -had. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you have anything to do with a lawyer by the name of -Tom Howard in connection with that? - -Mr. WADE. No, sir; Tom Howard had filed some kind of writ of habeas -corpus, assault to murder, and I never did see him. I saw Bob Stinson, -another lawyer on a corner and he said he and Robey were going to -represent him, which, I don't think they did, but they said they were -and so I went on home, and then when he died, we had a murder case, and -we took it to the grand jury the next morning, I believe, on Monday -morning and indicted him, turned it into Judge Joe Brown's court and I -was there, and as the grand jury walked in he said, "When are you going -to hear Ruby?" - -And I said, "I already have got the indictment here," and I said, then -I went right back and asked the judge to transfer it over to Judge -Henry King's court or Frank Wilson's court. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you know what happened to that habeas corpus of Tom -Howard's? - -Mr. WADE. No. - -Mr. RANKIN. You didn't have anything to do with it? - -Mr. WADE. I understand from hearsay it disappeared or somewhere down -there but we don't have anything to do with writs. But they don't come -through our office. You see that is directed by the judge. I heard or -at least Decker or somebody told me they never could find the writ but -there was some writ for assault to murder originally issued. - -And then, of course, after he died and the murder charge was filed, -well, that would actually be out of date. - -Senator COOPER. Was it a writ of habeas corpus to bring Oswald before a -court? - -Mr. WADE. No. Jack Ruby. - -Senator COOPER. Jack Ruby. - -Mr. WADE. It was actually, they have two kinds of writs, one of them is -where they set a bond on it and another one is what they have called a -dry writ which says, "You file on him or bring him before me at such -and such a time." - -Which one it was I don't know. As a matter of fact, I thought there -was a bond set on it, but I told the chief, I said, "You can hold him, -we don't want to release him until you know whether the person dies or -not because then he wouldn't be a bailable case," assault to murder is -bailable. - -I never saw the writ or anything. I just heard somebody say there is a -writ on him. - -(At this point, Chairman Warren entered the hearing room.) - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you ever help Ruby about any of his troubles of any -kind? - -Mr. WADE. Not that I know of. - -Mr. RANKIN. Prior to this occasion? - -Mr. WADE. No; I think we have had him for a liquor violation or -something, but if we have--like I say, I never knew him. I think that -they have had some charges against him. - -As a matter of fact, they had two pistol charges against him but I -don't think they ever reached my office. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you know what charges they were about pistols? - -Mr. WADE. Carrying a concealed weapon and if I understand the record I -think we checked it out and they dismissed them up in the police force. - -There was one liquor case that was dismissed in my office by an -assistant who is no longer there which I have read the reports on and -don't have any recollection of it either way. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you know Eva Grant? - -Mr. WADE. No, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. Ruby's sister. Do you know Sam Ruby? - -Mr. WADE. I knew none of them, none of the Ruby family, and didn't know -Jack Ruby. I think he claims that he had known me or something or other -but if he had, it is one of those things where you see somebody and I -didn't know his name or anything when I saw him that night or didn't -know who he was. I thought he was a member of the press, actually. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did it come to your attention that there was some claim -that Oswald was an agent of one of the intelligence agencies of -Government? - -Mr. WADE. I heard that talk down there. It was talk some---- - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you know who was talking that? - -Mr. WADE. I don't know. I have been up here once before, and some of -the press were--I don't remember, some of the press mentioned that -they had two voucher numbers in his book there that indicated he was -working for the FBI or the CIA. I know nothing about them, don't think -anybody in my office does. I think maybe Alexander mentioned it some, -but Alexander is not a great lover of the FBI. They fuss all the time -openly, so I don't know. I know nothing about it myself because I never -have seen the book and I don't know whether they have even got any -numbers in there but they were supposed to have two numbers in there as -a voucher number of $200 from some Government agency but like I say, -supposed to. - -I never saw it and heard it, talk, but I am sure you all know more -about it than I do. - -Mr. DULLES. By voucher you mean an entry or something of that kind, -what kind of a voucher? - -Mr. WADE. I think it was called a voucher number, it was voucher 209, -which doesn't make sense. I believe it was a low number. It doesn't -make sense for a government to have a voucher number that low. - -Mr. RANKIN. What book are you referring to? - -Mr. WADE. The little black book that Oswald had in his possession at -the time he was arrested. - -Mr. RANKIN. That was his memorandum book, in which he had a list of -numbers of various people and addresses and so forth, is that what you -referring to? - -Mr. WADE. Yes; and I never have seen the book myself. As a matter of -fact, I am trying to get some photos of it, trying to but I haven't -gotten them yet. - -Mr. RANKIN. Now what agency was it rumored he was a member of? - -Mr. WADE. It was rumored he worked first for the FBI and then for the -CIA. - -Mr. RANKIN. Is that all you have heard? - -Mr. WADE. As a matter of fact, I don't think I had ever heard that -until Waggoner Carr called me and told me--I don't think I ever heard -that. I did check into it a little, and they were talking it some, and -they have actually written it up in the newspapers by rumors or a story -or two--rumors of the thing. - -Mr. RANKIN. Is that the report by the reporter Hudkins? - -Mr. WADE. I believe it is. On the Houston paper, Hudkins. I believe we -got that introduced in the Ruby trial on the change of venue motion. - -Mr. RANKIN. Is there anything more that you know about that matter? - -Mr. WADE. I know absolutely nothing about it. I might say, I was under -the impression, I think when I talked to you and the Chief Justice -before, that, you see I was in the FBI, and I was under the impression -and I think maybe I told you all that we didn't list our informant -by name. The FBI have been kind enough to send down some of my old -vouchers on paying informants back in, down in South America, and I -see that we did list them by name which I--probably may, if I said -otherwise it was just my recollection on the thing but in that case I -was listing informants from South America that we were paying when I -was there. - -Mr. RANKIN. There was one other report by Goulden, reporter of the -Philadelphia Inquirer. Did that ever come to your attention in regard -to this matter? - -Mr. WADE. No; but I know him. He used to be a reporter in Dallas, but I -don't know what it was, if you will tell me about it. - -Mr. RANKIN. Apparently it was the same thing. - -Mr. WADE. Different angle. - -Mr. RANKIN. From Hudkins' report that had been picked up. - -Mr. WADE. He is more reliable than Hudkins but I know absolutely -nothing about that. Like I say, I have heard rumors and conversation -and I will even put it further, I don't think Alexander knows anything -about it, my assistant, although he doesn't fully admit all that. I -think he would like to talk a little about it but I don't think he -knows anything of his own knowledge. - -Mr. RANKIN. Have you inquired of him? - -Mr. WADE. I have asked him about it and he gives me nothing in the way -of evidence. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you prepare the complaint in regard to Jack Ruby -yourself? - -Mr. WADE. I don't believe I did. I don't believe I had anything to do -with it. If I did, my name will show on it but I don't think I had -anything to do with it. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you give any information to the press about what you -had in regard to that prosecution, and the nature of the evidence? - -Mr. WADE. No; not that I know of. Of course, they all saw it on -television, you know. We have got in--to bring you through the whole -story, I said practically nothing about this thing for about 3 weeks or -a month, but we had a lawyer on the other side who came into town and -every time he was met at the airport he would make statements. - -Mr. RANKIN. Who was that? - -Mr. WADE. Mr. Melvin Belli, and he had his psychiatrist on the -television, all his witnesses, said what he was going to prove and it -got to a situation where I had to do a little talking in self-defense, -and so we did later on have some statements more or less in answer to -his. It was entirely too much trying of that in the newspapers but a -situation where we couldn't let his psychiatrist go on there and prove -he had been insane on the jury without at least our saying we had some -evidence that he was sane. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you have anything to do with the preparation of the -case for trial? - -Mr. WADE. Yes, to some extent. You see I had four assistants to assist -me in the trial. - -Mr. RANKIN. Who were they? - -Mr. WADE. Jim Bowie, Frank Watt, and Bill Alexander. I read most of the -reports on it. I mean I had most of what I did was read things on it -because my main job in the trial as we started out was for me to pick -the jury, which I did, I think I have some ability along that line, and -do a great deal of the cross examination and the final argument. That -is what I do in the cases I participate in usually. - -Mr. RANKIN. Yes. - -Mr. WADE. Alexander spent the 2 weeks we were picking a jury in viewing -the witnesses. I never talked to any of the witnesses. After the -first half a day of testimony I was very disappointed in the way the -witnesses were being put on the stand; if this is of interest to you. - -Mr. RANKIN. Tell us what happened. - -Mr WADE. I told him, I said, on this case we are going on this theory, -I want everybody who saw Ruby from the time of the assassination of -President Kennedy down to the time he killed Oswald, I want to prove -where he was every minute of the time that I can and then we will take -it from there and put the films on there and show what happened there -and then afterward. We are going on the theory that he is a glory -seeker and a hero because I was convinced that was the motive of the -killing. - -I put on seven witnesses, and about six of them testified against us, I -think, or made poor witnesses saying if they saw him down in the Dallas -News where he was 2 minutes in a stare that never made any sense. - -Some of them said they thought there was something wrong with him and -none of them were the type of witnesses that I wanted testifying for -the State. - -Mr. RANKIN. Who were they? - -Mr. WADE. Well, you can check the first seven witnesses in the case. -You had three from the Dallas News who testified, and so during that -noon hour, I was convinced, whether right or wrong that Alexander had -been more interested in talking to the press. - -In my office our biggest problem was keeping the press out of the -office, and so I just would have to bar them from my office, I mean -personal property. He wouldn't do it. He liked to talk to them. - -So, I said, "Get all these witnesses in during the noon hour and let me -talk to them." - -I put all the witnesses on the next morning. I talked to all the -officers, I talked to Officers Dean, McMillon, Archer, King never had -talked with them about the case before and I talked with them then and -I put all of them on next morning. - -Mr. RANKIN. Tell us what starting with--which one did you talk to -first, Archer, Dean, or McMillon. - -Mr. WADE. I think I talked to all of them at first in a body. I talked -to---- - -Mr. RANKIN. I see. - -Mr. WADE. I had them all in there and said "Now what do you know about -the case?" because a lot of them I didn't know what they knew. - -Mr. RANKIN. What did they say? - -Mr. WADE. As a matter of fact, I wasn't familiar with Dean's testimony -until he told me right there a day before he testified. Then he showed -me the memorandum that he had made on the thing. I talked with him -there and I put Archer on the next morning and McMillon on, who stayed -all day. They cross-examined him from 11:30 until 5:30. Then I put King -on, and then Dean, I believe the next morning, and we rested. But they -told me just what they testified to in the trial which I don't know -whether I can give all of it but I can tell you roughly that McMillon -and Archer were partners and heard Ruby say some things, "I hope I -killed the sonofabitch." - -Mr. RANKIN. When? - -Mr. WADE. Within about a few seconds after the killing and then -upstairs then, "I meant to shoot three times but you all got me before -I did." - -Incidentally, you may not know it but their psychiatrist corroborated -that statement. - -Mr. RANKIN. Who was that? - -Mr. WADE. Dr. Guttmacher on cross-examination. We asked Dr. Guttmacher, -"Well, didn't Ruby tell you that he meant to shoot three times?" - -He said, "Yes; and he told me that." - -He said, "One time he told me that." He also said at one time he told -him otherwise but he corroborated that portion of it. Then it seemed -like there was something else said. Archer said to him as he got up in -the jail, "I believe he is going to die, Jack." I may be getting these -wrong, but they are roughly--he said something about, "You fellows -couldn't do it," or talking about the police, and, I believe that was -Archer and McMillon. - -Maybe you all being lawyers, in Texas this is not admissible unless -it is part of the res gestae. Mr. Belli sent into McMillon all -conversations in the jail that happened 4 hours later. - -Under our law if one side goes into a conversation we can bring out -anything in the conversation, the rest of the conversation. That is a -rule of law in Texas, I don't know whether it is that way everywhere -else, and so that was the theory that made Dean's testimony admissible -because had been in the jail--time varies from 20 minutes to an hour, -depending on who you are listening to. - -Senator COOPER. I have to go to a quorum call. - -(At this point, Senator Cooper left the hearing room.) - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Wade, could you tell us a little more clearly what was -involved in regard to this testimony? Did the defense start introducing -testimony concerning these conversations, is that what you are telling -us? - -Mr. WADE. The defense cross-examined McMillon--you see McMillon and -Archer stayed with Ruby until 4 o'clock that afternoon when he was -turned over to Captain Fritz or roughly. I am giving a rough hour of 4 -o'clock. - -Mr. RANKIN. Where did they stay with him? - -Mr. WADE. In the jail. They were--I don't say both of them were there -but they were assigned there and another person. The three of them or -two of them were there at all times, along with your jailers, they were -inside the jail. - -During this time he went into conversations, for instance he said, -"Didn't I tell you that he left his dog out in the car?" He said, "Yes, -they did," but this is something that happened an hour and a half after -they had been in jail. - -Mr. RANKIN. By "he" there you mean Ruby? - -Mr. WADE. Ruby. - -And they said also, "Didn't he tell you about going to the Western -Union," and he said, "Weren't you there when Sorrels and Dean came up -there, and what was the first thing that Sorrels asked him." - -Mr. RANKIN. Did they say when that was? - -Mr. WADE. Well, you are going to find your time varies from 20 minutes -to an hour, depending on whether it is a defense theory or our theory, -but---- - -Mr. RANKIN. After what? - -Mr. WADE. After the killing of Oswald. - -Mr. RANKIN. Yes. - -Mr. WADE. I think Dean, I would rather you get the record, and you can -get it accurate, but I think he said it was some time before 20 minutes -to 12 or some time before 12. Well, the killing happened at 11:21, I -think. That seems to be the best time, 11:21. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did they describe what the conversation was with Ruby when -Sorrels and Dean were there? - -Mr. WADE. They told, if I recall, what Sorrels asked him and he asked -him "What did you do it for, Jack?" or something; they knew that part -of it but they weren't present during that conversation between--they -were in the room but I may say not within hearing distance. They heard -part of what was said but not all of the conversation. - -Mr. RANKIN. By "they" who do you mean? - -Mr. WADE. I am talking about McMillon and Archer. - -Mr. RANKIN. What did they hear? - -Mr. WADE. Well, that is all I know that was testified to. Now, whether -they heard anything else I don't know. But that is all I know, the -beginning of the conversation. - -They had heard previous to this coming up there the conversation about -Jack, "I think he is going to die," and Jack answered some question, I -believe he said, "You couldn't do it, somebody had to," or something -like that. Jack Ruby, I am referring to. - -Mr. RANKIN. Where did that occur? - -Mr. WADE. That occurred as they arrived on the floor where the jail is, -the fifth floor, I believe, of the jail. - -Mr. RANKIN. Then what else could they testify to? - -Mr. WADE. That was about all we used them for, actually, that was -the last that we put on, but they asked them some questions of what -happened. Didn't he tell Captain Fritz something at 4 o'clock that -afternoon, but our testimony from them actually that amounted to -anything quit when they came on to the floor there of the jail. That is -McMillon and Archer. - -Shortly thereafter, Dean's testimony came on and only--I am kind of -anticipating your questions on this. - -Mr. RANKIN. Where was Dean then? - -Mr. WADE. They were in the jail. Dean---- - -Mr. RANKIN. Who else? - -Mr. WADE. Sorrels, Forest Sorrels. I am not testifying as a fact but -this was all told to me, of course, by Dean and Sorrels. - -Mr. RANKIN. Yes. - -Mr. WADE. The following day during the noon hour I found for the first -time that Sorrels was present in the jail. I told the sheriff there I -would like to talk to Sorrels and he came down there and he and Dean -and I talked in my office. - -Mr. RANKIN. That is the following day? - -Mr. WADE. That is Thursday before we rested the case on Friday. - -Mr. RANKIN. Will you tell us the approximate date that you talked to -him? - -Mr. WADE. It seems like we started on the 17th, and this was 2 weeks---- - -Mr. RANKIN. 17th of what month? - -Mr. WADE. Of February. - -Maybe we started on the 10th, because they ended on the 14th, 17th to -the 14th, I would say this was around the 6th of March roughly, a day -or two either way. - -I sat down there to talk to Dean and Sorrels because we was going to -put--and Sorrels showed me a copy of his report made on that incident -which I didn't keep a copy but I am sure you all have a copy of it or -it will be available to you. - -I read it over, and essentially from what Dean said, and him were the -same with other than the, I think the only variance was the part which -was strong testimony where Dean said that Ruby said, "The first time I -thought of killing him was Friday night or thought about killing him -was Friday night in the lineup." - -Mr. RANKIN. Sorrels didn't have that in his statement, did he? - -Mr. WADE. He didn't have that in his statement, and I, to go back a -little bit, I asked Sorrels how he got up in the jail and he said he -didn't know, and he said he didn't actually know Dean there sitting in -my office. - -I think he finally decided Dean was the one but he didn't know him. I -think it is pretty obvious that Dean, because they went in an unusual -entrance to the jail from the third floor, from the chief's office, and -he says there are two guards standing on each side of him which none of -the others corroborate, unless they are talking about jail guards in -the building, but there was no police in uniform supposed to be up on -that floor but Sorrels said that he saw two police guards on each side -of him. - -But I asked Sorrels, I said, "How can you account for it?" I had -already talked to Dean. I said, "I am getting ready to put him on the -stand." - -I said, "How are you going to--what are you going to say if you go on -the stand on this?" - -He said, "Well, I called my office in Washington and they wanted me -to find out two things: One, whether there was any connection between -Oswald and Ruby from Ruby, and two, whether Ruby had any confederates -or co-conspirators." - -He said, "Those were the two things I went to find out and I dwelled on -those entirely." - -He said, "These other officers were there and when I left they were -still questioning," and he said, "I couldn't say whether that happened, -I don't remember hearing it, I just can't say that I heard it," and so -the defense lawyers talked to Sorrels that night about testifying and -didn't use him. - -Of course, I thought probably they were going to use him on this one -thing, but there were so many other things in the statement that were -the same as what Dean has testified to about, something about being a -hero, Jew hero, or something in the statement, which Sorrels had that -in his statement. - -He had practically everything in the statement, but this is one thing -that he didn't have in there, as I recall. - -I couldn't find it and asked him about it and he said he couldn't say -it. He said there were a lot of things in there but he was interested -in knowing only two things. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you examine Dean's statement in regard to this matter? - -Mr. WADE. Well, I read it there that day. It is a very short one, you -know. Of course, there is more than one statement. - -Mr. RANKIN. Yes; did you look at his prior statements at that time? - -Mr. WADE. I think I had all of his statements. He was in charge -of security in the basement. All statements, this all came out on -cross-examination, dealt entirely with the matter of security, what was -done to secure the basement. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did he say anything in regard to this premeditation in the -prior statement? - -Mr. WADE. I don't think he did, and I don't think he actually said -anything about how Ruby got in in that prior statement. I may be wrong, -I don't remember even going into the conversation with Ruby. - -Mr. RANKIN. What did Dean tell you at the time that you asked him about -the later statement? - -Mr. WADE. He told me that he had been asked to submit a report dealing -with the security of the basement, and that that first report was the -security problem. - -Mr. RANKIN. What did he say about that, the security? - -Mr. WADE. Well, he said that, he told me, that when he heard the shot -that he thought a policeman had shot him because he didn't think there -was anybody else in the basement. He said he thought a policeman had -shot him, just got mad and the cop shot him for killing Officer Tippit. - -I don't know whether that was in the statement or not but he told me -that. I actually read that, that security, we were not too interested -in that because from our point of view, because there is no question -the security wasn't good. Something happened somewhere. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you learn from Dean how Ruby got into the basement? - -Mr. WADE. I learned the way he told him he got in. - -Mr. RANKIN. How was that? - -Mr. WADE. On walking in on Main Street, the ramp down on Main Street. -And I was under the impression he told a lot of other people that. But -if he had been in that basement a long time it would have helped us a -lot to know it. It would have shown more premeditation, but I don't -think he actually had been in long from what I know about the case. - -But Ruby told Dean in his statement that he got in by going to the -Western Union and walking there and the cop was helping a car go -out into it. I don't know whether that is Dean, that is somebody's -statement, that he went in that ramp and was there maybe a minute or -two before they brought him out. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did Dean tell you why he left out of his prior statements -the statement about premeditation or prior thinking about killing -Oswald? - -Mr. WADE. Well, he was cross-examined about that, and told me also -that he wasn't asked about it. That that wasn't part of what his -report concerned. I mean, you have to keep in mind Dean is a uniformed -officer. He is sergeant, had nothing to do with the investigation of -the crime. He just happened to be the one who was sent up there to -show Sorrels how to get in the jail and out, you know. He wasn't an -investigative officer. - -Now, McMillon and Archer are detectives, you know, but he is not. He is -a uniformed man. - -Mr. RANKIN. What did McMillon tell you about his statement? - -Mr. WADE. He just told me what his testimony was. I didn't actually -talk to him over 30 minutes, I don't guess, during the noon hour and -I was talking to all of them. I had the various statements he made, -some of what he said was in the statements and some wasn't, so I don't -remember--but the same story was where he was and what he was supposed -to do and one dealt with security and the other dealt with statement -that he had made. Dean and McMillon and any of them didn't think these -statements were admissible while he was in the jail. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did McMillon make a statement about premeditation? - -Mr. WADE. He had in his statement that he meant to shoot three times, -which was premeditation, but I don't think he thought about it Friday -night. - -Mr. RANKIN. What about Archer, did he have anything in his statement -about Friday night in his prior statements? - -Mr. WADE. No, sir; I don't think he did. He did have about the -intending to shoot three times. - -Mr. RANKIN. When Dean was telling you about this statement about -planning to shoot Oswald on Friday night, was he telling you that Ruby -had told him that? - -Mr. WADE. Yes. - -Mr. RANKIN. He didn't tell that to Sorrels? - -Mr. WADE. I think he said he told it to both of them. I think that the -question on that, he said when he saw the snarl on his face he first -thought about killing him. Now the snarl on his face could have been -Friday night or Saturday night. - -Mr. DULLES. That is on Oswald's face? - -Mr. WADE. On Oswald's face. - -And I think that, I am not sure of this, but I think that Sorrels -remembers saying something about the snarl on his face. But I think the -question was whether they were talking before the time of the shooting -of Oswald or whether they was talking about Friday night and it is -Dean's impression that when he saw the snarl on his face is when he -first thought about killing him. - -I don't think he ever testified he planned to kill him or anything. I -think he said that is the first time he thought about killing him. - -Mr. RANKIN. What I wanted to get clear for the Commission was whether -Ruby was telling this in answer to questions from Dean or in answer to -questions from Sorrels? - -Mr. WADE. I think largely Sorrels. I think at the end Dean asked him -one or two questions, mostly about how he got in, I think. I think that -is what Dean was asking him about. But I think actually that this came -out in the conversation while Sorrels was at least taking the lead in -questioning him. - -And I think, my recollection is at the end, as Sorrels got through and -walked on over to the elevator, he asked him how he got in the jail or -something on that score rather than on this subject. - -Now, Dean is under the impression that all this came out while Sorrels -was there. But I don't think Sorrels, at least, didn't have it in his -notes and I don't think he would say it didn't happen but he didn't -remember it, you know. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you make any further investigation of this addition or -change in the statements of Dean and these other people? - -Mr. WADE. I don't think there is any change in the statement. I think -you are asking a kind of a misleading question. - -I think that first report dealt entirely with the security in the -basement of the thing. - -Mr. RANKIN. You don't think that purported to relate what the -conversation was? - -Mr. WADE. Up in the jail, I don't think, you may have it there, and I -may be wrong. I never questioned him any more because like I said from -the time of the killing of Lee Harvey Oswald I thought that Friday -night was the time, in my own mind, that is what I thought, he had -thought about killing him. I don't say he said he would go arm himself, -but in my own mind I had that feeling all along and I thought it was -the first time he had thought about it, that is where I discounted -all the other theories there was a connection between them because I -saw him there and talked to him, and saw his excited demeanor, and so -you asked me did I question him any more, he finally told me, what I -actually thought were the facts and I do now incidentally. - -Mr. RANKIN. You have already testified that you thought it was Jack -Ruby before you even knew the name. - -Mr. WADE. Well, you may--I may have stressed a little saying thought. -When I was driving down there they said Dallas businessman kills him, -without his name. - -But in my own mind I said it must have been that Jack Ruby that was -down there the night before. I mean I was just talking to myself, there -wasn't nobody there. But like I say, one of those things, I might -be more truthful to say it ran through my mind rather than to say I -thought. - -Mr. DULLES. You didn't say that to your wife? - -Mr. WADE. I didn't say it to a soul. I went down there alone. I took -her home. We don't live four or five blocks and I drove downtown -myself, and it entered my mind and I will say when they announced -it I wasn't too surprised. I mean I had or thought about him as a -possibility. - -Mr. RANKIN. Now, did you get any assistance from the FBI, Secret -Service, and other agencies in the handling of these cases? - -Mr. WADE. Practically none. I never have seen the Secret Service -file. This Sorrels is the only one I talked with and I saw his report -although I never did get a copy of it. The FBI let us examine, I -believe all their files, I am not sure, but we couldn't take possession -of them and we had to send somebody up there to run through them and -dictate on them, and undoubtedly they helped us some in the trial. - -They helped us in this way. If you had a witness on the stand--I was -cross-examining and I would say, well now, you talked to the FBI and he -would say yes, sir, and they really picked up when they knew they had -talked to the FBI and then I would say didn't you tell them this and -they would usually admit it. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you know whether the files of the--of either of -these agencies or both of them were made available to the police in -connection with the two cases? - -Mr. WADE. It is a one-way deal usually with the FBI, you know. They -don't usually tell you anything about their files but I say they did -show us their files on this, and whether they showed them to the police -I have no idea. - -I will say they turned their files to the U.S. attorney and let me send -somebody up there to look at it, 4,500 pages of it. - -But that was about a week before the trial, and during the picking of -the jury when we were still going through them. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you learn anything during your investigation of the -Ruby case about the billfold and the ignition case in the car? - -Mr. WADE. Of Ruby's car? - -Mr. RANKIN. Yes. - -Mr. WADE. No. - -Mr. RANKIN. That didn't come to your attention? - -Mr. WADE. You know they found a lot of stuff in his car and a lot of -stuff on his person. I might say this--there are only two pieces of -evidence found on him I wanted to introduce during the trial and until -this day I never have found either one of them. - -I don't know where they are. The police say they gave them to us, and I -know they didn't. One was the receipt from the Western Union which we -never, can't find the original of that or a copy, which I think you all -have a copy of it. - -The second one was he had in his possession a "Lifeline Deal on -Heroism," telling about everybody had to take things into their own -hands and be a hero. - -We later got a copy of that because the night before the killing he -gave that to the Weird Beard up at KLIF, radio station, and told him -that we had to have some heroes, that was the night before the killing. - -We got a copy of what the article was but one of them, two or three -copies were in his possession but I never could find one to introduce. - -I never did know for sure whether to introduce it because there was a -lot of good American patriotism in the thing and, of course, there is a -lot of other that is complete hogwash, you know, and you don't know how -a jury is going to read part of it and like it and the other part not, -but the title of it was "Heroism" and he talked to the Weird Beard, -this was in testimony, that somebody had to be a hero. - -This was the night before the killing. - -This was in before, this was before the jury, and said he gave him an -article, the title of it was "Heroism," that he never did read. - -Mr. RANKIN. Have you supplied to the Commission all the information -that you have or has come to your attention with regard to the -assassination of the President? - -Mr. WADE. I don't know of anything. As far as I know, I have. I never -did get any information on the assassination of the President. I -requested them to send it up here to begin with. - -Mr. RANKIN. And all you have in regard to Jack Ruby, too. - -Mr. WADE. Everything I know of. - -Like I said I let them take those pictures of the physical evidence -last week, and there are supposed to be some things that I don't know -where it is. It is not in my office, I think the police have lost them -actually or at least they are up there and I don't think anybody is -trying to hide anything but it is just a situation there is so much -that it just got lost in the shuffle. - -Mr. RANKIN. So, far as you know it has all been supplied then? - -Mr. WADE. As far as I know it has. I don't know--I know of nothing in -my files that you don't have, and if there is you sure are entitled to -have it. I am not sure about this letter you mentioned from the lawyer, -the affidavit but I am pretty sure you all have that but I know I got -that during the trial and stuck it in my desk somewhere and I don't -even know where it is but it will be available. - -Mr. RANKIN. In any of these press conferences that you have described -did you ever say anything about the type of rifle that was thought to -be involved in the killing of the President? - -Mr. WADE. I think that was one of the inaccuracies that Sunday night on -the thing. - -Mr. RANKIN. What did you say about it? - -Mr. WADE. I think I said I thought it was a Mauser or I thought--was -one of those things I didn't know what it was. It was an Italian gun, I -think and I really thought I was giving them Italian but Mauser is a -German gun, isn't it? - -But I think you have that--it was a situation, I don't contend I -was right on that because it was a situation somebody asked me that -and that is what I thought I was telling them and I never--all my -information came from the police and actually somebody said originally -it was a Mauser but it turned out it was not. - -Mr. RANKIN. You learned it was not. - -Mr. WADE. Oh, yes; there was no question, I am not contending whatever -I said was so on that because I got it all secondhand from someone else. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you learn that the Mauser-type rifle was similar in the -type of action to the gun that was involved. Did that ever come to your -attention? - -Mr. WADE. I think someone told me that but I am not an expert on guns. -I don't believe I ever saw this gun except from a distance. I think -that Saturday night--Friday night, the 22d when they were taking it to -Washington, I saw somebody take it through homicide and give it to the -FBI and from a distance, I never did examine it. - -Mr. RANKIN. In your testimony you were not entirely sure as to whether -Chief Curry had the gun during the press conference? - -Mr. WADE. No; I am not. I remember seeing some officer wave that gun -around. I was tying it into Chief Curry but it could have been the day -before, because that gun actually should have still been in Washington -on the 23d. - -Mr. RANKIN. Yes. - -Mr. WADE. I am deducting, I think probably that I saw someone else with -the gun, rather than Chief Curry. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you in any press conference describe anything about -paraffin tests? - -Mr. WADE. I told them they gave him paraffin tests. I believe that--I -am not positive what I told them, but what I was told, they found -paraffin on one hand--powder showed positive on one hand. I don't know -which one, but I remember the police told me the paraffin test was -positive on one hand. I don't know which hand. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you indicate what that meant in terms of the effect on -crime or its investigation? - -Mr. WADE. Well, of course, it meant that a man had fired a gun if they -find powder on his hands. I assume I have told them that. I think -that was Sunday night when we were laying out the evidence, so far as -I know. I don't think that was prior to his being killed. It was, it -shouldn't have been done, but I think that was Friday night. - -Mr. RANKIN. That is all I have, Mr. Chief Justice. Mr. Dulles has a few -questions. - -The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Dulles, do you have some questions you would like to -ask Mr. Wade? - -Mr. DULLES. Mr. Chief Justice, Mr. Ford, believing I was the only one -going to be here during the interrogation--during the entire session -this morning--gave me a few questions and asked me to tell you he was -very sorry he could not be here today, but he will be here tomorrow. - -The CHAIRMAN. Yes. - -Mr. DULLES. A great many of these questions have already been covered. -I will just run over them briefly. - -You have testified as to a telephone call that the attorney general -received from Washington, what he told you about that. Did you have -anything further to add to that? - -Mr. WADE. No, sir; I believe we have covered that all right. I -was trying to think. In the course of this thing, during all this -investigation, I have talked to Cliff Carter in the White House, or at -least he used to be, but I don't think we talked then on it. I think it -was later, the next day, and then 2 or 3 days later, as I recall, but -I believe right after they got back to Washington, I got a call from -Cliff Carter wondering whether they had the person, or something, but -Cliff was one of President Johnson's aides. - -Mr. DULLES. Yes. - -Mr. WADE. And I have talked with him later, I think, on, I don't know, -I don't think it concerned any of these problems, but I am just talking -out loud with you, but we have covered that fully and, I believe, the -attorney general told you that he had talked to somebody in the White -House about it and called me, I think that is where he told me where he -had---- - -Mr. DULLES. There were no other messages other than these messages that -you mentioned with Cliff Carter, is that right? - -Mr. WADE. Yes; I talked to him, but I don't think it concerned this -problem. I think it was on a--as a matter of fact, I think it was after -Ruby had shot Oswald when I talked to him, but it is one of those -things I can't remember. I hope you don't think I am trying not to tell -you, I don't mind telling you anything, but talking to you that I got -a call every 5 minutes, and so I don't know, mostly the press calling, -you know. - -Mr. DULLES. Was the conduct of the investigation of the assassination -hindered by any possible overlapping of jurisdiction between Federal, -State, and local authorities? You have dealt with that in a general -way. Do you have anything more to say on that point? - -Mr. WADE. Well, I think the investigation of the assassination was -carried on in a rather cooperative manner between all the agencies -concerned. I think this cooperation was more than generally you would -have. It was born out of a feeling that all the agencies were to some -extent on the spot, I think, your FBI, your Secret Service. I think -that bred cooperation rather than antagonism. I don't know of any -antagonism. I think the biggest fault with the investigation was your -press and television. - -I don't think there is any question that you people up here deal with -it. But you take a chief of police, a little chief of police, or a -little district attorney down there who is not used to having all, -everybody, calling you all hours of the night and asking you questions, -and then if you sneeze, write a front page story about what you said, -with no way to deny it, you know, and I think the press was the biggest -thing that caused--I don't think they ever ought to have been in the -police department to begin with. I would have liked to have kept them -out of the courtroom. The judge announced that he was going to have -them in the courtroom, but I was instrumental in keeping them out. - -Mr. DULLES. When we were in Dallas, it was suggested to us that the -press, radio, and news media kind of took possession of city hall -there, and it was a question of throwing them out by force of arms or -leaving them there. Do you have any comment on that? - -Mr. WADE. I don't know how they got in. I don't see how they could -run those big cables right through the chief of police's office there -without somebody giving them permission. However, I have no way of -knowing how they got in. - -Mr. DULLES. It was suggested to us that the chief of police was out at -the airport and did not get back, and found them in there when he got -back at 3 o'clock. - -Mr. WADE. How they got in I have no idea, but the whole mechanics of -the thing--for instance, in the homicide office, the whole office--you -probably have seen it--I don't imagine it is as big as this room. It is -cut up into little offices. - -Mr. DULLES. I was in there; yes. - -Mr. WADE. If you know, when I went into the office, went into that -office there Friday night, you had to push people back to open the door -to get out. You had police having to move the crowd, and they were just -stacked down that corridor, and it was a situation that should not have -developed. - -Of course, you have a situation where the press yell that the American -people have a right to know their President had been assassinated. I -don't say there are not two sides to the situation, but I think when -they get to interfering with the processes of law there is bound to be -a middle ground or some way to work it out. I can't solve it. - -Mr. DULLES. So far as you know, have all documents of any evidence, -of any kind whatsoever, collected by State and local authorities in -Texas been turned over to the Federal authorities and the President's -Commission? - -Mr. WADE. So far as I know they have. We have either sent it to the -Commission or to Mr. Waggoner Carr, and I assume whatever he gets -he sends to you all. I don't know of any documents; I don't know -whether--you don't have a transcript of the trial, but that will be -testimony. - -The CHAIRMAN. How long was the transcript, Mr. Wade? - -Mr. WADE. I don't know how many pages. I don't think--we don't have -our copy of it. We ordered a copy, and so--he filed a pauper's oath, -so I don't have any idea how long it will be. It was about 2 weeks of -testimony, an argument, and also 2 weeks of picking the jury. They took -all that down, all questioning of prospective jurors, so all that will -be in the transcript. - -The CHAIRMAN. Will that all be in the record on appeal? - -Mr. WADE. Yes, sir. - -The CHAIRMAN. Have they made any extra copies, do you know? - -Mr. WADE. I know they are making some extra copies that have been -bought by individuals, I believe Life magazine, some of those magazines -have ordered a copy. - -The CHAIRMAN. I see; yes. - -Mr. WADE. We are having to pay for ours. We are having to pay for ours, -and, of course, we will handle that, we will use that when briefing our -case on appeal. - -The CHAIRMAN. Do you know what it will cost? You don't know that yet? - -Mr. WADE. I think--we think--our copy will be $3,000. I mean I have got -that figure in my mind, because the Commissioners' Court kicked about -us having to pay court reporters who are working for the county, but I -think the court reporters wrote the law, but I have got in mind $3,000, -but that is a copy. The original usually is twice that much, but of -course, a copy is all you would want. But you can write Mr. Jimmy -Muleady. He is the official court reporter of that court. - -Mr. DULLES. You have testified with regard to the Hudkins and Goulden -rumors that the FBI or CIA or some other Federal agency might have -employed Oswald. One or the other of those correspondents indicated -that he got his information from some high official that he refused to -identify--he or they--refused to identify. Do you know anything about -that? - -Mr. WADE. No; Hudkins, as I recall, wrote in his article--I don't know -who the high official is, but I imagine they are basing it on me or -the police or someone--Hudkins put in his article, you know he wrote -all this stuff, he is a wild writer, and he said, "Henry Wade said he -doubted whether it would be public information" or something. - -Well, he came running into me one day there and said, "Now, I have got -all kinds of evidence that he is working for the FBI." - -And I said, "Well, fine, I have none myself," and he said, "What would -you think about it?" - -I said, "Well, you are getting onto a situation that I don't know -whether it ought to be public information or not." I mean, I asked, -suppose he did, I don't know whether it would be something that ought -to be written or not, well, more or less trying to get him not to write -the article, and I said, "Assuming it is so, I don't see you are doing -any good writing it." - -So he quoted from that. That is all the conversation I had with -Hudkins, and you can get that--I haven't seen the Goulden article, and -didn't talk with him. I haven't seen Joe Goulden--I assume it is Joe -Goulden. He left Dallas and went with a Philadelphia paper. So if it is -the situation, if I have seen it I don't remember anything about it, if -he wrote a story. - -But the high official, all I can tell you anything on that, I have -absolutely no evidence myself or any personal knowledge that he worked -for the FBI or any Federal agency, and the only thing I have heard are -rumors on the subject, and none of them that has got anything to base -it on that I know of. - -Does that cover that? - -Mr. DULLES. That covers that. - -You referred to the statement attributed to you made prior to Oswald's -killing that the case against him was closed. I understand you say that -was not correct, you did not make that statement. - -Mr. WADE. That is right. To the best of my knowledge, I never said -that. I mean that is what burned me up more than anything, more than -any other statement on television when I saw it. I had not been on -television. They have written this in the Dallas papers and some woman -wrote in and said she saw me say it on television. But I would like to -see a picture of it because the case never had actually been opened as -far as--I mean, we weren't investigating the case. I think that night -I told them, of course he is dead, there is no way of trying him. But -the purpose, one other purpose in that interview Sunday night was to -point out that I am sure the agencies will go on investigating it for -the benefit of posterity, and I actually, if not in that interview, -the following day, said I agreed with some Congressmen who said they -thought they ought to have a Federal investigation on a national level -of this thing. - -Mr. DULLES. Do you know whether any other Texas officials made any such -statement? - -Mr. WADE. I don't know whether anybody did. They quoted the chief of -police. They quoted Fritz on it, and then they started quoting me on -it, which is all saying that. But so far, to the best of my knowledge, -I never told anybody the case was closed, and I really think that Fritz -must have said something about it, and then people think the captain -of detectives and the district attorney and the chief are all about -the same, and it finally drifted over to me because I left the police -station and never had a word to say until that night when I was on -television. - -Mr. DULLES. Do you know whether there were any official transcripts -made of the various interrogations of Oswald from the time he was -captured to the time of his killing? - -Mr. WADE. If there are any, I have never seen them. I have asked -for them, but you are dealing with a man who not only doesn't make -transcripts, but doesn't even make notes. Captain Fritz is the one who -interrogated him most of the time, and if you--if there is any written -evidence of what he said it must be from the FBI or the Secret Service -or someone who interviewed him. I assume they make a record of what he -said to them. - -Mr. DULLES. If any transcript was made we would have had it, would we -not? So far as you know? - -Mr. WADE. The only thing I know I never have seen one, and I don't have -one of an interview, and I don't know of any--you should have it, but -you are dealing with Fritz there who interviewed Ruby, and Melvin Belli -went right into the conversation with Ruby, and Belli at 4 o'clock that -afternoon made everything admissible, and we couldn't get a thing, -couldn't put Fritz on the stand because he couldn't remember anything -that was helpful. I mean, he could remember Ruby rambling around the -situation, but I don't know of any transcript like that that I have -that you don't have. - -Mr. DULLES. In your talks, going back to your talks, with Mr. Carter at -the White House---- - -Mr. WADE. Carter; yes. - -Mr. DULLES. Carter--did any questions come up in these conversations -about not raising the issue that he was a Communist or that there might -be a conspiracy or something of that kind? - -Mr. WADE. No, sir; that conversation, I'm rather sure sometime Friday -afternoon, and he called me and said, "Are they making any progress on -the case?" You see, Cliff Carter and I are close personal friends. I -have known him, and they were all upset, and I said, "I don't know. I -have heard they have got some pretty good evidence." I think that is -the only conversation I had with him. - -Somebody told me, Mr. Carr, I believe, or Barefoot Sanders, that -they had had some conversations with some Washington officials, and -I have got an impression it was the State Department, but it might -have been--that they--concerning the international conspiracy angle. I -didn't discuss it because it was silly, I mean the whole thing was a -silly deal. - -I mean, if you would prove he was a Communist, suppose he gave a -statement he was a Communist, I wouldn't have put that in a murder -charge because I had to prove it. - -Mr. DULLES. That is all I have, Mr. Chief Justice. - -The CHAIRMAN. I think that is all, Mr. Wade. Thank you very much for -your cooperation. - -Mr. WADE. I appreciate what you all are doing and your problems you -have got up here. I know if I were in your place I would hate to listen -to somebody like me talk 5 hours. - -The CHAIRMAN. All right. We will recess until 2 o'clock. - -(Whereupon, at 12:50 p.m., the President's Commission recessed.) - - -Afternoon Session - -TESTIMONY OF PATRICK T. DEAN - -The President's Commission reconvened at 2 p.m. - -(Chairman Warren presiding and Mr. Dulles present.) - -The CHAIRMAN. All right, gentlemen. - -Do you have a statement? - -Mr. RANKIN. Sergeant Dean asked if he couldn't appear before the -Commission and testify. We took his deposition in Dallas, and he asked, -when he signed his deposition, whether he couldn't appear personally, -so we are permitting him to do this. - -The CHAIRMAN. We are very happy to have you, Sergeant. Will you raise -your right hand and be sworn, please? - -You solemnly swear the testimony you are about to give before the -Commission shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the -truth, so help you God? - -Mr. DEAN. I do. - -The CHAIRMAN. Be seated, please. - -Mr. Rankin, you may examine the witness. - -Mr. RANKIN. Sergeant, will you give us your name, your address, please? - -Mr. DEAN. Patrick T. Dean. I live at 2822 Nicholson Drive in Dallas. - -Mr. RANKIN. Are you connected with the police department in Dallas? - -Mr. DEAN. Yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. What is your position? - -Mr. DEAN. I am a sergeant on patrol. - -Mr. RANKIN. How long have you been an official in the police department? - -Mr. DEAN. Eleven and a half years. - -Mr. RANKIN. Will you tell us briefly any training or experience you -have had? - -Mr. DEAN. Well, I worked as a patrolman for 5 years. Then I was -promoted to sergeant and remained in the patrol division. I have since -been in the patrol division the rest of the time. - -Mr. RANKIN. You have given us your deposition, have you not, Sergeant? - -Mr. DEAN. Yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. And is that correct and true as far as anything you know? - -Mr. DEAN. Yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. Is there any part of it that you want to change or correct -or modify? - -Mr. DEAN. No, sir; I feel the main reason I wanted to appear before -the Commission was about the 20 or 25 minutes that was off the record -that I feel I would like the Commission to have on the record, and this -is between Mr. Griffin and I. He was the original one who started my -deposition. - -Mr. RANKIN. Well, do you want to tell that at this time? - -First, is there anything about what you said on the record that was not -correct? - -Mr. DEAN. No, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. And the truth? - -Mr. DEAN. No, sir. - -Well, Mr. Griffin had questioned me about 2 hours, or maybe a little -longer. There was no problems at all, no difficulties. And after that -length of time, a little over 2 hours, Mr. Griffin desired to get off -the record, and he advised the court reporter that he would be off the -record and he could go smoke a cigarette or get a Coke, and he would -let him know when he wanted him to get back on the record. - -Well, after the court reporter left, Mr. Griffin started talking to me -in a manner of gaining my confidence in that he would help me and that -he felt I would probably need some help in the future. - -My not knowing what he was building up to, I asked Mr. Griffin to go -ahead and ask me what he was going to ask me. He continued to advise -me that he wanted me to listen to what he had to say before he asked -me whatever question he was going to ask me. I finally told him that -whatever he wanted to ask me he could just ask me, and if I knew I -would tell him the truth or if I didn't know, I would tell him I didn't -know. - -Mr. Griffin took my reports, one dated February 18, the subject of it -was an interview with Jack Ruby, and one dated November 26, which was -my assignment in the basement. - -He said there were things in these statements which were not true and, -in fact, he said both these statements, he said there were particular -things in there that were not true, and I asked him what portions did -he consider not true, and then very dogmatically he said that, "Jack -Ruby didn't tell you that he entered the basement via the Main Street -ramp." - -And, of course, I was shocked at this. This is what I testified to, in -fact, I was cross-examined on this, and he, Mr. Griffin, further said, -"Jack Ruby did not tell you that he had thought or planned to kill -Oswald two nights prior." - -And he said, "Your testimony was false, and these reports to your chief -of police are false." - -So this, of course, all this was off the record. I told Mr. Griffin -then this shocked me, and I told him it shocked me; that I couldn't -imagine what he was getting at or why he would accuse me of this, and I -asked him, and Mr. Griffin replied he didn't or he wasn't at liberty to -discuss that particular part of it with me, and that he wasn't trying -to cross-examine me here, but that under cross-examination he could -prove that my testimony was false, and that is when I told Mr. Griffin -that these are the facts and I can't change them. This is what I know -about it. - -I quoted Ruby just about verbatim, and since he didn't believe me, and -I was saying they were true, we might as well terminate the interview. - -Mr. Griffin then got back on the record, or before he did get back -on the record, he said, "Well now, Sergeant Dean, I respect you as a -witness, I respect you in your profession, but I have offered my help -and assistance, and I again will offer you my assistance, and that I -don't feel you will be subjecting yourself to loss of your job," or -some words to that effect, "If you will go ahead and tell me the truth -about it." - -I again told Mr. Griffin that these were the facts and I couldn't -change them, so with that we got back on the record. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you ask Mr. Griffin to ever put this part that was off -the record on the record? - -Mr. DEAN. No, sir; I didn't. - -Mr. RANKIN. Why didn't you at that time? - -Mr. DEAN. Well, now the discussion was, I said, "Mr. Griffin, I have -waived my rights for an attorney, of which I don't feel like I need -one." I still don't feel like I need one. - -The CHAIRMAN. And you do not need one either Sergeant. - -Mr. DEAN. True. - -The CHAIRMAN. You will get along all right. - -Mr. DEAN. Thank you. - -I said, "I have come over here with the idea of giving you all the -information that I have." In fact, I had some additional information -that I had gotten the night before, and it was a call that I had -received from some man in Victoria, Canada, who said he had a reel of -movie film that he had taken of the assassination. - -I got this man's name, where he called from, had the police department -in Victoria check to crisscross the number, and I gave him the -name--well, all the information as to where the call had originated -from, his name, also this man's attorney, he had given me his name, and -I told him that the reason the man had called, had called especially -for me at the police department, was that he had a reel of movie film -that he had taken the day of the assassination and that these--or the -camera was on the President at the time of the assassination, and he -described to me the position as to where he was, which was across and -in trajectory of the line of fire, and that he felt that in addition to -the assassination that he had gotten the School Book Depository. - -I told Mr. Griffin at the time that I had told this man--I can't -remember his name, the FBI has gotten it, and at the time I gave it -to Mr. Griffin, I told this man on the telephone from Victoria that -night that he should send these things, this film, that he said wasn't -developed, to the Warren Commission. - -He said, that is when he told me that he had contacted his attorney in -Victoria and that his attorney's name was Batter, and he spelled it -for me, B-a-t-t-e-r, and his attorney had advised him not to send this -information to the Warren Commission but to contact someone in Dallas -and send it to them. - -This man told me that he had read something about my testimony and -that he asked me would it be all right for him to send it to me, and -I told him, "Yes," and I said I was supposed to go back to the Warren -Commission and he could send it to me, and I would make it available -for them. - -This was just additional information that I told Mr. Griffin that I -was--this is an example--I was there to help them in any way I could. - -Mr. RANKIN. Now, the differences in your testimony that Mr. Griffin was -discussing with you off the record, you have gone into that in detail -on the record, haven't you, in your deposition? - -Mr. DEAN. Yes; I believe I have, about how Ruby entered the basement or -how he told me how he entered the basement. Also that he had thought -two nights prior when he saw Lee Oswald on a showup stand with a -sarcastic sneer on his face is when he decided if he got the chance he -would kill him. This was the thing that I testified in court about. I -was cross-examined in court. - -Mr. RANKIN. And you have explained all that in your deposition, haven't -you? - -Mr. DEAN. I believe so; I am not certain. - -Mr. RANKIN. And did he ask you about why you didn't have your--this -information about his planning to shoot Oswald the night before, or on -the Friday---- - -Mr. DEAN. Now, are you asking did Mr. Griffin ask me why I didn't---- - -Mr. RANKIN. Why you didn't put it in your February--in your statement -before the February 18 one? - -Mr. DEAN. Yes, sir; I believe he did, and I explained to him this -wasn't the subject--the subject of that November 26 report was my -assignment. I didn't put any of the conversation as to what Mr. Sorrels -and I talked to Mr. Ruby about. I did put at the closing paragraph, I -think, and I have a copy of it here, that my main concern was how he -got into the basement and how long he had been there because I was in -charge of the security of the basement. - -Mr. RANKIN. So you didn't put it in your prior reports? - -Mr. DEAN. No, sir; this was later on. Chief Curry--I think probably it -was February 18--and I think I probably wrote it that day, called me -to his office and asked me had I heard all the interview of Ruby and -Sorrels, and I told him that I did, and he asked me could I remember -it pretty well, and I said, "Yes, I believe I can remember most all of -it," and that is when Chief Curry told me that, he said, "Well, you are -going to have to testify to it because Mr. Sorrels can't because he -says he didn't warn Mr. Ruby when he was questioning him. - -Well, this was fine with me. I wrote the report. This was February 18. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you tell Mr. Griffin at that time that you thought it -was unimportant or had some other reason for not including it? - -Mr. DEAN. I believe that I told him that the investigation, the focal -point, was as to how he got into the basement. There was an officer, -and I knew who the officer was, I assigned him there myself, and I -felt this was more of a part of the investigation in which it was -investigated--Officer R. E. Vaughan was investigated as to whether or -not he let Ruby into the basement or saw him in the basement, and, of -course, he was cleared of this. I know of no--the only information -I passed on about that was when Jack Ruby told me how he entered. I -told my superiors and then they carried it on from there as far as the -investigation. - -Mr. RANKIN. And about his planning to shoot him prior to the day -that---- - -Mr. DEAN. Now, this wasn't--the only time that I put that in the report -was February 18. - -Mr. RANKIN. Yes; did you explain to Mr. Griffin in your prior testimony -why you didn't put it in? - -Mr. DEAN. I believe that I did; I am not sure. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you want to add anything to that, just anything that you -wanted, to the Commission? - -The CHAIRMAN. Do you recall whether you were asked that specific -question or not, Sergeant? May I ask, Mr. Rankin, was he asked that -question, and did he answer it? - -Mr. RANKIN. I have to look at the record to be sure. - -Mr. Chief Justice, in answer to your question, he was asked about what -was the first time that he had given this information and if this was -the date. He was not asked for any explanation as to why he didn't give -it at any earlier time. - -The CHAIRMAN. Then we can't blame him if he didn't answer why. - -Mr. RANKIN. No; I just wanted to find out if he wanted to add anything -at this time that would complete the record. - -The CHAIRMAN. Yes; all right. - -Mr. DEAN. Well, my main concern has been in some way this got out to -the papers. The only thing I told the papers was that I can't give any -statement. I said I have no comment, and I feel that the accusation -started with my denial because I haven't had an opportunity to deny it. -The story came out in the papers and it has been on the radio several -times, and, in fact, several times since the original, some weeks or so -after the paper learned of it of the so-called rift, as they put it. - -They had the one side of it that he accused me of lying. He didn't use -the word "lie," he just said, "These are false statements, and when -you testified in court you testified falsely." He didn't use the word -"lying," and a lot of papers have since then used the word "lying." - -I feel like the accusation is a lot stronger than my denial because -I haven't denied it. I haven't made any statement at all to press or -radio or any news media. I just told them it will have to come from the -Warren Commission or some other source. - -Mr. RANKIN. What I was asking, Sergeant, was whether there is anything -that you would like to tell the Commission or add to your testimony -about why it wasn't in the earlier statement prior to February 18 that -you haven't already told us. - -Mr. DEAN. Well, I don't think I would like--if I could, I would like -to know why Mr. Griffin had accused me of perjury. Of course, this is -something for you people to know, but I just--he wouldn't discuss it -with me. - -The CHAIRMAN. Well, Sergeant, I want to say to you that, of course, -without knowing what your conversation was with Mr. Griffin, I have -never talked to Mr. Griffin about this. I didn't know that you had -this altercation with him, but I want to say this: That so far as -the jurisdiction of this Commission is concerned and its procedures, -no member of our staff has a right to tell any witness that he is -lying or that he is testifying falsely. That is not his business. It -is the business of this Commission to appraise the testimony of all -the witnesses, and, at the time you are talking about, and up to the -present time, this Commission has never appraised your testimony or -fully appraised the testimony of any other witness, and furthermore, I -want to say to you that no member of our staff has any power to help or -injure any witness. - -So, so far as that conversation is concerned, there is nothing that -will be binding upon this Commission. - -Mr. DEAN. Yes, sir. - -The CHAIRMAN. But, as I say, I don't know what your conversation was -with Griffin, but I am just telling you as to what the limitations of -the members of our staff are. - -Mr. DEAN. Yes, sir; thank you. That is about all I had. - -Mr. RANKIN. That is all I have, Mr. Chief Justice. - -The CHAIRMAN. Well, thank you, Sergeant, for coming and feeling as you -do, I am glad you had the frankness to come and talk to the Commission, -and offer to testify concerning it. - -Mr. DEAN. Thank you. I appreciate the opportunity. - -The CHAIRMAN. All right, Sergeant. - -Mr. DEAN. Thank you. It is nice to have met you. - -Mr. RANKIN. Waggoner, do you want to take the stand for a minute about -that conversation? - -The CHAIRMAN. You are going to ask the General about it? - -Have you been sworn? - - -TESTIMONY OF WAGGONER CARR - -Do you solemnly swear the testimony you are about to give before the -Commission shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the -truth, so help you God? - -Mr. CARR. I do. - -The CHAIRMAN. Be seated, please. - -Proceed, Mr. Rankin. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Carr, will you state your name and position for the -record? - -Mr. CARR. I am Waggoner Carr, attorney general of the State of Texas. - -Mr. RANKIN. And you are a practicing lawyer, are you? - -Mr. CARR. Yes, sir; before I was elected, I was practicing law in -Lubbock, Tex. Now, of course, being attorney general, this has taken me -out of the private practice. Prior to that I graduated from law school -at the University of Texas, had my pre-law with a BBA degree from Texas -Tech. I have been an assistant district attorney for the 72nd judicial -district in Texas; county attorney of Lubbock County for 2 years; -served in the Texas House of Representatives for 10 years, the last 4 -of those years being as Speaker of the House, and was elected attorney -general in 1960. - -Mr. RANKIN. You are the same Waggoner Carr who has participated from -time to time in observing these hearings and cooperating with the -Commission regarding its work? - -Mr. CARR. Yes. - -Mr. RANKIN. Insofar as the State of Texas is concerned? - -Mr. CARR. Yes. - -Mr. RANKIN. Were you here when Henry Wade was testifying with regard to -a conversation between himself and yourself, this morning? - -Mr. CARR. Yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. Would you relate to us that conversation as you recall it, -both what you said and what he said? - -Mr. CARR. As I recall, it was around 8 or 9 o'clock at night on -November 22, 1963, when I received a long-distance telephone call from -Washington from someone in the White House. I can't for the life of me -remember who it was. - -A rumor had been heard here that there was going to be an allegation -in the indictment against Oswald connecting the assassination with an -international conspiracy, and the inquiry was made whether I had any -knowledge of it, and I told him I had no knowledge of it. - -As a matter of fact, I hadn't been in Dallas since the assassination -and was not there at the time of the assassination. - -So the request was made of me to contact Mr. Wade to find out if that -allegation was in the indictment. - -I received the definite impression that the concern of the caller was -that because of the emotion or the high tension that existed at that -time that someone might thoughtlessly place in the indictment such an -allegation without having the proof of such a conspiracy. So I did -call Mr. Wade from my home, when I received the call, and he told me -very much what he repeated to you today, as I recall, that he had no -knowledge of anyone desiring to have that or planning to have that -in the indictment; that it would be surplusage, it was not necessary -to allege it, and that it would not be in there, but that he would -doublecheck it to be sure. - -And then I called back, and--as I recall I did--and informed the White -House participant in the conversation of what Mr. Wade had said, and -that was all of it. - -Mr. RANKIN. Was there anything said to you at any time by anybody from -Washington that if there was any evidence that was credible to support -such an international conspiracy it should not be included in the -indictment or complaint or any action? - -Mr. CARR. Oh, no; absolutely not. There was no direct talk or indirect -talk or insinuation that the facts, whatever they might be, should -be suppressed. It was simply that in the tension someone might put -something in an indictment for an advantage here or disadvantage there, -that could not be proved, which would have very serious reaction, which -the local person might not anticipate since he might not have the -entire picture of what the reaction might be. - -Mr. RANKIN. Thank you. That is all I have, Mr. Chief Justice. - -The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Attorney General, I don't know whether you will be -testifying on any other subject before the Commission or not, but -in the event that you do not, and both of us are not here in the -Commission again at the same time, I want to say to you for the record -that from the very beginning of our investigation your cooperation has -been complete, it has been enthusiastic, and it has been most helpful -to the Commission. - -The Commission and I all appreciate it very much indeed. - -Mr. CARR. Well, thank you, sir. I will say this, that it has been a -very pleasant experience for us, and I think set a good example of how -a State government and a Federal Government can cooperate together -where we have common objectives such as this, where we are trying to -determine the facts and nothing else. - -Mr. DULLES. May I add my voice to that, Mr. Chief Justice? - -The CHAIRMAN. Yes; indeed, you may. - -Mr. DULLES. I know that has been true as far as I am personally -concerned, and during our trip to Dallas, Mr. Carr was of great help to -us. - -Could I ask just one question? - -The CHAIRMAN. Yes, indeed. - -Mr. DULLES. Was there any indication in the call from the White House -as to whether this was a leftist, rightist, or any other type of -conspiracy or, as far as you recall, was just the word "conspiracy" -used? - -Mr. CARR. As far as I recall, it was an international conspiracy. This -was the idea, but I don't know whether the word "Communist" was used or -not, Mr. Dulles. It could have been, or maybe I just assumed that if -there was a conspiracy it would only be a Communist conspiracy. I don't -know which it was, but it was a perfectly natural call. - -The circumstances that existed at the time, knowing them as I did, and -the tension and the high emotion that was running rampant there, it was -not inconceivable that something like that could have been done, you -understand, without any thought of harming anyone or any thought of -having to prove it, as long as you didn't know that under our Texas law -you have to prove every allegation made in an indictment. If you didn't -know that, it might seem logical that someone might put something like -that into an indictment, factual or not. - -Mr. DULLES. Thank you very much. - -Mr. CARR. But there was no such thing going on. - -The CHAIRMAN. Well, General, I think that will be all then. Thank you -very much. - -Mr. CARR. Yes, sir. - -The CHAIRMAN. The Commission is adjourned. - -(Whereupon, at 2:50 p.m., the President's Commission recessed.) - - - - -_Tuesday, June 9, 1964_ - -TESTIMONY OF RICHARD EDWARD SNYDER, JOHN A. McVICKAR, AND ABRAM CHAYES - -The President's Commission met at 10 a.m., on June 9, 1964, at 200 -Maryland Avenue NE., Washington, D.C. - -Present were Chief Justice Earl Warren, Chairman; Senator John Sherman -Cooper, Representative Gerald Ford, and Allen W. Dulles, members. - -Also present were William T. Coleman, Jr., assistant counsel; W. David -Slawson, assistant counsel; Charles Murray, observer; and Dean Robert -G. Storey, special counsel to the attorney general of Texas. - - -TESTIMONY OF RICHARD EDWARD SNYDER - -(Members present at this point: Chief Justice Warren, and Mr. Dulles.) - -The CHAIRMAN. Gentlemen, the Commission will come to order. Mr. -Coleman, would you make a statement as to the purpose of the meeting -this morning? - -Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. Chief Justice, the first witness is Mr. Richard E. -Snyder, who is presently first secretary in the American Embassy in -Tokyo, Japan, and was second secretary and consul, American Embassy, -Moscow, U.S.S.R., in 1959, and remained in that post in Moscow through -at least the middle of 1961. - -Mr. Snyder will be asked to testify concerning Lee Harvey Oswald's -actions when he came into the American Embassy in Moscow on October 31, -1959, and stated that he desired to renounce his U.S. citizenship, the -actions which the Embassy took at that time, and the information which -it gave to the State Department. - -Mr. Snyder also handled the interview of Oswald when he appeared at the -Embassy in July of 1961, and had his passport returned to him, and will -be asked to testify about the return of the passport. - -Mr. Snyder will also be asked to identify for the record the various -Embassy dispatches and State Department instructions which were -exchanged concerning Oswald in 1959, 1960, and to the middle of 1961. - -The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Snyder, it is customary for us to read a statement of -that kind to the witness, so you will be apprised of what we are going -to interview you about. - -Will you please rise and raise your right hand and be sworn? - -Do you solemnly swear that 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. SNYDER. I do, sir. - -The CHAIRMAN. You may be seated. - -Mr. Coleman will conduct the examination. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. Snyder, will you state your name for the record. - -Mr. SNYDER. Richard Edward Snyder. - -Mr. COLEMAN. And what is your present address? - -Mr. SNYDER. 118 Geary Drive, South Plainfield, N.J. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Are you presently employed by the Federal Government? - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir. - -Mr. COLEMAN. In what capacity? - -Mr. SNYDER. As a Foreign Service officer of the Department of State. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Where are you presently stationed? - -Mr. SNYDER. In Tokyo, American Embassy. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Directing your attention to the fall of 1959, were you -employed by the Federal Government at that time? - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Where were you stationed? - -Mr. SNYDER. At the Embassy in Moscow. - -Mr. COLEMAN. What was your title? - -Mr. SNYDER. Second secretary and consul, sir. - -Mr. COLEMAN. I take it that you have had called to your attention a -copy of the joint resolution which was adopted by Congress with respect -to the Commission. - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir. - -Mr. COLEMAN. And I also take it that since you have been back in the -country that you have had an opportunity to look at the various State -Department files dealing with Oswald. - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Calling your attention to the date of October 31---- - -Mr. DULLES. Could I ask one question, Mr. Coleman, about that? What -previous posts had you had before going to Moscow? - -Mr. SNYDER. Well, my first post in the Foreign Service---- - -Mr. DULLES. I am interested as an old Foreign Service officer. - -Mr. SNYDER. I see. I served for a brief time in HICOG in Frankfurt, -Germany and then for about 2 years in Munich, in the consulate general, -which was my first post in the Foreign Service. - -My second post, I spent 1 year in the boondocks of Japan, in Niigata, -on the Sea of Japan, in a one-man cultural center. - -Mr. DULLES. As a Foreign Service officer? - -Mr. SNYDER. As a Foreign Service officer; yes, sir. I was assigned to -this duty at a time when USIS was still part of the State Department, -and when I reached my post it had already been separated, so I was on -loan to them. And then a year and a half in Tokyo. Then a summer and -an academic year at Harvard, in Russian area studies. - -Mr. DULLES. In what school there? - -Mr. SNYDER. In Littauer. - -Mr. DULLES. Did you learn Russian at that time? - -Mr. SNYDER. No; I had had Russian in college before. - -Mr. DULLES. So you speak Russian fairly fluently? - -Mr. SNYDER. Fairly fluently; yes, sir. - -Mr. DULLES. And then Moscow was your next post? - -Mr. SNYDER. And then Moscow for 2 years; yes, sir. - -Mr. DULLES. What 2 years? - -Mr. SNYDER. July of 1959 to July of 1961. I arrived there just before -the Vice President. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Directing your attention, sir, to October 31, 1959, did -you have occasion to see Lee Harvey Oswald on that day? - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Had you ever seen him before? - -Mr. SNYDER. No, sir. - -(At this point, Representative Ford entered the hearing room.) - -Mr. COLEMAN. Had you ever heard about him before? - -Mr. SNYDER. No. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Could you state for the Commission just what happened when -you saw Mr. Oswald on October 31. 1959, indicating the time of day, -what he said, and what you did? - -The CHAIRMAN. Before you answer that question, may I say that this is -Congressman Ford, a member of the Commission. - -This is Mr. Snyder of the State Department now stationed in Tokyo, and -who was stationed at the Embassy in Moscow when Oswald attempted to -defect. - -Representative FORD. Thank you. - -Mr. SNYDER. Well, as for the time of day, I am afraid I draw a blank. -I can make some assumptions as to the time of day, for what they are -worth. - -But since I told Oswald--and you will come to this, I think, a little -later on--that the Embassy was closed theoretically at the time, I -presume this was a Wednesday afternoon or perhaps a Saturday afternoon, -but I just don't recall. - -Mr. COLEMAN. For the record, I think it was a Saturday, sir. - -Mr. SNYDER. Was it a Saturday? - -So, at any rate--if it had been a morning, I could not have used this -particular approach with him. So I presume it was an afternoon. - -Oswald came into the Embassy without prior announcement. He didn't call -or in any other way communicate with us, to the best of my knowledge. - -Mr. DULLES. You had no way of knowing he was in Russia? - -Mr. SNYDER. I had no previous knowledge of his presence; no, sir. - -At any rate, he came in to me cold, so to speak. I was told that an -American wanted to see me, wanted to see the consul. And I am not sure -whether I went out and brought him in or whether he was taken into my -office by someone else. At any rate, this was my first meeting with -Oswald. - -I will be glad to give you such recollections as I have as to his -general demeanor and this sort of thing, if you would like. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Yes, sir. - -Mr. SNYDER. And I might inject at this point something which I -mentioned to Mr. Slawson before our session began, and that is that -I reviewed the files, our own files, on Oswald, enough to refresh my -memory as to the basic facts and the chronology of events and this sort -of thing, but I have attempted not to go too deeply into details with -the thought that what the Commission is interested in, presumably, is -what I honestly remember at the time and not so much what may have been -planted in my mind by reviews since that time. - -As to his general appearance, I do recall that he was neatly and very -presentably dressed. I couldn't say offhand whether he was dressed -in a suit and shirt, though I think probably he was. At any rate, he -presented a nice physical appearance. - -I presume that he was well shaven. Otherwise, I would not have had this -feeling about him--that he, in general, was competent looking. - -He was extremely sure of himself. He seemed to know what his mission -was. He took charge, in a sense, of the conversation right from the -beginning. He told me in effect that he was there to give up his -American citizenship. I believe he put his passport on my desk, but -I am not sure. I may have asked for it. In general, his attitude was -quite arrogant. - -Mr. DULLES. Could I ask one question there? When you say you presume -you asked for it, you mean you asked to see it--you didn't ask to take -it from him? - -Mr. SNYDER. No, I asked to see it. If he didn't put it on the desk, -then I asked for it early in the game--one way or the other. - -He told me, among other things, that he had come to the Soviet Union -to live, that he did not intend to go back to the United States, that -this was a well thought out idea on his part. He said, again in effect, -"Don't bother wasting my time asking me questions or trying to talk me -out of my position." - -He said, "I am well aware"--either he said, "I am well aware" or "I -have been told exactly the kind of thing you will ask me, and I am not -interested, so let's get down to business"--words to that effect. - -Well, he was a very cocksure young man at that time. - -I am not sure that he sat at all throughout the interview, but -certainly in the early part of it he did not. - -I asked him--I recall asking him to take a seat, and he said, no, he -wanted to stand. He may have relented later on. - -At any rate, I did nevertheless probe about and elicited a bit of -information about him which was in my report to the Department of State. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Sir, was anyone else present at the time you were talking -to Mr. Oswald? - -Mr. SNYDER. No; I believe Mr. McVickar was in the next room. But there -was no one in the room with us at that time. - -Mr. COLEMAN. How long did the interview with Mr. Oswald last, -approximately? - -Mr. SNYDER. Well, I would have to pull it out of the air, really. It -would be on the order of magnitude of half an hour. It might have -extended to three-quarters of an hour, something of this sort. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Other than the passport, did he give you any other piece -of paper? - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes, yes; he did. He gave me a written statement saying -something along the line of what I have said he mentioned to me orally. -That is, that he had come to the Soviet Union to live, that he desired -to renounce his citizenship, that he was going to become a citizen of -the Soviet Union, words to that effect. - -Mr. DULLES. We have that written statement, do we not? - -Mr. COLEMAN. I have marked as Commission Exhibit No. 913 a photostatic -copy of a handwritten letter which is signed by Lee H. Oswald, and -ask you whether that is a copy of the letter that Oswald gave you on -October 31, when he appeared at the Embassy? - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 913 for -identification.) - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes; I would say it is, sir. - -Mr. COLEMAN. After he gave you the letter and the passport, did he do -anything else? - -Mr. SNYDER. No; after his initial statement of purpose and intent, and -after giving me this statement, the interview was then pretty much in -my hands. He was, I would say, a reluctant interviewee from there on. - -He had announced initially his desire not to discuss the matter with -me, but simply to get on with the business for which he had come and, -therefore, anything else that was to be said was up to me to get said. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Did you at that time go through whatever formalities are -required for a person to renounce his citizenship? - -Mr. SNYDER. No; I did not. - -Mr. COLEMAN. What does an American citizen have to do at the Embassy to -renounce his citizenship? - -Mr. SNYDER. Well, the law requires, in general, that an American -citizen, to renounce his citizenship, must appear before--I am not -sure whether the law confines it to a consular officer--but at any -rate must appear, in the case of the Foreign Service, appear before -a consular officer, and swear to an affidavit in the proper form, -something of this order. In practical terms, it means that the consul -draws up a statement, the content of which--the exact wording of which -is contained in our regulations, and has the person swear to it in his -presence. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Well, did Mr. Oswald ask for such an affidavit? - -Mr. SNYDER. I don't think he asked for such an affidavit in those -terms. I am not sure that he understood that completely, what the -procedure was. But he did ask to renounce his citizenship. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Well, did you provide him with the affidavit? - -Mr. SNYDER. No, sir; I did not. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Why didn't you provide him with the affidavit at that time? - -Mr. SNYDER. Well, as the consul and, of course, the responsible person -at the time, it didn't seem to me the sensible thing to do--in the -sense that--I can't, I suppose, speak for all consuls, but it is sort -of axiomatic, I think, in the consular service that when a man, a -citizen comes in and asks to renounce his citizenship, you don't whip -out a piece of paper and have him sign it. This is a very serious step, -of course, an irrevocable step, really, and if nothing else you attempt -to provide enough time for--to make sure that the person knows what -he is doing. You explain, for one thing, what the meaning of the act -is; and, secondly, again speaking for myself--I cannot speak for the -Foreign Service in this--provide a little breather, if possible make -the man leave your office and come back to it at a later time, just -to make sure--for what value there is in making sure--that the man's -action is not something completely off the top of his head. - -Representative FORD. Mr. Chairman, would it be helpful for the record -to have put in the record at this point whatever the law is in this -regard, and whatever the Department regulations are on this point? - -The CHAIRMAN. That may be done; yes. - -Mr. COLEMAN. I would like to say, sir, at 2 o'clock the Legal Adviser -to the State Department is coming in, and he is going to put it in at -that time. - -Mr. DULLES. May I ask a question at this point? - -Mr. COLEMAN. If you want it in now, we can indicate the sections which -are applicable. - -Representative FORD. I think there ought to be some citation at this -point, because the witness is talking specifically about the process of -the law and the regulations. - -The CHAIRMAN. Do you have the law there, Mr. Snyder--is that the law? - -Mr. SNYDER. I brought nothing with me, myself. - -The CHAIRMAN. I saw a book there that you were looking at, and I -thought that would suffice. - -Mr. SNYDER. Shall I read the section of law, sir? - -This is the Immigration and Nationality Act, section 349(a)(6). - -Section 349(a) states, "From and after the effective date of this Act, -a person who is a national of the United States, whether by birth or -naturalization, shall lose his nationality by"--then section 6 under -that, subsection, states, "making a formal renunciation of nationality -before a diplomatic or consular officer of the United States in a -foreign state in such form as may be prescribed by the Secretary of -State." - -Mr. COLEMAN. Sir, the Secretary of State has promulgated regulations -which are found in 22 Code of Federal Regulations, sections 50.1 and -50.2 and they are also reproduced in 8 Foreign Affairs Manual, section -225.6. - -Basically, as I understand it, those regulations provide the form in -which the citizen is to make the renunciation, and it is to be done in -four copies, and then one copy is to be given to the person who makes -the renunciation. Is that your understanding? - -Mr. SNYDER. This is my understanding; yes, sir. - -Representative FORD. Are those forms available? Are they printed up, or -do you have to draft them? What is the circumstance? - -Mr. SNYDER. They are not printed forms, to my knowledge, Mr. Ford--at -least I have never seen a printed form. The only time that I have used -them in my Foreign Service experience I have had them typed up on the -spot. - -The CHAIRMAN. You may continue, Mr. Coleman. - -Mr. DULLES. We ought to have in the record, Mr. Chief Justice, a copy -of that form--either here or later. - -The CHAIRMAN. As I understood, someone from the State Department is -coming here to testify on the procedures, and the witness did not bring -anything with him, he says. - -Mr. SNYDER. That is right, sir. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. Snyder, when you were talking to Mr. Oswald on October -31, 1959, did he say anything with respect to applying for Soviet -citizenship? - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes; this was contained in his written statement, for one -thing, and I believe that he also stated this to me orally. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Did he say anything with respect to having any information -since he had been in the Marine Corps that he would be willing to make -available to the Soviet Union? - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes; he did. He stated again, in effect, that he would make -available to the Soviet authorities or to the Soviet Union what he had -learned concerning his speciality--he was an electronics specialist of -some sort, a radar technician--at any rate, he would make available to -the Soviet Union such knowledge as he had acquired while in the Marine -Corps concerning his specialty. - -He volunteered this statement. It was rather peculiar. - -Mr. COLEMAN. You say that the interview lasted about a half an hour. I -take it he then left. Did he say he was going to return? - -Mr. SNYDER. No; I don't believe he did. He gave no particular -indication of when he would return, if he would return, or this sort of -thing. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Do you recall just what he said when he left your office? - -Mr. SNYDER. No, sir. - -Mr. COLEMAN. I show you a document---- - -Mr. DULLES. Could I ask one question there? Did he take his passport or -did he leave it? - -Mr. SNYDER. No; I kept it. - -Mr. DULLES. You kept the passport? - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir. - -Mr. COLEMAN. I show you a document which has been marked Commission -Exhibit No. 908, and it is a Foreign Service dispatch dated November -2, 1959. This is from Embassy, Moscow, to the Department of State, -Washington. It is signed by Edward L. Freers, but on the first page -there is an indication it was actually drafted by you. Do you recall -drafting the original of that document? - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 908 for -identification.) - -Mr. COLEMAN. That statement was drafted within a day or two after you -had the interview with Mr. Oswald. I take it it reflects what happened -at that time. - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir. - -Mr. DULLES. Was there any cabled report of this incident? - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes; I cabled a report on the 31st, Mr. Dulles. Commission -Exhibit No. 908 is a somewhat fuller report, 2 days later. - -Mr. COLEMAN. To answer Mr. Dulles' question, I show you a document -which has been marked Commission Exhibit No. 910, which purports to be -a copy of a cable from Moscow to the Secretary of State, and ask you -whether that is the cable which was sent off on October 31, 1959. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 910 for -identification.) - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir. - -Mr. COLEMAN. I also had marked, and I would like to show you, -Commission Exhibit No. 909, which is a copy of a telegram from American -Embassy, Tokyo, to Secretary of State, dated November 27, 1963. This -telegram purports to be an interview which the Ambassador in Tokyo had -with you immediately after the assassination in which you attempted to -recall what happened on October 31, 1959, when Mr. Oswald appeared at -the Embassy. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 909 for -identification.) - -Mr. COLEMAN. I ask you if you can identify that telegram? - -Mr. SNYDER. Might I just inject something? I notice in my reports, on -my first interview with Oswald, that I mention the Petrulli case. You -might at this time or later on wish to refer to the Petrulli case. - -Mr. DULLES. Mr. Chairman, this cable is very short and quite -significant. I wonder if it could not be read into the record at this -point, just for the continuity of the record. - -Mr. SNYDER. There is a slight problem of classification on these, Mr. -Dulles. I don't know how public the records are. - -Mr. DULLES. Maybe you could paraphrase it, then. You mean it is a -question of codes? - -Mr. SNYDER. It is a question of code security; yes, sir. - -The CHAIRMAN. If this is in the record, it will be published. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Off the record. - -(Discussion off the record.) - -The CHAIRMAN. Back on the record. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Would you be kind enough to read Commission Exhibit No. -910 into the record? - -Mr. SNYDER. In paraphrase? - -The CHAIRMAN. Paraphrase, yes; in your own way. - -Representative FORD. Of course keeping the intent of what was said -precisely as it was sent. - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir. - -A person appeared at the Embassy today, October 31, identified himself -as Lee Harvey Oswald, and stated that he had come to renounce his -American citizenship. He was the bearer of U.S. passport No. 1733242, -date of issuance September 10, 1959, which showed him to be unmarried -and gave his age as 20, or which showed him to be 20--it gives his date -of birth. Mr. Oswald stated that he had applied for Soviet citizenship -in Moscow. He stated that he had entered the Soviet Union from -Helsinki, Finland, on October 15. He said that he had contemplated this -action for the previous 2 years. The main reason given was that "I am a -Marxist." He has a mother living at 4936 Collinwood Street, Fort Worth, -Tex., which was also his last address. - -His attitude was arrogant and aggressive. He stated that he had -recently been discharged from the Marine Corps. He also volunteered -the information that he had offered to the Soviet authorities any -information which he had acquired as an enlisted radar operator in the -Marines. - -In view of the Petrulli case, the Embassy proposes to delay completing -the renunciation procedure until the action of the Soviet authorities -on his request for Soviet citizenship is known or the Department -advises. - -A dispatch follows. - -The press has been informed. - -The CHAIRMAN. Would the Commissioners like to see the document itself? - -Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. Snyder, could you tell the Commission what the -Petrulli case was? - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes. The Petrulli case I remember quite well. - -Mr. Petrulli was an American citizen who came into the Embassy some -weeks before, I believe, asking to renounce his American citizenship. -Mr. Petrulli hung around Moscow for quite some time, again a number of -weeks, and perhaps as long as 3 weeks or a month. He had entered the -Soviet Union as a tourist, I believe. - -It is not clear what intent he had when he arrived. - -But, at any rate, he did apply for Soviet citizenship while in Moscow, -and he did come into the Embassy, and was interviewed by me to renounce -his American citizenship. I did not, in accordance with the thinking -which I outlined to you earlier--I did not accept his renunciation -the first time he came in, but did accept it when he subsequently -appeared, and insisted that is what he wanted to do. - -The case had a--I might skip over the minor details, but it had a -rather rapid denouncement, when the Soviet authorities, after having -looked him over for a number of weeks, decided they did not want him -as a citizen or resident of the Soviet Union. And when we subsequently -learned, that is I learned, from my reporting to the Department, and -correspondence with them, that Mr. Petrulli had been discharged from -the Armed Forces some time earlier on, I believe, a 100-percent mental -disability--the Soviet, I think it was the head of the consular section -of the Soviet Foreign Ministry, called me into the Foreign Ministry one -day and said words to the effect that an American citizen Mr. Petrulli, -has overstayed his visa in the Soviet Union, he is living here -illegally, and "We request that you take steps to see that he leaves -the country immediately." - -I told the Soviet official that to the best of my knowledge Mr. -Petrulli was not then an American citizen, he having executed a -renunciation of citizenship before me. - -The Soviet official said in effect, "As far as we are concerned, he -came here on an American passport, and we ask that you get him out of -here." - -Well, again to end what was a long, involved and terribly -time-consuming story at the time, it was determined by the Department -that Mr. Petrulli's renunciation was null and void because he was not -competent, and therefore he was an American citizen, and we shipped him -home. - -The Petrulli case, as I say, was very much in my mind when Mr. Oswald -showed up. - -Mr. COLEMAN. After you sent the telegram, which is Commission Exhibit -No. 910, to the State Department, I take it that the first word that -you received from the State Department is a telegram which I have -marked as Commission Exhibit No. 916. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 916 for -identification.) - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Now, by paraphrasing, could you read the second paragraph -of that telegram into the record? - -Mr. SNYDER. "For your information, in the event that Mr. Oswald insists -on completing a renunciation of his United States citizenship, the -Embassy is precluded by the provisions of section 1999 of the Revised -Statutes from withholding the right to do so without regard to the -status of his application for citizenship which is pending before the -Soviet government and without regard to the Petrulli case." - -Mr. COLEMAN. At the same time that you were notifying the State -Department that Oswald had appeared, someone in the Embassy also sent -a telegram to the Navy Department, didn't he, advising that Oswald, a -former Marine, had appeared at the Embassy and stated that he was a -radar operator in the Marine Corps, and that he had offered to furnish -the Soviets the information he possessed on radar. - -I have marked as Commission Exhibit No. 917 this telegram and ask you -whether that is the telegram that went forth to the Navy Department. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 917 for -identification.) - -Mr. SNYDER. I don't recall that I saw this telegram at the time. But I -would say from the content of it, and the form, that it is clearly a -telegram sent by the naval attache of the Embassy to his home office. - -Mr. COLEMAN. We also have had marked as Commission Exhibit No. 918 the -telegram which the Navy sent in reply to Commission Exhibit No. 917. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 918 for -identification.) - -Mr. COLEMAN. Have you seen that before and can you identify that? - -Mr. SNYDER. I do not recall having seen this telegram before; no, sir. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Now, sir; the next contact that you had with Oswald was by -a letter dated November 3, 1959, which has been marked as Commission -Exhibit No. 912, is that correct? - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 912 for -identification.) - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes--to the best of my knowledge, this was the next thing -that I heard of Oswald--the next thing I heard from Oswald. - -Mr. COLEMAN. How did the original of Commission Exhibit No. 912 come -into your possession? - -Mr. SNYDER. I believe it came through the mail. - -Mr. COLEMAN. And after you received Commission Exhibit No. 912, what -did you do? - -Mr. SNYDER. I wrote Mr. Oswald a reply, I believe, the same day. - -The CHAIRMAN. Exhibit No. 912 was a request to revoke his application -to renounce citizenship, was it not? - -Mr. COLEMAN. No, Mr. Chief Justice; Commission Exhibit No. 912 is a -letter from Mr. Oswald complaining that the Embassy had not permitted -him to renounce. - -The CHAIRMAN. I misread it. Yes; that is right. Excuse me. - -Mr. COLEMAN. You say you wrote Mr. Oswald a letter the same day? - -We have had marked as Commission Exhibit No. 919 a letter from Richard -E. Snyder, to Lee Harvey Oswald, dated November 6, 1959. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 919 for -identification.) - -Mr. COLEMAN. I show it to you and ask you is this a copy of the letter -which you wrote to Mr. Oswald? - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir. - -Representative FORD. Mr. Chairman---- - -Mr. DULLES. Could we have some indication of what that letter is, for -the record. - -The CHAIRMAN. Referring back to Exhibit No. 912, where I was acting -apparently under some misapprehension I read the first three lines and -it said "Nov. 3, 1959. I, Lee Harvey Oswald, do hereby request that my -present United States citizenship be revoked." Well, that is consistent -with what was said. - -Representative FORD. I think that is a pretty categorical statement. - -The CHAIRMAN. Yes; it is. - -Representative FORD. He subsequently, in Exhibit No. 912, makes a -protest about the fact that he was not accorded that right previously. -But I don't see how we could come to any other conclusion but the first -three lines are a specific request for the right to revoke his American -citizenship. - -The CHAIRMAN. Yes; but I had misread that first sentence, and I had -asked if it wasn't a revocation of his original request. I was in error -when I said that. You are correct, absolutely, on your interpretation -of it. - -Mr. COLEMAN. As a result of receiving Commission Exhibit No. 912, you -wrote Mr. Oswald a letter which has been--a copy of which has been -marked and identified as Commission Exhibit No. 919, is that correct? - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Earlier in your testimony, when asked about what a citizen -has to do to renounce his citizenship, you referred to section 349(a) -(6). - -I would like to call your attention to the fact there is also another -provision--section 349(a) (2)--which provides that an American citizen -shall lose his nationality by "taking an oath or making an affirmation -or other formal declaration of allegiance to a foreign state or a -political subdivision thereof." - -Did you consider whether the Oswald letter, marked as Commission -Exhibit No. 912, was such an affirmation or other formal declaration? - -Mr. SNYDER. There is a considerable body of law, I believe, -interpreting this provision of law as to what constitutes an -affirmation or other formal declaration. I believe that I was quite -aware at the time that a mere statement did not constitute a formal -declaration within the meaning of the law. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Did---- - -Mr. DULLES. May I ask one question about Exhibit No. 912? - -In the second paragraph of this letter, Exhibit No. 912, Oswald says, -"I appered [sic] in person at the consulate office of the United States -Embassy, Moscow, on Oct. 31st, for the purpose of signing the formal -papers to this effect. This legal right I was refused at that time." - -Do you know how he learned about his legal rights? Did you tell him his -legal rights in your conversation with him? Or where did he get the -information about his legal rights, if you know about that? - -Mr. SNYDER. Well, to the best of my knowledge, Mr. Dulles, I did -discuss with Oswald both the significance of his act and the legal -basis of it, and so forth. And I believe that in the letter which I -wrote to him---- - -Mr. DULLES. Which was subsequent to Exhibit No. 912, was it not, in -answer to 912? - -Mr. SNYDER. In answer to Exhibit No. 912--in the letter which I wrote, -replying to this, I purposely used the word, I think, "again", or words -to that effect, and I put that word in there at the time, indicating -that he had been told this before, and that I was repeating it to him. - -Mr. COLEMAN. You are talking about Commission Exhibit No. 919, the -third paragraph, is that correct, where you use the word "again"? - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes; that is correct. - -In other words, at the time Oswald was there, the reason which I gave -him for not taking his renunciation at the time was not that he was -not legally entitled to have it, but that the office was closed at the -time. In matter of fact, I don't think I had a secretary there to type -out the form and so forth. But this is really quite beside the point. - -But the reason which I gave him was not that I had any legal right to -refuse him--that is, it wasn't based on a provision of law, as it was -based on simply the fact that the Embassy was closed at the time. - -Mr. COLEMAN. You will recall in Commission Exhibit No. 913, which was -the first letter that Oswald gave you, that the last paragraph states, -"I affirm that my allegiance is to the Union of Soviet Socialist -Republics," and once again I take it that you didn't think that that -was the type of oath or affirmation which is set forth in section -349(a) (2)? - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir; that is right. - -Mr. SLAWSON. Mr. Snyder, in reference to the same document, Commission -Exhibit No. 913, do you think that Mr. Oswald, when he appeared before -you and gave this to you, believed in his mind that this was sufficient -to renounce his citizenship? - -The CHAIRMAN. How could he tell what was in his mind? - -Mr. SNYDER. I really don't know. - -Mr. SLAWSON. Do you believe that if you had given Mr. Oswald the -opportunity to carry through with the procedures, that he would have -renounced his citizenship at that first appearance? - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes; I have every reason to believe he would have. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Sir, I also would like to show you a copy of a passport -issued by the United States, which has been marked as Commission -Exhibit No. 946, and ask you whether that is the passport that Mr. -Oswald gave to you when he came into the Embassy on October 31, 1959. - -Mr. DULLES. May I ask a preliminary question about Exhibit No. 913? - -This is undated. Do we know the date of the receipt of this by the -Embassy? - -Mr. COLEMAN. Yes, Mr. Dulles; the testimony is that when Mr. Oswald -came into the Embassy, sir, he handed this document to Mr. Snyder. - -Mr. DULLES. That is the first time he came in, he handed this document -to you? - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir. - -This is undoubtedly his passport; yes, sir. - -Mr. COLEMAN. After you received Commission Exhibit No. 919, which is -the second letter from Oswald, the letter dated November 3, 1959, you -then prepared and sent to the Secretary of State in Washington an -airgram which the Commission has had marked as Commission Exhibit No. -920. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 920 for -identification.) - -Mr. COLEMAN. I show you the document and ask you whether you prepared -the original thereof and sent it to the State Department? - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir. - -Representative FORD. May I ask a question here? - -When Oswald first came in, and either placed his passport on the desk -or the table, or you asked for it, did you note that he had overstayed -his visa by 5 days? - -Mr. SNYDER. I can't recall that I did or did not, Mr. Ford. - -Representative FORD. Is that something that you would normally examine -and determine under circumstances like this? - -Mr. SNYDER. Oh, I might if there were some reason to look at it--if it -were particularly relevant to something I was thinking at the time or -asking about at the time. - -In terms of Soviet practice, it is not really too relevant. That is, -if the Soviet authorities find it to their interest to keep a person -around, then there is no problem. And if they do not, one does not -overstay one's visa in the Soviet Union. - -Representative FORD. But if it is, for some Soviet reason, a good -reason to keep somebody around beyond the time of their visa, wouldn't -that be of some interest to us--I mean to the United States officials? - -Mr. SNYDER. Oh, yes; but, of course, that assumption was already -strongly made in the Oswald case by other circumstances in this case. -There was no question in my mind that Mr. Oswald was there in Moscow -for the purposes for which he stated he was in Moscow, and that this -was known to the Soviet authorities, for he said he had applied for -Soviet citizenship. - -Representative FORD. Is it the usual thing for them to let an -individual stay beyond their visa termination date? - -Mr. SNYDER. Well, I would say it is not usual. Again, one can never -cite a list of specific instances in these things, but I think that -when you are working as a consul in Moscow for a couple of years, you -have a considerable feel for these things, and that I would say it is -not usual--people simply do not overstay their visas in the Soviet -Union without the knowledge, by and large, of the Soviet authorities. - -And this is because of the nature of the passport registration system -at your hotel, and all of this sort of thing. It simply is not normally -done by oversight or by lapse either on the part of the individual or -on the part of the Soviet State. - -Representative FORD. When he presented the passport, or when you were -given the passport by him, did you examine it? - -Mr. SNYDER. I undoubtedly examined it. - -Representative FORD. Where in the passport would this fact be noted -that he had overstayed his visa by 5 days? - -(At this point, Senator Cooper entered the hearing room.) - -Mr. SNYDER. It may either be on the original visa or on the police -stamp placed in his passport at the time. This is to the best of my -recollection. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Congressman Ford, as I understand it, one of the stamps in -the passport, which would be in Russian, indicates the visa that he got -in Helsinki, and also indicates the length of time he was permitted to -stay. - -Representative FORD. So it is clearly a Soviet document in the passport? - -Mr. COLEMAN. Yes. - -Mr. SNYDER. I could probably find these for you, if you would like. - -Representative FORD. When Oswald came in, did you notice anything -peculiar about his physical appearance--any bruises, any injuries of -any kind? - -Mr. SNYDER. No, no; as I said--you may not have been here, Mr. Ford, at -the time I made my original comments on his appearance. - -He was very neatly dressed, very well composed, and to all outward -appearances a respectable-looking young man. - -Representative FORD. I was there then, and I was interested because -I think we have testimony to the effect, or we have documentation to -the effect, that he had tried to commit suicide prior to his coming to -the American Embassy for the purpose of renouncing his citizenship. In -other words, he had cut his wrist and had been in a Soviet hospital or -medical facility. And I was wondering whether you had noticed that. - -Mr. SNYDER. No, sir; I did not. - -Representative FORD. You did not. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. Snyder, on November 2 you sent forward Commission -Exhibit No. 908, which is the Foreign Service dispatch. You had also -sent forth 2 days earlier a telegram advising them about Oswald. - -And on November 12 you had sent forth Commission Exhibit No. 920. Now, -according to the files that we have, except for Commission Exhibit -No. 916, which is the telegram asking where the dispatch was, we have -no other communication during this period from the Department to the -Embassy giving you advice on what to do in the Oswald case. - -Was there any messages that went back to the Embassy, other than -Commission Exhibit No. 916, during that period? - -Mr. SNYDER. I can't really say, Mr. Coleman, that I have personal -recollection. But I have no reason to believe that there was anything -else came in, other than what is now in our files. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Well, would you expect to get some answers to those -dispatches that you were sending forward to Washington? - -Mr. SNYDER. Not really--not really. The thrust of information in -something like this is from the field to the Department. The Department -really answered the only thing which I asked them. That is, I told -the Department what I intended to do concerning his request for -renunciation, and the Department responded to that. And this was really -all I would have expected from them at the time. - -I would have expected--if the Department had had any information -concerning Oswald in its files--I would have expected them to let me -know if they had indication, for instance, that Oswald was mentally -unbalanced or emotionally unstable or anything else of this sort, -anything which might look like a repeat of the Petrulli pattern, I -would have expected them to let me know this, so I would know how to -handle the case. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Sir, 3 days before Mr. Oswald came into the Embassy, did -you have occasion to write a letter to Mr. Boster in Washington, asking -him how you should handle these matters of attempted renunciation of -American citizenship? - -Mr. SNYDER. Well---- - -Mr. DULLES. Is this the first time he came into the Embassy? - -Mr. COLEMAN. This is 3 days before he came. - -Mr. DULLES. The first time? - -Mr. COLEMAN. Yes, sir. - -Mr. SNYDER. I recall writing. I think probably the letter you have in -mind-- - -Mr. COLEMAN. I show you Commission Exhibit No. 914 which is a letter -dated October 28, 1959, from Mr. Snyder to Mr. Boster, and ask you -whether that is a letter you sent. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 914 for -identification.) - -Mr. COLEMAN. Is that a copy of the letter that you sent to Mr. Boster? - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Doesn't that letter, at the bottom, indicate that you were -attempting to get advice on how to handle an attempted renunciation of -American citizenship? At the bottom of the first page. - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes; this is a letter which I wrote to Gene Boster. This -letter, I might add, did not refer to any particular case, but was a -letter in which I had put down ideas which had been circulating in my -mind for some time, based on my initial handling of cases in Moscow. -And it was by way of putting down, as I say, some general ideas on the -subject, and asking Gene what the Department felt about this general -area of notions. It wasn't directed at any particular case. - -Representative FORD. Do you feel that the regulations then, as well as -now, and the law as well, are archaic in this regard? - -Mr. SNYDER. Oh, no; it is simply that--not the law, and certainly not -the regulations--and certainly not the law, can ever take the place of -the judgment of the officer on the spot. - -Mr. DULLES. Was this motivated by the Petrulli case? - -Mr. SNYDER. No; I don't think it was. The Petrulli case was a clear-cut -case, there was no problem with the Petrulli case, legal or otherwise. - -It was motivated, as best I can recall, by my experience with a few -other cases. Well, let's say--let's go back a little bit further, in -a more general vein. The kind of people, the kind of Americans, and I -suppose not only Americans but Frenchmen, Englishmen, and otherwise, -who occasionally drift into the Soviet Union and state that they want -to roll up their sleeves and go to work for socialism for the rest of -their lives, or something of this sort, are usually quite a peculiar -kind of person. - -In the first place, they are rarely Marxists in any meaningful sense -of the term. That is, they don't really know what it is all about. -They probably don't know two words about Marxist theories, or Marxism, -Leninism, Stalinism, or anything else. Even less do they know anything -about the country that they have chosen to spend their lives in, -theoretically. - -Almost universally they have never been to the country before. They -speak no Russian. And they are rebounding from something--in some -cases, such as the Petrulli case, the man is simply incompetent. In -other cases, as in the Webster case, he appears to have been fleeing -from his wife and the general responsibilities of his prior position, -and finding that he could not escape from them in the Soviet Union -either. - -In the case of Oswald, a man who, for one reason or another, seemed -to have been uncomfortable in his own society, unable to accommodate -himself to it, and hoping he will make out better some place else. - -At any rate, almost universally, the pattern is of a person who is not -acting out of any ideological grounds. He simply doesn't--and I think -this is essentially true probably of Oswald--this was my feeling in -speaking with him--that Oswald really knew nothing about Marxism and -Leninism, that he professed to be modeling his life after. - -Mr. DULLES. Isn't it possible, though, from this discussion--maybe this -should be asked to your legal adviser--that our procedure under law -about renunciation may be in conflict with general international law, -because if he comes into the country with an American passport, as an -American citizen, I gather under ordinary international law we have to -take him back. We are responsible for him. And no renunciation he makes -changes that, as the Petrulli case shows. - -Now, in the Petrulli case you had a situation where he was incompetent, -and you could throw the thing out on the ground he didn't know what he -was doing. But in these other cases, maybe you can't. - -Mr. SNYDER. Well, in the specific instance and circumstances of the -Soviet Union, you obviously have a major problem, there is a major -state problem. - -Mr. DULLES. That might arise in other cases. Isn't that true in any -case--If an American citizen arrives with an American passport, the -country where he arrives doesn't have to keep him, does it? Isn't it -our responsibility to take him back? - -Mr. SNYDER. Well, this is a point---- - -Mr. DULLES. That is a question of law. - -Mr. SNYDER. This is a question of law which I really cannot answer. - -And where we have an extradition treaty, I think there is no great -problem, perhaps, or at least the problem is somewhat different from -where we do not have an extradition treaty, as in the case of the -Soviet Union. - -And I just don't know whether we are in the last analysis required to -take back a person who is no longer one of our citizens, and under -circumstances where we do not have an extradition treaty with the -nation, where that person now resides. - -Representative FORD. Do we have an extradition treaty with the Soviet -Union? - -Mr. SNYDER. No, sir. - -Well, we did not at that time, and I don't think we have subsequently. -But we did not at that time. - -Representative FORD. Do the legal advisers to the Department know -whether we have an extradition treaty now? - -Mr. CHAYES. We do not have an extradition treaty with the Soviet Union. - -The only bilateral treaty we have with the Soviet Union, the Senate has -not yet given advice and consent--but the only bilateral agreement is -the consular agreement. - -But so long as I am on the record here, I don't see how the extradition -treaty has any bearing at all on the requirement of taking back a -former American citizen who may get into trouble in the other country. -That would be a matter governed by general principles of international -law, and also one's own humanitarian outlook on the particular -circumstance, rather than--or there could be treaty provisions perhaps, -commerce and navigation, that might bear on it. But in the usual case, -I think not. - -Senator COOPER. May I ask a question here? It might save time. - -Is there any statutory--any statute bearing on this question of -renunciation? - -The CHAIRMAN. Senator Cooper, we just went through that, and it has -been put in evidence here, and the statute has been read and it is very -simple. All he has to do is go there and renounce before a consul or -State officer to satisfy the regulations and requirements of the State -Department, and he is out. - -Isn't that correct, generally speaking? - -Mr. CHAYES. Yes, sir. - -Senator COOPER. Is there any other statute bearing upon the effect of -that renunciation with respect to any application or petition he might -make later to renew his citizenship in the United States? Is there any? - -Mr. COLEMAN. I would assume, sir, if he has made a valid renunciation, -he is then just like any other non-American that wants to come into the -United States. He has to go through one of the immigration quotas. - -Mr. SNYDER. He must get an immigration visa. - -Senator COOPER. I remember during the war and after the war we had -problems with persons who had become naturalized citizens, and were -returned to their countries, and in effect renounced their citizenship -in various ways. As I remember, under certain circumstances they could -renew their citizenship with the United States. But, as I understand -it, there is no provision of law respecting a citizen of the United -States who actually renounces his citizenship. - -Mr. CHAYES. The issues in all those cases, I believe, were whether the -purported expatriating act was actually an expatriating act. Whether -they had voted voluntarily or served in a foreign army voluntarily, or -something like that. - -Senator COOPER. All this matter, the legal side of it, will be put into -the record? - -Mr. COLEMAN. At 2 o'clock, sir. - -Now, Mr. Snyder, after you wrote that letter to Mr. Boster, which -is Commission Exhibit No. 914, you received a reply to your letter -which was signed by Nathaniel Davis, acting officer in charge, Soviet -affairs, dated December 10, 1959, which has been marked Commission -Exhibit No. 915. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 915 for -identification.) - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Sir, also on December 1, 1959, you sent an airgram to the -State Department indicating that you had been informed that Oswald had -left the hotel at which he had been staying in Moscow, is that correct? - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir. - -Mr. COLEMAN. I show you a document which has been identified as -Commission Exhibit No. 921, and ask you whether that is a copy of the -airgram you sent forward to the Department. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 921 for -identification.) - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes. - -Mr. COLEMAN. In Exhibit No. 921, you stated that you felt that he had -not carried through with his original intent to renounce American -citizenship in order to leave a crack open. Now, what information did -you have which led you to put that in the airgram? - -Mr. SNYDER. I am not sure whether this was my statement or---- - -Mr. COLEMAN. Well, would you look at that, sir? - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes; this was the statement of the correspondent. The -correspondent states that. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Oh, you were informing the Department that the -correspondent told you that she felt that Oswald may have been leaving -a crack open? - -Mr. SNYDER. That is right. This crack part here is part of the sentence -"correspondent states." - -Mr. COLEMAN. Who was the correspondent? - -Mr. SNYDER. This was Priscilla Johnson. - -Mr. COLEMAN. And I take it you were the one that prepared Commission -Exhibit No. 921? - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir. - -Mr. COLEMAN. You also state that no known Soviet publicity on case. I -take it you meant by that there had been no mentioning in the Soviet -press about Oswald. - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Are you saying from the time he came into your Embassy -office until the time you wrote that airgram, that there was nothing in -the Soviet press about Oswald? - -Mr. SNYDER. Not to my knowledge. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Is that usual in these cases, where Americans attempt to -renounce their citizenship? - -Mr. SNYDER. I think if there is a usual pattern--and, again, this is -difficult to use words like "usual" because there are never two cases -alike in this sort of thing--but if there is a usual pattern, it is -that there is some exploitation of the defector in Soviet public -media, usually after the details of his defection have been settled, -particularly the detail as to whether the Soviet Union desires to have -him. - -Up to that point, publicity in the Soviet press probably is not to be -expected. - -Mr. COLEMAN. After you sent the airgram dated December 1, 1959, to the -Department of State, which is Commission Exhibit No. 921, you didn't -have any more contact with Oswald until some time in February 1961, is -that correct? - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir. - -Mr. COLEMAN. In the meantime, however, there was correspondence between -the Embassy in Moscow and the State Department, is that correct? - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Did---- - -Mr. SNYDER. Well, let me see. - -Mr. COLEMAN. I will mark---- - -Mr. SNYDER. I guess there was. There was one or more welfare and -whereabouts inquiries concerning him from his mother, which I think was -the bulk, if not all, of the correspondence which we were engaged in -between those two periods. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Well, one such memorandum which went from the State -Department to Moscow was a memorandum dated March 21, 1960, which -has been marked as Commission Exhibit No. 922, which indicates that -Representative Wright of Texas had made inquiry with respect to the -whereabouts of Oswald. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 922 for -identification.) - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir. - -Mr. COLEMAN. And attached to the operations memorandum which was marked -as Commission Exhibit No. 922 is the letter sent to Congressman Wright, -which has been marked as Exhibit 923. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 923 for -identification.) - -Mr. COLEMAN. And also a letter sent to Mrs. Marguerite Oswald, which -has been marked as Commission Exhibit No. 924. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 924 for -identification.) - -Mr. COLEMAN. In reply to Commission Exhibit No. 922, you prepared and -sent to the Department of State an operations memorandum under date of -March 28, 1960, which we have marked as Commission Exhibit No. 927. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 927 for -identification.) - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir. - -Mr. COLEMAN. In Commission Exhibit No. 927, you make the statement that -the Embassy has no evidence that Oswald has expatriated himself other -than his announced intention to do so "and the Embassy is, therefore, -technically in a position to institute an inquiry concerning his -whereabouts through a note to the Foreign Office." - -Do you recall that statement in the operations memorandum? - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Was it your thought, then, that based upon all the -documents you had and what transpired on October 31, 1959, and the -subsequent letter that Oswald sent, that in your judgment he had not -renounced his American citizenship? - -Mr. SNYDER. The statement which I made in that letter--to be quite -accurate, as to its content--was made not for the--that is, the -statement wasn't directing itself to the question has Oswald lost his -citizenship or not, but rather to the question would we have the right -in Soviet eyes to ask about the whereabouts of this man. The Soviet -authorities took a very strict line that no foreign government had -the right to inquire about any resident of the Soviet Union unless he -was their citizen. So that my statement was merely--was meant there -to support my conclusion that the Embassy, as far as we could see, -would have the right in Soviet eyes to ask about the whereabouts of -Oswald--because we had no reason to believe he was not our citizen, -and, therefore, we had a perfect right to ask about where he might be. - -Representative FORD. In other words, in your own mind, at that point, -he had not renounced his citizenship? - -Mr. SNYDER. There is no question he had not renounced his citizenship; -yes, sir. - -Mr. COLEMAN. You considered that he was still an American citizen as of -March 28---- - -Mr. SNYDER. No evidence to the contrary. - -Mr. DULLES. That is, he hadn't taken the procedures required under the -law to renounce his citizenship? - -Mr. SNYDER. He had not renounced his citizenship, and there was no -evidence that he had acquired Soviet citizenship. These were the two -things under which I think he could possibly have lost his citizenship -at that time. - -So, for lack of evidence to the contrary, he was an American citizen. - -Mr. COLEMAN. On April 5, 1960--you received an operations memorandum -from the Department of State, dated March 28, 1960, which we have had -marked as Commission Exhibit No. 929. Do you recall receiving that? - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 929 for -identification.) - -Mr. COLEMAN. The second paragraph of that memorandum indicates that a -lookout card or file has been opened or prepared. - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir. - -Mr. COLEMAN. What does that mean? - -Mr. SNYDER. Never having worked in this end of the Department of -State, I can say only what it would mean in general terms--when one -says a lookout card has been prepared, it means that an entry has been -made in the file in such fashion that should someone look in the file -for--under this name or this category, that there would be--that their -attention would be flagged by this entry, and their attention would -be called to the fact that there is something that they ought to look -into. In other words, it is kind of a red flag placed--perhaps red flag -is not the word to use here--but it is a flag placed in the file to -attract the attention of anyone looking in the file under that. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Then on May 10, 1960, and again on June 22, 1960, you -received two operations memorandums from the State Department making -inquiries with respect to Mr. Oswald. Can you identify those? - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir. - -Mr. COLEMAN. You remember receiving those? - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir. - -Mr. COLEMAN. The operations memorandum dated May 10, 1960, was given -Commission Exhibit No. 928, and the operations memorandum dated June -22, 1960, has been given Commission Exhibit No. 925. - -(The documents referred to were marked Commission Exhibits Nos. 925 and -928, respectively, for identification.) - -Mr. COLEMAN. In response to those two operations memorandums, you, -then, on July 6, 1960, sent forth an operations memorandum which has -been given Commission Exhibit No. 926, which states that until you get -other instructions, you are not going to make any further inquiry or -do anything further in connection with Oswald, is that correct? - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 926 for -identification.) - -Mr. SNYDER. That is correct. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Then, sir, on February 1, 1961, you received a Department -of State instruction which was marked as Commission Exhibit No. 930, -which requested the Embassy to ask the Ministry of Foreign Affairs--to -inform the Ministry of Foreign Affairs that Mr. Oswald's mother was -worried about his personal safety, and was anxious to hear from him. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 930 for -identification.) - -Mr. COLEMAN. Did you ever make such an inquiry of the Ministry of -Foreign Affairs? - -Mr. SNYDER. No, I think I did not. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Do you know just when that Department instruction reached -the Embassy in Moscow? - -Mr. SNYDER. The date should be stamped on the document. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Well, on the copy we have, sir, there is no date. I take -it you have no independent recollection? - -Mr. SNYDER. No; it should have been within a week, though. - -Mr. COLEMAN. I take it, though, you would say that Commission Exhibit -No. 930 went by diplomatic pouch. - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir. - -Mr. COLEMAN. This didn't go by cable? - -Mr. SNYDER. No, that is not a telegraphic form. - -Mr. COLEMAN. On February 13, 1961, you received a letter from Mr. -Oswald, did you not? - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir. - -Mr. COLEMAN. I show you a copy of a letter which has been marked as -Commission Exhibit No. 931, and I ask you whether that is a copy of a -letter you received from Mr. Oswald. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 931 for -identification.) - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir. - -Representative FORD. Mr. Chairman, it would be helpful, I think, if we -would pass these around, or if copies would be available to us at the -time. Otherwise--at least I am not able to know what is transpiring -between the counsel and the witness. - -Are there extra copies of these we could have to examine as the exhibit -is submitted to the witness? - -Mr. SLAWSON. We could have them made up, Mr. Ford. I don't think there -are any extra ones right now. - -The CHAIRMAN. Well, suppose before you pass it to the witness you pass -it to me, and I will pass it to Congressman Ford, and then over to -Commissioner Dulles. - -Mr. SNYDER. This letter is presumably the reason why no action was -taken on the previous operations memorandum. It was overtaken, -presumably, by Oswald's letter. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Could you indicate for the record what Oswald said in his -letter which has been marked as Commission Exhibit No. 931? - -Mr. SNYDER. Perhaps I might just read the letter into the record. - -The letter is dated February, no date. - -"Dear sirs"---- - -Mr. DULLES. What year? - -Mr. SNYDER. 1961. - -"Since I have not received a reply to my letter of December 1960, I am -writing again asking that you consider my request for the return of my -American passport. - -"I desire to return to the United States, that is if we could come to -some agreement concernig [sic] the dropping of any legal proceedings -against me. If so, then I would be free to ask the Russian authorities -to allow me to leave. If I could show them my American passport, I am -of the opinion they would give me an exit visa. - -"They have at no time insisted that I take Russian citizenship. I am -living here with non-permanent type papers for a foreigner. - -"I cannot leave Minsk without permission, therefore I am writing rather -than calling in person. - -"I hope that in recalling the responsibility I have to America that you -remember your's in doing everything you can to help me since I am an -American citizen. - -"Sincerely Lee Harvey Oswald." - -Mr. DULLES. That is addressed to the American Embassy in Moscow? - -Mr. SNYDER. It is simply "Dear sirs:" As near as I can recall, it came -by mail, through the Soviet mail, addressed to the Embassy. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Had you received a letter from Mr. Oswald at a date of -December 1960, the way he mentioned in the first paragraph of his -letter? - -Mr. SNYDER. No, sir; we did not. - -Mr. COLEMAN. This is the first letter you received? - -Mr. SNYDER. This is the first communication since he left Moscow. - -Mr. COLEMAN. I would next like to mark as Commission Exhibit No. 933 -the reply which you made to Mr. Oswald, which is dated February 28, -1961. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 933 for -identification.) - -Mr. DULLES. When you say since he left Moscow, that was in---- - -Mr. SNYDER. November 1959, sir. - -Mr. DULLES. November 1959? - -Mr. SNYDER. This is what we presume was the date. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. Dulles, we have other evidence that he didn't leave -until January 7, 1960. - -Mr. DULLES. The last the Embassy heard from him was in November 1959? - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir. - -Mr. COLEMAN. You have been shown Commission Exhibit No. 933. Is that a -copy of a letter which you sent to Mr. Oswald? - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir. - -Mr. COLEMAN. At the same time did you inform the State Department that -you had received a letter from Mr. Oswald? - -Mr. SNYDER. I presume that I did. - -Mr. COLEMAN. I have had marked as Commission Exhibit No. 932 a Foreign -Service Despatch under date of February 28, 1961, from the Embassy in -Moscow to the State Department in Washington. I would like to ask you -whether this is the despatch which you sent forth to the Department. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 932 for -identification.) - -Representative FORD. Do the records show the date that the letter from -Oswald was written--yes; February 5--and received February 13. This -communication is dated February 28. Is that a long or a short time in -communicating with Washington? - -Mr. SNYDER. I would say it is a long time. - -Representative FORD. Is there any explanation why it is a long time? - -Mr. SNYDER. The only thing I could think of is simply that Moscow is -a very busy office, and Mr. Oswald's case was no longer the top of my -docket. - -Representative FORD. Had there been any communication with the State -Department in Washington concerning the inquiries of the mother, other -than this? - -Mr. SNYDER. I don't know, Mr. Ford. The only knowledge I had at the -time of inquiries is what I was informed of by the Department. I -presume that they informed me of all inquiries--since they could hardly -act upon them themselves. - -Representative FORD. What is the date of the last inquiry by the mother -as to Oswald's---- - -Mr. COLEMAN. Sir, I think the record will show that on January 26, -1961, the mother came to the State Department and as a result of that -visit, that inquiry of February 1, 1961, went forward, making the -inquiry. It has already been put in as an exhibit. - -Representative FORD. This is the trouble not keeping copies available. -It is a little difficult to follow the sequence. - -Mr. COLEMAN. It is Commission Exhibit No. 930. - -Representative FORD. This document, Commission Exhibit No. 930, shows -what, as far as you are concerned, Mr. Snyder? - -Mr. SNYDER. Well, it shows an interest by Oswald's mother in his -whereabouts. - -Representative FORD. As of what date, and where? - -Mr. SNYDER. It says that Mrs. Oswald called at the Department of State -on January 26, 1961; she personally called at the Department to inquire -about her son. - -Representative FORD. And that was communicated to the Embassy in Moscow? - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir. - -Representative FORD. When was it received in the Embassy in Moscow? - -Mr. SNYDER. Well, this doesn't show the date of receipt, but it was -sent on February 1, and was received within a week of that time. - -Representative FORD. And according to the records, the letter written -by Oswald on February 5, 1961, which was received--was received -February 13, 1961. - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes. - -Representative FORD. And this document, Commission Exhibit No. 933, -shows a reply was given February 28, is that correct? - -Mr. SNYDER. I think that is correct, sir. - -Mr. DULLES. Does that mean it took 8 days to go from Minsk to Moscow? - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir. - -Mr. DULLES. Isn't that an unusually long time? - -Mr. SNYDER. Well, not too much of that time is transit time. - -Mr. DULLES. That is what I was getting at. - -Representative FORD. It also shows it took 15 days to get out of the -American Embassy. - -Mr. SNYDER. You must remember that in my eyes, as the officer on the -spot, Mr. Oswald had no claim to prior action from the Embassy among -other cases. And although the consular officer attempts to be as -impersonal as he can about these things, in matter of fact it is very -difficult to be entirely impersonal. - -Mr. Oswald had no claim to any unusual attentions of mine, I must say. - -I think that the letter from Oswald from the Metropole Hotel to the -Embassy took something like 3 days or 4 days. - -Representative FORD. What does that mean to you? Does that mean that -his correspondence was intercepted? - -Mr. SNYDER. There was no question about that, Mr. Ford? - -Representative FORD. Intercepted by Soviet authorities? - -Mr. SNYDER. Oh, yes; this has been known for years. - -Representative FORD. Common practice? - -Mr. SNYDER. Oh, yes; every embassy there knows the system, and operates -within it. All mail from or to a foreign embassy in Moscow goes to a -separate section of the Moscow Post Office, called the international -section, and this is the screening office for all mail to and from any -embassy. - -Representative FORD. As far as you know, is that still the process -today? - -Mr. SNYDER. I am sure it is, sir. The essentials of the Soviet State -haven't changed. - -Senator COOPER. May I ask a few questions? - -I have been examining these exhibits which have been introduced. The -first one I have looked at is Exhibit No. 908, which refers to Lee -Harvey Oswald's call at the Embassy and your interview with him. - -Mr. DULLES. Is that from Moscow to Washington, the State Department? - -Senator COOPER. Yes; it is your interview with Oswald. - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir; that is right. - -Senator COOPER. In this he states that he applied for a Soviet tourist -visa in Helsinki on October 14. He applied for citizenship by letter -to the Supreme Soviet on October 16, in Moscow. And your report to the -State Department said that he appeared at the Embassy on October 31, -and presented his request for renunciation in writing. - -I assume that you have had other cases of this kind, have you not? - -Mr. SNYDER. Well, particularly the Petrulli case, yes; a few weeks -earlier. - -Senator COOPER. Would it be normal in your judgment that this period -of time, from the time he applied to the Soviet for citizenship, the -Supreme Soviet, which was on October 16, as he said, it would not be -acted upon in 2 weeks? - -Mr. SNYDER. I would think it would be highly unusual if it were acted -upon in 2 weeks; yes, sir. - -Senator COOPER. Did others talk to him in the Embassy beside you? - -Mr. SNYDER. Not to my knowledge; no, sir. - -Senator COOPER. Did you know whether or not newspaper people, American -newspaper people were talking to him? - -Mr. SNYDER. I know that Priscilla Johnson talked to him. Whether others -got to him, I don't know. He wasn't terribly communicative. - -Senator COOPER. Did she tell you she talked to him? - -Mr. SNYDER. Oh, yes. - -Senator COOPER. But you do not know whether or not other members of the -Embassy staff talked to him? - -Mr. SNYDER. I have no reason to believe that anyone else talked to him, -other than myself, Senator Cooper. That is, at this time. I mean at a -later time, Mr. McVickar, I presume, talked to Oswald. He talked to his -wife, I am quite sure. I presume that Oswald was with her. But up until -the time that I left Moscow, Oswald was my baby, and I don't think -anyone else talked to him in the Embassy. - -Mr. DULLES. Were there other cases, other than the Petrulli and the -Oswald case, where Americans attempted to or did renounce their -citizenship while you were in Moscow in this period? - -Mr. SNYDER. No, sir. - -Senator COOPER. To whom were you directly responsible in the Embassy? - -Mr. SNYDER. My immediate superior was Mr. Freers, Edward Freers, who -was the Deputy Chief of Mission. - -Senator COOPER. Was he informed about this case? - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir. - -Senator COOPER. Who was the American ambassador at that time? - -Mr. SNYDER. Ambassador Thompson. - -Senator COOPER. Did he know about it? - -Mr. SNYDER. I presume he did. Ambassador Thompson knew everything that -went on in his shop. If through no other means, both the Ambassador and -the DCM, the Deputy Chief of Mission, read the correspondence coming in -and out, and this is their basic line of information. - -Senator COOPER. In your report, Commission Exhibit No. 908, you stated -that he knew the provisions of U.S. law on loss of citizenship, and -declined to have them reviewed by the interviewing officer. Is that -correct? He said he knew how he could renounce his citizenship? - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes; I attempted to explain to him at the time the -seriousness of his move, the meaning of it, the irrevocability of it -and the section of law applying. He was quite curt in his manner, and -apparently among other things, declined to have me read the law to him. - -Senator COOPER. Exhibit No. 920 refers to the letter received by the -Embassy from Lee Oswald, who was residing in the Metropole Hotel. It -does show that it was dated November 3, and received, according to -this, on November 12, no, date sent November 7. - -This could be a speculation. It appears to me, though, it is a very -well written letter. "I, Lee Harvey Oswald, do hereby request that -my present United States citizenship be revoked. I appered [sic] in -person, at the consulate office of the U.S. Embassy, Moscow, on Oct. -31st for the purpose of signing the formal papers to this effect. This -legal right I was refused at that time. I wish to protest against this -action and against the conduct of the official of the United States -consular service who acted on behalf of the United States Government. -My application requesting that I be considered for citizenship in the -Soviet Union is now pending before the Supreme Soviet of the U.S.S.R. -In the event of acceptance, I will request my government to lodge a -formal protest regarding this incident." - -Signed "Lee Harvey Oswald." - -I would assume that the last sentence referred to the Soviet Union. - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir. - -Senator COOPER. From your examination and interview with Lee Harvey -Oswald, your talks with him, does that letter appear to be one which he -had the capacity to write in that language and form? - -Mr. SNYDER. That is a difficult thing to speculate on, Senator Cooper. -I would say this---- - -Senator COOPER. It is a very good letter. - -Mr. SNYDER. At first blush, I would not say that it was beyond his -capacity. He did strike me as an intelligent man. He was certainly -very articulate. Actually still a boy, I suppose, in a sense--he was -20 at the time I saw him. He was a very articulate person, and quite -intelligent. I don't think from what I saw of him that the letter is -beyond his capacity to have written. - -There is also an element of it which is very much Oswaldish, and that -is the last paragraph, the rather strident tones of it. One finds this -in his other correspondence with the Embassy, and in the tone which -he took when he first spoke with me--extremely strident tone. It is -almost comical in a sense, this last paragraph, in its pomposity, its -sonorousness. I am quite prepared to believe that the last part at -least is Oswald's. - -Senator COOPER. One other question. - -In your report you noted that he had made statements about the United -States, derogatory statements. - -Did he ever direct his statements toward any individual in the United -States, any official? - -Mr. SNYDER. No; I have no recollection that he directed his statements -against anyone, Senator Cooper. I think that if he had, I would likely -have reported this matter. As a matter of fact, on the general subject -of the molding of his attitudes, he was not very communicative. - -Mr. DULLES. Was he technically correct there in his statement--I -believe he said that his application was pending before the Supreme -Soviet. Is that technically correct? - -Mr. SNYDER. That is technically correct; yes, sir. - -The CHAIRMAN. You may continue, Mr. Coleman. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Now, Mr. Snyder, on March 24, 1961, you sent a Foreign -Service Despatch to the Department indicating that you had received a -second letter from Mr. Oswald on March 20, 1961, and you said that the -letter was postmarked Minsk, March 5, and Moscow March 17. I would like -to show you a Commission document which has been marked as Commission -Exhibit No. 940, and ask you whether that is a copy of the Foreign -Service Despatch which you sent forth to the Department. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 940 for -identification.) - -Mr. DULLES. Could this be very briefly summarized for the record while -it is being read? - -Mr. COLEMAN. In this despatch, he sets forth the letter which Mr. -Oswald sent, which basically said that it would be hard for him to get -to the Embassy in Moscow, and why can't they send the papers to Minsk? - -Mr. DULLES. These are the papers about his return? - -Mr. COLEMAN. Yes, papers that he would have to fill out to see if he -was entitled to get his passport back. - -Would the witness identify the despatch? Is that the one you sent? - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes; it is. - -Mr. COLEMAN. I take it that the first answer you got from the -Department to your despatch of February 28, 1961, which is marked as -Commission Exhibit No. 932, indicating the first letter you received -from Oswald, and then the second despatch marked Commission Exhibit No. -940, was a State Department instruction dated April 13, 1961, which was -marked as Commission Exhibit No. 934. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 934 for -identification.) - -Mr. COLEMAN. Is that the despatch which you received? - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir. - -Senator COOPER. And then again on May 26, 1961, you sent another -despatch to the State Department indicating that you received another -letter from Oswald, and stating that you thought you would return to -Oswald his passport, and that has been marked as Commission Exhibit No. -936. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 936 for -identification.) - -Mr. DULLES. Mr. Chairman, I note a reference in the margin here, in -Commission Exhibit No. 934. - -Do you know whose handwriting that is in, Mr. Snyder? - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir; that is my handwriting. - -Mr. DULLES. What does that say? - -Mr. SNYDER. It says, "May be necessary give him before he can arrange -depart." - -Mr. COLEMAN. Now, Mr. Snyder, on or about July 10 or 11, 1961, Mr. -Oswald physically appeared at the American Embassy again, did he not? - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes; I saw him once more--I believe once more--possibly -twice. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Actually he came in on a Saturday, did he not, which was -July 8, and then you saw him again on the following Monday, isn't that -correct? Didn't you actually see him twice during that period? - -Mr. SNYDER. I think that I must have. As I say, I think I must have, -because of my review of the record at the time indicates that I think -I saw him on the 8th, and the application was taken on the 10th, which -means, I presumably saw him twice. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Do you recall when he came into the Embassy on the 8th and -what he said, and what you did? - -Mr. SNYDER. No; in fact, I have no recollection of his having come in -at that time, Mr. Coleman. - -Mr. COLEMAN. In the course of these two interviews on the 8th and on -the 10th, he actually filled out an application for renewal of his -passport, did he not? - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir. - -Mr. COLEMAN. And you handled that application? That is correct? - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir. - -Mr. COLEMAN. I next have marked as Commission Exhibit No. 938, a six -page document which purports to be an application for renewal of -passport, together with a questionnaire which was attached thereto, and -ask you whether that is a copy of the application for renewal which you -filled out at that time. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 938 for -identification.) - -Mr. SNYDER. With reference to his visit on the 8th, it is possible that -he telephoned. Again, I don't know quite what our record shows on that. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Well, to help you refresh your recollection, sir, there -has been marked as Commission Exhibit No. 935 a Foreign Service -Despatch dated July 11, 1961, in which you described the meeting with -Oswald. Perhaps you would want to be reading that. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 935 for -identification.) - -Mr. SNYDER. This is the interview which I thought I had on the 10th. - -Representative FORD. What does it mean in this questionnaire -[Commission Exhibit No. 938] where Oswald says, and I quote, "I recived -[sic] a document for residence in the U.S.S.R. but I am described as -being 'Without Citizenship'"? - -Mr. SNYDER. This undoubtedly refers to his so-called internal Soviet -passport, Mr. Ford. Every Soviet citizen living in urban areas, and -also in the border areas, bears an internal passport which identifies -him, has certain other information about him, and bears a notation -of nationality. There are, as I recall, three varieties of this. One -is for Soviet citizens, one is for citizens of foreign countries, I -believe, and another is for stateless persons. - -The CHAIRMAN. What is the last category? - -Mr. SNYDER. Stateless persons. My mind is not clear at this stage as to -whether the passports for foreigners and stateless persons is the same -or not. I don't quite recall. At any rate, there is an entry in there -which asks to state his nationality. No, it is a separate passport. As -I recall the title of it, it is called--it is a separate passport. - -Mr. DULLES. Did the Soviet Union ever indicate to the Embassy, as far -as you know, that they considered Oswald as stateless, or is that -Oswald's own statement? - -Mr. SNYDER. The only indication is the internal passport which he had, -which was made out by local officials, and which may have been based -upon a statement that Oswald himself made to them. He may have regarded -himself as being stateless, I don't know, at the time he applied for -that document. - -Mr. DULLES. And that did not necessarily require, as far as you know, -reference to Moscow? - -Mr. SNYDER. No. - -Mr. DULLES. You think the local authorities could have done that on -their own, and on the information they got from Oswald? - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes; the term "stateless," I might interject here, is used -rather loosely by Soviet authorities, because, in the first place, they -have clearly no authority and no basis upon which to determine whether -a person is a citizen of a foreign state. I mean only the foreign state -can determine that. - -So that the Soviet authorities had no basis on which to determine -whether Oswald was or was not a citizen of the United States or of six -other countries. - -Mr. DULLES. Except the fact that they had seen his passport and knew of -the existence of his American passport. - -Mr. SNYDER. On that basis, they would--well, he was certainly an -American citizen when he entered as far as they were concerned; yes, -sir. - -Representative FORD. Is a person who is stateless the same as a person -who is "without citizenship"? - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir; this distinction is only in translation, Mr. Ford. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. Snyder, in the passport application, at the bottom -there is a place where you have to cross out "have" or "have not" in -connection with four questions. Could you read into the record the -printed part at the bottom of the application? - -Mr. DULLES. Would you just clarify for us what application this is? - -Mr. COLEMAN. This is the application for the passport renewal which -Oswald signed---- - -Mr. DULLES. For the American passport to return to the United States? - -Mr. COLEMAN. Well, this is a renewal of the passport. - -Mr. DULLES. A renewal of the passport to return to the United States? - -Mr. SNYDER. It says, "I have--have not--been naturalized as a citizen -of a foreign state; taken an oath or made an affirmation or other -formal declaration of allegiance to a foreign state; entered or -served in, the armed forces of a foreign state; accepted, served in, -or performed the duties of, any office, post or employment under -the government of a foreign state or political subdivision thereof; -voted in a political election in a foreign state or participated in -an election or plebiscite to determine the sovereignty over foreign -territory; made a formal renunciation of nationality, either in the -United States or before a diplomatic or consular officer of the United -States in a foreign state; been convicted by court martial of deserting -the military, air or naval service of the United States in time of war, -or of committing any act of treason against or of attempting by force -to overthrow, or of bearing arms against the United States; or departed -from or remained outside the jurisdiction of the United States for the -purpose of evading or avoiding training and service in the military, -air or naval forces of the United States. - -"If any of the above-mentioned acts or conditions are applicable to the -applicant's case, or to the case of any other person included in this -application, a supplementary statement under oath should be attached -and made a part hereof." - -Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. Snyder, as I read the application, what you did was to -cross out the "have not" which means that Oswald was stating that he -had done one of those acts which you have read, is that correct? - -Mr. SNYDER. This is what it would mean. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Which one of the various acts that you have read was it -your impression that Oswald was admitting that he had done? - -Mr. SNYDER. Well, there are two possibilities here. One possibility is -that the crossing out of "have not" is a clerical error, and that he -did not intend to do this. - -Mr. COLEMAN. How could that be a possibility. Don't you pretty much -negate that possibility by the fact that you did require him to fill -out the questionnaire which only has to be filled out if he admits that -he has done one of the various acts? - -Mr. SNYDER. No; the questionnaire is filled out routinely in Moscow in -any kind of problem case. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Even though the citizen has done none of the acts which -are set forth in the passport renewal application? - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes; well, I say in a problem case. I don't mean an -American tourist coming in to get his passport renewed, on whom there -is no presumption of any problem at all. But a person who has resided -in the Soviet Union---- - -Mr. COLEMAN. Is it your testimony this is only a typographical error? - -Mr. SNYDER. This is one possibility. The other possibility is that he -may have said, "I have taken an oath or made an affirmation or formal -declaration of allegiance to a foreign state." - -He had, on several occasions, you know, stated that his allegiance was -to the Soviet Union. - -He may have put this down--that is, he may have said "have", having -that act in mind, knowing that I knew it, and that there was no need to -attempt to hide the fact. This is possible. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Do you recall just what you had in mind on July 10 when he -gave you that application filled out in the manner it was? - -Mr. SNYDER. I am sorry, I don't think I understand the question. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Then I will withdraw it and rephrase it. Do you now recall -what reaction you had in mind when you received the application which -had been crossed out in such a way that indicated that he was admitting -that he had done one of the various acts which are set forth on the -form? - -Mr. SNYDER. No; I don't. Of course what I would have been concerned -with at the time in more detail really is the questionnaire, which -is an expansion of this paragraph, and is much more meaningful. So I -would have been concerned both with what he said on the questionnaire -and with the facts of his case--whether he thought he committed one of -these acts is not material to the fact of whether he had committed it -or whether he lost his citizenship thereby. - -At any rate, my attention would have been directed to the expanded -questionnaire in which he had to fill out individual paragraphs -concerning each one of these things, and to a determination of the -facts in the case. - -Mr. DULLES. Do you recall whether or not that striking out was noted at -the time the passport application or extension was considered? - -Mr. SNYDER. I do not, Mr. Dulles; no. - -Representative FORD. Did you have his file out and looking at it, -reading it, studying at the time he was there and this came up? - -Mr. SNYDER. I presume I did, Mr. Ford, but--I am sure his file was -there. But in any event, I was the officer handling his case. Having -written virtually everything in the file from the outgoing point of -view, I was very well familiar with it. - -Mr. COLEMAN. In any event, having received the questionnaire and the -application, you determined that Mr. Oswald was entitled to an American -passport, is that correct? - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir. - -Mr. COLEMAN. And you sent forward the application and the questionnaire -in the Foreign Service Despatch of July 11, 1961, which has been marked -Exhibit No. 935, is that correct? - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir. - -Mr. COLEMAN. And your recommendation was that the passport should -issue--the passport office should issue a new passport, is that correct? - -Mr. SNYDER. I would issue the passport; yes. - -Mr. COLEMAN. And also on the same day, at the end of the interview on -July 10, 1961, you returned to Mr. Oswald the American passport which -he had given you in 1959. Is that correct? - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Didn't you stamp that passport before you returned it -to him? I show you Commission Exhibit No. 946 and ask you would you -indicate to the Commission---- - -Mr. DULLES. Could I ask one question before the witness answers this -question? Was that application and questionnaire considered in the -State Department before the passport was issued, or was the passport -issued on general instructions before they received this application? - -Mr. SNYDER. I will have to correct a word we used before. It is -renewal, and not issuance. - -His passport was good for another 2 years if we renewed, and he was -applying for renewal of his passport, not issuance of a new one. - -In either event, the issuance or renewal would have been done by the -Embassy, by me. - -Mr. COLEMAN. The problem, Mr. Dulles, is the existing passport he had, -by its term, would expire September 1961, is that correct? - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir. - -Mr. COLEMAN. And you felt he would not be able to get out of the Soviet -Union prior to September 1961, and therefore his existing passport -would have to be renewed? - -Mr. SNYDER. I don't recall offhand what the purpose of renewing the -passport at that time was. There was no prospect of his leaving the -Soviet Union at that time, and probably not for quite some time to -come, in my estimation, and based upon my experience with other cases -he would have required his passport, and I presume this is why I was -returning it to him. - -Mr. COLEMAN. On July 10, 1961, you did two things with respect to the -passport. First, you returned to him his old passport, isn't that -correct? - -Mr. SNYDER. I think I did. I might reread my despatch and see. - -Mr. COLEMAN. And, second, you accepted his application for renewal of -the passport. - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes; my mind is clear on that. Yes; I recall now. - -Mr. COLEMAN. When you returned to him his old passport, you first -stamped the old passport. - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Will you indicate for the record how you stamped the old -passport? - -Mr. SNYDER. The passport was marked "This passport is valid only for -direct travel to the United States." (Commission Exhibit No. 946, p. 6.) - -Mr. DULLES. Are you quite clear you returned the passport to him before -he made his final plans to return? - -Mr. SNYDER. I am not entirely---- - -Mr. COLEMAN. Sir, before you answer the question, I suggest if you look -at the Foreign Office Despatch dated July 11, 1961, you will find that -you told the Department what you did at the time. - -Mr. SNYDER. Oh, yes. - -Mr. DULLES. Could that be read into the record--just what he did say -about the handling of the passport at that time--that is July what? - -Mr. SNYDER. July 8, 1961. - -This was July 8. "Oswald intends to institute an application"---- - -Mr. COLEMAN. Pardon me. Wasn't it really July 10? July 8 was the day he -came over to the Embassy just for a few moments. Then he came back on -the 10th. - -Mr. SNYDER. I don't know. It isn't clear from my despatch, I would say. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Would you read---- - -Mr. SNYDER. Actually, if we knew what day of the week the 8th was---- - -Mr. COLEMAN. Subject to check, it was a Saturday. - -Mr. SNYDER. "Oswald intends to institute an application for an exit -visa immediately upon his return to Minsk within the next few days. His -American passport was returned to him for this purpose after having -been amended to be valid for direct travel--for direct return to the -United States only." - -Mr. COLEMAN. In that same Foreign Service Despatch you indicated at the -end that you were sending to the Passport Office in Washington the -application for renewal, isn't that correct? - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes; that is right. - -Representative FORD. May I ask Mr. Snyder--on Commission Exhibit No. -938, where Oswald said, "I have been naturalized as a citizen of a -foreign state," and so forth--if that was the only statement that was -made, what effect would that have had on his application either for a -renewal or a new passport? - -Mr. SNYDER. Well, it would have the effect of flagging the consular -officer to ask some questions, Mr. Ford. - -Representative FORD. Would it have automatically disqualified him for -renewal or the issuance of a new passport? - -Mr. SNYDER. No, sir. - -Representative FORD. Not under the law or the regulations? - -Mr. SNYDER. Not to the best of my knowledge. In other words, what -he says, to my knowledge, is immaterial to a finding of his loss of -nationality. It is the act which counts. - -Mr. COLEMAN. I don't think that is quite the Congressman's question. -His question is if he had actually naturalized himself, could he be -entitled to get an American passport? - -Mr. SNYDER. Oh, no; of course, if he had committed the act of accepting -naturalization in a foreign state, he could not have. He would have -lost his American citizenship. - -Representative FORD. But limiting your knowledge to what he said in -this paragraph, this in and of itself would have precluded either the -issuance of a new passport or renewal? - -Mr. SNYDER. No; I don't think we can say that, Mr. Ford, because no -matter what he says in there, this does not affect his right--does not -affect his American citizenship. It is the determination of facts which -determines it. And the only thing this does, really--well, the first -thing it does is to alert the consular officer to start asking him some -questions. - -The CHAIRMAN. Gentlemen, I have a call from the Court. I must go over -there now. We have the Court conference at 2 o'clock. Will someone be -here to preside at 2 o'clock? - -Representative FORD. Mr. Chairman, I have to leave, too. We have a -quorum call over on the floor of the House. I can be back at 2. But I -do have to leave at the present time. - -The CHAIRMAN. Would you be back at 2 to preside until I return from the -Court? - -Representative FORD. I would be very glad to, Mr. Chairman. - -Senator COOPER. Mr. Chairman, I will be able to be here part of the -time this afternoon. But we are voting this afternoon. I don't know -exactly what time. - -Mr. DULLES. I will be here at 2:30, Mr. Chairman. - -The CHAIRMAN. All right, fine. - -Representative FORD. May I ask how much longer you intend to go on? - -Mr. COLEMAN. I think I can finish in about 4 minutes with Mr. Snyder. - -Representative FORD. Off the record. - -(Discussion off the record.) - -Representative FORD. Back on the record. - -We will recess now until 2 o'clock. - -(Whereupon, at 12:25 p.m., the President's Commission recessed.) - - - - -Afternoon Session - -TESTIMONY OF RICHARD EDWARD SNYDER RESUMED - - -The President's Commission reconvened at 2 p.m. - -Representative FORD. The Commission will come to order. Will you -proceed. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. Snyder, we have marked as Commission Exhibit No. 947, -which is a covering airgram and another copy of the application for -renewal of passport, which is a copy which remained in the Embassy at -Moscow until May 29, 1964, when it was sent to the State Department. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 947 for -identification.) - -Mr. COLEMAN. I show it to you, sir, to call your attention that on this -copy the "X" is over the "have" rather than the "have not." - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir. - -Mr. COLEMAN. I had originally shown you Exhibit No. 938, which was the -other copy of the application for renewal of passport. - -I take it when you compare those two copies, you note that one is not a -direct offset of the other. - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Do you have an explanation of why on July 10, two separate -typings were made of the application for renewal? - -Mr. SNYDER. No, sir; I do not. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Also on or about July 11, 1961, at the same time you were -interviewing Oswald, the State Department was sending instructions, -answering your earlier despatch of May 26, 1961, is that correct? - -I show you Commission Exhibit No. 937. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 937 for -identification.) - -Mr. SNYDER. This communication would have been received after my -departure from Moscow. - -Mr. COLEMAN. You never saw that communication? - -Mr. SNYDER. No, sir. - -Mr. COLEMAN. That communication does indicate, doesn't it, that the -State Department was saying, that based upon its records, that Oswald -had not expatriated himself, or was still technically an American -citizen? - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes; the one operative sentence there in the communications -states, "In any event in the absence of evidence showing that Mr. -Oswald had definitely lost United States citizenship he apparently -maintains that technical status." - -Mr. COLEMAN. But you say you never saw that document? - -Mr. SNYDER. No; this arrived after I departed from the post. - -Mr. COLEMAN. I show you Commission Exhibit No. 939, the State -Department operations memorandum dated August 18, 1961, and ask you if -you saw it? - -Mr. SNYDER. No; it arrived after I left. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 939 for -identification.) - -Mr. COLEMAN. On July 8 and July 10, when Oswald was at the Embassy, did -you see his wife, Marina? - -Mr. SNYDER. Not to the best of my knowledge, Mr. Coleman. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Did you have any knowledge that she was also in Moscow? - -Mr. SNYDER. I don't really know. I can't say whether at that time I had -knowledge that she was or not. I don't ever recall having seen her, no. - -Mr. COLEMAN. When you spoke to Oswald on the 8th or on the 10th of -July, did he indicate that his wife was in Moscow? - -Mr. SNYDER. I am sorry, I don't know. - -Mr. COLEMAN. In connection with the various decisions you have made in -this matter, did you consult with anyone? - -Mr. SNYDER. I think perhaps the word "consult" isn't quite the word. I -kept my superiors informed of what I was doing, and, of course, they -did see my communications, and in most cases countersigned them before -they went out. But in the sense of asking their opinion of what I ought -to do, I don't think so. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Did anyone instruct you as to what particular decision you -should make in connection with any requests made by Mr. Oswald? - -Mr. SNYDER. No; this was my responsibility, really. There was no one -who was presumed to know more about it at the post than I did. I mean -in the sense that I was the officer in charge of that activity. - -Mr. COLEMAN. There is one other question, sir. - -We have some information that Oswald stated that in 1959, when he -was in the hospital, that he was in the same ward with an elderly -American. Do you have any idea who the elderly American could have been? - -Mr. SNYDER. No; I am afraid not. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Would there be any record in the Embassy which would -indicate what Americans were in Moscow at that time, and whether there -was an elderly American who had been hospitalized? - -Mr. SNYDER. We kept an informal file of all information relating to the -presence of Americans any place in the Soviet Union. - -In other words, any time we had a report of any kind, of any level of -credibility, we kept some kind of a record. It was known that there -were Americans in the Soviet Union under various circumstances against -their own will, or persons who might be Americans, or might have had a -claim to American citizenship, who might have been dual nationals--one -doesn't know. But we would get reports occasionally from a state camp, -a labor camp, of a sighting of an American, or a person who claimed to -be an American. This sort of thing. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Would that information be in a special file in the -Embassy, or would it be spread throughout various files? - -Mr. SNYDER. No; it was in, as I recall, a separate informal listing. In -other words, they were also reported to the Department of State. The -chances are that the Department also maintained---- - -Mr. COLEMAN. Have you any idea what that file might be called, if we -were going to ask for it by name--what name we would give so that the -people in Moscow would know what we are trying to take a look at? - -Mr. SNYDER. No; I don't. But it would most likely have been under -"Welfare and Whereabouts." The files in Moscow, I might say, the -classified files are not that extensive. I mean they were one-drawer -files for the most part that we officers worked on ourselves, -physically. - -Mr. COLEMAN. When Oswald came in to see you in 1959, did you have any -feeling that somebody was coaching him, or had instructed him what to -say or do? - -Mr. SNYDER. Well, I think I am accurate in saying at that time I -assumed he had been in contact with some level of Soviet representative -or official and had discussed his intended actions, and perhaps had had -some advice from them as to what to do or how to approach things--in -the sense that his words were somebody else's, I don't think I could -say, because he gave me the impression, the times I saw him, of an -intelligent person who spoke in a manner, and on a level, which seemed -to befit his apparent level of intelligence. - -However, he did say in my first interview with him either "I have been -told what you are going to tell me," or "I am very familiar with the -arguments you are going to use on me," or words to this effect, which -would be the most direct evidence, shall we say, that he had discussed -what he intended to say, and how he intended to handle himself, before -he came in to me. - -But, in any event, I think it is a foregone conclusion, from what I -know of the procedures and things like this, that he was in contact -with a Soviet official, he was under somebody's charge in a sense -during the time he was there. This was certainly the pattern in the -Petrulli case. My whole knowledge of the system and the way it works, -the whole internal consistency of it, would lead me to believe that -this were the case, unless I had firm evidence to believe otherwise. - -Mr. COLEMAN. How about when he reappeared on July 8 and 10, 1961? Did -you feel he was being coached at that time in connection with his -attempt to get his passport returned to him? - -Mr. SNYDER. No; I don't have any direct evidence that he was coached, -I think, in the terms in which you mean. For one thing, his manner of -speech and his general approach to the degree that I recall it was, -well, less stiff, less formal, and certainly less haughty than it -had been on the first occasion. He also didn't use with me the kind -of Marxist sloganeering which I got from him on the first interview, -which also, I think, is in a sense an evidence of his having been well -briefed on his talk with me. - -The second time around this was pretty much absent from his -conversation. - -Mr. COLEMAN. You say you felt he was well briefed on his first -conversation with you in 1959, but not in connection with his second? - -Mr. SNYDER. Well, again, I cannot say that he was well briefed. I just -don't know. But I say, it seemed to me evident at the time that he had -discussed with, presumably, a Soviet person or persons what he intended -to do at the Embassy, and perhaps the line he should take at the -Embassy. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Well, how do you feel or do you think there is any special -significance to the way he entered the Soviet Union from Helsinki in -October of 1959? - -Mr. SNYDER. Well, there is some significance perhaps, but not a great -amount of significance. As most travelers, most tourist travelers -come into the Soviet Union on a prearranged tour--many do come -from Helsinki. Many of them do not come to Moscow. They go only to -Leningrad, spend a day or two, and go back again across the border. -It is the shortest entry onto Soviet territory from non-Communist -territory. - -It was at least one other case, when I was in Moscow, of a person--that -is with possible defecting intent, who came into the Soviet Union -through Helsinki, and who got his visa apparently directly at the -Soviet Embassy, which I think is what Oswald did, although I cannot -be sure. But it was my impression at the time that he did not have a -prepared tourist tour sort of thing. But I cannot be sure on this point. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Do you draw any significance from the fact that he was -able to come from Minsk into Moscow on July 8, apparently without any -difficulty? - -Mr. SNYDER. No; I cannot say that he came without any difficulty. He -may have had considerable difficulty. It was my feeling that he would -have some difficulty in coming to Moscow. - -Representative FORD. Did you make any inquiry about that? Did that -rouse your curiosity, that he was able to come? - -Mr. SNYDER. No; because I expected that he would be able to come, Mr. -Ford. As a matter of fact, the letter which I wrote to him in reply to -the first letter to me which I received was very carefully worded with -this in mind. It was written, for one thing, partly addressed to the -Soviet authorities who would read it. And partly to Oswald--which could -be used by him in a sense should he run up against real difficulties in -getting permission to come to Moscow. - -At any rate, I think it was my feeling at the time that he probably -could come to the Embassy, although it might cost him considerable -difficulty. But I saw no reason to spare him this difficulty. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Is there any other information you have which you think -the Commission would be interested in in connection with its work and -its investigation? - -Mr. SNYDER. I can't really--well, let me say that I don't know of any -other facts pertinent to the investigation, or pertinent to Oswald in -any way which I have not presented, at least not knowingly. - -There may well be--there is much that I could elaborate on, on what I -have said, relating to Oswald. There are a good deal of small things -which perhaps under further questioning might be elicited. - -But I am not aware of anything which I have not mentioned and which is -in any way pertinent, and which ought to be mentioned. - -There are other observations about Oswald and this sort of thing I -suppose I could elaborate on to some extent. - -Representative FORD. Earlier in the interrogation, Mr. Coleman had you -outline what transpired the day that Oswald walked into the Embassy, in -the first instance? - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir. - -Representative FORD. The Commission has in the various papers picked -up following Oswald's apprehension and murder, what purports to be his -observations or his diary during his stay in the Soviet Union. Have you -read any of those? - -Mr. SNYDER. No, sir. - -Representative FORD. He describes in one of these documents his -experience that day he came into the Embassy. Would you in some detail -relate that again, as you understand what transpired? What time of day -it was, where you were, in what office, and so forth. Who was with you, -if anybody. - -Mr. SNYDER. I might begin, I think, as I began originally, by stating -that I don't recall the time of day. But from my knowledge of the facts -of the case, and the fact that I told him the Embassy was closed and so -forth, it had to have been either a Wednesday or a Saturday afternoon, -if not a Sunday. I am told that the date on which he came actually was -a Saturday, so I presume it was a Saturday afternoon that he came. - -Representative FORD. Don't spare of the detail, because it would be -interesting to get your version and his as he purportedly related it in -a document of his own subsequently. - -Mr. SNYDER. I am not sure whether he was brought in to me or whether -I went out and met him at the door and brought him in. I don't recall -whether one of my secretaries might have been on duty that afternoon. -Normally, she would not have been. - -I believe that Mr. McVickar was working in the office adjoining mine. -The offices in Moscow are quite small and the door between our offices -is usually open. And I think that Mr. McVickar told me he was in the -next office. - -There was no one in the office with me at the time I saw him. - -Oswald was well dressed and very neat appearing when he came in. I -don't recall whether he was wearing a suit and shirt and tie. But at -any rate, his appearance impressed me at the time. And I recall that he -looked very presentable. - -He was very curt, very proper. At no time did he insult me or anything -of that sort personally. He was just proper, but extremely curt. - -Representative FORD. Did he just walk in the door and you were seated -at your desk? What was the way in which you first spoke to one another? - -Mr. SNYDER. I don't recall whether he was ushered into my office by the -secretary or one of the employees, or whether I was told that there was -someone waiting for me outside, and I went and got him. It is unlikely -that he walked into the offices, because he would have had to walk -through two other offices to get to mine. - -Well, he stated--he gave me a written statement, which is in the -record, almost immediately upon his arrival, I believe. - -Representative FORD. That is Commission Exhibit No. 913. - -Mr. SNYDER. He stated in effect that he had come to the Soviet Union -to live in the Soviet Union, that he desired to renounce his American -citizenship, though I don't think he used the word "renounce"--I think -he used another word--but that he desired to renounce his American -citizenship. That his allegiance was to the Soviet Union. - -I think initially this was pretty much what his statement was. And -would I please do what was necessary to get this over with. - -Well, during this period of the interview, as far as I recall, he was -standing. And he may have seated himself some time later in it. But I -think for the initial part of the interview, he remained standing and -declined to take a seat. - -When I began to question him, he then rejoined with words to the -effect, "I know what" or "I have been told what you are going to ask -me, you are going to try to talk me out of this, and don't waste your -time, please let's get on with the business." - -I then asked him--I continued to probe and see where I could find a -chink in his armor some place. - -And I think that the initial chink which I found was regarding his -relatives and place of residence in the United States. - -I had his passport. I don't recall whether he handed it to me, though -he probably did, or whether I asked him for it. - -I noted that on the inside of the cover page of his passport his home -address had been crossed out. - -When I asked him where he lived, he declined to tell me. When I asked -him about his relatives--I had noted from his passport that he was 20 -years old. When I asked him about his relatives, he also said this was -none of my business, and would I please get on with the business. - -Well, I told him at that time, or fairly early in the interview, having -found this kind of chink I could work on, I told him that I would have -to know certainly where he lived in the United States in order to do -anything else with his case. - -At that stage, he kind of hemmed and hawed a bit and said--well, I live -at so and so. And from there on it opened the crack a little bit, and I -found his mother also lived at that--that this was the address of his -mother, and probing further I found out about his Marine background, -and that he had been recently discharged. - -I questioned him a bit about where he had applied for his passport, and -how he had come to the Soviet Union, and had he gone home to see his -mother, and things of this sort. - -Some of these questions he answered, and some he didn't. However, he -did not seem quite, as I recall--quite so adamant about refusing this -kind of question as he did about questions closer to the bone. That -is, what knowledge do you have of Marxism, or where did you first come -across this, or did you meet someone in the Marines? - -Representative FORD. Did you go into those questions in your probing -with him? - -Mr. SNYDER. Oh, yes; this sort of question he parried. I won't say he -parried them--he simply refused to answer them. The only thing which he -did say in the interview was "I am a Marxist." And I recall telling him -then in a jocular vein, which evoked no response, that he was going to -be a very lonesome man in the Soviet Union. - -But I found at that point, and from there on, that for all I could -determine he was completely humorless. And this was my impression of -him on the other occasions on which I saw him. He was intense and -humorless. - -Representative FORD. What prompted the breakup of the interview, or the -meeting? - -Mr. SNYDER. Well, the interview finally broke up when I couldn't get -any more out of him. - -Representative FORD. Was he satisfied or dissatisfied with the result -of his conference with you? - -Mr. SNYDER. I think he was dissatisfied, if anything. I think he had -come in there to renounce his citizenship, and had found himself -thwarted. It is quite possible, though, this is reading into it -things which were not necessarily evident to me at the time. It is -quite possible that this was to be his big moment on the stage of -history as far as he was concerned. He may have contemplated this for -some time, as he said--and thus my refusal at that time to complete -his renunciation may have been a hurdle which he had been totally -unprepared for. - -Representative FORD. Did he demand at any time that this was a right he -had to renounce his citizenship, and demand why you would not permit -him to proceed? - -Mr. SNYDER. Well, I cannot really reconstruct our conversations on that -line. But I clearly pointed out to him his right. And he did decline, -as I recall, to have me read the law to him. He said he was familiar -with it, or something, so that I need not read the law to him. So I -pointed out, I believe, at that time he had a right, as any citizen has -a right to give up his citizenship if he so desires. - -That other consideration is that the consul has a certain obligation -towards the individual, and also towards his family, to see that a -person--or that the consul at least does not aid and encourage an -individual, and particularly a 20-year-old individual, to commit an -irrevocable act on the spur of the moment or without adequate thought. - -But I told him in any event that the consulate was closed that -afternoon, that I had no secretary there to prepare the papers, and -that if he would come back during normal business hours I would, of -course, go through with it. - -So I don't think that he left the room happy--if I can use that -term--in his attitude towards me. - -I recall probing a bit on the subject of the formation of his attitudes -towards Marxism. I developed at this time the impression that he really -had no knowledgeable background at all of Marxism. I think I asked him -if he could tell me a little bit about the theory of labor value, or -something like that, and he hadn't the faintest notion of what I was -talking about--I mean something basic to Marxism. And I probed around a -bit as to the sources of his attitudes. And I think the only thing he -told me at the time was that he had been doing some reading, and that -is about as far as I got. On that subject, he simply would not be drawn -out. - -Representative FORD. Did you ask him anything about his knowledge of -the Russian language? Did he volunteer anything? - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes; I did ask him a bit about that. He said he had been -studying Russian. And, again, I had the impression--I don't recall--I -may have spoken some Russian to him--but I at least formed the -impression that he did not know very much Russian. I don't think he -could have gotten along on his own in Russian society. I don't think he -could have done more than buy a piece of bread, maybe. - -Representative FORD. Did he converse with any other member of the staff -at the Embassy, to your knowledge, during the time of this first visit? - -Mr. SNYDER. No, no; at this time he definitely did not. And I don't -think that he did during the time I was there--unless it was simply a -passing word with the receptionist, or something of this sort. - -But as far as I know, he had no knowledgeable conversation with anyone -there. - -Actually, there were only--well, when he first came there were only two -officers, McVickar and myself, and at the time I left, three officers, -with whom he might have talked. And it is inconceivable that either of -the other two officers would have talked to him, knowing my interest in -the case, or if I were not there somebody would have done so without -making a memo for the file and for me of the conversation. - -Representative FORD. In retrospect, assuming the tragic events that -did transpire last year didn't take place, and this circumstance was -presented to you again in the Embassy in Moscow, would you handle the -case any differently? - -Mr. SNYDER. No; I don't think so, Mr. Ford. You mean in terms of would -I have taken his renunciation? No; I think not. - -Representative FORD. In other words, you would have put him off, or -stalled him off, in this first interview, make him come back again? - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes; I would have. - -(At this point, Mr. Dulles entered the hearing room.) - -Mr. SNYDER. Particularly, since he was a minor. Normally, it would have -been, I think, my practice to do this in any event, though. Obviously -no two cases are alike, and the consul must decide. But particularly -in the case of a minor, I could not imagine myself writing out the -renunciation form and having him sign it, on the spot, without making -him leave my office and come back at some other time, even if it is -only a few hours intervening. - -Representative FORD. In one of the despatches I believe you sent to -Washington, you indicated that you had informed the press--I don't -recall what exhibit that is. - -Mr. SNYDER. I think I said, "Press informed." - -Mr. COLEMAN. Commission Exhibit No. 910, sir. - -Representative FORD. You say, "Press informed." Is that the same as -informing the press? - -Mr. SNYDER. No; this simply---- - -Representative FORD. What is the difference? - -Mr. SNYDER. This simply tells the Department that the press is onto -the case, and that they can expect something from Moscow on it. The -Department hates to be caught by surprise, they hate to read something -in the newspapers before they have gotten it back home. And I am simply -telling them that the Moscow press corps is aware of Oswald's presence, -and that there would likely be some dispatches from the press from -Moscow on the case. - -Representative FORD. That doesn't mean the Embassy informed the press? - -Mr. SNYDER. Oh, no. - -Representative FORD. How did you know the press had been informed? - -Mr. SNYDER. Again right at the moment, I cannot say. At what -stage--Priscilla Johnson, I think, was one of the first to be aware of -Oswald. Just how she became aware of him, and just where I became aware -of her knowledge of him, I don't quite know. But this, I think, was -quite early in the game. - -Representative FORD. Was he given much attention by the press in -Moscow? - -Mr. SNYDER. I cannot really speak with great authority on the point. I -don't think so. This is based on several things. - -One, there was very little about Oswald, I think, at the time other -than what was sent in by Priscilla Johnson. - -Secondly, I believe that Oswald himself had declined to talk to some -other press persons of the American press corps. - -Priscilla, as I recall, was the only one who seemed to have an entree -to him. - -Representative FORD. But you did not inform the American press in -Moscow of Oswald? - -Mr. SNYDER. No. - -Representative FORD. Did you ever talk to any of the American press or -any other of the press, about Oswald at this time? - -Mr. SNYDER. No; not that I recall, Mr. Ford. It was my normal practice -not to discuss cases of this kind. They were occurring all the time in -Moscow. If it wasn't one kind it was another. And it was my practice -not to discuss the details of such cases with the press simply because -the cases--each one being different in any event--the cases were always -ticklish. And every little bit helped or hurt in a case of this kind. -And the consul needed, to the extent possible, to minimize the forces -acting on the case, so that--and the press understood this very well. - -Representative FORD. Were you familiar with his interview with Miss -Mosby? - -Mr. SNYDER. I don't recall that I was. I knew that Priscilla Johnson -had seen him and had been seeing him. - -But I don't recall that I was aware that Ellie Mosby had seen him. - -Representative FORD. You were acquainted with Miss Mosby as well as -Priscilla Johnson? - -Mr. SNYDER. Oh, yes; very well. - -Representative FORD. Are any of these stories that these correspondents -write on these defector cases ever checked out with your office, or -people, in corresponding position? - -Mr. SNYDER. Normally not, I would say. - -Representative FORD. Were you at all aware of the 5,000 rubles that -Oswald was given by Soviet authorities or by an agency of the Soviet -Union which is sometimes called, I guess, the Red Cross? Are you at all -aware of that? - -Mr. SNYDER. No. - -Representative FORD. Are you aware of that organization in the Soviet -Union? - -Mr. SNYDER. Oh, yes. - -Representative FORD. Would you describe it for us, as far as you know -what it is? - -Mr. SNYDER. Well---- - -Representative FORD. 5,000 rubles--excuse me. - -Mr. SNYDER. This was the old rubles at that time. No; I don't---- - -Mr DULLES. For the record, what was the date of the change in the value -of the ruble? I think I remember it. It was around 1960--May-June of -1960, I think. - -When it went into effect, I don't remember. - -Mr. SNYDER. I am sorry, I don't either, Mr. Dulles. It was during my -term there. It seemed to me it was in the second half of my tour in -Moscow. But I cannot really recall. - -Mr. DULLES. I think somewhere in the record that ought to appear. I -have an idea it was May of 1960. - -Mr. EHRLICH. January 1, 1961. - -Mr. DULLES. That is when it went into effect? - -Mr. EHRLICH. It was officially revalued. - -Mr. DULLES. January 1, 1961--let the record show that--the ruble was -revalued, so that it took about 10 rubles to make 1 new ruble. - -Representative FORD. So 5,000 rubles in 1959 was not an inconsequential -amount. - -Mr. SNYDER. Oh, no. - -Mr. DULLES. It wasn't very much. - -Mr. SNYDER. No; but 5,000 rubles at that time was probably two-thirds -to three-quarters of the monthly salary of an average Soviet worker. - -Representative FORD. Could you describe---- - -Mr. DULLES. About $500, isn't it, roughly--10 to 1 in those days? - -Mr. SNYDER. Wait a minute; yes. - -Mr. DULLES. It was a considerable sum. - -Representative FORD. It would be more than a month's salary, then. - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes; an average month's salary at the time was about 750 -rubles, something around there. - -Mr. DULLES. I think the legal rate was 20 cents, but the sort of going -rate was around 10, I think. I think you could buy tourist rubles -around 10, as I recall--10 to the dollar. The legal rate, I think, was -5 to the dollar. - -Mr. SNYDER. No; I think the legal rate was 10 to a dollar, Mr. Dulles. - -Mr. CHAYES. In the same letter that states the date, which we supplied -to the Commission at the Commission's request, it states that the legal -rate was 4 to 1 until January 1961. But that was the official rate. - -Mr. DULLES. I understand. - -Mr. SNYDER. There were different rates. The official rate was not the -rate which was used for all things. For instance, we got 10 to 1 for -our rubles. The so-called official rate was used, for instance, in -clearing foreign trade accounts and this sort of thing. - -Representative FORD. Can you tell us your impression of this so-called -Red Cross in the Soviet Union? - -Mr. SNYDER. Well, again, I cannot speak of--about the Soviet Red Cross -with any great personal knowledge. It is not a Red Cross organization -in quite the sense in which we know it. It is clearly an organ of the -State in a totalitarian state, which means it is not an independent -organization, and its policies flow from the policy of the state, and -of the central committee. - -I don't think that the Soviet Red Cross conducts public fund-raising -campaigns, for instance, in the way ours does. - -It also is not an organization to which an individual might turn -routinely for assistance as he might in our society. - -Since the Soviet State does not admit that there is need in the Soviet -Union, that there can be poverty or difficulty for which there are not -organizations already in existence who are fully competent to deal with -such problems, since they don't admit this kind of a situation--they -also do not admit of public welfare organs in a sense such as the Red -Cross. - -Representative FORD. Do you know of any other cases during your period -of service there where there were payments by this organization to -American citizens, or Americans, those who had given up or tried to -give up or failed to give up their citizenship? - -Mr. SNYDER. No, sir; as a matter of fact, the only way in which the -Soviet Red Cross impinged upon my experience in Moscow was that they -were the organ for handling whereabouts inquiries of persons living in -the Soviet Union. If an American citizen wrote to the Embassy asking -our assistance in locating a relative in the Soviet Union, this inquiry -would go from us to the Soviet Red Cross, who was charged under the -Soviet system of things with actually checking into it and letting us -know if they felt that was in their interest. This was the only way in -which the Soviet Red Cross impinged upon us. - -I do recall on a few occasions advising persons who had come into the -Embassy in one way or another and who were in dire need that they go to -the Soviet Red Cross. - -But the reaction of such persons indicated to me that they felt the -Soviet Red Cross was not the place to go. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. Snyder, had you ever heard, while you were in the -Embassy in Moscow, the secret police referred to as the Red Cross? - -Mr. SNYDER. No. - -Mr. COLEMAN. You never heard the MVD, for example, referred to in that -way? - -Mr. SNYDER. No; to my knowledge--I mean there is an organization called -the Soviet Red Cross, which carries on at least in the international -sphere some of the normal activities of international Red Cross -organizations. - -The big point of departure is that they on the one hand are not -independent organizations as they are in free societies, but they are -an organ of the state. And, secondly, I do not think they have the -same role internally that our Red Cross organizations do. - -Mr. DULLES. Have you heard of it being used in other instances for what -might be called extraneous payments--that is, payments not related to -Red Cross work? - -Mr. SNYDER. No, sir. - -Representative FORD. Is there a policy that you were familiar with, as -far as the Soviet Union was concerned, for permitting a person to apply -for and be given Soviet citizenship? - -Mr. SNYDER. Oh, yes; there is a well-defined way of acquiring Soviet -citizenship under Soviet law. - -Representative FORD. Was Oswald familiar with that, as you could tell -from your conversation with him? - -Mr. SNYDER. Well, he obviously was familiar with what one does. That -is, he had made application to the Supreme Soviet, which is what one -does. - -Representative FORD. Did he tell you that? - -Mr. SNYDER. Oh, yes. - -Representative FORD. He did? - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes, sir; this is not something which is common knowledge. -One would have to have inquired and found out, and had someone show you -or give you the proper form on which to make application, and tell you -where to address it, and this sort of thing. - -Representative FORD. What did he tell you had happened when he did that? - -Mr. SNYDER. All he said was that he had made application. - -Representative FORD. He didn't indicate the application had been -processed and approved? - -Mr. SNYDER. No; I cannot recall what our conversation was on that -score. It was quite clear that he had not received Soviet citizenship. - -But, also, I would not have expected him to receive it that early in -the game. I mean, for one thing the Supreme Soviet does not act on -these things on a continuing basis, but acts upon them periodically. - -Representative FORD. En masse, so to speak? - -Mr. SNYDER. That is right. It has them on its calendar. So many times a -year it acts on petitions for Soviet citizenship, presumably. - -Presumably before it is sent to the Supreme Soviet with a favorable -recommendation by the various Government organs, a thorough -investigation is made by MVD and other organs, and various officials -presumably at different levels have got to stick their necks out and -recommend he be accepted--that sort of thing. - -Representative FORD. If you had known that Oswald was in Minsk, what -would your reaction have been? - -Mr. SNYDER. Serves him right. - -Representative FORD. Why do you say that? - -Mr. SNYDER. You have never been in Minsk. - -Well, in the first place, my own feeling is that there is no better -medicine for someone who imagines he likes the Soviet Union than to -live there awhile. - -Representative FORD. In Minsk? - -Mr. SNYDER. Any place. - -Representative FORD. I am more particularly interested in Minsk. - -Mr. SNYDER. But provincial towns in the Soviet Union are a very large -step below the capital, and the capital, believe me, is a fairly -good-sized step down from any American populated place. - -But the difference between large cities and minor cities, and between -minor cities and villages, is a tremendous step backward in time. And -to live in Minsk, or any other provincial city in the Soviet Union, is -a pretty grim experience to someone who has lived in our society--not -necessarily American, but simply in western society. It might be just -the same if he lived in Denmark, or some place. I mean to land up in -Minsk, working in a grubby little factory is quite a comedown. - -Representative FORD. Have you ever been in Minsk? - -Mr. SNYDER. I spent about an hour walking around Minsk, between trains, -one time. - -Representative FORD. Is there anything significant about him being sent -to Minsk, as far as you are concerned? - -Mr. SNYDER. No, no; the only pattern that I would discern is that it is -in all cases to my knowledge--all cases of which I have had knowledge, -the invariable pattern of the Soviets is to send defectors somewhere -outside of the capital city--to settle them in some city other than -Moscow. There have been some minor exceptions to this. - -What is the name--the British defector, and the two foreign office men -Burgess and McLean. McLean lives or did live, until his death, just on -the outskirts of Moscow. - -Mr. DULLES. McLean is still alive. - -Mr. SNYDER. Pardon me--Burgess. Is Burgess the one married to an -American? - -Mr. DULLES. Philby is married to an American. - -Mr. SNYDER. One of the two, Burgess or McLean, is married to an -American. - -Mr. DULLES. McLean is. - -Mr. SNYDER. I had an interview with McLean's mother-in-law at the -Embassy. At any rate, this was one exception. - -Representative FORD. It has been alleged that in Minsk there are -certain training schools for foreigners, or possibly for citizens of -the Soviet Union. Are you at all familiar with that? Is there any -information you have on it? - -Mr. SNYDER. No; I have not, Mr. Ford. - -Representative FORD. Did you ever contact any Soviet officials about -Oswald at the time of this first interview? - -Mr. SNYDER. No. - -Representative FORD. Is that unusual or is that usual? - -Mr. SNYDER. It is usual. - -Representative FORD. In other words, you, in your capacity, would not -normally contact a Soviet official about someone such as Oswald? - -Mr. SNYDER. That is right; yes, sir. In other words, there is nothing -at that stage of the game which--for which I would have any reason to -go to the Soviet authorities. - -Representative FORD. Even the fact that he had a visa 5 days overdue? - -Mr. SNYDER. Well, of course, I am already aware in a sense and -am acting under my awareness that he is living under controlled -circumstances. He is not simply living in a hotel and nobody knows -about it. That he is in contact with Soviet authorities, and is there -with their knowledge and consent. So that---- - -Representative FORD. It is implied consent, even though it may not be -official as far as the documents are concerned? - -Mr. SNYDER. Well, actually, the document itself is quite eloquent on -this subject, I think. There is the very negative fact that his visa is -5 days overdue, and he is still there--that speaks pretty loudly for -the fact that he is living there without a valid visa, at least without -a valid visa in his passport, with the knowledge and consent of the -Soviet authorities. It could hardly be otherwise. - -Representative FORD. Mr. Dulles, we have a quorum call over on the -floor of the House. I will have to leave. Will you take over as -Chairman? I will be back shortly. - -Mr. DULLES. Very gladly. I have one or two questions. - -(At this point, Representative Ford withdrew from the hearing room.) - -Mr. DULLES. Is there any question as to whether a minor can renounce -his nationality? - -Mr. SNYDER. To my knowledge, there is not. To my knowledge---- - -Mr. DULLES. I will withdraw that question and ask Mr. Chayes that when -it comes, because that probably is a matter for him rather than for you. - -Does the Embassy in Moscow have any facility for learning about or -finding out about errant American citizens, or any American citizens -that are wandering around Russia? Do they register at the Embassy? - -Mr. DULLES. They may. - -Mr. DULLES. There is not a requirement? - -Mr. SNYDER. No; as a matter of fact, most do. Most that are in Moscow -do stop in. - -Mr. DULLES. There is a book in the Embassy that they can come in and -sign? - -Mr. SNYDER. Yes. - -Mr. DULLES. Oswald did not sign in the book, I gather. - -Mr. SNYDER. I don't think he would; no. There would be no need for him -to. He came into the Embassy and spoke to an officer, which is a higher -form of registration in a sense. - -Mr. DULLES. For the record, how long was it after his arrival in Moscow -that he reported to the Embassy? - -Mr. COLEMAN. He arrived on October 16, and he didn't go into the -Embassy until October 31. - -Mr. DULLES. That was about the time his visa--his permission to stay -was going to expire? - -Mr. COLEMAN. His permission to stay as designated on his visa had -already expired. - -Mr. DULLES. Was that a 12-day? - -Mr. COLEMAN. He was in the Soviet Union 15 days before he went to the -American Embassy. - -Mr. DULLES. How long was his permit good for? - -Mr. COLEMAN. His permit was good for 6 days. - -Mr. DULLES, Only 6 days? You, of course, get no word from the Soviet -Union when they give visas to Americans to come into the country. - -Mr. SNYDER. Oh, no, no; we get no cooperation from the Soviet -authorities on anything concerning American citizens--excepting in -circumstances where they desire the Embassy's help. A citizen gets sick -while he is traveling in the Soviet Union, and they want the Embassy -assistance in some way or other. But even in such cases, surprisingly -often, we do not hear from the Soviet authorities. We hear from the -traveler himself, somehow, but not from the authorities. - -Mr. DULLES. Am I correct in my understanding that the State Department, -having issued a valid passport for travel abroad, had no way of knowing -whether the owner of that passport is going to the Soviet Union or not? - -Mr. SNYDER. Well, no. - -Mr. DULLES. They have no way of knowing? So they have no way of -informing you about it? - -Mr. SNYDER. No. - -Mr. DULLES. I think there is a misunderstanding by a great many -American people that there are certain countries that are named on the -passport, which at one time I think was the case, but no longer is. As -I recall it now an American passport was only stamped "Not good for -Hungary," as I believe Oswald's passport was stamped. That has been -changed, has it not. - -Mr. SNYDER. These stamps are changed a little from time to time. - -Mr. DULLES. I will ask Mr. Chayes that question. - -Mr. SNYDER. Hungary, North Korea, North Vietnam, and China---- - -Mr. COLEMAN. Now Cuba. - -Mr. DULLES. Could I see that passport for a moment? I think at this -particular time this passport was issued, I thought the only stamp was -Hungary. - -Mr. SNYDER. I think there must have been others, and Hungary was added -after 1946. - -Mr. DULLES. I will just read this. - -"This passport is not valid for travel to the following areas under -the control of authorities with which the United States does not have -diplomatic relations: Albania, Bulgaria, and those portions of China, -Korea, and Vietnam under Communist control." - -Now, that speaks as of--this is a printed notice in the passport, -and that speaks as of the date of issue of the passport, September -10, 1959. And then there is a stamp--I guess that is printed on the -passport--also printed, in a special box, "This passport is not valid -for travel in Hungary." - -Mr. CHAYES. And then that is superimposed with a void stamp when we -took Hungary off the list of restricted areas. - -Mr. DULLES. Right. I don't know whether that void stamp was put on in -1959--but it is not important as far as we are concerned. - -In any event, this passport, as I understand, is perfectly good to -travel to Russia without any notification to the State Department, is -that correct? - -Mr. SNYDER. Oh, yes. - -Mr. COLEMAN. I should state for the record, sir, actually the -application which Oswald filed on September 4, 1959, included Russia as -a place where he intended to visit. - -Mr. CHAYES. On the other hand, the State Department has no mechanism -for notifying posts abroad of ordinary travel to those countries. - -Mr. DULLES. I wonder if it would not be a convenience to you if in -the case, let's say, of the Soviet Union, or possibly other Communist -countries, just as a routine matter they took off this note from the -passport so you would have some record there if anything turned up that -this fellow had said he was going to Russia. Maybe that would involve -administrative work. - -Mr. SNYDER. I can't see what value this would be to a consul. - -Mr. DULLES. Well, if a fellow got into trouble you would turn to his -records alphabetically and you would find Lee Harvey Oswald in his -application said he was going to go to Russia. - -Mr. SNYDER. You mean if he gets in trouble in Russia? - -Mr. DULLES. Yes. - -Mr. SNYDER. If he gets in trouble in Russia, we know he is there. - -Mr. DULLES. You might; you might not. They don't always tell you. You -don't think that would be of any particular value, though? - -Mr. SNYDER. No; I don't, Mr. Dulles. Under any circumstances under -which it was useful to the Embassy to know whether a person had said he -was coming there, we can have the information by cable within 24 hours. -So to attempt--it would seem to me--to attempt to notify embassies -abroad---- - -Mr. DULLES. I am not saying embassies abroad. I am saying the Soviet -Union. - -Mr. SNYDER. But why the Soviet Union and not Poland, Czechoslovakia, -Bulgaria? - -Mr. DULLES. I said the Communist countries, I think, before. I -certainly would not do it for Britain, France, and friendly countries. -There is no point. - -Mr. SNYDER. This would involve a clerical job of major magnitude which -from the Embassy's point of view I don't see that it would serve any -purpose. - -Mr. DULLES. Well, if a young man 20 years old just out of the Marines -says he is going to the Soviet Union, isn't that of some significance? - -Mr. SNYDER. Not necessarily. I mean in terms of the thousands of -people--thousands of Americans who flutter back and forth across the -face of the earth---- - -Mr. DULLES. I am not talking about people floating back and forth -across the earth. I am talking about people going to the Soviet Union. - -Mr. SNYDER. In other words, if I had looked at Oswald's application -at the time he made it, knowing nothing else about it than he had -just gotten out of the Marines, I would not think it was so terribly -unusual, or of great interest to me that this young boy is taking a -trip to a number of western European countries, including the Soviet -Union. Nor would there be anything in such knowledge which would in any -way I think trigger any action on my part. - -Mr. DULLES. Do you have any special instructions other than the ones -that you have referred to about the handling of those that renounce -their citizenship, or have you covered that, do you think, quite -fully? Are there any special instructions that the Embassy in Moscow -prescribed? - -Mr. SNYDER. No. - -Mr. DULLES. There are none? - -Mr. SNYDER. No; there are none; no, sir. This sort of thing is down to -the meat of the consular officer's job. That is, he is out on his own -pretty much on something of this sort. He has got to use his judgment, -and such experience as he has, and such commonsense as he has. - -Mr. DULLES. He has got to know the law, too--he has to know the law and -regulations. - -Mr. SNYDER. Oh, yes; if you don't know, the first thing you do is look -up the regulation and the law and see what your basic requirement is. - -In renunciation cases, it is a fairly simple matter--that is, for the -consular officer, as far as the law is concerned. He doesn't have a -large body of law. He has a specific law which tells him exactly what -the conditions are for renouncing citizenship, and that is it. - -Mr. DULLES. I differ from you a little bit, in the sense that I don't -think if a young fellow 20 years old came in to me and wanted to -renounce his citizenship, and if I were doing consular work, as I was -at one time--I think I would feel that that was a pretty--rather a -tough one to handle. - -Mr. SNYDER. I don't say it is not tough to handle. What I meant to say -was that the legal basis under which the consul, or within which the -consul has to operate---- - -Mr. DULLES. I will talk to Mr. Chayes about the problem of a minor -doing that. - -Mr. SNYDER. From the consular's point of view it is a fairly simple -one. It doesn't require a lot of legal research. - -Mr. CHAYES. Just to have that in the record at this point the statute -provides very clearly on the age problem, section 351(b) of the act -provides that below 18 years the act specified--the citizen shall not -be deemed to have expatriated himself by the commission prior to his -18th birthday of any of the acts specified in paragraphs 2, 3, 4, 5, -and 6. - -Mr. DULLES. That includes renunciation? - -Mr. CHAYES. Yes, 6 is renunciation. But he has to assert--within 6 -months after obtaining the age of 18 years--he has to assert his claim -to U.S. nationality, in order to get this automatically. But I would -think the courts would go further and hold that, especially where -volunteerism is involved, as in renunciation, below 18 years is the -cutoff point--not 21. It used to be 21, but the Congress reduced the -age limit to 18. - -Mr. DULLES. Well, that covers the point here. Was there anything about -the Oswald case in the Soviet press at any time to your knowledge? - -Mr. SNYDER. To my knowledge, there was not, Mr. Dulles. - -Mr. DULLES. And the Soviet authorities have given you no information -about Oswald that hasn't been communicated to us? You have no other -information at all from the Soviet authorities about Oswald? - -Mr. SNYDER. No, sir; I never communicated with the Soviet authorities -about Oswald in any form, nor did they ever ask me anything about him. - -Mr. DULLES. And you don't know any of the other circumstances under -which his case was reconsidered after his attempted cutting of his -wrists and suicide? You don't know what channels that went through in -the Soviet Union? - -Mr. SNYDER. I was not aware of this element of the case. - -Mr. DULLES. You were not aware, of course, at that time of this element -of the case. Do you know what intourist guides were in charge of him? - -Mr. SNYDER. No. - -Mr. DULLES. Do you know any other case during the period when you were -in Moscow of an American who had married a Soviet wife and was given -an exist visa as quickly and as easily as Oswald and Marina were given -theirs? - -Mr. SNYDER. I don't know offhand whether Marina Oswald got her visa, -her exit visa, that quickly and easily. - -Mr. DULLES. Well, I think that is a matter of record--when she applied -and when she got it. - -Mr. COLEMAN. The American visa---- - -Mr. DULLES. This is the Soviet exit visa. - -Mr. COLEMAN. You are talking about the Soviet passport? She applied for -her passport---- - -Mr. DULLES. It is a visa to get out. - -Mr. SNYDER. It is both. She needs a Soviet passport. They are issued at -the same time. - -Mr. DULLES. That is correct. - -Mr. COLEMAN. She applied for her Soviet passport in July 1961, and she -was informed that it would be issued to her approximately on December -25, 1961. - -Mr. DULLES. About 6 months. Do you know of any case where that has been -accomplished in 6 months, other than this case, during your period -there? I don't think I ought to ask you about any period other than -the period you were in the Soviet Union. - -Mr. SNYDER. I think that a review perhaps of a few other of the cases -of American citizens marrying Soviet girls during the time I was there -might show that 6 months is not a terribly short period. There isn't, -again, any standard for things like this. In the first place, so much -depends upon the local officials in the beginning of the thing, and -whether they drag their feet or don't, and how much pressure they put -on the girl to talk her out of it, and all of this sort of business. - -My offhand feeling is that 6 months is not an unusually short period of -time, but it certainly is getting down to about probably the minimum of -our experience with such things. - -Mr. DULLES. That is all I have, Mr. Witness. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. Chairman, at this time I would like to offer for the -record Commission Exhibits 908 through 940 except for Exhibit 911, -which we didn't identify. - -Mr. DULLES. Let me take these one at a time. - -Exhibits Nos. 908 through 940, except for Exhibit No. 911, shall be -admitted. - -(The documents heretofore marked for identification as Commission -Exhibits Nos. 908-910, and 912-940 were received in evidence.) - -Mr. DULLES. Now, for the record, what about these two numbers that are -omitted? - -Mr. COLEMAN. When Mr. McVickar testifies he will be able to identify -the documents. - -Mr. DULLES. You will have these admitted at a later date? - -Mr. COLEMAN. Yes. - -Mr. DULLES. Now, the second category you wanted to have admitted. - -Mr. COLEMAN. I would like to also offer into evidence Commission -Exhibit 946 which is the Oswald passport. - -Mr. DULLES. It shall be admitted. - -(The document referred, to heretofore identified as Commission Exhibit -No. 946 for identification, was admitted into evidence.) - -Mr. COLEMAN. I offer for the record Commission Exhibit No. 947 which -is the second copy of the passport renewal application, which has been -identified after lunch. - -Mr. DULLES. And Exhibit No. 947, the passport application, shall be -admitted. - -(The document referred to, heretofore identified as Commission Exhibit -No. 947 for identification, was admitted into evidence.) - -Mr. COLEMAN. I have no further questions, sir. - -Mr. DULLES. We are just starting with a new witness. Won't you go ahead. - -(Discussion off the record.) - -Mr. DULLES. I want to thank you very much, Mr. Snyder. It has been very -helpful to us. - -Mr. SNYDER. I hope it has. - -(Discussion off the record.) - - -TESTIMONY OF JOHN A. McVICKAR - -Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. John A. McVickar, who is presently principal officer, -American Consulate in Cochabamba, Bolivia, was consul in the American -Embassy in Moscow in 1959, until at least the middle of 1961. - -Mr. McVickar will be asked to testify concerning Oswald's appearance -at the Embassy in October 1959, when Oswald announced his intention to -renounce his American citizenship. - -Mr. McVickar will also be asked to testify concerning his interview -of Marina Oswald when she applied for a visa in July of 1961, and his -actions in connection with securing a waiver of section 243(g) of the -Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, with respect to Marina Oswald. - -Mr. McVickar will also be examined on two memoranda which he has -provided the State Department since the assassination of President -Kennedy. - -At this time I would ask the Chairman to swear Mr. McVickar. - -Representative FORD. Mr. McVickar, will you stand. Do you solemnly -swear that the testimony you are about to give is the truth, the whole -truth, and nothing but the truth. - -Mr. McVICKAR. I do, so help me God. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. McVickar, will you state your full name for the record? - -Mr. McVICKAR. John Anthony McVickar. - -Mr. COLEMAN. That is spelled M-c-V-i-c-k-a-r? - -Mr. McVICKAR. I have given the court reporter here my card. - -Mr. COLEMAN. And what is your present address? - -Mr. McVICKAR. American consulate, Cochabamba, Bolivia. - -Mr. COLEMAN. What was your position with the American Embassy in Moscow -in the fall of 1959? - -Mr. McVICKAR. I was one of two officers in the consular section of the -Embassy. - -Mr. COLEMAN. How long did you remain in Moscow? - -Mr. McVICKAR. I was there from June of 1959, until September of 1961. - -Mr. COLEMAN. I take it you have been shown a copy of the Congressional -resolution with respect to the formation of this Committee? - -Mr. McVICKAR. I am not sure but I think so. With respect to this -Commission? - -Mr. COLEMAN. Yes. - -Mr. McVICKAR. Do you want me to read it now? - -Mr. COLEMAN. No, just generally have it available. - -Directing your attention to the fall of 1959, did you have occasion to -see or to talk to Lee Harvey Oswald? - -Mr. McVICKAR. I had occasion to see him and to talk briefly to him. I -was present in the office at the time he was interviewed by Mr. Snyder. -We had an office about the size of this room with two desks in it, and -Mr. Snyder's desk was at one end and mine was at the other, and we did -our business in effect in the same room separately, but this was an -unusual case, and I recall the man coming in and I recall parts of the -conversation. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Was the day he came in October 31, 1959? - -Mr. McVICKAR. I couldn't say exactly but that sounds just about right. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Was it a Saturday? - -Mr. McVICKAR. I don't know. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Do you recall what time of the day it was? - -Mr. McVICKAR. I don't know. It might have been in the morning but I am -not sure. I don't know for sure. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Did Oswald speak to you at all or was all of his -conversation with Mr. Snyder? - -Mr. McVICKAR. I think all of his conversation, subsequent conversation, -was with Mr. Snyder. As I recall, he said a few words to those of us -who were in the office, myself and the secretary, on his way out of the -office probably, but I don't really remember very much about that, if -he said anything at all. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Could you tell the Commission to the best of your -recollection what he said to Mr. Snyder that you overheard during the -conversation of October 31, 1959? - -Mr. McVICKAR. In an effort to be helpful I have already, in the form of -this memorandum, put everything I could remember down. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Sir, are you referring to the memorandum you prepared on -November 27, 1963? - -Mr. McVICKAR. Yes; the two memoranda, the one of November 27, 1963, -and of April 7, 1964, but, of course, I will try to recall again. As -I recall, he came into the office, and in a rather truculent fashion -gave Mr. Snyder his passport and said that he wanted to renounce his -American citizenship, and he was unusually nasty about it, and he -then--Mr. Snyder talked with him for about I would say maybe an hour, -in an effort to draw him out I think. The reasons that he gave were -that he was very angry at the United States and that he was no longer -under the illusion that we had a good system in the United States. He -had seen capitalism and imperialism in operation, and I think that he -referred to his tour in the Marine Corps, and I think to--possibly he -was stationed in Okinawa. - -I think that he did seem to know something about the renunciation -process, and it was almost as though he was trying to bait the consul -into taking an adverse action against him. - -He mentioned that he knew certain classified things in connection with -having been I think a radar operator in the Marine Corps, and that he -was going to turn this information over to the Soviet authorities. And, -of course, we didn't know how much he knew or anything like that, but -this obviously provoked a rather negative reaction among us Americans -in the consulate section. I don't think I probably can recall anything -more than that for sure. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Sir, I take it at the time that Mr. Oswald was in the -Embassy in 1959 that you did not prepare a memorandum at that time? - -Mr. McVICKAR. No; because it was not my responsibility. I did prepare a -memorandum which I have a copy of here, some time later with respect to -a conversation I had with the correspondent, Priscilla Johnson, who had -been at that time, as of November 17, 1959, in contact with Oswald, and -I think she sought my guidance as to how she should handle her contacts -with him, and also I think to inform the Embassy through me as to these -contacts that she had had. - -Mr. COLEMAN. I take it the memorandum you refer to is dated November -17, 1959? - -Mr. McVICKAR. That is right. - -Mr. COLEMAN. We have marked it Commission Exhibit No. 911. I will ask -you whether that is a copy of the memorandum? - -Mr. McVICKAR. Yes; that is a copy of the memorandum. Is it 911 or -9--excuse me--I would like to call attention to the fact that it seems -to me there is an error in the date there in the second paragraph of -that memorandum. It says "She told me that on Sunday May 15." - -I am almost certain that would have been Sunday, November 15. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Sir, in that memorandum on the second page you have a -P.S., and you state that Priscilla J. told you that Oswald has been -told he will be leaving the hotel at the end of this week. - -Did Miss Johnson tell you that? - -Mr. McVICKAR. I feel sure I wouldn't have written that if she hadn't. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Do you know whether Oswald actually left the hotel the end -of the week? - -Mr. McVICKAR. I am not sure of the time that he left the hotel, but -from what I gather from the record, that must have been about the time -that he did leave the hotel and go to Minsk. As reflected in the other -memorandum it was rather unclear exactly how long Oswald spent in -Moscow, but I think that the record is approximately accurate here, and -that this would have been about the time he would have left the hotel. - -Mr. COLEMAN. According to other information which the Commission has, -which happens to be Oswald's diary so we don't know how accurate it is, -it is stated that he didn't leave Moscow until January 4, 1960. - -Mr. McVICKAR. That is new to me. - -Mr. COLEMAN. You had no such information? - -Mr. McVICKAR. I had no such--this is the first time I heard that. - -Mr. DULLES. He left the hotel, however, for a period, did he not? He -was in the hospital for a period. - -Mr. COLEMAN. No, sir; he was in the hospital before he came into the -Embassy. - -Mr. DULLES. That is correct. - -Mr. COLEMAN. His suicide attempt was before October 31. - -Mr. McVICKAR. Now it says leaving the hotel, but it doesn't say--and I -think that would be all the information that would have been available -at the time that I wrote that, I think the implication was that he was -going to leave town as well, but that doesn't necessarily mean that he -wouldn't have spent the ensuing weeks in some other place in the city -of Moscow. - -Mr. COLEMAN. In the P.S. you also indicated that "he will be trained in -electronics." Did you get that information from Miss Johnson? - -Mr. McVICKAR. Well, yes; I think so, according to this. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Did she say any more than just he would be trained in -electronics? Did she say what type of training he would get? - -Mr. McVICKAR. I am afraid I have no more memory than what is written -here. In fact, I didn't even remember that I had written this -memorandum until I saw it the other day. - -Mr. DULLES. Is the language "he will be trained" or "he had been -trained"? - -Mr. McVICKAR. "He will be," that is what I wrote. - -Mr. DULLES. Is it possible that could have been a reference to past -training during the Marines when he was trained in electronics? - -Mr. McVICKAR. No; I suspect, that what I meant was, that he would be -trained in electronics by the Soviets, but I think that this was a -rather sketchy note of the conversation, and I suspect that what she -would have said, was that he would be trained in or used in the field -of electronics, in such a way probably that they would get the greatest -benefit from his knowledge. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Sir, immediately prior to the time that you had the -conversation with Miss Johnson, you had had occasion, hadn't you, on -November 9, 1959, to attempt to deliver a message from Oswald's half -brother to Oswald? - -Mr. McVICKAR. Yes; there is a note in the file to that effect, and I -don't really remember that incident very well, just very vaguely. I -think that I was given the assignment to attempt to deliver a message. -I think the idea was that we would try to see what we could do to get -this fellow to change his mind and go back to the United States. - -The attitude that we took toward him was, I think, a normal one, as one -might toward a very mixed up young person, probably misinformed, and so -I think this was an effort to put him back in communication with his -family. - -Mr. COLEMAN. I would like to show you a note from the Oswald file dated -November 9, 1959, which has been given Commission Exhibit No. 942, and -a copy of a telegram to Oswald from John E. Pic, which has been given -Commission Exhibit No. 943, and ask you, is that the telegram you -attempted to deliver, and is that the note you wrote at the time when -you were unable to deliver the telegram to Oswald? - -Mr. McVICKAR. Yes; that is the note, and I don't necessarily recollect -this telegram. It may be that it was in a sealed envelope. I cannot say -that I recollect the telegram, but it certainly looks like the probable -telegram that would have been delivered, that I would have attempted to -deliver at that time. - -Mr. COLEMAN. I take it that after October 31 of 1959, until Oswald left -Moscow, that you had no further contact with Oswald? - -Mr. McVICKAR. That is my recollection, yes, that I had no further -contact with Oswald. I must say that a great many things did take place -in that 2 years. - -I, for example, did not recollect, until just the other day when I -saw the file, that I had interviewed his wife. But to the best of my -recollection I never laid eyes on Oswald again. - -Mr. COLEMAN. I think earlier in your testimony you said that you had -prepared a memorandum on November 27, 1963, in which you attempted to -recall what happened when you were in the American Embassy in 1959, -1960, and 1961, is that correct? - -Mr. McVICKAR. Yes. - -Mr. COLEMAN. A copy of the memorandum has been marked Commission -Exhibit No. 941. I want to ask you whether that is a copy of the -memorandum which you prepared, and sent to Mr. Thomas Ehrlich? - -Mr. McVICKAR. Yes; that is a copy of it. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Now in that memorandum, on the last page, page 3, the -second paragraph, you say: "In short, it seemed to me that there was a -possibility that he had been in contact with others before or during -his Marine Corps tour who had guided him and encouraged him in his -actions." - -Could you indicate to the Commission the basis for making that -statement? - -Mr. McVICKAR. Well, I think it is clear here, and if it isn't I should -certainly say, that this last page is in the nature of speculation and -an attempt to be helpful. - -Now in answer to your question, he gave me the impression, and this was -supported by the impressions other people seemed to have at the time -through conversation, that he was a very young person to have so many -ideas in his head, and to have done so much about them, in effect, in -such a relatively short time, and so it occurred to some of us that it -may be that he had had some coaching from somebody; but also, I must -say, he was an unusual person and apparently sort of an ingrown person, -and so it may be that he had conceived and carried out all these things -by himself. - -But I think that that paragraph in a way sums up that same idea, that -it seemed that there was a possibility that he had had some guidance in -carrying out this line of action. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Does that also explain the sentence in the same paragraph -where you say: "On the other hand, there also seemed to me to be the -possibility that he was following a pattern of behavior in which he had -been tutored by person or persons unknown"? - -Mr. McVICKAR. Yes; the same applies. - -Mr. COLEMAN. You had no independent evidence of this at all, did you? - -Mr. McVICKAR. I was asked to explain this attitude I had as best I -could, and I wrote another memorandum dated April 7, 1964, in which I -described to go into this line of thought. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Could we have marked as Commission Exhibit No. 958 a -three-page memorandum from Mr. McVickar to Mr. Ehrlich, dated April 7, -1964? - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 958 for -identification.) - -Mr. COLEMAN. Is that the memorandum you just referred to? - -Mr. McVICKAR. Yes; that is the same memorandum. - -Mr. COLEMAN. You say this memorandum, Commission Exhibit No. 958, was -written in April 7, 1964, after you had been asked to explain your -earlier statement concerning following a pattern of behavior in which -he had been tutored by person or persons unknown? - -Mr. McVICKAR. Yes; that is correct. I believe that the Commission asked -for this clarification from the Department of State, and it was relayed -out to me in Bolivia. - -Mr. COLEMAN. In that memorandum you first indicated that you felt that -Oswald probably would not know that Helsinki would be a good place to -go to try to get a visa into Russia. - -Mr. McVICKAR. Yes; I think so. It is a well enough known fact among -people who are working in the Soviet Union and undoubtedly people who -are associated with Soviet matters. - -But I would say that it was not a commonly known fact among the -ordinary run of people in the United States. - -Mr. COLEMAN. You also placed some reliance upon the fact that he didn't -come in under a $30 per day individual tour or he didn't join a group, -is that correct? - -Mr. McVICKAR. Well, now, when you say that he did not do these things, -I don't know that he did not do these things. I was merely discussing -the fact that the particular type of visa that he obtained might have -some significance, and I went into a little bit maybe not in complete -detail and maybe not knowing all of the factors, but I tried to go into -a little bit of the different kinds of possibilities there might have -been. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Well, if it is established that Oswald got a tourist -visa, then I take it that paragraph 2 of your memorandum pretty much -disappears because the assumption is that he didn't get a tourist visa, -is that correct? - -Mr. McVICKAR. No; I don't think entirely so. I think you would have -to take a look at the amount of time that it would take him to get a -tourist visa or any kind of a visa. - -But as I say, I can't be sure that it would be very significant. But I -think it is a point, however. - -Mr. DULLES. How long is the ordinary tourist visa good for? - -Mr. McVICKAR. Tourist visas are usually issued for specific periods of -time, specific tours. That might be a week or might be a month, and -they vary in price with the length of time and where they are going, -and also how many people are in the group. If you are going by yourself -it is very expensive. If you are going with larger and larger groups it -becomes less expensive. - -Mr. COLEMAN. You also indicated in the memorandum in paragraph No. 4 -that according to your experience Oswald's application to remain in the -Soviet Union was relatively quickly accepted by the Soviet authorities? - -Mr. McVICKAR. I think item 4 is more or less canceled out by the fact -that my memory was inaccurate as to how long he had stayed in Moscow. I -think that my paragraph 4 is based on my inaccurate memory that he was -there for only about a week, but if he was there for much longer than -that, I think that is vitiated. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Assuming that he did stay the longer length of time then, -I take it you don't think there is any particular significance in the -fact that he was able to remain in the Soviet Union? - -Mr. McVICKAR. No; I think that the length of time that he apparently -was in Moscow was sufficient for them to make any bureaucratic decision. - -Mr. COLEMAN. And in paragraph No. 5 you indicated that he seemed to -be surprisingly competent and determined about what he was doing, -considering his age and experience. - -Could you indicate for the Commission just what he did which led you to -that conclusion? - -Mr. McVICKAR. Well, that goes back to my comment of a few minutes ago. -I think his bearing and attitude was unusually confident in a very -far away country where the way of doing things is very different from -what it is in the United States, and considering presumably he hadn't -traveled very much before, and he was very young. I think the word -"competent" refers to what seems to be a rather efficiently organized -chain of events which began, as I understand it, when he first applied -for a passport in the United States in Los Angeles, on September 4, -until his apparent appearance in Moscow about October 16, where he -applied for Soviet citizenship. And it seems to me, just offhand I -would say, that is a fairly well organized movement considering also -that apparently he went by ship from New Orleans to Helsinki--that -is what I understand--and was determined, as was very evident in -everything he said when he was in the office, was determined to do what -he was doing. - -Mr. COLEMAN. In paragraph No. 8 of the memorandum you place some -significance in the fact that he was permitted to belong to a rifle -club and practice target shooting while in Minsk. - -First, from where did you get that information? - -Mr. McVICKAR. I apologize for that in a way. That is complete -speculation, and the rifle club was something I read about in the -newspaper. I cannot be very accurate about the rifle club business, and -I point out in that note that it is not related to my contact with him. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Do you think it would be unusual from your knowledge of -life in the Soviet Union that people would belong to a rifle club and -that they could practice target shooting? - -Mr. McVICKAR. Yes; I would say so; yes. - -Representative FORD. In other words, if it was a fact? - -Mr. McVICKAR. If it was a fact. - -Representative FORD. That he belonged to a rifle club and did shooting -it would be unusual? - -Mr. McVICKAR. It would seem to me, yes, particularly for a foreigner, -but unusual in any case, I think. - -Mr. DULLES. But you did not hear that either from Oswald or from his -wife whom you saw later, I believe. - -Mr. McVICKAR. No; I did not. It is unrelated to anything except what -I heard about the case, and I don't know really about this. I just -remember reading about it in the paper, that is all. - -Mr. COLEMAN. After November 17, 1959, you had no more contact with -Oswald until some time in July 1961, is that correct? - -Mr. McVICKAR. Yes; that is right, and I believe that I didn't have any -contact with him in July of 1961. I believe I only had contact with his -wife. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Do you speak Russian? - -Mr. McVICKAR. Yes; or I did. - -Mr. COLEMAN. When did his wife come in in July of 1961? - -Mr. McVICKAR. Well, as I recall, and as I say, my memory here was -completely refreshed by the record, and I see that I have some notes in -the file that are undated, but that they were used evidently to write a -communication to the Department of State which was dated on August 28, -1961, and so I am confident that this interview must have taken place -in say the week before that. - -I departed from the Soviet Union about the 1st of September, and things -were pretty busy, and I can't remember very much more about it than I -can see here in the record. - -I do not really remember this interview, and I can only speak about it -on the basis of the record. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Isn't it possible that you saw her on July 11, 1961? - -Mr. McVICKAR. No; because I think what happened, and I think this is -reflected in the record. I think what happened was that Oswald himself -came into Moscow and was interviewed by Mr. Snyder on July 10, and that -he did not have his wife with him, and that he said that he was going -to try to get his wife to come to Moscow in the next few days, so that -she could be interviewed in connection with the visa, but that in fact -she did not appear until several weeks later, some time in August. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Are you certain about this, sir? - -Mr. McVICKAR. This is the best of my recollection, and I am pretty sure -that I read something in the record yesterday that indicates that she -was not in Moscow at the time he was interviewed by Mr. Snyder in July -of 1961. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Wasn't it possible that Mr. Snyder talked to Mr. Oswald -on July 8, which was a Saturday, and that Mrs. Oswald appeared at the -Embassy with Oswald on July the 10th, or on July 11th, 2 or 3 days -later? - -Mr. McVICKAR. I won't say that it is not possible, and as I say, -I don't remember this. But I very much doubt that I would have -interviewed somebody in the middle of July and have not written to -the State Department about it until the end of August, and I say that -honestly. That was not the way we operated. - -Mr. COLEMAN. You referred to some handwritten notes you saw in the -file. I would like to show you Commission Exhibit No. 945 and ask you -whether that is the copy of the notes that you were referring to? - -Mr. McVICKAR. That is the copy of them. I do not believe they are -dated, and it was with a ballpoint pen. I made this copy for myself -from the copy that is in the file. - -Mr. CHAYES. Would it be appropriate to point out that there seems to be -more on your copy than on his copy? - -Mr. McVICKAR. No, these are my own notes. This is exactly what it is -here. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Sir, I take it that Commission Exhibit No. 945 is some -notes you took at a time when you had an interview with Marina Oswald, -is that correct? - -Mr. McVICKAR. Yes. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Now you have a notation "was not Komsomol." What does that -mean? - -Mr. McVICKAR. That I am confident means that I asked her whether -she was a member of the Komsomol, which is the Communist youth -organization, and this would have been an ordinary question for me to -ask a visa applicant because this had some bearing on her admissibility -to the United States under the immigration law, and I was apparently -satisfied from what she said she was not. There is no other way of -really establishing it under such circumstances. - -Mr. DULLES. Did she say whether she had at anytime been a member of the -Komsomol? - -Mr. McVICKAR. I would have undoubtedly phrased my question in such a -way as to cover that point, I think. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Did you ask her whether she was a member of any particular -Communist organization? - -Mr. McVICKAR. Yes; and I believe that, as I stated in this report to -the Department of State, and I think it appears a little bit in here, -that she was a member of a Profcoes, which is probably a combination of -English and Russian, but this would have been a labor union, and she -apparently was a member of the medical workers labor union when she was -in the technical school, and then later in her work since 1957, it says -here. - -Mr. COLEMAN. When you had this interview wouldn't she then have to -fill out or you would have to fill out a form or some type of petition -to get her classified as an alien eligible for an immigration visa? - -Mr. McVICKAR. This was not the procedure. There is a form of -application for a visa, the number of which I forget. But that, under -the procedure, was filled out by the applicant at a later date. -This initial interview was to obtain in effect the approval of the -Department of State from the security point of view for the issuance of -the visa, and the interview was in connection with preparing a report -covering the points that are of concern to the Department in that -connection, and this report was prepared by me, sent in on August 28, -1961. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Sir, I have marked as Commission Exhibit No. 959 a copy -of a petition to classify status of alien for issuance of immigrant -visa, and it shows it was signed by Lee Harvey Oswald, and that -the beneficiary was Marina N. Oswald, and that it was sworn to and -subscribed before you on July 11, 1961. I ask you, have you seen that -before? - -Mr. McVICKAR. Well, this is something that I did not recall. But I see -that it was also an enclosure to my document which I sent in on August -28, 1961. - -Undoubtedly I must then have taken Mr. Oswald's oath on this document -on the date specified. This would not have required the presence of his -wife, but I am sure then on the basis of what I see here that this must -have occurred, but I did not remember it. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Since you have that document before you, could you then -say that there is a possibility that Commission Exhibit No. 945 was -written on July 10 or July 11, 1961, rather than in August as you -earlier testified? - -Mr. McVICKAR. I would say there is a possibility, but again I doubt it -because for one thing I do recall this item in the record which said -that she was not present when he came in to the Embassy in July, and I -am confident that there would have been no reason to hold up the type -of report made here unless it was that she wasn't available for an -interview. - -But as I say, I couldn't say for sure, but I don't remember, I don't -think of any reason that would have caused a delay of this kind unless -it had been that she didn't come in. I think it is too bad that I -didn't date this note, but I guess I didn't. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Can we infer from Commission Exhibit No. 959 that you must -have seen Mr. Oswald on July 11, 1961? - -Mr. McVICKAR. Yes; I think this would be a safe assumption, but I don't -remember anything about it, and it could have been a very routine thing -you see, because the way the work was arranged was that Consul Snyder -as the officer in charge handled our matters relating to citizenship, -and I handled matters relating to visas, and this was a visa matter and -he could very well have asked that I take Mr. Oswald's oath on this -petition in behalf of his wife, and it might have a very pro forma -thing. But I honestly don't remember this incident; but this sort of -thing is never done unless the person is present, unless both signing -parties are present. - -So it would seem to me that this man must have appeared to me and -signed this thing and said that it was his legal act, and then I -certified to that. - -Mr. DULLES. By both signing parties you only mean Oswald and the notary -or whoever certifies to it? - -Mr. McVICKAR. I being the notary in this case you see. But the -beneficiary, Mrs. Oswald, did not have to be present for this thing. - -Mr. COLEMAN. There is a possibility she was present? - -Mr. McVICKAR. Well, I think it is possible; but I rather doubt it -frankly, and I doubt it on the basis of what I have said before, that I -think I recall seeing in the record that she was not present, and that -I don't see why this whole procedure would't have gone through much -more quickly if she had been, that is all. - -Mr. COLEMAN. You keep on referring to the fact that you recall seeing -this in the record. Could you tell me where you saw it, please? - -Mr. McVICKAR. Well, I can try to find it. I think the best thing would -be if I looked at the Moscow official file. Is that right here? Okay; -well, maybe I can find it. Is that all right if I take a minute to look -through these papers? - -Mr. COLEMAN. Yes. - -(Discussion off the record.) - - -TESTIMONY OF ABRAM CHAYES - -Representative FORD. Mr. Chayes, will you take the following oath. Do -you swear the testimony you are about to give is the truth, the whole -truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? - -Mr. CHAYES. I do. - -Mr. COLEMAN. The Honorable Abram Chayes is the Legal Adviser to -the Department of State. Mr. Chayes will be asked to testify with -respect to the files and other information and documents supplied the -Commission by the Department of State dealing with Mr. Oswald. - -Mr. Chayes will also be asked about the legal correctness of certain -decisions made by various offices of the State Department with regard -to Oswald, including whether Oswald had lost his American citizenship -by his actions in 1959, whether his passport should have been returned -to him in July 1961, whether his passport should have been renewed -based upon the July 10, 1961, application, whether he should have been -issued his 1963 passport, and whether action should have been taken to -revoke it in October 1963 as a result of information received by the -Passport Office, and whether the Department and the Immigration and -Naturalization Service acted properly in connection with section 243(g) -of the Immigration and Nationality Act with respect to Marina. Mr. -Chayes will also be asked about the lookout card system in the Passport -Office. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. Chayes, will you state for the record your full name? - -Mr. CHAYES. My name is Abram Chayes. There is a middle name that I -don't use. It is Joseph. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Where do you presently reside? - -Mr. CHAYES. At 3520 Edmunds Street NW., Washington, D.C. - -Mr. COLEMAN. When did you become Legal Adviser to the State Department? - -Mr. CHAYES. I think I was sworn in on February 7, 1961. - -Mr. COLEMAN. So, therefore, anything that happened with respect to Mr. -Oswald prior to that time you had nothing to do with and knew nothing -about? - -Mr. CHAYES. Well, I should say that I never heard the name Lee Harvey -Oswald until November 22, 1963, so that neither before nor after the -time I became Legal Adviser, before the assassination, did I have any -direct knowledge about Oswald, nor do I believe I passed directly on -any matters in the case, although there may have been some matters that -were considered in my office. I am not sure about that, but I took no -personal action in the case. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Since the assassination your office has had occasion to -review the various files which were in the State Department dealing -with Lee Harvey Oswald, is that correct? - -Mr. CHAYES. Yes; on November 22, Mr. Ball, the Under Secretary of -State, directed me to take in personal charge all the files in the -Department that I could find, and to review those files and be prepared -with a report for the Secretary the following morning on the general -relations of Mr. Oswald and the State Department. - -I did take some files, the basic files into my custody at that time, -and retained them in my custody, I think, until we sent them to the -Commission at the Commission's request. And others than who were -working on the matter in the Department had access to the files but had -to work in my office on them. - -Mr. COLEMAN. On or about May 28, 1964, you had occasion to reassemble -the files and deliver another set to the Commission, is that correct? - -Mr. CHAYES. Yes; from time to time between the first delivery, which -was probably last December sometime, and just last week we have made -other papers available to the Commission as they have come to our own -notice. A file search of this kind in a place like the Department of -State is a pretty elaborate business. - -Only last week we got a whole new shipment from the Moscow Embassy in -which they said, "We have sent you before everything that you didn't -have duplicates of, but here is a whole bunch of duplicates." - -And it turned out that some of them weren't duplicates as appeared just -this morning. We made those available as soon as they came in. - -Mr. COLEMAN. I take it with the covering letter of May 28, 1964, and -the description you made of the file together with the other files that -you delivered to us just yesterday, that they constitute all of the -files that the State Department has? - -Mr. CHAYES. As I say, they constitute all that we have been able to -find, all the documents we have been able to find after a most diligent -search. - -I myself did not personally conduct the search, but we directed -responsible officers in all the various places where documents might -be to give us all the documents they had, and I think we made a very -intensive search, and to my knowledge there are no other documents in -the Department relating to this matter in any way. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Shortly after the Commission was appointed, you had -prepared under your direction, and submitted to the Commission a -document entitled "Report of the Department of State Lee Harvey -Oswald," is that correct? - -Mr. CHAYES. That is correct, sir. - -Mr. COLEMAN. And this document is an examination of the various actions -taken by people in the State Department, and your judgment as to the -legal correctness of the various actions? - -Mr. CHAYES. Well, as you see, the document consists of five subparts. -It is an analysis and summary of the documents in the files. We went -through the files, looked at all the documents, tried to summarize them -for the Commission so as to give the Commission the fullest possible -appreciation of the contacts between Oswald and the Department. Where -it was necessary to elucidate policies or matters of law in order to -give the Commission that appreciation, we have done so, yes. - -Mr. COLEMAN. The Report has been given a number of Commission Document -No. 2. (Commission Exhibit No. 950.) After that you, on May 8, 1964, -sent a letter to the general counsel for the Commission in which you -answered certain questions which had been proposed by the general -counsel? - -Mr. CHAYES. Yes; the general counsel sent us a questionnaire with two -attachments, attachment A and attachment B. Attachment A referred to -matters mostly concerning Russia and the Embassy in Moscow. Attachment -B raised questions about matters within the Department, passport and -visa offices within the Department. Each attachment contained a series -of questions. - -Again I think it is more accurate to state that the responses were -prepared under my supervision and direction. I, of course, reviewed -every response and and none were sent out without my approval. But I -was not the draftsman or didn't do all of the work. - -Mr. COLEMAN. The first question that the Commission would like to know -about and be given some advice on is the question of whether the acts -which Oswald performed in October 1959, and shortly thereafter, would -in your opinion result in his loss of citizenship. - -Mr. CHAYES. In my judgment they would not amount to expatriating acts. -The basic analysis is covered in the third part of Commission Document -No. 2, entitled "Lee Harvey Oswald--Expatriation." - -Representative FORD. On what page is that, Mr. Chayes? - -Mr. CHAYES. Well, I am sorry, each of the parts begin at No. 1, so it -is not very convenient, but it is about halfway through. There is a -memorandum entitled "Memorandum Lee Harvey Oswald--Expatriation." - -Now, in that memorandum we analyze three sections of the act under -which it might be argued that an expatriation took place. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Yes? - -Mr. CHAYES. I say in that memorandum we analyzed the three possible -sections of the act under which it might be argued that an expatriation -took place, and in each case we conclude, and I think properly, that -there was no expatriation. The first section is section---- - -Mr. DULLES. May I ask one question? This is a formal opinion of your -office as Legal Adviser to the State Department? - -Mr. CHAYES. I take responsibility for this as my present opinion, yes, -sir, and it goes out over my signature. We are not quite like the -Attorney General. We don't have opinions that get bound up in volumes. - -Mr. DULLES. I realize that it is not a formalized opinion from that -angle. Was this ever submitted to the Department of Justice for -consideration? - -Mr. CHAYES. No; it was not. - -Mr. EHRLICH. Actually this report did go to the Department of Justice -because it was submitted before the Commission was formed. - -Mr. CHAYES. Yes; but it wasn't submitted to the Department of Justice -for consideration. - -Mr. DULLES. For concurrence or anything of that kind. - -Mr. CHAYES. For concurrence, no. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Now, the first section which I assume you address your -attention to was section 349(a) (1). - -Mr. CHAYES. We could do it that way. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Do you want to start with 349(a) (6)? - -Mr. CHAYES. We started with (a) (6) in the memorandum because there was -likely to be a better case under (a) (6) than almost anything else. -The reason why one might argue more about (a) (6) than anything else, -is that there were written statements by Oswald saying, "I renounce my -citizenship" or words to that effect, and they were made in writing, -and in a way that appeared to be intended as a formal, considered -statement. - -But (a) (6) says that a U.S. national may lose his nationality by -"making a formal renunciation of nationality before a diplomatic or -consular officer of the United States in a foreign state, in such form -as may be prescribed by the Secretary of State." - -Now, even if you resolve every other issue in favor of expatriation, -that is if you say handing a fellow a letter of the kind that Oswald -handed to Mr. Snyder was a formal renunciation of nationality before -a diplomatic or consular officer, it was clearly not on the form -prescribed by the Secretary of State, and the courts have been very -precise on that. - -Representative FORD. Do you have those citations, Mr. Chayes? - -Mr. CHAYES. The form we have here, it is called "Form of Oath of -Renunciation." It is volume 8 of the Foreign Affairs Manual of the -Department of State, and it is an exhibit to section 225.6, and you can -see here that it is a fully prescribed form. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Do you have any case where (a) it was a written statement, -and (b) it was given to a consul and yet because it was not on the form -prescribed by the Secretary of State, a court has held that it was not -a renunciation? - -Mr. CHAYES. No case has been decided under 349(a) (6), but the general -line of cases under 349 is to resolve every doubt in favor of the -citizen, and there are innumerable citations to that effect. I feel -quite confident when the statute itself prescribes that the form should -be one established by the Secretary, and where the Secretary has in -fact prescribed such a form, that one cannot bring himself under (a) -(6) unless he uses the form. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Wouldn't the two letters that Oswald delivered be -considered as making an affirmation or other formal declaration of -allegiance to a foreign state or political subdivision thereof, which -is an act under (a) (2)? - -Mr. CHAYES. That would be (a) (2), and we consider that at page 7 of -the memorandum, subsection C. - -Mr. DULLES. Are we through with all pages up to 7? - -Mr. CHAYES. No; we probably go back to 1. But there we do have cases, -and the cases are clear that the oath or affirmation or formal -declaration under section (a) (2) has to be to an official entitled to -receive it on behalf of the foreign state, and even then the courts -have been very sticky about holding people to that. - -For example, there is one case where a dual national, a Philippine and -U.S. national, made an oath of allegiance to the Philippines in the -usual form in order to get a Philippine passport, and it was asserted -that this was an expatriating act, and the court held no, it wasn't. In -re _Bautista's Petition_, 183 F. Supp. 271 (D.C. Guam, 1960). There is -a case where a man took an oath of allegiance to the British Crown, but -the recipient of the oath was his employer, private employer, and it -was held that that was not the kind of oath that is involved. In _The -Matter of L._ 1 I. & N. Dec. 317 (B.I.A. 1942). - -The courts have said that this is a reciprocal relationship in which in -order to come under this section, the citizen or the U.S. citizen must -offer his allegiance to the foreign state and the foreign state must -accept it. - -Mr. DULLES. There has to be action on both sides. Unilateral action is -not enough if the affirmation is not accepted. - -Mr. CHAYES. That is the way I read the cases. Now, of course, if it -comes before, if the oath is taken before an official of the foreign -state that is authorized to take oaths of allegiance, why then nothing -more is needed than that. But making an oath or statement of allegiance -to another American or to a private party, whatever his nationality, -has been held not to fall within 349 (a)(2). - -Mr. COLEMAN. Do you know whether Oswald had to make any statement or -take any oath when he got employment in the Soviet Union? - -Mr. CHAYES. I don't personally, but it may have been inquired into by -the consul when Oswald came back for a renewal passport. - -I think the record shows that it was concluded that there was no -evidence that he became a naturalized Soviet citizen, and so far as I -know, there is no evidence that he in any other way took an oath of -allegiance of the kind that would bring him under 349(a)(2). - -Even if he had had to do so, for example, in connection with his -employment, there are cases which may say that that is not a voluntary -oath if it is done out of economic necessity and it will not, -therefore, serve to expatriate. See _Insogna_ v. _Dulles_, 116 F. Supp. -473 (D.D.C. 1953); _Stipa_ v. _Dulles_, 233 F. 2d 551 (3d Cir. 1956); -and _Bruni_ v. _Dulles_, 235 F. 2d 855 (D.C. Cir. 1956). In at least -one other case, _Mendelsohn_ v. _Dulles_, 207 F. 2d 37 (D.D.C. 1953), a -court held that the plaintiff had not expatriated himself by residing -abroad for more than 5 years since he had remained abroad to care for -his sick wife, who was too ill to travel. - -Representative FORD. I think it would be helpful wherever you say, Mr. -Chayes, there are cases, that the record show the citation of the cases. - -Mr. CHAYES. I think most of the cases that I am relying on are cited in -the memorandum to which I am referring. But there may be others that I -am recollecting. If I could have a chance to review the transcript, I -will submit exact citations in each case. - -Representative FORD. I think that would be very helpful. Otherwise I -think the record is---- - -Mr. CHAYES. Yes; I agree. - -Representative FORD. Is not clear or not complete, and as far as I am -concerned, and I think the Commission would agree, that you should -review the transcript to supply those citations for those particular -categories of cases. - -Mr. CHAYES. I will be very glad to do so, Mr. Chairman. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Now do you want to address yourself to section 349(a) (1)? - -Mr. CHAYES. Well (a) (1) is obtaining naturalization, and there just -wasn't any indication, there wasn't any evidence at all that he had -become a naturalized Soviet citizen. - -We knew that he applied for naturalization, but even on the basis of -his Soviet documents he had not been given Soviet citizenship. - -Mr. COLEMAN. I take it your testimony is that after reviewing all of -the files, your office has determined that Oswald committed no act -which would justify the Department stating that he had expatriated -himself. - -Mr. CHAYES. I think that is right. I more than think that is right. I -know that is right. We have reached the conclusion, and I personally -have reached the conclusion, that Oswald's actions in the Soviet Union, -although he may very well have wanted to expatriate himself at one time -or another, did not succeed in doing that. - -I think for the record I would like to read here a citation from the -case of _Stipa_ v. _Dulles_ decided by the Court of Appeals for the -Third Circuit--the citation is at 233 F. 2d. 551--which gives some idea -of the general attitude with which the courts approach expatriation -cases. In that case it said: - - The burden of proving expatriation generally is upon the defendant - who affirmatively alleges it [that is the Secretary of State] and - the burden is a heavy one. Factual doubts are to be resolved in - favor of citizenship. The burden of proof on the Government in an - expatriation case is like that in denaturalization. The evidence - must be clear, unequivocal and convincing. The rule prevailing - in denaturalization cases that the facts and the law should be - construed as far as is reasonably possible in favor of the citizen - equally applies to expatriation cases. American citizenship is not - to be lightly taken away. - -This is the dominating attitude of the courts in all of these cases. We -find, for example, that a group of Japanese Americans, who during the -war under the stress of the relocation program, did all of the business -of renouncing their citizenship and did it in the most formal kind of a -way, and it was clear that they had done it and they had meant to do it -and all that sort of thing. When after the war they raised the question -of their citizenship status, the court held well, that the emotional -stress and strain of the relocation and shock under those circumstances -was such that this shouldn't be held against them. _Acheson_ v. -_Murakami_, 176 F. 2d 953 (9th Cir. 1949). - -So the courts have gone very, very far to uphold the notion that -American citizenship is not to be lightly taken away, see e.g., -_Schneiderman_ v. _United States_, 320 U.S. 118 (1943), and that has -affected not only our legal judgment in the particular case, but our -general policy which you have heard explained by Mr. Snyder and Mr. -McVickar. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Could you describe for the record what the policy of the -Department is when a person appears at a foreign embassy and attempts -to expatriate himself? - -Mr. DULLES. Before you answer that question may I ask a question. -In your memorandum here, relating to the paragraph we have been -discussing, there is a footnote that interests me. It says: - -"After the assassination of President Kennedy, an official of the -Soviet Ministry of Foreign Affairs stated to an officer of the American -Embassy in Moscow that Soviet authorities had considered Oswald's -application for Soviet citizenship but had decided not to approve it -because Oswald seemed unstable." - -Mr. Coleman, do we have that in our files? - -Mr. COLEMAN. Yes. - -Mr. CHAYES. Yes; I think also the American Embassy officer was -Ambassador Kohler? - -Mr. COLEMAN. It was Stoessel. - -Mr. CHAYES. Oh, Stoessel, Deputy Chief of Mission. - -Mr. DULLES. The statement was made to him by an official of the Foreign -Office? - -Mr. CHAYES. I think he is identified in the telegram; yes. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Also when the Secretary appears tomorrow I think he will -impart some information on what the Soviet Ambassador told him as to -the reason why they refused Oswald citizenship. - -Mr. DULLES. Yes; I would rather like to put that in the record unless -there is some similar reason to the one we had before. - -Mr. CHAYES. Could I go off the record for just a moment? - -(Discussion off the record.) - -(Mr. Coleman's last question was read back by the reporter.) - -Mr. CHAYES. Well, I think the basic policy of the Department is a -recognition that this is a very grave and serious and irrevocable act -that can affect a person's life and does affect a person's life very -fundamentally. And so the policy of the Department is to make sure that -the person making the renunciation does so with full recognition of the -consequences of his action, of the fact that it is a very grave act, -and in such a way as to make sure that it is a completely voluntary act -in every sense of the word, so that it can be shown not only to be free -of any physical duress or coercion, but mental stress and things of -that kind. - -This is not only true because of the recognition of what it means -to the individual, but also because in order to support the -denaturalization in court. You have got to be able to show those things -under the standards and the general attitude that I have set forth. - -Mr. COLEMAN. I take it your testimony is that you reviewed all of the -files and looked at all of the memorandums or had it done under your -direction, and your judgment is that Oswald had not expatriated himself -in 1959? - -Mr. CHAYES. Yes; on the basis of the record that I have in the file. - -Mr. COLEMAN. And with that determination made, then I take it that when -Oswald appeared at the Embassy in July 1961, and requested that his -passport be returned to him, that Mr. Snyder had no other alternative -but to return his passport to him, is that correct? - -Mr. CHAYES. In the absence of any other disqualifying ground, and there -wasn't any other disqualifying ground either known to the Embassy in -Moscow or available in our own files back home. If Mr. Oswald was a -citizen, and was not disqualified in some other way, he was entitled to -the passport. - -Mr. DULLES. Do you know from studying the records, or otherwise, -whether when that request was made by Lee Harvey Oswald, it was -referred back to the State Department and reconsidered again? - -Mr. CHAYES. Oh, yes; it was. In the first place, the expatriation issue -wasn't decided until that time. That is the expatriation issue was open -until he came back in and applied for the passport. - -The expatriation issue was decided in the first instance by the officer -in the field, and then the tentative decision was reported by him back -to the Passport Office and the expatriation decision was reviewed in -the Passport Office at that time. The file was reviewed for other -possible disqualifications, and an instruction went out with respect to -the return of the passport. - -The field was instructed that when the passport was returned, it should -be marked for travel to the United States only, and then when the -passport was finally renewed some weeks later, that was also pursuant -to a departmental instruction. - -Mr. DULLES. Was that reviewed in your office at that time? - -Mr. CHAYES. No; it wasn't. - -Mr. DULLES. Shouldn't it have been? - -Mr. CHAYES. I don't think so, Mr. Dulles. The Passport Office has to -make nationality determinations on thousands and thousands of people. - -Mr. DULLES. But this is a legal question, isn't it? - -Mr. CHAYES. But they have adjudicators in the Passport Office. - -Mr. DULLES. They have legal officers. - -Mr. CHAYES. Thirty lawyers or something. - -Mr. DULLES. They have? - -Mr. CHAYES. And two lawyers reviewed this case. There are just -thousands of nationality or loss of nationality determinations. - -Mr. DULLES. And those are generally all settled in the Passport Office? - -Mr. CHAYES. In almost every case. - -Mr. DULLES. Some of them may be presented to your office. - -Mr. CHAYES. Where they present especially difficult questions of law or -general policy of administration; yes, sir. - -Mr. DULLES. And this wasn't considered as a case involving particularly -difficult questions of law? - -Mr. CHAYES. No; I don't think it did then or does now. - -Representative FORD. Did the people in Washington who made this review -know that on this one particular form, I don't recall the Commission -Exhibit, that Oswald said, "I have done this, that," one or the other? - -Mr. CHAYES. They would have had that before them. I think that is the -form that was sent back to the Department, the one that had "have -not" crossed out and "have" was left standing. So they made the -determination on the basis of a form---- - -Mr. COLEMAN. Commission Exhibit No. 938, for the record. - -Mr. CHAYES. Commission Exhibit No. 938, in which Oswald indicated -that he had done one of these acts, and then supplied a supplementary -questionnaire explaining in fuller detail what he meant. - -Mr. DULLES. Do you happen to know who the lawyers were who did this in -the Passport Office, and whether they would be available if we should -want to see them? - -Mr. CHAYES. I think they are on the list to testify. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. Chayes, those lawyers didn't review the file in 1961. -They are the two lawyers that reviewed it in October 1963. - -Mr. CHAYES. I see. Well, I can find out if we haven't supplied the -names already. - -Mr. COLEMAN. I don't think any lawyer reviewed the file in 1961. - -Mr. CHAYES. Well, an adjudicator did. - -Mr. COLEMAN. It was Miss Waterman. She is not a lawyer. - -Mr. CHAYES. I see. - -Mr. DULLES. She is coming before us? - -Mr. COLEMAN. Yes. - -Mr. CHAYES. She is a passport adjudicator. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Now, were have marked as Commission Exhibit No. 929 an -Operations Memorandum from the Department of State to the Embassy in -Moscow, dated March 28, 1960, which stated that: - -"An appropriate notice had been placed in the Lookout Card Section -of the Passport Office in the event that Mr. Oswald should apply for -documentation at a point outside the Soviet Union." - -I would like to show you this Commission exhibit and ask you are you -familiar with that memorandum? - -Mr. CHAYES. I have seen this, but only since the assassination in my -general review of the files. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Now, has your office made a check to determine whether a -lookout card was prepared? - -Mr. CHAYES. Yes; Mr. Coleman. In connection with the preparation of -this memorandum, and the responses to the supplemental questions for -the Commission, we did examine the question of whether a lookout card -was prepared. I should say again that the matter of preparation of -lookout cards is not under my jurisdiction, and my knowledge of this is -only from a subsequent investigation. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Your examination revealed that a lookout card actually was -never prepared, is that correct? - -Mr. CHAYES. I think we have to say that our examination does not reveal -that a lookout card was prepared, and that on balance examining all -the relevant considerations, it appears more likely than not that no -lookout card was prepared. - -Representative FORD. But there was none in the file. - -Mr. CHAYES. There was none in the file, but there wouldn't have been -anyway, because this lookout card was ordered prepared because there -was a doubt as to whether Oswald had expatriated himself. Once that -doubt had been removed by an adjudication as it was in July of 1961, -the lookout card based on the possibility of expatriation would have -been removed. - -It might be worth a moment if I could give you some general picture of -the lookout card system. Miss Knight will be able to testify in much -greater detail than I as to the actual operating---- - -Mr. DULLES. So that when 1963 came around and there was a further -application for a passport, there was no lookout card then found in -1963? - -Mr. CHAYES. Nor should there have been. - -Mr. DULLES. That is the issue under your procedure. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Let me refer back to 1961 when you determined or the -Department determined to renew the passport. Now, as I understand it, -there was a search made of the Lookout Card Section, and the records -that we have reveal that no lookout card was found. - -Mr. DULLES. Even in 1961? - -Mr. COLEMAN. In 1961. - -Mr. CHAYES. I don't think that that can be said that categorically. I -think it appears probable that there was no lookout card in 1961 at -that time, yes; that is correct. - -Mr. DULLES. But in 1961 all of these facts with regard to Oswald were -before you, were they not? - -Mr. CHAYES. If I could just give some notion of what this system is -like. - -Mr. DULLES. Yes. - -Mr. CHAYES. The lookout card is an IBM card, an ordinary IBM card, -and it should be prepared on anyone as to whom some evidence of -disqualification for a passport exists in our files. If the system -worked perfectly, anytime there was an unresolved question about the -eligibility of a person for a passport---- - -Representative FORD. Does a defector or an attempted defector fall in -that category? - -Mr. CHAYES. No; the problem here was that this man had attempted to -expatriate himself, and said he was going to naturalize himself as a -Soviet citizen, and if he had done either of those things effectively, -he would have disqualified himself for a passport. - -So there was an unresolved question on the facts known in 1959, or -January 1960, whenever it was. And at that point a lookout card should -have been prepared for him. - -Then in July of 1961, when he came back in in Moscow, and asked for -the renewal of his passport, that question of expatriation was then -determined, both in Moscow and at home, and it was determined in favor -of the applicant. So that the outstanding question was then removed, -and if the procedures had gone right, the lookout card also, if it had -been prepared, would have been taken out of the lookout file and torn -up and thrown away. - -Representative FORD. Don't you keep records of what you put in and what -you take out? - -Mr. CHAYES. Yes, the refusal slip which formed the basis on which this -memorandum that we are talking about was made. There was a refusal slip -which was a direction to the person in the lookout card office to make -a lookout card, and also probably whoever made the refusal slip also -sent this memorandum to Moscow saying that a lookout card had been -prepared. - -If you look at the refusal slip, which is retained in the main passport -file of Oswald, it doesn't have the notations that it would have had or -should have had if a card had been made. So that on the general basis -of the evidence, we conclude that it is probable that no card was made. -But you can't say that for sure because even if one had been made, it -would have been removed when the issue was resolved. - -Representative FORD. If it is probable one wasn't made, but there is -a possibility, remote as it might be, don't you have some means of -recording when a lookout card is removed? - -Mr. CHAYES. That notation also does not appear. - -Representative FORD. So the probability is increased. - -Mr. CHAYES. That is correct. - -Representative FORD. That there was no lookout card ever made and put -into the file. - -Mr. CHAYES. That is correct, sir. All of this is covered in some detail -in our response, our written response to the questionnaire, and comes -to the same conclusion, and all of these points are enumerated. - -Mr. COLEMAN. There is a Commission Exhibit No. 948 where Mr. Chayes -under date of May 8, 1964, addressed himself to these problems. - -Representative FORD. Is this that which I have here? - -Mr. COLEMAN. Yes. - -Representative FORD. And that is to be in the record? - -Mr. CHAYES. Yes. - -Mr. COLEMAN. We will give it an exhibit number. - -(Discussion off the record.) - -Mr. COLEMAN. Back on the record. - -I would like to mark as Commission Exhibit No. 948 a letter from the -Legal Adviser to the Department of State to Mr. Rankin dated May 8, -1964. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 948 for -identification.) - -Mr. COLEMAN. I would like to ask the witness whether this letter was -prepared under his direction together with the attachments. - -Mr. CHAYES. Yes; the letter and attachments are those which were -prepared--I haven't had a chance to examine each right now, but appear -to be those which were prepared in my office and under my personal -supervision in response to the request of the Commission. - -Mr. COLEMAN. In Commission Exhibit No. 948 you explain the lookout card -situation. - -Mr. CHAYES. Yes. - -Mr. COLEMAN. You treat with the question of whether a lookout card was -in the State Department file on Oswald in 1961. - -Mr. CHAYES. Yes, sir; I think it is covered in the answers to questions -12 and 13. In particular the answer to question 13 shows the -evaluation on which we reached the conclusion that it is probable that -a lookout card was not prepared. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Was there any other occasion as a result of acts by Oswald -that you felt that a lookout card should have been prepared? - -Mr. CHAYES. Yes. - -Mr. COLEMAN. What were those? - -Mr. CHAYES. Under the procedures of the Department, once Oswald was -given a repatriation loan, as he was on his return to this country in, -what was it, May of 1962, a lookout card should have been prepared and -should have been maintained in the lookout file during the period when -there was an unpaid balance on his repatriation loan, and in that case -it appears pretty certainly that no card was prepared. We don't even -have in that case a refusal slip indicating a direction to prepare a -card. - -Mr. DULLES. Can you refuse issuance of a passport when there is an -unpaid balance due? - -Mr. CHAYES. I don't know what the courts would say, but a person who -accepts a repatriation loan now signs an agreement that he will not -apply for a passport until he has paid the loan. - -At the time that Oswald got his loan, the form was a little different, -but even then he signed a statement saying that he understood that -passport facilities would not be furnished to him while an outstanding -balance was---- - -Representative FORD. Could we have in the record the form that was in -existence before and that which is now the form? - -Mr. CHAYES. I think you do have it in the report. Again it is in the -answer to question 13, page 3 of that answer, if you see there it says, -"In the promissory note"--it is about the middle of the page--"which -he signed for the loan he stated, section 423.6-5 that 'I further -understand and agree that after my repatriation I will not be furnished -a passport for travel abroad until my obligation to reimburse the -Treasurer of the United States is liquidated.'" - -Mr. COLEMAN. You testified that you made a search of the records or you -had a search made of the records of the Department, and you conclude -that no lookout card was ever prepared. - -Mr. CHAYES. Yes; we can't find any evidence that a lookout card might -have been prepared. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Do you know why one was not prepared? - -Mr. CHAYES. There could have been more than one reason. It could have -been simply a bureaucratic oversight. It could have been that they -didn't have date and place of birth information on Oswald. - -Because of the possibility of identical names, the practice of the -Passport Office is not to prepare a lookout card on any individual on -the basis of his name alone. They need both name and date and place of -birth. - -Now, it may have been either that the Finance Office failed to notify -the Passport Office because it did not have date and place of birth -information, or that it did notify the Passport Office, and because -there was no date and place of birth information, the Passport Office -did not make a card. - -Mr. DULLES. But the Passport Office had that information. - -Mr. CHAYES. The Passport Office had the date and place of birth -information on Lee Harvey Oswald; yes. - -Mr. DULLES. But not on Marina? - -Mr. CHAYES. Marina wouldn't have gotten into the Passport Office at -all. She is an alien. But they didn't know whether the Lee Harvey -Oswald, or they might not have known that the Lee Harvey Oswald that -came down from the Finance Office, if indeed it did come down, was the -same Lee Harvey Oswald as to whom they had date and place of birth -information. - -That is the problem. The problem is avoiding the difficulties that -would arise if duplicated names put you into the lookout card system. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Once the loan had been repaid, would the card have been -taken out? - -Mr. CHAYES. Yes. - -Mr. COLEMAN. So, therefore, by the time he applied for the passport in -June 1963, the loan had been paid so there wouldn't have been a lookout -card in any event. - -Mr. CHAYES. That is correct. The lookout card would have been removed, -had it been made, on January 29, 1963, 6 months before the passport -application, when Oswald finally paid the last of his outstanding loan -balance. - -Mr. DULLES. Can I ask a question there? Is the lookout card then only -prepared in those cases where a passport should be refused irrespective -of the moral turpitude or idiosyncracies or whatever else may be the -case with regard to the individual? - -Mr. CHAYES. There are three cases in which a lookout card is prepared. -One is the case you have just mentioned, where a passport should be -refused or there is evidence that might warrant refusal that you have -to look into further. - -The second is if you are a very important person and your passport is -supposed to be given specially expeditious treatment. - -And the third, if another agency, for example, your old agency or the -FBI or any other agency has asked the Department to inform them in case -of the passport application by a particular individual, a lookout card -will be made. So those are the three categories. - -Now, the first category is by far the biggest. There are 250,000 -lookout cards, and by far the overwhelming majority of those is in the -first category, that is people as to whom there is evidence which would -warrant a determination that they should not be issued a passport. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Does the State Department have any regulations which -set forth the circumstances under which they will refuse a person a -passport? - -Mr. CHAYES. Yes; we have regulations which are set forth, a copy of -which is attached to question 17. They appear in volume 22 of the -Federal Register. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Volume 22, title 22? - -Mr. CHAYES. Yes; title 22, part 51 of the Code of Federal Regulations. - -Mr. COLEMAN. I take it then that in 51.135 you have the regulation -which says that you can deny a passport to a member of a Communist -organization, is that correct? - -Mr. CHAYES. Well, I think you have to be careful how you read that. It -is a member of a Communist organization registered or required to be -registered under section 7 of the Subversive Activities Control Act of -1950, as amended. - -This 51.135 is a regulation which implements section 6 of the -Subversive Activities Control Act, which denies passports to members of -organizations required to register. - -The only such organization so far against which a final order of -registration is outstanding, is the Communist Party of the United -States. So, not only technically but actually, membership in the -Communist Party of the Soviet Union would not bring you within this -paragraph of the regulation. - -Mr. DULLES. Or the Communist Party of any other country. - -Mr. CHAYES. Of any other country. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Is there any other regulation, which the State Department -has, dealing with the circumstances under which they can refuse to -issue a passport? - -Mr. CHAYES. The other regulation covering substantive grounds of -refusal is 51.136. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Could you read into the record the regulation? - -Mr. CHAYES. Yes; the regulation says: - -"In order to promote"---- - -Well, it is entitled "Limitations on Issuance of Passports to Certain -Other Persons." - -It reads: - -"In order to promote and safeguard the interests of the United States, -passport facilities except for direct and immediate return to the -United States shall be refused to a person when it appears to the -satisfaction of the Secretary of State that the person's activities -abroad would (a) violate the laws of the United States, and (b) be -prejudicial to the orderly conduct of foreign relations, or (c) -otherwise be prejudicial to the interests of the United States." - -Mr. COLEMAN. In 1963, on June 24 when Oswald applied for a passport, he -was issued the passport within 24 hours after the application; is that -correct? - -Mr. CHAYES. Yes, sir. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Is there any record in the Department that anyone ever -examined Oswald's file to make a determination of whether he should -have been issued a passport? - -Mr. CHAYES. In 1963? - -Mr. COLEMAN. 1963. - -Mr. CHAYES. In 1963 the passport was issued on the basis of a simple -check of the lookout file under the normal procedures of the Department. - -What happens is that when a field office, in this case it was the New -Orleans field office, get a series of passport applications, they -Telex the names of the applicants and their place and date of birth -to the Department, and the Department makes a name check through the -lookout card file. That is all. And if there isn't a lookout card in -the lookout card file, they authorize the issuance of the passport -by the field agency. The field agency has to make a determination of -citizenship, of course. But no further action is taken in Washington -unless for some reason or other the field agency would wish to send a -particular case forward. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Since there was no lookout card, I take it we can assume -that the June 25, 1963, passport was issued without any---- - -Mr. CHAYES. Without any examination. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Without any consultation of the files on Oswald---- - -Mr. CHAYES. Exactly. - -Mr. COLEMAN. That were in the Department. - -Mr. CHAYES. I am confident that that was the case. - -Mr. DULLES. May I ask whether there are any lookout cards to your -knowledge that are filed under that third section there? - -Mr. CHAYES. "Violate the laws or be prejudical"? - -Mr. DULLES. That is it; yes. - -Mr. CHAYES. Well, I don't know for a fact that there are, but if we -would make such a determination with respect to some person or group, I -suppose lookout cards would be prepared for such a group. - -And I would go further and say that probably the authority, you -don't need authority to do it, but the theory of preparing cards -for defectors which we are now doing under the Schwartz to Knight -memorandum, that we referred to a moment ago, is that it is possible -that a defector, upon examination of his file, will be shown to fall -within one of these categories. - -Mr. DULLES. Would Oswald now be considered a defector, or should he -have been at that time if the regulations that you now have in effect -were then in effect? - -Mr. CHAYES. If we had the instruction in the Schwartz to Knight -memorandum, yes; there would have been a lookout card on Oswald. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. Chayes, assuming on June 25, 1963, a person in the -Passport Office had examined all of the files that the State Department -had on Oswald from 1959 through June 25, 1963, in your opinion could -the Department have refused Oswald a passport based upon section 51.136 -of the regulation? - -Mr. CHAYES. In my opinion, they could not. They could not have refused -a passport based on the information in the Oswald file. - -Representative FORD. If that is true, how could you have a lookout card -now that would have resulted, that would result in a passport being -refused? - -Mr. CHAYES. I don't think we could. What the lookout card would do -would be to refer you to the file. You would look into the file. You -might then want some further investigation as to this fellow. - -You might, having seen that you were dealing with this kind of a -person, want to examine him more fully on his travel plans and so on -and so on. That further investigation might turn up some information -which would warrant a determination under one of these subsections. But -if it turned up nothing but what was in the file, you would have to -issue the passport, in my judgment. - -Mr. DULLES. That is, lookout cards might well be put in in borderline -cases, but when you came to consider the case on all the facts, you -would decide in favor of issuance of the passport rather than refusal? - -Mr. CHAYES. Yes; that is the same thing with the expatriation card -which should have been made out for Oswald in 1960. It should have -been made out because there was a possibility that he had expatriated -himself. But then when he came to apply for the passport, all the -lookout card would do is say, "Investigate this carefully and determine -this issue." - -And as you say, when you got all the facts as in the expatriation -situation, you might determine that he had not expatriated himself. - -Representative FORD. At least in this case if there had been a lookout -card, there would have been a delay. - -Mr. CHAYES. Yes. - -Representative FORD. That is the very least that would have happened. - -Mr. CHAYES. There would have been a delay of a couple of days probably. - -Representative FORD. And in this case time might have been important. - -Mr. CHAYES. No; if you are talking about this case as it actually -happened, time wasn't important at all. He applied for the passport in -June of 1963. He got it in June of 1963, and he made no effort to use -the passport, nor did he have any occasion to use it, until he died. - -Mr. DULLES. It would have been a blessing for us if he had used it, -say, in the sense that the assassination might not have taken place, if -he had taken the passport and gone to China as he may have contemplated. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. Chayes, is it your testimony that when the Department -knows a person went abroad in 1959, attempted to defect to the Soviet -Union, stated that he had information on radar which he was going -to turn over to the Soviet, and the difficulty that we had to get -him back, it is your opinion that it would not be prejudicial to the -interests of the United States for him to be given a passport to go -abroad the second time? - -Mr. CHAYES. Well, I think that is correct without knowing any more -about what he intended to do this time on his travels abroad. - -You have got to remember that the discretion that the Secretary can -exercise under 51.136, is as the Supreme Court said in the Kent case, a -limited discretion, although it is phrased in very broad terms. - -For example, we have people who are going abroad all the time and -making the nastiest kinds of speeches about the United States, or who -go abroad for political activity that is completely at odds with the -policy of the United States, and may be even directed against our -policy. But we could not deny a passport on the grounds of political -activities, political associations, speech, things of that kind. So -the Kent case says, as I read it and as most others do. I think you -have to, in order to apply this section, there are some fairly regular -categories, fugitives from justice. - -Mr. DULLES. Just one question. If there had been a lookout card in, and -then you would reconsider the case in June 1963, when he applied, would -you not then normally have notified the FBI and the CIA that here was a -returned defector? - -Mr. CHAYES. No. - -Mr. DULLES. Who was going abroad again? - -Mr. CHAYES. No; not unless the FBI and the CIA had asked us to notify -them. However, what we might have done would be to use FBI facilities -to make a further investigation of the situation. That is possible. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. Chayes informed us prior to the commencement of his -testimony that he would have to leave at 4 p.m., but would return -tomorrow morning to complete it. He will now be excused. Thank you, sir. - -Mr. DULLES. Thank you very much. - - -TESTIMONY OF JOHN A. McVICKAR RESUMED - -Mr. COLEMAN. Do you recall, Mr. McVickar, we were trying to determine -whether Mrs. Oswald came into the Embassy in July or in August 1961, -and you said that if you had an opportunity to look at the State -Department file that you might find something which would aid you in -recollecting. - -Have you had such opportunity. - -Mr. McVICKAR. Yes; I have. I observe two items in here. There is -a despatch prepared by Mr. Snyder which says that Mrs. Oswald was -expected to come in very shortly. This despatch was prepared I believe -on the same day that Mr. Oswald was in the office. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Is that despatch dated July 11, 1961? - -Mr. McVICKAR. Yes. - -Mr. COLEMAN. The record shows it is Commission Exhibit No. 935. - -Mr. McVICKAR. And the item is on page 2, and it says, "He is attempting -to arrange for his wife to join him in Moscow so she can appear at the -Embassy for a visa interview in the next day or two." - -And then there is a later despatch dated October 12, 1961, which -encloses the text of certain letters addressed to the Embassy by -Oswald, and one of them is a letter dated July 15, 1961. - -Mr. DULLES. Moscow? - -Mr. McVICKAR. No; apparently from Minsk after he had returned. - -Mr. DULLES. Oh, Minsk. - -Mr. McVICKAR. And it says that; "While we were still in Moscow the -foreman at her place of work was notified that she and I went to the -Embassy for the purpose of visas." - -Well now, it seems clear that she did in fact go to the Embassy in -early July, and that this interview that I had with her undoubtedly -took place then approximately the 12th or 13th of July. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Wouldn't you say that it took place, sir, on the 11th of -July? - -Mr. McVICKAR. It probably took place then on the 11th of July, except -that this despatch here, which was dated the 11th, said that she was -coming in, in the next couple of days. - -No, no; this says that he appeared at the Embassy on July 8, and so -this was probably prepared on the 8th of July. - -I would say then it must have taken place on the 11th of July. - -Mr. COLEMAN. It is your testimony, therefore, that Commission Exhibit -No. 959, which is the petition to classify status of alien for issuance -of immigrant visa, was prepared on July 11, 1961? - -Mr. McVICKAR. Oh, yes; that is correct. - -Mr. COLEMAN. That was probably the day that Marina came into the -Embassy? - -Mr. McVICKAR. Probably the day she came into the Embassy, and probably -the day on which I interviewed her. - -Mr. COLEMAN. And, therefore, the notes, Commission Exhibit No. 945, -were apparently made on July 11? - -Mr. McVICKAR. Yes; apparently made then on July 11. They formed the -basis of this later communication of August 28, and I now think that -the reason that this was not done sooner, was because it was not an -urgent matter, because they had not yet received exit visas, and we -were in the process of processing cases that had received exit visas, -and were ready to go, and no one could tell when they might get Soviet -exit visas. - -Mr. DULLES. Which is the chicken and which is the egg here? I mean, do -you get your exit visas before you know whether you are going to get -into the country of destination, or do you get your permission to go to -the United States before you get your exit visa? - -Mr. McVICKAR. In an ordinary country you would apply for your American -visa, and then apply for your exit visa, or permission to depart from -the country, after you had your American visa. - -But in this case, in the Soviet Union, it was reversed because it was -so difficult to get exit visas. - -The American Government never bothered with any of its papers other -than to just take record of the interest of the people, until after -they had received permission to depart from the Soviet Union at which -point we processed their papers expeditiously. - -But usually there was very little done in the American documentation -until after they had received an exit visa from the Soviet Union. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Sir, you then on August 28, 1961, prepared the Operations -Memorandum which has been given Commission Exhibit No. 944; is that -correct? - -Mr. McVICKAR. Yes; that was the date of the memorandum. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Now in that memorandum you indicated that Marina had been -in to see you; is that correct? - -Mr. McVICKAR. The memorandum does not specifically state that. It -merely gives data necessary to the determination by the Department of -State of the legal status of this individual. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Now as the wife of an American citizen, I take it Marina -would have the right to come into the country under a nonquota status? - -Mr. McVICKAR. Yes; that is correct. - -Mr. COLEMAN. What were the sanctions imposed by section 243(g), which -you referred to in the memorandum? - -Mr. McVICKAR. There is a provision 243(g), section 243(g) of the -Immigration and Nationality Act, which provides that countries -which--and I am just taking this from memory now--which do not accept -either at all or readily, I suppose, deportees from the United States -may not be granted, the nationals of those countries may not be granted -immigration visas. - -There is, however, a procedure for waiving these sanctions in -individual cases, and as I recall the regulations, there was a -procedure for waiving these sanctions in the cases of relatives of -American citizens, and in the case of Soviet citizens who wanted to go -to the United States. - -So Soviet citizens who were relatives of American citizens could -receive a waiver of these sanctions. - -Is that clear? - -Mr. COLEMAN. If the sanctions had not been waived, what would be the -effect of refusing to waive the sanctions? - -Mr. McVICKAR. If the sanction was not waived, the effect would be a -denial, in effect, by the Immigration and Naturalization Service of the -Department of Justice, of authority to issue the visa. - -The exact legality of this I am not sure, but I know that we couldn't -issue the immigration visa because she would not be admitted at the -port of entry. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Would that mean that Marina could not have come to the -United States? - -Mr. McVICKAR. It would mean that she could not enter the United States, -but it would not mean that she could not depart from the Soviet Union -if she had a Soviet visa. And, presumably, maybe at some later time -this---- - -Mr. COLEMAN. Couldn't she have gone to say, Brussels, for example, in -Belgium? - -Mr. McVICKAR. And then applied for a visa there? This may be. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Did you have any discussions when you were in the Embassy -as to whether if the sanctions imposed by section 243(g) were not -waived, that you should send her to Brussels and let her get a visa -there? - -Mr. McVICKAR. I think that the record shows that there were such -discussions, but they did not take place during the time I was there. - -Mr. COLEMAN. When did you leave? - -Mr. McVICKAR. I left on September the 1st of 1961. - -Mr. COLEMAN. In this memorandum which is Commission Exhibit No. 944, -you indicated that you thought a favorable advisory opinion and -approval of the petition is recommended, together with a waiver of the -sanctions. - -Mr. McVICKAR. Imposed by section 243(g) of the act, yes. This was a -routine request which would have been made in any similar case using -almost exactly that type of language. - -In short, this was the two actions that we had to receive from -Washington in order to be in a position to issue this visa. - -Mr. COLEMAN. The first action to get the petition granted, that -depended upon whether she was ineligible, because she belonged to a -Communist organization, didn't it? - -Mr. McVICKAR. Yes; that is exactly right. - -Mr. COLEMAN. As to that in your memorandum you indicated that since she -belonged to the Soviet trade union for medical workers, because she -had to belong to that to get a job, that you would recommend that the -membership be considered involuntary. - -Mr. McVICKAR. Yes. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Under section 212(A)(28)(i) of the act? - -Mr. McVICKAR. Yes; that is correct. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Is it the general practice to indicate that such -membership is involuntary when it is connected with employment? - -Mr. McVICKAR. Yes; there are instructions from the Department giving -guidance to officers in general terms, that indicate that membership -in mass organizations, such as a membership in a trade union, in -connection with one's work, that this membership is ordinarily -considered to be involuntary, may be considered involuntary. - -However, the instructions are also that all of these cases must be -referred to Washington with the facts for a determination to be made, -and, of course, it might well be that under some unusual circumstances -if there was some indication of voluntariness, that, you know, such a -membership would render the person excludable. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Now you referred to Department instructions. Are those -instructions found in the confidential appendix, appendix A to the visa -regulations of the Department in 22 CFR 42.91A28 note 3, last issued on -December 9, 1960? - -Mr. McVICKAR. Yes; I believe so. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Would you be kind enough to read into the record the -instruction referred to? - -Mr. McVICKAR. I am reading here from the Department of State's report -to the Commission, and it cites the text of that. Do you wish me to -read it over? - -Mr. COLEMAN. Yes. - -Mr. McVICKAR. All right, it says this looks like it is "Note 3.3. -Membership in mass organizations rank and file membership in proscribed -mass organizations, in Communist and Communist controlled countries -may in general, if police repression or political or economic -discrimination is or was the coercive factor bringing about such -membership, be considered involuntary within the meaning of section -212(a)28I(i) of the act unless the alien actively participated in -the organization's activities or joined or remained connected with -it because of political or ideological conviction. When an alien -is refused a visa because of voluntary membership in a proscribed -organization of this type the report submitted to the Department -pursuant to appendix A22 CFR 42.13 on note 1 should show the -circumstances leading to the decision." - -I should note that the text of that is confidential, as a part of -confidential appendix A. - -Mr. COLEMAN. After you interviewed Marina and took the facts, that you -determined that her membership in the Soviet Trade Union for Medical -Workers was involuntary? - -Mr. McVICKAR. It appeared to be involuntary. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Suppose Marina had told you that she was a member of the -Komsomol, what would you have done then? - -Mr. McVICKAR. That comes under a more complicated type of instruction. -The membership in the Komsomol may be found to be involuntary and is on -occasion found involuntary. But you have to investigate more carefully -under the regulations into the nature of the membership, because -whereas if a person is a member, works in a factory, everybody in the -factory belongs to the trade union. - -But if you are going to the university, not everybody is a member of -the Komsomol, although a high percentage of them are. - -If you are going to say high school, why their membership in the -Komsomol is even more in the nature of a minority, and so I had -experience in this same matter considering visas for a number of -different wives of American citizens, and when the Komsomol was -involved, why the results varied considerably. - -In some cases it was found that membership in the Komsomol was -completely routine and merely because the people really were hoping -to get a decent education and a good job and didn't participate in it -actively. - -In another case I recall, particularly a girl who had been one of the -leaders in the Komsomol, and this was clearly beyond the definition of -involuntary, and this was part of, was a consideration which entered -into the denial of her visa in Washington. - -Representative FORD. In that case, the latter one, there was a denial? - -Mr. McVICKAR. There was a denial, yes, but this was because--and -it is a difficult thing to be in a position to say that somebody's -wife shouldn't go with him to the States, but this was the law and -the question was looked into with a great deal of detail, and based -largely upon this particular other person's statements in a number of -interviews, why it is clear, the facts. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Sir, after the memorandum of August 28, 1961, which is -Commission Exhibit No. 944, did you have anything else to do with Lee -Oswald or his wife Marina? - -Mr. McVICKAR. No; I don't think so, because I left almost immediately -afterward, and I had nothing more to do with the case. - -Mr. COLEMAN. When you made the decision: (1) That Marina's petition for -immigration should be granted, and (2) recommended that there should be -a waiver of the sanction provided by section 243(g), did anyone tell -you or request that you make this decision? - -Mr. McVICKAR. Now one thing. I want to be sure we are accurate on my -function. I was merely recommending these things. I was not making a -decision. I was recommending a favorable advisory opinion from the -security point of view from the Department of State. I was recommending -the approval of the visa petition to grant her the status under the -quota system of the wife of an American citizen, and I was recommending -that the immigration service waive the sanctions imposed by 243(g), -principally because she was the wife of an American citizen. - -But this was my responsibility to make these recommendations, and I -did so of my own free will as the officer-in-charge of this particular -aspect of the case. - -Mr. COLEMAN. No one called you and asked you to do it? - -Mr. McVICKAR. No, no; it was my responsibility to look into the matter -and make the recommendation and I did. - -Mr. COLEMAN. And did you have any other facts in your possession or in -your knowledge other than those which were set forth in the memorandum -dated August 28, 1961, concerning whether Marina was eligible for -admission as a nonquota immigrant? - -Mr. McVICKAR. No; as far as I know the facts are as stated right there, -and these facts were obtained from here on the basis of an interview -with her, a personal interview. - -Mr. COLEMAN. I have no other questions. - -Representative FORD. Mr. McVickar, in your memorandum dated April 7, -1964, in the first paragraph you say: "Although I now regret that I -made no notes on this even then unusual case, the following points seem -to me to lend weight to my suggestion especially considering the youth -and relative inexperience of the subject." - -Was the Oswald case in October of 1959 a then unusual case? - -Mr. McVICKAR. Yes; because we had had only a few people in the category -of defectors, and at that point I think we might have had--this was -the third one that had come up since I had been there, and the other -two were much less aggressive, much less determined, and much less -self-possessed people. - -One of them turned out to be suffering from various mental diseases, -and another one was a very weak individual who had been sort of lead -astray by some Russian female agent, but this was a man who had, you -know, he came directly and walked in, slammed his passport down. It was -an unusual case from the very beginning. - -Representative FORD. In the next paragraph you discuss in this -memorandum the entry of Oswald into the Soviet Union through Helsinki. -Is there any other port of entry into the Soviet Union that is -comparable to Helsinki in the context you are using it here? - -Mr. McVICKAR. Well, yes; there are a number of other ways to get into -the Soviet Union. I would think by far the most used one is to arrive -at the airport in Moscow. And then frequently used by people who have -not very much means, would be to come by rail from Western Europe by -way of Warsaw and the port of entry in that case is Brest. One could -also come by sea into Odessa. It would not be unusual to arrive by air -in Leningrad. - -Representative FORD. But in this memorandum in that paragraph you say, -"He would have to have known the not too obvious fact that Helsinki -is an unusual and relatively uncomplicated point of entry to the -Soviet Union (one that the Soviets might well choose, for example, if -arranging the passage themselves)." - -Mr. McVICKAR. Yes. - -Representative FORD. Is there any other port such as Helsinki, in the -context you are using it? - -Mr. McVICKAR. I am sorry, I hope I haven't confused the record. Of -course, when you are actually talking about a port of entry, Helsinki -is not a port of entry. It is a point of departure for the Soviet -Union, and you could come in and land at the Moscow airport from -Helsinki. - -What I think--what I was referring to is a point of departure for the -Soviet Union which would then be more likely to be Copenhagen, for -example, or Warsaw or Vienna. Helsinki is a frequently used one, but it -is way up north and it is---- - -Mr. DULLES. Wasn't he traveling by boat, however? - -Mr. McVICKAR. He traveled by boat to Helsinki. - -Mr. DULLES. That is where the boat went? - -Mr. McVICKAR. That is right. - -Mr. COLEMAN. No; he traveled by boat to Le Havre, France. He then went -by boat from there to London but then he flew by plane from London to -Helsinki. - -Mr. DULLES. He did? He went by plane? - -Mr. McVICKAR. I didn't realize that. But he flew from London to -Helsinki and then entered the Soviet Union from Helsinki. - -Mr. COLEMAN. By rail? - -Mr. McVICKAR. By rail. - -Representative FORD. What is so unusual and relatively uncomplicated -about Helsinki as a point of entry? - -Mr. McVICKAR. Well, I was thinking of this in the terms of a person who -didn't know the situation and wasn't very familiar with it, and I think -that it might be more logical to try to fly into the Soviet Union from -Copenhagen or directly from London. - -It might be more logical for some people to take the train into the -Soviet Union through Warsaw. - -Mr. DULLES. Where did he get his visa? - -Mr. McVICKAR. He got his visa in Helsinki. - -Mr. DULLES. That is it then. I think that is the answer to the thing. -It is much easier to get a visa right there than go through the mill of -a great place like London or Paris or any of the other places. - -Representative FORD. So it is the ease of getting the visa. - -Mr. DULLES. I would think the ease of getting a visa there. If you -could get it at all, you could get somebody to pay some attention to -you. There, in London, you would have a much bigger problem, I think. - -Mr. McVICKAR. And it may be that the Soviet Embassy in Helsinki is -accustomed to processing unusual cases or something. But my point is -that if a completely ignorant person might well apply for his visa in -Paris or in London, and then go in from there, but you have to know a -little bit about what you are doing if you go straight to Helsinki and -get your visa there. I am afraid this is a rather marginal point, but I -thought it was worth mentioning. - -Mr. DULLES. Had he made any attempt to get a visa or to announce that -he was going to try to pick up a visa in Helsinki? Do you know if he -took any steps at all with the Soviet authorities prior to arriving in -Helsinki? - -Mr. McVICKAR. This I do not know what is known about that. It did seem -to me that he moved very quickly, if he could arrive in Helsinki and -then get his visa and go right into the Soviet Union. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Sir, the fact that he didn't go by ship from New Orleans -to Helsinki but he went to Le Havre by boat and then to London but -then flew to Helsinki, doesn't that change somewhat the thrust of your -paragraph? - -Mr. McVICKAR. Yes; I must say that it explains a little bit more -clearly how he was able to get all this done in such a relatively short -time, because he would have saved himself, oh, at least a week of time, -I should think, if he got off in France and flew from there on. - -Mr. DULLES. Can any ordinary tourist, unknown tourist, just go to -Helsinki and get a visa there and pick it up and get into Russia? - -Mr. McVICKAR. Yes; I think an ordinary tourist can go to any one of -their Embassies and get a visa. - -Mr. DULLES. Do they have authority, do you know, to do that without -referring back to Moscow? - -Mr. McVICKAR. Yes; for tourist visas they do, and in fact they can go -and get their visas at travel agencies. But it still takes a little -time ordinarily to arrange it. - -Representative FORD. On page 3 of your memorandum of April 7, 1964, -paragraph 8, you say: - -"My impression was that in the Soviet Union such a privilege would not -have been usual." - -You are referring, of course, to the allegations made that he had been -a member of a rifle club and did target shooting? - -Mr. McVICKAR. Yes. - -Representative FORD. Why do you have that impression? - -Mr. McVICKAR. Well, I was thinking particularly in terms of his having -been a foreigner, and of course strictly on the assumption that he did -belong to a rifle club, and I don't know that to be a fact. - -Representative FORD. Let's assume the fact that he did. - -Mr. McVICKAR. Yes; and this again is only based on the impression that -I gathered from such contacts as I may have had while I was there, and -I had the impression that sporting activities in the Soviet Union are -organized as a part of the state effort, and that there might have -to be some good purpose to be served by the state for a person to -participate in such a club. - -And that the usual purpose would be international competition, and that -people who are sportsmen in the Soviet Union generally do this, they -are given time off from their work to do this kind of thing. - -I have heard it said that sometimes they are really almost full time -engaged in whatever the sport is, and that they only have another job -to be able to say that they have amateur status. - -Representative FORD. Have you ever been to Minsk? - -Mr. McVICKAR. I have only passed through Minsk on the train several -times going back and forth to Poland. - -Representative FORD. Do you feel from your experiences in the Soviet -Union it was unusual for Oswald to be sent or permitted to go to Minsk? - -Mr. McVICKAR. No; I don't think that is particularly unusual. I have a -feeling that what they were trying to do probably was, at least a part -of what they were trying to do, was to take advantage of his competence -and knowledge in the electronic field, and so they probably sent him to -a place where they would have technicians qualified to learn from him. - -The same thing was done in the case of the immediately previous -defector, Mr. Webster, who was a glass expert--what do they call that -kind of glass, foam glass? - -No, fiber glass. At any rate, he was employed at the fair that we had -in the Soviet Union in the summer of 1959, and he more or less defected -and he was sent to a glass factory, to work at a glass factory in -Leningrad, and it was logical for them to send him there because he -could do that kind of work and he could teach them something about how -it was done in the United States. - -Representative FORD. Do you know of any special kind of schools that -might be in Minsk, any particular schools that they might send a person -like Oswald to? - -Mr. McVICKAR. I only had the impression without being sure of my facts, -that he went to a factory where they manufactured electronic equipment. -I don't know of any particular school that he might have been going to. - -Mr. DULLES. I want to straighten out if I can this question of the -delay in the issuance of an exit visa for Mrs. Oswald. - -Representative FORD. Mr. Dulles, I do have to leave. Would you take -over and preside as chairman. - -Mr. DULLES. I want to raise this question. Now the record here in this -memorandum indicates that the exit visa to Marina was issued at least 2 -months before the State Department gave the entry permit. It seems to -me to be contrary to the testimony we have previously had, because in a -letter dated March 16--what is this exhibit number? - -Mr. COLEMAN. That is Commission Document No. 2. It hasn't been marked -as an exhibit yet. - -Mr. DULLES. Oh, it has not been marked. I don't understand what that -number can be. - -Mr. COLEMAN. That is the number, Commission Document No. 2. - -Mr. DULLES. Commission Document No. 2 prepared by the State Department. -It is stated here that on March 16th the Soviet Affairs Office of the -State Department advised the Visa Office of the Department of State, -and in that it said that the Soviet had already issued an exit visa. So -Marina had the exit visa some time before March 16, 1962. - -Do you know the date when the exit visa was granted? - -Mr. McVICKAR. Well, sir, I left in September of 1961, and so I don't -know the details of this part of the case, but I think it is consistent -because--in fact, I did see in the record that the exit visa was -received by the Embassy on about January the 12th, as I recall it. - -Mr. COLEMAN. 1962? - -Mr. McVICKAR. Of 1962, and that, therefore, the Embassy would then have -proceeded with the documentation and the processing, some of which had -already been initiated to get them out. - -Mr. DULLES. So that 5 months of the delay in their getting out was -American regulations? - -Mr. McVICKAR. Sir, I cannot speak for that part of it because I don't -know about that personally. I think it is possible that it may have had -something to do with Oswald's personal arrangements and that sort of -thing, or maybe the Soviet--I just don't know. I do know that it was -our policy to expedite these operations as quickly as possible after -these exit visas took place. - -Mr. DULLES. I only know that this exhibit that I referred to states, if -I can take your date of January 12, 1962, for the date that the exit -visa was issued to Mrs. Oswald, the Immigration and Naturalization -Service did not agree to the waiver of section 243 (g) until May 9, -1962. - -Mr. McVICKAR. That would have been something that had been going on in -Washington then, and I just don't know. It may be. I don't know what -considerations would have taken place. - -Mr. DULLES. So that if we take the time it took them to get their -exit visas, you have got to subtract really 5 months for American -regulations. - -I am not criticizing the regulations or the study that was given to it -or whether they did or did not grant it. I am just referring to the -question of the time, so that in considering the remarkably short time -it took these two to get out, 5 months were American regulations, or -approximately 5 months, if the January 12 date is correct. No; it would -be 4 months, wouldn't it, February, March, April, May, 4 months were -American regulations. - -Mr. McVICKAR. It does look as though at that time there was a certain -amount of consideration. - -Mr. DULLES. I am not blaming anyone for giving this the fullest -possible consideration. That is all I have. - -Representative FORD. Do you have some exhibits? - -Mr. COLEMAN. For the record, Commission Exhibit No. 911 which is the -McVickar memorandum of November 17, 1959. - -Representative FORD. It may be admitted. - -(The document referred to, previously marked as Commission Exhibit No. -911 for identification, was received in evidence.) - -Mr. COLEMAN. Commission Exhibit No. 941, which is the McVickar -memorandum of November 27, 1963. - -Representative FORD. It may be admitted. - -(The document referred to, previously marked as Commission Exhibit No. -941 for identification, was received in evidence.) - -Mr. COLEMAN. Commission Exhibit No. 942, which is the note which Mr. -McVickar wrote for the Oswald file on November 9, 1959. - -Representative FORD. It may be admitted. - -(The document referred to, previously marked as Commission Exhibit No. -942 for identification, was received in evidence.) - -Mr. COLEMAN. Commission Exhibit No. 943, which is a copy of the -telegram from John E. Pic to Lee Oswald in care of the American Embassy -in Moscow. - -Representative FORD. It may be admitted. - -(The document referred to, previously marked as Commission Exhibit No. -943 for identification, was received in evidence.) - -Mr. COLEMAN. Commission Exhibit No. 944, which is the Operations -Memorandum, dated August 28, 1961. - -Representative FORD. It may be admitted. - -(The document referred to, previously marked as Commission Exhibit No. -944 for identification, was received in evidence.) - -Mr. COLEMAN. Commission Exhibit No. 945, which is a photostatic copy -of the handwritten notes which Mr. McVickar made when he interviewed -Marina Oswald in the Embassy on July 10 or July 11, 1961. - -Representative FORD. It may be admitted. - -(The document referred to, previously marked as Commission Exhibit No. -945 for identification, was received in evidence.) - -Mr. COLEMAN. Commission Exhibit No. 959, which is a copy of the -petition to classify status of alien for issuance of immigrant visa -filled out by Lee Oswald on behalf of Marina Oswald in July 1961. - -Representative FORD. It may be admitted. - -(The document referred to, previously marked as Commission Exhibit No. -959 for identification, was received in evidence.) - -Mr. COLEMAN. And also Commission Exhibit No. 958, which is the -memorandum of Mr. McVickar, dated April 7, 1964. - -Representative FORD. It may be admitted. - -(The document referred to, previously marked as Commission Exhibit No. -958 for identification, was received in evidence.) - -Representative FORD. Are we going to admit as exhibits this State -Department answer? - -Mr. COLEMAN. Yes; I thought when we finished with Mr. Chayes then -we will offer all the exhibits, and during that time I was going -to identify the State Department earlier memorandum and the other -documents. - -Mr. DULLES. All this will then go in. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Oh, yes; that is all going in. - -Representative FORD. I think it is well to get that one document -paraphrased, but I think from what Mr. Chayes said the other one, there -shouldn't be any problem. - -Unless there is something else the Commission will recess until 9 -o'clock tomorrow morning. - -(Whereupon, at 6:20 p.m., the President's Commission recessed.) - - - - -_Wednesday, June 10, 1964_ - -TESTIMONY OF ABRAM CHAYES, BERNICE WATERMAN, HON. DEAN RUSK, SECRETARY -OF STATE, AND FRANCES G. KNIGHT - -The President's Commission met at 9:10 a.m., on June 10, 1964, at 200 -Maryland Avenue NE., Washington, D.C. - -Present were Chief Justice Earl Warren, Chairman; Senator John Sherman -Cooper, Representative Gerald Ford, and Allen W. Dulles, members. - -Also present were J. Lee Rankin, general counsel; William T. Coleman, -Jr., assistant counsel; W. David Slawson, assistant counsel; Thomas -Ehrlich, special assistant, Department of State; Leon Jaworski, special -counsel to the attorney general of Texas; Robert D. Johnson, Legal -Department, Passport Division, Department of State; and Charles Murray, -observer. - - -TESTIMONY OF ABRAM CHAYES RESUMED - -The CHAIRMAN. The Commission will come to order. Mr. Chayes is on the -stand. Mr. Coleman, you may continue the examination. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. Chayes, at the adjournment of your testimony -yesterday, we were talking about section 51.136, State Department -regulations dealing with the issuance of passports. - -Mr. CHAYES. Yes; Mr. Coleman. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Could you tell us the circumstances in which the State -Department feels it can refuse a passport based upon the regulations? - -Mr. CHAYES. Yes; there are some fairly regular categories of refusals -under that section. The first is a violation of a travel restriction. -As you know, the section has from time to time placed certain areas out -of bounds for travel by U.S. citizens without a specially validated -passport. - -I think, yesterday, Mr. Dulles read into the record, from the Oswald -passport, the then applicable area restrictions. And if a person having -a passport violates these restrictions, let's say travels to Communist -China without a specifically validated passport, we regard that as -warranting the withdrawal of the passport under section 51.136. - -Now I have to say that I think in one case, the case of William Worthy, -a withdrawal of a passport under those circumstances was sustained. -However, when he later traveled without a passport, and then reentered -the country without a passport, which is a violation of the passport -laws as they read on the books, he was indicted and prosecuted in the -district court, convicted, and on appeal the conviction was reversed -on the ground that it was unconstitutional to make reentry, without a -passport, an offense. That case has not been appealed to the Supreme -Court. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Is that the case that was in the Fifth Circuit? - -Mr. CHAYES. I think so. - -Mr. COLEMAN. It came up from the Federal District Court in Florida? - -Mr. CHAYES. New Orleans, it came up from New Orleans. - -Mr. DULLES. This applies to American citizens of course? - -Mr. CHAYES. American citizens. Only American citizens can get -passports. When we are dealing with aliens, we are in the visa area. - -Mr. DULLES. Yes. - -Mr. CHAYES. Now the travel restrictions, the area restrictions are -under attack in a number of other cases, that come up in different -procedural ways. But we have in the past, and will continue to do so -until we are told otherwise, withdrawn passports under 51.136 from -people who have violated travel restrictions. - -The next category is fugitives from justice. There if a person is under -indictment or even if there is a warrant for his arrest, certainly if -he has been convicted, we will not issue a passport to him to permit -him to depart. In the Kent case, the Supreme Court recognized this as -one of the well-defined categories in which the Secretary's discretion -to withhold a passport was confirmed by practice and experience. - -As I say, the fugitive from justice category is one that operates on -the whole within the United States. If a man is abroad and is indicted, -we will not ordinarily withdraw his passport abroad or mark his -passport good only for direct return to the United States. We never -articulated the rationale for that, but essentially it doesn't really -fall within our notion of (a), (b), or (c) of 51.136, and our motion -is that the remedy against persons abroad who are charged with crime -is extradition rather than the use of the passport power to get them -returned. - -Now, a third category is passport fraud, where someone has in fact -acted in one way or another to make fraudulent use of the passport -itself. We have withdrawn passports under those circumstances. - -Then there is a miscellaneous category, which doesn't include too many. -For instance, in one case a man was convicted in the Federal Republic -of Germany for attempting to acquire knowledge of state secrets. -Another man had been involved in a number of fraudulent schemes in -various countries, issued worthless checks. He was arrested in -Australia for fraud and subsequently convicted and sentenced to jail -there. - -Another one paid for his passport renewal with a worthless check. That -in itself is perhaps in the passport fraud category. Left the United -States paying for his passage with a worthless check. He represented -himself to be an employee of the U.S. Government on leave and continued -to put out worthless checks, using his passport for identification. We -have summarized these actions under these categories in a letter which -I sent to Mr. Rankin, on June 6. It contains a list of the actions in -these categories in the years 1962-64--through March of 1964. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Can the record note that the original of that letter has -been given Commission Exhibit No. 949? - -Mr. CHAYES. Very good. Now it should be said that there is one category -here that does not appear in the list that we have attached to the -letter, although it is explained in a paragraph, the third paragraph -of the letter, and that is in fact the category that Oswald himself -was in, in 1961, when he wanted to come back. That is where there is -a person abroad who is in some kind of trouble at the time, or who is -anxious to leave where he is and come right back to the United States, -as Oswald did. - -We issue a passport as the regulation says, for direct and immediate -return to the United States. And that action is taken under section -136. But since it is taken abroad, heretofore there has been no central -list of the actions of that kind in the Department's files. As a result -of the Commission's inquiry a list is being maintained from here on -out, but it is not possible without going through a million passport -files, to find when action of that kind was taken in the past. I know -of a number of cases of my own knowledge where this happened. - -For example, one or two, a man and his wife, of the students who went -to Cuba last year went on to Morocco, and got into trouble with the -Moroccan police and so on, and we marked their passport for immediate -return. I am told that the names of those two students are listed under -category (a), in 1963 on the list. Their passports were withdrawn -because they had violated the travel restrictions, but also, for -most of the students we didn't do anything about the passports until -they got back to the United States when we withdrew them, but in -their particular case, because they got in trouble with the Moroccan -authorities and were pretty obstreperous about it, we marked their -passport good only for direct and immediate return. - -Another case that I remember, in my own experience, was a case of -a notorious gun runner in the Congo, who was running guns to the -Katangese rebels during the Congo operation, and he was apprehended -by the Congolese authorities. We didn't want him to be tried, and the -Congolese didn't want to try him if we didn't want him to be tried. On -the other hand they didn't want him around there either. - -So we marked his passport good for direct and immediate return. In -other words, those cases are cases where you can find either some form -of trouble which makes the applicant, the passport holder want to go -directly home, and us want to make him go directly home, or some very -immediate and direct relation to our relations with that particular -country. And as I said yesterday, we have taken the view that it can -never be done solely, because of political activities or political -associations or the exercise of speech. It has to be something beyond -that. - -Mr. COLEMAN. I take it that judgment is effected in part by the holding -of the Supreme Court in the _Kent_ v. _Dulles_ case. - -Mr. CHAYES. Yes; it derives from that. The Kent case said that the -Secretary was not entitled without statutory authorization, at least -as we have read the case, was not entitled in the absence of statute, -to withhold a passport on grounds related to political association and -beliefs. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Yesterday you testified that you had reviewed all of the -State Department files dealing with Oswald, and you paid attention -to those files as they existed as of June 1963, and that it was your -judgment that the Passport Office could not have refused to issue a -passport to Oswald in June 1963. - -Mr. CHAYES. It is my judgment that the passport was properly issued in -June of 1963; yes, sir. - -Mr. COLEMAN. You know that in October 1963, the Passport Office -received information that Mr. Oswald had been at the Russian Embassy in -Mexico. Would that information have changed the result at all, in your -judgment? - -Mr. CHAYES. No, sir; that information by itself could not have affected -the result. As a matter of fact, as you know, the passport application -itself indicated that Oswald wanted to travel to Russia, and the mere -fact that he had gone to the Russian Embassy in Mexico, would not of -itself have been a disqualifying event. - -Representative FORD. Even despite the past history? - -Mr. CHAYES. I think that is correct. In other words, by itself it -doesn't disqualify the applicant because there is no suggestion here -that even--first of all could I review the message that came in on -October 16, to the Department. I think I may have it in my own document -here. - -(Discussion off the record.) - -Mr. CHAYES. All that is suggested here is that he was in the Embassy -and he contacted the Soviet Embassy about a telegram which had been -sent. Now, there is nothing from that, I don't think, that adds -anything or permits us to infer in any way that his travel abroad would -be inimical to the foreign policy of the United States or otherwise -harmful to the national interest, or that he was going abroad to -violate U.S. law. - -I think this can be said, and I don't think it should be said in -criticism of the people who made the decision at the time, because I -think the decision at the time and on the basis of our procedures and -on the basis of our experience was proper. - -Mr. DULLES. May I ask at that point---- - -The CHAIRMAN. May he finish? He hadn't finished that statement. - -Mr. CHAYES. I was going to say looking at it in retrospect and knowing -what we now know, it seems to me it would have been desirable to have -had some means for triggering off a further investigation of this kind, -of a passport applicant, or a passport holder, on the basis of that -kind of information. If the further investigation had turned nothing -else up, it seems to me clear that he was entitled to a passport on the -state of the file as it then existed. - -The only issue is whether the state of the file showed enough to start -or to instigate a further investigation of the purpose and plans for -his travel abroad. What you could have done is hard to speculate about. -You might have called him in and asked him about his travel plans. -You might have made inquiries among friends and relatives about his -plans, and so on, and that might have turned up evidence that would -have suggested that his proposed travel abroad fell within one of these -categories and it would have warranted the withdrawal of his passport. - -Because of our review of these procedures, in the light of what -happened, as we said yesterday, we now have established a defector -category in the lookout card file, and people of this kind who apply -for passports now won't get them routinely, even though the state of -the file as it then exists would warrant the issuance of a passport. -But there will be a review of the file and any necessary further or any -indicated further investigatory steps, if a defector does apply for a -passport. You say why didn't you have those procedures before? - -Why did it take this kind of a thing to do it? To stimulate a new -procedure? The answer is simply that nothing in our past experience -at all suggested anything like this kind of trouble. Of course the -ultimate result, the ultimate assassination wasn't related in any way -to the passport decisions. But it has drawn our attention more closely -to the problem of defectors in this connection. - -I should add one general point, and that is when we talk about -passports in this context, we tend to emphasize the very, very few -bad apples of one kind or another, and they are very few, who are -not entitled to passports. But the fact is that the function of the -Passport Office is not to deny passports to people. It is to get -passports to people. The Passport Office puts out 1 million passports -a year. The great overwhelming majority of those people are ordinary -American citizens who want to get abroad for business or pleasure, -and the ability of the Passport Office to furnish them with passport -facilities, in very short order, is of tremendous service, and -tremendous convenience to them. - -That is the primary function of the Passport Office. It has of course -the duty of administering these denial and withdrawal statutes. But -that is not its primary function. Its primary function is to get -passport facilities to the great bulk of Americans who have legitimate -business abroad. It is dealing with a million or more applications a -year, and millions of bits of information, like this piece we have just -been talking about. I think when you see things in that perspective it -is perhaps easier to evaluate some of the decisions and some of the -actions taken here. - -Representative FORD. But I think you have to turn the coin over. There -are millions of passport applications, or a million plus. But there are -only very few such as Mr. Oswald, or people in the defector category. -So the problem there I don't think is as serious an administrative one -as you would tend to imply. - -Mr. CHAYES. No; I am not suggesting it is, and in fact I think we have -by a relatively simple administrative action taken the steps which will -assure that in the future applications from this kind of person will -receive a more elaborate review. - -All I am saying is that if you ask why that wasn't done before, it is -because the experience didn't indicate that there was a problem, and -that is because that isn't the main business of the Passport Office. -Its main business is not the business of a security agency which goes -around focusing or is supposed to be focusing on security problems. Its -main business is that of a processing agency. - -Representative FORD. But we have vast resources of people in the -Government who are, or who do have security as a main business, and it -seems to me that it is vitally important that those people and those -vast resources somehow tie into the administrative process of denying -or refusing passports under unique circumstances. - -Mr. CHAYES. They do. That is any of those agencies can levy a request -on the Passport Office for notification when a passport is issued to -any person. If the FBI or the CIA or the Secret Service or any other -security or law enforcement agency is interested, or the U.S. court, -the Federal district court or the district attorney's office, any -agency of that kind which is interested in knowing whether a particular -person has applied for passport facilities may levy a request. That -request would be serviced by placing a lookout card in the file which -would then automatically involve notification of that agency when that -person applied for a passport. - -Mr. DULLES. Isn't there a broader point than that though, because the -security agencies don't know in all cases what requirements to levy. -Now if in this case, for example, in the Oswald case, if there had been -this lookout card, and you had notified let's say the FBI and the CIA -that the former defector had applied for a passport and might be going -abroad, then they can put in a card, and then they can be helpful in -following that situation abroad. But they don't know, if they don't -know that Oswald is going to apply, they have no way of putting in -their requirements. - -In certain cases they can. But in a great many cases they cannot. - -Mr. CHAYES. Well, let me make two points. First, now under the new -memorandum as to defectors, the FBI and CIA and other security agencies -will automatically be notified whether they have made a request or not. - -Second, as to most people who have lookout cards, the FBI and the other -security agencies couldn't care less about whether they apply for -passports. Most of the lookout cards relate to loss of nationality, not -security issues at all. So that there is a problem both ways. We can't, -the Department can't--it could notify the security agencies whenever a -lookout card, a person as to whom there was a lookout card applied for -a passport. - -But in 9 out of 10 cases that would be so much waste paper for the -security agency. There has to be a reciprocal effort at cooperation. -There is a reciprocal effort at cooperation, and by and large it works -very well. By and large when the FBI is interested in somebody, it -tells the Passport Office it is interested in them and they want to -know if he comes for a passport. - -By and large the Passport Office knows people whom the FBI is -interested in, and when they apply for a passport or something like -that, there is an exchange of information. It is interesting that this -CIA report got to the Passport Office. It is a matter of routine. All -security reports of this kind that originate in the security agencies, -copies go to the Passport Office and are put in the passport file. So -that there is a great deal of coordination. But in the nature of things -it can't be a perfect system when the two kinds of responsibilities are -differently allocated, the security responsibility in one case and the -other responsibility in another. - -Representative FORD. When did the CIA report of the Mexican trip get -into the passport file? - -Mr. CHAYES. It is not clear to me here. It is probably about 10-11-63 -is what it looks like to me from the date, October 11, 1963. But on the -other hand, note that this report--we pay a great deal of attention -to the fact that it got into the passport file. But the report itself -originated in the CIA. - -Copy of it went to the FBI. In other words, all the security agencies -themselves knew of this fact. As I say, myself, I think it did not -change the character of the file so as to warrant the withdrawal of a -passport from the passport administration point of view. But even if we -had taken steps to withdraw the passport, it is hard to see how it had -any impact on the result at all. - -Representative FORD. Leave aside the tragic result. Under your -current procedures if such a situation developed, would there be an -administrative step taken to try and retrieve the passport? - -Mr. CHAYES. Under current procedures what would have happened in -June, when he first made application, was that there would have -been a lookout card in the file, and before automatically issuing a -passport there would have been a review of the file and some further -investigative steps. Now that investigation would have inquired into -the purpose of travel abroad, and a determination would then have -been made whether the purpose of travel on the basis of the file--and -remember when we do deny a passport we are then subject to hearing, -administrative hearing and judicial review, and we have got to make -the denial and the evidence on which it is based stand up in those -circumstances--but if we determined that there was a basis then for -denial we would have denied it then. So the question wouldn't have -arisen later in October. If at the time in June we had determined after -investigation that there was no basis for denial, then the passport -would have been issued, and if a matter of this kind had come in, there -would have been, I suppose, an administrative determination to decide -whether, in the light of the earlier investigation, whether this new -information warranted any further action or further investigation. - -Representative FORD. Would it be your judgment that the June -determination, using your new criteria, would have resulted in a -refusal of this passport? - -Mr. CHAYES. Not on the basis of the file as then existed. It is hard -to answer your hypothetical question because under our new procedures -there would have been a further investigation that would either have -turned up some additional material, or would have left the file in -its present state. If there was no additional material suggesting the -evil purposes or improper purposes for travel, the decision to give a -passport would have been the same as it was on the file. On the basis -of the file, the decision was properly made. - -Representative FORD. Would you in the June determination have had the -files from the Department of State which showed that on October 31 -Oswald walked into the American Embassy. - -Mr. CHAYES. Oh, yes. - -Representative FORD. And said "I, Lee Harvey Oswald, do hereby request -that my present citizenship in the United States of America be revoked." - -Mr. CHAYES. Oh, yes; the entire file. - -Representative FORD. And would it also have had the one of November 3d -where he said "I, Lee Harvey Oswald, do hereby request that my present -United States citizenship be revoked"? - -Mr. CHAYES. Yes; It would have had all of that. - -Representative FORD. It would have had all of that? - -Mr. CHAYES. Yes. - -Representative FORD. And it would have had the---- - -Mr. CHAYES. But it would also have had the determination that he had -failed to expatriate himself and that he was an American citizen. I, -myself, doubt that an abortive attempt at expatriation would, certainly -without more, warrant the denial of a passport to a person who was in -fact a citizen. - -Representative FORD. And a person who in his application in June of -1963, indicated he wanted to return to the Soviet Union? - -Mr. CHAYES. One of the places he wanted to travel to was Russia. I -think if you add those two together, and all you have is his intention -to travel to Russia, and the fact that he made an abortive attempt -to expatriate himself in Russia sometime before, I don't think you -have the basis for a finding in terms of the regulation that persons, -activities abroad would "violate the laws of the United States, be -prejudicial to the orderly conduct of foreign relations or otherwise be -prejudicial to the interests of the United States." - -I think you have got the basis for a finding that this is not a very -attractive fellow, but I don't see how you can bring him within any of -those categories on the basis of the evidence in the file. - -Mr. DULLES. Is it not correct though that when you were trying to -get the visa for Mrs. Oswald, you made a very strong case that his -continued residence in the Soviet Union was harmful to the foreign -policy of the United States, or words to that effect? - -Mr. CHAYES. Well, we were very anxious to get him back and I think -that is right. In a sense we had him on our hands then. We were in -discussion with him. He was in the Embassy and he was very directly -our responsibility, so that anything that he did or that went wrong -during that period, he was under our protection and we were necessarily -involved. - -If he went back as a tourist and got into some trouble of some kind or -another, we would then have the choice I think to get involved, and -we might or might not. The situation it seems to me is different when -a fellow is already in trouble and you have taken steps to put the -U.S. Embassy in the picture. Then you have a special responsibility -if anything goes off the track and you want to take whatever steps -you can to shorten the time in which you are bearing that special -responsibility. - -Representative FORD. I think, Mr. Chayes, however, you are saying or -you are inferring that it was a clear-cut decision back when it was -determined that he had not given up his United States citizenship. - -Mr. CHAYES. It was in July of 1961, when his passport was renewed. -We couldn't have had a passport renewal if there weren't such a -determination, and in fact there was such a determination. - -Representative FORD. There was such a determination? - -Mr. CHAYES. Yes, sir. - -Representative FORD. That is correct, but it was not a clear-cut case -when you look at the steps that he, Lee Harvey Oswald, tried to take. - -Mr. CHAYES. Well, I don't know---- - -Representative FORD. It was a determination, but it was not one that -was absolutely all black or white. - -Mr. CHAYES. No, but once you make the decision on the basis of whatever -is before you, he is either a citizen or he is not a citizen, and I -think he is a citizen, or was a citizen. - -Representative FORD. But the fact that the matter was administratively -investigated ought to, I would think under your new regulations, -when he applies to go back to the country where he originally sought -citizenship, there ought to be some real investigation, and I am -surprised that you say that under those regulations, under these facts, -he probably would still be given a passport. - -Mr. CHAYES. I agree with the first part of your statement, that -under the new regulations, as we have developed them in the light of -hindsight, there would be a further investigation. - -Representative FORD. But you also said---- - -Mr. CHAYES. And I think there should. - -Representative FORD. He would then be given his passport again despite -the new regulation. - -Mr. CHAYES. But if the investigation turned up no more than what was in -the file with respect to his purposes for travel abroad, if we didn't -have some hard factual evidence to support a finding that his travel -would fall within one of these three categories in 51.136, then the -passport would be issued. We have to start from the proposition that -the Supreme Court has said that the right to travel is a part of the -liberty protected by the fifth amendment, and that the Secretary cannot -withhold a passport arbitrarily. Now we have taken the position, I -think properly so, that in order to justify withholding under one of -these three subsections of 51.136, there has to be a real and concrete -showing that the travel either would violate the laws of the United -States, be prejudicial to the orderly conduct of foreign relations, or -otherwise be prejudicial to the interests of the United States. - -Add to that that you can't make that finding on the basis of, let's -say, political activity abroad. Suppose we could show, for example, -that Oswald was going to the Soviet Union to make a speech before the -Supreme Soviet telling how terrible things were in the United States -and how bad the U.S. policies toward Cuba were, for example. - -Representative FORD. Would that preclude him from getting a passport? - -Mr. CHAYES. No. We have people abroad who are doing that all the time. -We have got Malcolm X traveling across Africa making one speech after -the other about how terrible our policies on the race question are. -And it is perfectly clear to me on the basis of the cases--although we -might get a little more information in the next couple of weeks, we -have a case before the Chief Justice now--but it is clear to me on the -basis of the cases so far that if what is involved is speech, no matter -how hostile it is to our policies or our objectives, you can't deny a -passport for that. - -Representative FORD. What about Oswald's statements to either Mr. -Snyder or Mr. McVickar that he as a former Marine was going to -give information he had acquired as a former Marine to the Soviet -authorities. - -Mr. CHAYES. That is, of course, a more difficult one. Of course we know -he didn't have very much information. - -Representative FORD. No, but he was a Marine and he had been trained -as an electronics radar specialist. He said he was going to give this -information. - -Mr. CHAYES. But the second point is that on the whole these criteria -look to the future. They look to the purpose of this travel. Now if he -had committed an offense against the espionage laws or whatever it was -abroad on his past performance---- - -Representative FORD. This isn't a question of freedom of speech. - -Mr. CHAYES. No; I understand. - -Representative FORD. This is a question of giving away Government -secrets. - -Mr. CHAYES. No, no; I don't equate the two at all. But that kind of -thing I think would have been the subject of investigation under our -new procedures, and might have turned up something. I think if you -could have found, for example, that he did in the past give information -of this kind, you might be in a different position. - -Representative FORD. Was any investigation of that aspect made at the -time? - -Mr. CHAYES. Yes. - -Representative FORD. When he came back and asked for the renewal of his -passport? - -Mr. CHAYES. No; but what happened was when he returned to the United -States--first of all the FBI was kept constantly informed, and as you -know kept looking into the Oswald situation periodically from the time -he came back. - -Mr. COLEMAN. And those reports were in the passport file. - -Mr. CHAYES. They were in the passport file, and immediately after he -came back, he was interviewed very fully by the FBI, and I think as -I recall the file--I haven't reviewed it recently--I think he was -questioned on this very point by the FBI, and he said he hadn't given -any and they weren't very much interested in it. And the FBI apparently -was satisfied with that. They made no further move against him on that -basis. - -So that we did have whatever information there was. - -As I say, although this regulation looks to the purpose of the -forthcoming travel and not to the past travel, nonetheless I think it -is perfectly appropriate to make inferences on the basis of what he -did before. We refused to issue a passport to Worthy when he would not -give us assurances that he would observe the restrictions, because on -the basis of his past conduct, we were prepared to infer that in the -absence of such assurances, he might well disobey the restrictions. - -Mr. Ehrlich points out to me that on May 16, 1962--this is one of -several such memorandums--our security office sent to the FBI with -copies to the other security agencies a memorandum on the subject of -American defectors, and their status in the U.S.S.R., and there is a -summary of that which covers Oswald. This was just before he came home, -I guess. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Will you indicate what file that is by the number? - -Mr. CHAYES. This is the folder II in the numbering that we gave you, -and it is document No. II-6(4), in our number system. - -Mr. DULLES. Could you read or indicate what that says about Oswald? - -Mr. CHAYES. Oh, yes; it just summarizes his status as of that date and -it says: - -"Lee Oswald: It has been determined that Oswald the ex-Marine is still -an American citizen. Both he and his Soviet wife now have exit permits -and the Department has given approval for their travel with their -infant child to the U.S.A. There is a problem with his wife, however, -in that SOV in the Department is trying to get a waiver of 243(g), -which requires that Oswald's wife pick up her visa for entry into the -U.S.A. in Western Europe. As soon as this question has been settled, -they will be free to travel." - -Mr. DULLES. May I clarify one other point? - -Mr. COLEMAN. May I ask him a question about that? In that file Mr. -Chayes isn't there also another FBI report dated August 30, 1962, which -indicates that Lee Harvey Oswald was reinterviewed by the Bureau agents -on August 16, 1962, with respect to contacts he had made at the Soviet -Embassy in Washington? - -Mr. CHAYES. I would have to review the file itself, for the specific -details as to dates and so on. I do remember that the FBI in its -subsequent inquiries talked to him about his contacts with the Soviet -Embassy. He had some, of course, in connection with his wife. They -asked him whether he had had any other contacts with the Soviets and so -on. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. Dulles, you had a question. - -Mr. DULLES. This apparently just went to the Bureau, did it not? Did it -go to the other agencies? - -Mr. CHAYES. I think the---- - -Mr. DULLES. Yes; it went to the CIA. Copy went to the CIA. I would like -to clarify one point. It is not quite clear to me what information -about Oswald was in the passport files as distinct from the Department -files. I didn't realize that there was much about Oswald in the -passport file itself in the absence of, what do you call it, a check---- - -Mr. COLEMAN. A lookout card. - -Mr. DULLES. A lookout card. - -Mr. CHAYES. No; the passport file, I am holding it up. - -Mr. DULLES. It is a big file. - -Mr. CHAYES. It is roman numeral X and it contains in our numbering -system 80 documents or something like that. - -Mr. DULLES. That was in the passport file itself? - -Mr. CHAYES. In the passport file itself. A large amount of the security -material is there, and of course the security file would have been -pulled too whenever the passport file was reviewed. - -Mr. DULLES. Do you know whether that file was reviewed before the -issuance of the passport in June 1930 or not? - -Mr. CHAYES. 1963. - -Mr. DULLES. I mean 1963? - -Mr. CHAYES. It was not. - -Mr. DULLES. It was not? - -Mr. CHAYES. It was not, because what happened then was that the Telex -came in from New Orleans. The only thing that you do is go to the -lookout card file. There was no lookout card. In the absence of a -lookout card, routine approval goes out and the passport was issued -from the New Orleans office. If there had been a lookout card, then -the lookout card would have sent them back to the file. There was no -lookout card because the file as it then stood didn't have anything -in it that warranted the denial of a passport, and under our then -procedures we didn't have a flag for people of this kind to stimulate a -further inquiry or investigation. - -Mr. DULLES. Isn't it usual in issuing a passport though to look, in -addition to the lookout card, to look at the file you have on the -individual? - -Mr. CHAYES. No, sir; unless there is a lookout card, the passport is -issued automatically on the basis of the local agency's determination -of citizenship. There has to be evidence of citizenship. - -Now let me say there are different ways in which this can come up, -because for example a man may apply for a passport before a clerk of -the court and that application would be forwarded to the Department. -But even then the Department adjudicator would first look at the -lookout file. If there is no card in the lookout file, all he would -do is determine whether the application was complete, and whether -satisfactory evidence of citizenship was presented, and whether on the -face of it, you know, the oath was properly taken or any supplementary -questionnaire resolved doubts. - -And then would issue the passport. If there were a supplemental -questionnaire or something like that, then he would probably go to the -file. - -In our agency there are special passport issuing offices. New Orleans -is one of the big ones, we have one in New York, we have some others, -there the system is very routinized. - -Daily, and sometimes more than once daily, the agency will telegraph by -Telex the name, date, and place of birth of its applicants, the people -who have come in that day to make an application. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Could we mark as Exhibit No. 952 the teletype that came in -on Oswald. I think that would help the Commission to indicate how it -comes in. - -(Commission Exhibit No. 952 was marked for identification and received -in evidence.) - -Mr. CHAYES. Yes. - -Mr. COLEMAN. You had better explain the "NO" which is beside Oswald's -name. name. - -Mr. CHAYES. Yes; well here you see the Telex coming in from New -Orleans, and there are 25 names on it with date of birth beside each -name, and it is interesting that opposite Lee Harvey Oswald is capital -letters "NO" which might be rather interesting except that it stands -for New Orleans, and every Telex that comes from New Orleans has that -mark on it. It is covered by our abbreviations manual, and one of your -investigators made, of course with our knowledge in our office, but not -in the Passport Office, a surprise visit to the Passport Office to make -sure that they were, in fact, putting NO on these things, and they are. - -That is the designation of the office. - -What happens is when these 25 names come in, the lookout file is -searched for those names, and if there is no lookout card, then a -responding Telex is sent back. It says here 561, OW561. That is this -one, "All okay." OW is office to Washington. WO is Washington to -office. So the control number of the outgoing from Washington is WO38, -and it says that on your OW561, all the names were okay. - -Now it is interesting, the Telex came in and it is stamped June 24, -4:19 p.m.--June 24, 1963. It went out June 25, 10:57 a.m. and these 25 -people all got the passports. - -Now it is only on the basis of that kind of a system that you can get -out a million passports in a way that really provides first class -service to the American people. Miss Knight in her administration of -the office, which extends back into the previous administration, has -cut down the time from something like 2 weeks to 24 hours in most of -the cases. - -Mr. DULLES. Could the Passport Office itself prepare a lookout card on -its own initiative on the basis let's say of a file like the Oswald -file? - -Mr. CHAYES. It would have prepared a lookout card on any person as to -whom the file suggested that there were grounds for withdrawal, or -denial of the passport. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. Chayes, at this point could we mark as Commission -Exhibit No. 951 the existing standard operating notice which was in -effect on February 28, 1962, of the Department with respect to the -lookout card system? - -(Commission Exhibit No. 951 was marked for identification and received -in evidence.) - -Mr. CHAYES. Yes. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Would you describe Commission Exhibit No. 951? - -Mr. CHAYES. This is the standard operating notice which covers the -categories, and if you look at them they relate each category to a -ground of potential disqualification. - -Mr. DULLES. As of what date does this read? - -Mr. COLEMAN. February 1962. - -Mr. CHAYES. Now we have added by the Schwartz to Knight memorandum -of recent date a defector category which differs slightly from the -others in that in all of the other categories something in the file -already suggests that the person may be ineligible for a passport. The -defector category would simply stimulate further investigation in the -case of application by such a person, and would automatically trigger -notification of the other security agencies. - -Mr. DULLES. How do you define the defector category, do you know? - -Mr. CHAYES. I think we have the---- - -Mr. DULLES. Would that have covered Oswald? That is what I am -interested in. - -Mr. CHAYES. Yes; well, it was in fact designed to cover Oswald, so -that---- - -Mr. DULLES. It probably would have. - -Mr. CHAYES. It would, but defector is not a statutory term or one that -has real technical significance. I have said in my own discussions with -people who have asked for guidance in administering this memorandum and -others that it is not necessarily related to an attempted renunciation -of citizenship or anything else. It involves the kind of thing that if -there were a war on would be treason. - -In other words, it involves something like aid and comfort to the enemy -or attempted aid and comfort to the enemy. The only thing is the enemy -isn't technically an enemy because we are not at war. But that requires -some judgment to decide which ones you put in and which ones you -wouldn't. - -Mr. DULLES. There is a definition we could get though and put it in the -record. - -Mr. CHAYES. No, no. - -Mr. DULLES. There is no definition? - -Mr. CHAYES. If you look at the Schwartz memorandum, it says that the -Oswald case highlights the necessity of maintaining up-to-date lookout -cards in the files of the Passport Office, "for persons who may have -defected to Communist countries or areas or redefected. Subsequent to -the Oswald incident, I requested the Department of Defense to furnish -this office with identifying information on military personnel in this -category. Information with respect to these military personnel has now -been received from all three services and copies are attached. - -"On the basis of the attached information, please bring up to date the -lookout cards of the Passport Office." - -And then it simply lists the names of the people that came over from -the military. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. Chayes, is the document we have marked Exhibit No. -951, the standard operating notice as of February 28, 1962? - -Mr. CHAYES. Yes. - -Mr. COLEMAN. In the attachment in category K you have "Known or -suspected Communists or subversives" as a category on which there -should be a lookout card. - -Mr. CHAYES. Yes. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Wouldn't Mr. Oswald have fallen in that category, based -upon the passport file? - -Mr. CHAYES. I don't think so. There is nothing to indicate that he -had ever been a member of the Communist Party. Maybe you would have -regarded his Fair Play for Cuba activities as falling within the notion -subversive. I have to say that I think K dates from an earlier period -before the Kent Case, in which we were denying passports very broadly -to a category of people who might be called subversive. Rockwell Kent -himself, Brehl, the other defendant, people as to whom there was no -real membership information, but who had generally, what had been -thought of as having subversive views or connections. - -With the Kent and Brehl cases, it may well have been that that category -fell into some desuetude. I think it is worth inquiring of Miss Knight -whether that category was maintained after the Kent case, or whether we -simply took those out. - -Mr. COLEMAN. In the Commission Exhibit No. 951 you also have another -category, category R, which reads: "Individual's actions do not reflect -to credit of U.S. abroad." Would you say that based upon the Oswald -file as it existed in the Passport Office as of June 1963, that he -would not fall in that category? - -Mr. CHAYES. I don't think so when you are thinking about what this -means. I don't think one person in a billion abroad knew Oswald or -had any such experience with him or anything else. This isn't really -a reflection on the United States. I suppose if you construed it that -way, if somebody got drunk on the Champs Elysees he ought to be in that -category. I don't think you can really construe it that broadly. It has -to mean I am sure someone who has a really notorious course of conduct -like the kind of thing that I summarized for you on the three people in -the so-called other category when we were talking to earlier--my letter -of June 6. - -Representative FORD. If you really are equating someone who is -intoxicated in Paris with Oswald---- - -Mr. CHAYES. No; I am not equating them in the quality of their conduct, -but for the purposes of this category "Do not reflect credit on the -United States abroad" I think what that must involve is some very -notorious course of conduct which a lot of people have had a chance -to see, which has somewhat serious consequences of the kind that I -summarized here "convicted for attempting to acquire knowledge of state -secrets in Germany, fraudulent schemes, convicted for fraud," that kind -of thing. - -Here is a fellow who left a trail of bad checks, using his passport as -identification and claiming to be a U.S. employee. All I am saying is -that category R, although it is a catchall category, I would conceive -is construed or should be construed narrowly. - -Let me say further, I probably should not be testifying to this so -much anyway because these categories are guidelines, are operational -guidelines. They don't have legal consequences. And I think you ought -to ask Miss Knight, who has the operational responsibility, whether the -way I conceive this is correct. I may misconceive it, but I think in -essence these categories are related to grounds of disqualification, -and unless the conduct specified comes within the range of being a -ground, a basis for disqualification, I don't think the lookout card -would be made up. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Don't you have a category X, which is called "catch card," -denotes limited lookout validity, not necessarily refusal situation? - -Mr. CHAYES. Yes. - -Mr. COLEMAN. So perhaps Oswald could have been put in there, couldn't -he, in that category, based upon the file? - -Mr. CHAYES. It is possible, and I suppose that is exactly what we are -now doing with defectors. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Do you know what category---- - -Mr. CHAYES. I think you ought to inquire from Miss Knight about that. - -Mr. COLEMAN. I also take it you wouldn't know what goes in categories O -and P, O being "orange card, includes recent master list" and P being -"project Carry." - -Mr. CHAYES. I don't personally know at all. - -(Discussion off the record.) - -Representative FORD. Let me ask you this, Mr. Chayes. Were Oswald's -various applications and various approvals ever handled as a special -case as far as you know? - -Mr. CHAYES. The only applications that were handled as a special -case were the ones made in Russia for the return of his passport in -the first instance, and then the renewal of his passport. Those were -handled as a special case, both in the Embassy and in the Department. - -Although I don't think very high ranking officers passed on them in -the sense of Assistant Secretaries or something like that, nonetheless -they where handled at very responsible levels in the Department. The -political desk was consulted as well as the Bureau of Security and -Consular Affairs, and a very deliberate and special decision was made. - -The subsequent application, the June 1963 application, was handled as a -matter of routine. - -Representative FORD. The application in the Embassy for renewal or -reissuance, was that handled more expeditiously or less expeditiously -than other defector or attempted defector cases? - -Mr. CHAYES. I couldn't say. I couldn't say because I don't have any -experience in it against which to measure it. As I reviewed the file it -seemed to me to be a fairly normal kind of a file for a matter of this -kind. When I say "this kind" I don't mean other defectors because I -have never seen any of that. - -But the reporting seemed full enough, and the response came back -in time. But they didn't seem to be accelerated. There were always -adequate supporting memorandums indicating consultation within the -Department on broad enough basis. - -Representative FORD. How long did it take from the actual time that he -made the application in Moscow until it was finally approved? - -Mr. CHAYES. He made the application on---- - -Mr. COLEMAN. This is the passport? - -Representative FORD. Yes; in Moscow. - -Mr. COLEMAN. He made it July 11, 1961. At that time Mr. Snyder returned -to him his existing passport. The new passport, namely the one he got -to travel back to the United States, was not issued until May 1962. - -Mr. CHAYES. Yes. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Though the instruction that it could be issued was -submitted, sent forward to the Embassy, certainly by the end of 1961. - -Mr. CHAYES. Yes; they were submitted subject to the Embassy being -satisfied on certain points. - -It ought to be stated also that, according to the record at least, the -passport was returned to him, in July, July 11. It was marked at that -time "good for travel only for direct return to the United States." -But the purpose of returning it to him was so that he could apply to -the Soviet authorities for an exit document, because he believed and -our people in Moscow concurred, that he couldn't get an exit document -unless he had a U.S. passport. - -Representative FORD. An exit document for himself? - -Mr. CHAYES. For himself. - -Mr. DULLES. I note in this file, looking at your passport file which -is very complete, that in his passport application of June 1963 he -gives as his approximate date of departure, I assume departure from -the United States, as October-December 1963. Is it the practice of the -Department to issue passports for persons who are not leaving for 3 or -4 months? - -Mr. CHAYES. Oh, yes. - -Mr. DULLES. Anytime? - -Mr. CHAYES. Anytime you want a passport, if you are entitled to one, -you get it. And you keep it even after you return. I mean if he had -used it, gone out of the country and returned, if it is still within -what is it, the 3-year period now, the passport is a valid passport and -he can depart again in the absence of some action taken looking towards -withdrawal. So that these are ambulatory documents, and there are many -people who just automatically--I don't say Oswald did this, obviously -he didn't, but there are many people who automatically renew their -passport when it runs out so that they always have travel documentation. - -Representative FORD. Are there any other defector or attempted defector -cases where the person came back and tried to get his passport? How -long did it take in those cases to go through this process? - -Mr. CHAYES. You mean comparable to the June application? - -Representative FORD. No; I am talking of the Moscow application. - -Mr. CHAYES. I think we did submit a report on that. Well, I am sorry, -we didn't. We did inquire whether there were any defectors who were in -the situation of the June application. We found that there was one, -and he was also issued a passport routinely. But I can supply for the -record the information as to the others. - -Representative FORD. I think it would be helpful. - -Mr. CHAYES. You would like to know the time from application to grant -of passport in the Soviet Union for defectors or attempted defectors -who were trying to get back then to the United States? - -Representative FORD. Yes; if we could have that for the record. - -Mr. CHAYES. We will be very glad to submit it. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. Chayes, turning your attention to the question of -the admission of Marina Oswald to the United States as a nonquota -immigrant, I take it that since she was the wife of an American -citizen, she would be entitled to nonquota immigrant status unless she -was disqualified because she was a member of a Communist organization, -is that correct? - -Mr. CHAYES. Yes; unless she was subject to one of those -disqualifications in 212(a)(28). - -Mr. COLEMAN. Now the first decision that was made by the Embassy was -that her membership in the particular trade union was involuntary, and -therefore she was not disqualified? - -Mr. CHAYES. That is correct. - -Mr. COLEMAN. I take it you reviewed the record and you concur in that -judgment? - -Mr. CHAYES. That is correct. It would also be made, and be made -automatically in the case of persons belonging to trade unions not in -leadership positions in the trade union, and where there is no external -evidence of active participation, because membership in the union is a -condition of employment in those places in the Soviet Union, and our -regulations cover the point precisely. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Now the other decision that was made was that the -Department and the Immigration and Naturalization Service would waive -the provisions of section 243(g) of the Immigration and Nationality -Act which provision says that a visa could not be issued from Moscow -because the Attorney General in 1953 had placed Russia among those -countries that refused to accept Russian citizens that we wanted to -send back to Russia. - -Mr. CHAYES. Yes; 243(g) is a sanction which the act provides against -countries, not against people. It is not a disqualification for a -person. If 243(g) had not been waived, Mrs. Oswald would simply have -gone to Rotterdam and gotten the same visa from our consulate in -Rotterdam. It is a sanction against the country which is levied when, -as you say, the Attorney General determines that the country refuses to -accept people whom we deport who are their nationals. It gets back a -little to the point you were making yesterday about what obligation one -has to accept his own nationals back from another country. - -Mr. DULLES. That is a general rule of international law, isn't it, you -are supposed to do it. - -Mr. CHAYES. Yes; as a general rule of international law I suppose -one should accept his own nationals, but people who have expatriated -themselves wouldn't be nationals and therefore we wouldn't have to take -them back. - -In any event--that is a little digression--but this sanction is a -sanction designed to penalize a country which has refused to receive -back its own nationals when they are deported from the United States. -That sanction was brought into play by the determination of the -Attorney General made on May 26, 1953. - -Mr. DULLES. I wonder whether in addition to the information that Mr. -Ford has requested, you could give us information, oh, say covering the -last 5 or 10 years---- - -Mr. CHAYES. I think we have already. - -Mr. DULLES. I haven't said what I want it on. With regard to the time -that has elapsed between the application of a Soviet woman married to -an American citizen, the time that is taken from her application to the -time that that application has been favorably acted upon by the Soviet -Union. In this case as far as I understand it, the Soviet Union gave -permission for Mrs. Oswald to come either in December 1961 or January -1962, and that because of this particular sanction you have just been -discussing, it wasn't really cleared up until May. And therefore that -the delay was in part a delay due to American regulations rather than -to Soviet regulations. - -Mr. CHAYES. Well, her processing in the Soviet Union from the time she -first started to try to get back---- - -Mr. DULLES. That is it. - -Mr. CHAYES. Until she got an exit visa was about 6 months. It was just -under 6 months. - -Mr. DULLES. Yes. - -Mr. CHAYES. We have answered in our answers to your---- - -Mr. COLEMAN. It is a Commission Exhibit No. 960 which was just marked, -where Mr. Chayes, under date of May 26, 1964, answered various -questions which were asked, to determine whether there was anything -unusual in the way that Marina and the Oswald applications were handled -by the Soviet Union and we will make that part of the record. - -(Commission Exhibit No. 960 was marked for identification and received -in evidence.) - -Mr. DULLES. Does that cover this particular point? - -Mr. COLEMAN. It covers the point not for 10 years but for 3 or 4 years. - -Mr. CHAYES. If I can read into the record this answer, it says---- - -Mr. DULLES. Which answer is that? - -Mr. CHAYES. Question 3, attachment A. - -The relevant part is "In the immediate post-war period there were about -15 marriages in which the wife had been waiting for many years for a -Soviet exit permit. After the death of Stalin the Soviet Government -showed a disposition to settle these cases. In the summer of 1953 -permission was given for all of this group of Soviet citizen wives -to accompany their American citizen husbands to the United States. -Since this group was given permission to leave the Soviet Union, there -have been from time to time marriages in the Soviet Union of American -citizens and Soviet citizens. - -"With one exception it is our understanding that all of the Soviet -citizens involved have been given permission to immigrate to the United -States after waiting periods which were in some cases from 3 to 6 -months and in others much longer." - -So that I think what Mr. Snyder said yesterday was that 6 months was -par for the course. It wasn't an unusual delay, and it was fairly -low as those things went, but not something that would give you any -surprise. There were a number of other 6-month ones and there were some -less. - -Mr. DULLES. For our records I wonder if it would be possible to be a -little more specific, I mean to furnish us information that would be a -little more specific on this point, because it is very hard for us to -tell of the numbers how many had less than 6 months and how many had -more than 6 months. - -That is the point that has been raised often you know in the press, -and the charge has been made that this is very suspicious, that this -was done so soon. I think our records ought to show a good deal of -specification what that record is. I mean this is very helpful in a -general way but it is not very specific. - -Mr. CHAYES. We can do that. The further answer farther down on the next -page, page 2, says for example that "In a most recent case of this type -a Soviet woman married an American citizen in December of 1963 and -received an exit visa about 2 months later." - -Mr. DULLES. That is very helpful. - -Mr. CHAYES. But we will get a detailed account for the Commission. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. Chayes, as I understand it, section 243(g) itself says -nothing about the power of the State Department or Immigration and -Naturalization Service to waive its provisions. - -Mr. CHAYES. The State Department doesn't waive the provisions. I should -start by saying that 243(g) is a section administered by the Justice -Department and the Attorney General has primary responsibility for -interpretation and administration. The Attorney General has from the -beginning interpreted 243(g) as involving waiver power. I had never had -occasion to examine the question at all until this matter came up, and -I have made only a cursory examination, but I think the judgment is -sound that there is waiver power under 243(g). - -Mr. DULLES. May I just ask one question there. Our file that I have -before me, and your very helpful paper---- - -Mr. COLEMAN. Commission Document No. 2. - -Mr. DULLES. Commission Document No. 2 doesn't indicate really the basis -on which the Texas authorities were holding up the visa. Does that -appear anywhere in the record? - -Mr. CHAYES. I don't know. It may appear in our attachment B answers. In -essence it was that they thought this fellow had behaved pretty badly -and he wasn't entitled to any special consideration. - -Mr. COLEMAN. That is why at this time I would like to read into the -record part of the regulation under which they will waive. It says: - -"If substantial adverse security information related to the petitioner -is developed, the visa petition shall be processed on its merits and -certified to the regional commissioner for determination whether the -sanction should be waived. - -"The assistant commissioner shall endorse the petition to show -whether the waiver is granted or denied and forward it and notify the -appropriate field officer of the action taken." - -In other words, that since some derogatory information was in the file, -and since Oswald was the petitioner, the initial decision made by the -field officer of the Immigration Service was that the waiver should not -be granted. - -Mr. CHAYES. That is correct. - -Mr. DULLES. I assume that that was motivated probably in one of the -letters from the Texas immigration office to the Department of Justice -or the Immigration Service here. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Yes; well what happened, the record was referred to the -immigration field officer in Texas, and the record was the history -of the fact that Oswald had defected or attempted to defect, and the -statements he had made. So they, therefore, made the determination on -the field level that they would not waive the sanction. - -Mr. CHAYES. That is right. The sanction was waived only after urging -from the Department. - -Mr. DULLES. Yes, that appears in this Commission Exhibit, this document -that I have referred to. But we do not have in our files the letter of -the Texas immigration authorities first refusing as far as I know. - -Mr. COLEMAN. We will have that. That testimony will be put in through -Miss James and Miss Waterman. - -Mr. DULLES. They have that. All right, if they supply that, that will -be adequate. - -Mr. COLEMAN. So I take it that, in your judgment after reviewing the -file, you think that the waiver should have been granted? - -Mr. CHAYES. Well, I think there that it was not an improper exercise of -discretion. That is correct. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Just one other question. Is there any policy in the -Department to delay the acceptance of attempted renunciation of -citizenship? - -Mr. CHAYES. Well, delay, I don't know that there is a stated policy -that you put the person off. The general policy of the Department is -first I think to discourage renunciations, to make it clear that the -person has a right to renounce, but nonetheless to discourage them. - -Secondly, the policy is that the consular officer should assure himself -that the person seeking to renounce his citizenship is acting soberly, -rationally, and with full awareness of the meaning and consequences of -his act. And for that purpose the consular officer can use any means -within his judgment. He can talk to the person. He could invoke a -cooling-off period or ask a person to sleep on it or something of that -kind. It seems to me how the policy is implemented is something for the -particular case. If somebody came up in England and had just married an -earl or something like that and said "I want to be an English citizen -now" and was in full possession of her faculties apparently there -probably wouldn't be much worry about it, although even then the consul -would go through a routine of trying to assure that the person knew and -understood fully what she was doing. - -Mr. DULLES. Is that routine prescribed, should it be prescribed do you -think now in the light of hindsight in this situation? - -Mr. CHAYES. No; I think in each case it will depend so much on the -situation with the particular person. If a person comes in and he is -very agitated or something of that kind, it might dictate a totally -different approach than a different kind of thing. - -Mr. DULLES. Wouldn't it be useful though to give--I don't want to -suggest what the Secretary of State should do in this, but in the -light of this experience, would there not be some benefit possibly in -giving people in the field the result of the experience gained in this -particular case? - -Mr. CHAYES. Well, the general approach, and other matters related to -it, are touched on in orientation courses for consular officers and so -on. I think as I look on Consul Snyder's actions, that he behaved very -much like a responsible Foreign Service officer. - -That happened long before I was in the Department, so I can say that -without any involvement. But it seemed to me that he did just what he -should have done, despite the unfortunate aftermath. And it shows to -me, at least, that the training and orientation that these people are -getting is right, is serviceable, and they are able to handle these -situations as they come in. - -Mr. DULLES. I realize that you ought not to prescribe hard and fast -rules, that there is a broad range of discretion that should be -exercised here. But I just raise the question as to whether a good deal -of experience hasn't been gained in this case in that very field. - -Mr. CHAYES. Well, it may very well be that more attention to that -particular aspect should be given in the orientation courses and so on. -Those things tend to reflect what is hot at the moment you know, and if -you haven't had trouble with something for a pretty long time, it tends -maybe not to get mentioned. - -Representative FORD. If Oswald had persisted that day, October 31, in -demanding the form that is a prerequisite under your definition for -renunciation, would Snyder have been required to give it to him and -permit him to sign it? - -Mr. CHAYES. I think if it had been in ordinary office hours when the -consulate was open for business, and if Snyder was satisfied that he -was competent, that Oswald was competent, he would have to give him the -form, yes, sir. - -Representative FORD. Does Snyder have the authority to make a -determination of competency? - -Mr. CHAYES. No; he doesn't have the authority to make a determination -of competence, and I suppose it is possible at some point to get the -issue tried in court. But I think a consular officer would probably -be acting within his discretion if he saw somebody who was drunk or -raving or something and just said, "Well, I am not going to give you -this until I am sure that your action is your act." After all, when the -consul accepts the oath, he is certifying that it is the act of the -person in a meaningful sense, and so if he thought that the person was -incompetent, I think he would have discretion not to give the oath. But -I put that far aside because in the particular case here, Mr. Snyder -made it perfectly clear that he had no reason to doubt that Oswald was -fully competent. - -And so if Oswald had been there at a time when the office was open, or -had returned at a time when the office was open, and had persisted in -his demand, I think Snyder would have been under an obligation to give -him the form. - -Representative FORD. The only technical reason or basis upon which -Snyder could have denied Oswald the right that day was the fact that it -was on a Saturday, a non-working-hour period of the Embassy. - -Mr. CHAYES. Yes; I think he had every right to try to dissuade him, -or persuade him not to act or persuade him to think it over and come -back the next day. But if after all of that Oswald still had said "But -I want to do it now" and if the office was open for business, then I -think he would have had to do it. - -Mr. DULLES. I think it might be useful if it has not been done to -introduce at this point as an exhibit the form of oath of renunciation. -Here is the formalized oath and I think it would be well to have this -in our records unless it is already in our records. - -Representative FORD. I agree. - -Mr. COLEMAN. No; it isn't. Could we say it will be marked as Commission -Exhibit No. 955 and place this sticker on that page, photostat it and -then just send it back? - -(Commission Exhibit No. 955 was marked for identification and received -in evidence.) - -Representative FORD. When Oswald came back on November 3, I believe, -which was a regular working day---- - -Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. Commissioner, he did not come back on November 3. He -merely wrote a letter. - -Mr. CHAYES. Wrote a letter. He never came back. - -Representative FORD. Are all of the employees, Mr. Snyder, Mr. -McVickar, and the others who had any firsthand contact with the Oswald -case in this area, were they State Department employees? - -Mr. CHAYES. Yes, sir; these two men who were the only ones who did see -him directly, I think the secretary, their secretary also saw him, but -had nothing to do with him except as a receptionist. These two men were -Foreign Service officers and are now Foreign Service officers. - -Representative FORD. In the strictest term. - -Mr. CHAYES. Yes, sir; members of the Foreign Service, appointed by the -President with the advice and consent of the Senate. - -Representative FORD. Could you tell us in a bit more detail the process -that you followed or the procedure that you carried out when you first -got into the Oswald case. - -You mentioned yesterday you got a call or you were directed by I -believe the Secretary of State or by somebody in higher authority to -take certain steps. Will you tell us who called you, what you did in -the first 3 or 4 days? - -Mr. CHAYES. It was the evening of the day, perhaps about 5 o'clock -on the day of the assassination. It may have been somewhat earlier, -because I think I remember I went home for an hour and then came back -to carry out this assignment. Mr. Ball, once it became known that -Oswald had some history as a defector---- - -Mr. DULLES. Ball is the Under Secretary of State. - -Mr. CHAYES. He was then the Acting Secretary because the Secretary of -State as you recall was on a plane over the Pacific. So he was the -Acting Secretary. But even if he had been the Under Secretary he is my -client. - -Representative FORD. He still had some authority. - -Mr. CHAYES. Yes; he directed me to gather together the files in the -Department on Oswald, and to prepare a report to be available for him -the first thing in the morning covering as best we could within that -time span the contacts that Oswald had with the Department. - -We got the passport file. We got the security office file. We got the -special consular services file which covered Mrs. Oswald's visa and the -repatriation loan. I think those three files were the ones that we had. -It may have been there was a smaller fourth file, but I think those -three were the ones. - -Representative FORD. What would that smaller fourth file be? - -Mr. CHAYES. I can't remember. It was duplicates if it was anything. Oh, -that is right, we had a visa file and an SCS file so those were the -four. The SCS file, that is Special Consular Services in the office, in -the Bureau of Security and Consular Affairs. - -Representative FORD. You got this order on or about 5 o'clock the 22d -of November? - -Mr. CHAYES. The 22d; yes, sir. - -Representative FORD. And you issued orders to have these files brought -in, or did you go and get them yourself? - -Mr. CHAYES. No. - -Representative FORD. Or what happened? - -Mr. CHAYES. I issued orders to have them brought in. I called--I am -trying to think how we got them. [Turning to Mr. Ehrlich.] Did you go -down and get them? Mr. Ehrlich and Mr. Lowenfeld, another of my people, -we worked through the night on this, the three of us all together and -it may be that the two of them went down to get them. I don't think we -just called over the telephone and asked them to be brought up. - -(Discussion off the record.) - -Mr. CHAYES. It is my recollection that one of these two gentlemen, -either Mr. Ehrlich or Mr. Lowenfeld acting for me, went down to pick -up the file. Mr. Ehrlich thinks he recalls that one of the files was -already being examined by the Secret Service or the FBI, the passport -file. My own recollection, which I am sure of, is that later on in the -evening, about 8 o'clock or 9 o'clock, we established contact with the -FBI and they came over and read the files in our office at the same -time we were reading them. Now actually there was nothing in any of the -files that wasn't duplicated in the others in essence. I mean much of -our files consisted of FBI or CIA reports. - -Much of their files consisted of these letters and documents that you -have seen that we had come into possession of when Oswald attempted to -renounce. - -We worked, as I say, through the night. One thing that we did other -than go through the files was to go down to the lookout card file to -see whether there was a lookout card for Oswald. We got Mr. Johnson, -who is the General Counsel of the Passport Office, to open up the -lookout card file which is a large room that has a combination lock on -the door, and is also plugged into a general alarm system, got into the -room and examined the lookout card file and found that there was no -card for Oswald. - -This was the first experience I had ever had with the lookout card -file, and I said all the things that you have said here, why wasn't -there a card. But we were very careful in doing that to record, Mr. -Lowenfeld, Mr. Ehrlich and I and Mr. Johnson and Mr. Schwartz all went -in and we all mutually recorded what steps we took. I think there are -notes of that, if anybody is interested in them, but I don't think -there is any need to see them. - -Nothing of significance happened. We did find---- - -Mr. DULLES. May I ask is the passport office under you as Assistant -Secretary and Legal Adviser? - -Mr. CHAYES. No, sir; the passport office is under Mr. Schwartz. - -Mr. DULLES. Under Mr. Schwartz? - -Mr. CHAYES. It is Bureau of Security and Consular Affairs. - -Mr. DULLES. And he is directly under the Secretary of State. - -Mr. CHAYES. Yes; he is Assistant Secretary. His chain of command goes -through the Deputy Under Secretary for Administration, but he like I -has the rank of Assistant Secretary and he operates a bureau just as I -do. The Legal Adviser's office is a separate bureau. - -We did prepare a 10- or 12-page document by dawn the next day which in -fact is the basis of this report, the Commission Document No. 2. - -Mr. COLEMAN. We will give that Commission Exhibit No. 950, your first -report. - -Mr. CHAYES. The one we did overnight? - -Mr. COLEMAN. No; the one that you sent us. It is Commission Exhibit No. -950. It has been given a number. - -Mr. DULLES. I wonder if the witness would identify this and verify the -circumstances under which it was prepared? - -Mr. CHAYES. This report, Commission Exhibit No. 950, is not the one -that we prepared overnight. This is the report we prepared for the -Department of Justice before the Commission was appointed when the -Department of Justice itself was looking into the matter. - -What I say is that Commission Exhibit No. 950 is essentially an -expansion and elaboration of the document that we prepared that night. - -Representative FORD. There have been fears expressed by some that -somehow we don't have before the Commission all of the documents -that are in the hands of the Department of State or any other agency -pertaining to Oswald. You can only testify as to the Department of -State. Do you testify that we have been given everything that was at -any time in the files of Lee Harvey Oswald? - -Mr. CHAYES. To my knowledge that is the case. However, let me say again -what I said at the beginning of the testimony. We have constantly and -persistently gone around to all the places in the Department, and that -has been done under my supervision, and we have made very aggressive -efforts to assure that every office or subdivision of the Department -that might have documents pertaining to Oswald should give them to the -Commission, through me to the Commission. - -I think there was one stage where perhaps that wasn't understood, but -we got that corrected. Then later on, as I say, there was the Moscow -Embassy just sent us a whole load of documents. They said "We think you -have got duplicates of all of these so we didn't send them in earlier" -and it turned out that some of them we didn't have duplicates of. I -now think--as I say, it is very hard to prove a negative, but we have -made all the efforts that I think are humanly possible to get these -documents out of the files, and I think you have them all, with the -exception of some documents originating in other agencies where by -arrangement with the staff they are getting those documents from the -originating agency. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. Chayes, at this point could we mark as Commission -Exhibit No. 956, a letter from you to Mr. Rankin under date of May -28, 1964, in which you sent us a complete copy of the files, and in -which you numbered each one of the files from file I through XII, -and then within each file, each document was numbered and there was -also indicated the number of pages which would be in each particular -document? Will you identify that? - -(Commission Exhibit No. 956 was marked for identification and received -in evidence.) - -Mr. CHAYES. Yes; we sent that letter, a copy of which is Commission -Exhibit No. 956, in response to the request of the staff in order that -we would be able exactly to answer this kind of question. - -I should add that I think we sent some additional documents since then, -those that came back from Moscow in response to our last request. - -Mr. COLEMAN. I would next like to mark as Commission Exhibit No. 954, -a letter from Mr. Chayes to Mr. Rankin under date of June 4, 1964, in -which you sent us the file which you recently received from the Moscow -Embassy and indicated that that file would be marked file XIII. - -(Commission Exhibit No. 954 was marked for identification and received -in evidence.) - -Mr. CHAYES. Yes; that is the letter and it contains also the text of -the Moscow telegram explaining that they thought all the documents they -were pouching were duplicates. - -Mr. COLEMAN. With the files you gave us or sent us along with -Commission Exhibits Nos. 956 and 954, as far as you know you have sent -the Commission every file which the State Department has, referring to -Oswald? - -Mr. CHAYES. That is correct. - -Mr. DULLES. Were you in general charge, under the Secretary, of -the correspondence which has been carried on with the Soviet Union -inquiring as to Oswald and to obtain such information as we could from -the Soviet Union with respect to the Oswald case? - -Mr. CHAYES. Well, I talked with the Secretary about the Commission's -interest in making an approach to the Soviet Union, and then he made -the decision that the Department was willing to proceed with that -approach. I participated in the drafting of the documents, and I -participated in the transmissions to the Commission. But the approach -was made by the Secretary himself, and I did not observe the approach. - -Mr. DULLES. Was that made orally as well as in writing or should we ask -that of the Secretary of State? - -Mr. CHAYES. You can ask it of the Secretary and I think you would get -a fuller answer from him, but he did make an oral presentation at the -time that he handed the note, and the Chief Justice's letter, to the -Russian Ambassador. - -Mr. DULLES. In view of your knowledge of this situation, do you think -that we have got all we can get from the Soviet Union or is there any -other way in which we could get anything additional? - -Mr. CHAYES. Well, I think probably, the best respondent to that -question would also be the Secretary. I think it probably has to be -recognized that the decision to give what documents were given was a -carefully considered decision, probably made at very high levels within -the Soviet Government, and not done lightly or without an examination -of alternatives, and therefore, it seems to me unlikely that one would -be able to change any such decision. - -But again I say I am really not the best man to ask that. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. Chayes, just two other documents I would like you to -identify for the record. One is your letter of May 8, 1964, which has -been marked Commission Exhibit No. 948, which answers certain questions -directed to you by Mr. Rankin, and it is the document that you referred -to several times in your testimony. - -Mr. CHAYES. Yes; this is my letter, Commission Exhibit No. 948. It -contains the answers to the questions which were in attachment B to -Mr. Rankin's letter, and concern essentially matters within the United -States and within the State Department here. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Your answers to attachment A were in Commission Exhibit -No. 960. We have already identified that in the record. - -Mr. CHAYES. Yes; that is correct. There was a delay between the two -letters because attachment A involved questions about activities in -Russia, and some questions about the Soviet Union, and although we -prepared the answers in the first instance in the United States in -the Department, we wanted to send the replies to the Soviet Union -for review by our Embassy there. And that accounted for the time -discrepancy in the answer to the two attachments. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Then in the attachment A we also asked you a question in -reference to a memorandum from Mr. McVickar and you under date of April -24, 1964, sent us Mr. McVickar's memorandum which has been marked as -Commission Exhibit No. 958. But I would like to mark as Commission -Exhibit No. 953 your covering letter. - -(Commission Exhibit No. 953 was marked for identification and received -in evidence.) - -Mr. CHAYES. Yes; this is my letter. It is dated April 24, 1964, and -it is marked Commission Exhibit No. 953, and it clears up a factual -question that was left at large in Mr. McVickar's memorandum. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. Chairman, at this time I would like to offer for -admission into evidence Commission Exhibits Nos. 948, 950, and 949. -I would also like to note that the attachment to Commission Exhibit -No. 952 was marked as Commission Exhibit No. 958 and has already been -admitted into evidence. - -Mr. DULLES. They shall be admitted. - -(Commission Exhibits Nos. 948, 950, and 949 were marked for -identification and received in evidence.) - -Mr. DULLES. May I ask this question? Have all of these been previously -identified in the testimony. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Yes, sir; they have been identified and marked. - -(Discussion off the record.) - -Mr. COLEMAN. Back on the record. That is all the examination I have -of Mr. Chayes. I do want to express my appreciation and thanks for -the detail in which he gave us information and the method in which he -answered all the questions. - -Representative FORD. I have no further questions. - -Mr. DULLES. I have no further questions. Thank you very much. You have -been very full, very frank, very helpful. - -Mr. CHAYES. I am glad to do what I can. - - -TESTIMONY OF BERNICE WATERMAN - -Mr. DULLES. Would you kindly rise and raise your right hand. - -Do you swear the testimony you will give before this Commission is the -truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth so help you God? - -Miss WATERMAN. I do. - -Mr. DULLES. Would you please advise Miss Waterman of the general -purpose of the testimony we will ask of her. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Miss Waterman was with the Department of State until 1962, -at which time she retired. Miss Waterman was the adjudicator in the -Oswald case, and she is being called to testify with respect to certain -memorandums and actions she took in connection with Lee Harvey Oswald. -These actions dealt with the question whether he had expatriated -himself, and whether a passport should be reissued to him in 1961. And -also she has some information concerning the waiver for Marina under -243(g). - -Mr. DULLES. Miss Waterman, I wonder if you would just give us a brief -outline of your experience with the State Department. - -Miss WATERMAN. Well, I entered the Passport Office in March of 1926, -and I was there until I retired in February 1962, and during that time -I progressed from the position of typist to working on citizenship -cases, and became an adjudicator. - -Mr. DULLES. Can you hear? - -Miss WATERMAN. Then I became in charge of a section adjudicating -citizenship cases from certain places. I continued in citizenship work -until I retired. - -Mr. DULLES. Would you proceed, Mr. Coleman. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Miss Waterman, I have had marked 25 documents beginning -with Commission Exhibit No. 957 and going through Commission Exhibit -No. 982, and just before you came in, I showed you a set of those -files. Have you had opportunity to review those files? - -Miss WATERMAN. Yes; I did look over the State Department file. I don't -mean State Department files, I mean Passport Office files on Oswald. - -Mr. COLEMAN. And I take it that you would agree that every one of the -documents I showed you was a document which you prepared, or was a -document which was sent to you and you had occasion to read it prior to -the time I gave it to you today? - -Miss WATERMAN. I believe so. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Now would you tell the Commission the first time, to the -best of your knowledge, that you heard the name Oswald and in what -connection? - -Miss WATERMAN. Well it was rather seeing it in connection with the---- - -Mr. COLEMAN. I call your attention to Commission Document No. 961, -which is the second document in the folder I gave you, a telegram dated -November 2, 1959. - -Miss WATERMAN. The telegram--this is a reply. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Yes; I am talking about the telegram dated November 2, -1959. - -Miss WATERMAN. Yes; I recall from examination of the file that on -November 2, 1959, I saw the telegram from the Embassy at Moscow -reporting that Mr. Oswald had called there, and that was sent for -reply. Sent to me for reply. - -Mr. COLEMAN. I show you Commission Exhibit No. 910, which is a copy of -a telegram from Moscow to the Secretary of State, dated October 31, -1959, and I ask you whether that is the telegram you saw on November -the 2d? - -Miss WATERMAN. Yes; this is the telegram, and this is the telegram to -which I prepared an interim reply on the same day received, November 2, -1959. - -Mr. COLEMAN. And the reply that you prepared is Commission Exhibit No. -961. That is the telegram of November 2? It is the second document in -the file before you. - -Miss WATERMAN. Yes. - -Mr. COLEMAN. And that telegram indicated that it was prepared---- - -Mr. DULLES. Miss Waterman's file doesn't have the exhibit numbers on it -so you will have to identify it in some other way. - -Miss WATERMAN. Yes. - -Mr. COLEMAN. That telegram shows that it was prepared by you because -your name appears in the lower left hand corner, is that right? - -Miss WATERMAN. That is right. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Now below that you indicate "Clearances EE: SOV: V. James -in substance paraphrased by telephone." Will you indicate to the -Commission what that notation means? - -Miss WATERMAN. This is a telegram, isn't it? - -Mr. COLEMAN. Yes. - -Miss WATERMAN. Well, as I recall all telegrams which we dispatch to -Embassies or offices within the Iron Curtain countries were sent at -least with the lowest classification, official use only, and we had -previously received instructions that the telegrams which we prepared -on any subjects going to the offices in the Iron Curtain countries -should be cleared with the desk officers of the appropriate divisions, -that is EE and so on. - -Mr. DULLES. Geographical divisions? - -Miss WATERMAN. Geographical divisions, yes. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Could you identify for the record who Miss V. James is? - -Miss WATERMAN. Well, Virginia James, an officer in EE. - -Mr. COLEMAN. EE means? - -Miss WATERMAN. Eastern Europe. - -Mr. COLEMAN. And SOV? - -Miss WATERMAN. SOV, Soviet Division. - -Mr. COLEMAN. So the Commission Exhibit No. 961, which is a telegram---- - -Miss WATERMAN. Yes. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Indicates that the telegram was at least communicated to -and cleared by the Soviet desk in Washington before it was sent out? - -Miss WATERMAN. Well yes; I think that one reason that it was always -cleared was that the geographic divisions were particularly interested -in the wording of our replies. I think they just wanted the general -idea of whether or not we were using the proper classification. - -Mr. COLEMAN. And in that telegram of November 2, 1959, you advised -the Embassy in Moscow that if Oswald insisted on renouncing U.S. -citizenship, that the statute precludes the Embassy from withholding -his right to do so regardless of his application pending with the -Soviet Government, is that correct? - -Miss WATERMAN. Yes. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Now thereafter did you have anything else to do with the -Oswald matter prior to March 1960? To help you, Miss Waterman, March -1960 was the time in which you prepared the refusal card. - -Miss WATERMAN. Yes--refusal sheet. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Between sending this telegram on November 2, 1959, and -March 1960, did you personally have any knowledge or anything else that -was going on as far as Oswald was concerned? - -Miss WATERMAN. Well, not certainly unless it is in the file. I would -think that in the meantime we received some kind of further report from -the Embassy, but I am not---- - -Mr. COLEMAN. Well, we have had marked and put in the record the various -reports that were received, and you say that as all the reports came in -that you had opportunity to read them? - -Miss WATERMAN. Yes; of course that isn't too long from the latter part -of 1959 to 1960. Quite often in cases of this nature, the appropriate -Embassy might submit reports which didn't need replies, just -information submitted. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Well, there was a report submitted by the Embassy on -November 2, 1959, which has already been identified as Commission -Exhibit No. 908. - -Miss WATERMAN. Yes. - -Mr. COLEMAN. And I assume that you received a copy or saw that report? - -Miss WATERMAN. Yes; I did. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Then on or about March 25, 1960, you had occasion to -prepare a card which has as its head the name or the word "Refusal." - -Miss WATERMAN. That is not a card. That is a sheet. - -Mr. COLEMAN. That is a sheet which is marked as Commission Exhibit No. -962. Now will you indicate to the Commission the circumstances under -which you prepared that card and why you prepared that card? - -Miss WATERMAN. This was prepared after the receipt, I believe, of -further correspondence from the Embassy, which indicated that Oswald -was--that it would be possible that he might want to return to the -United States. And it was customary to make this red refusal sheet in -our office. - -Mr. COLEMAN. What was your office? - -Miss WATERMAN. In the adjudication part of the office, to put a flag on -the case for future reference. - -Mr. COLEMAN. After you made the refusal card which has been marked---- - -Miss WATERMAN. Not a card. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Pardon me, refusal sheet---- - -Miss WATERMAN. Refusal sheet. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Has been marked as Commission Exhibit No. 962, what would -be the next step in the system to make sure that Mr. Oswald could -not use his passport or come back to the United States without the -Department having notice? - -Miss WATERMAN. Well, in the case of this being a classified file, the -file would have been returned to the Classified File Section as I -recall, and there would be a note on there to please index the refusal -sheet, and then if there were any other instructions, for instance, -another office might want the file or ask for it, if no one wanted it, -we would ordinarily ask to have the refusal sheet carded and the case -filed. - -Mr. COLEMAN. As a result of the preparation of the refusal sheet, would -someone else or you have a responsibility to prepare something which is -called a lookout card? - -Miss WATERMAN. At that time, at least--I don't know what the procedure -is now, I have no idea; at that time, at least, the refusal card as -I call it, or lookout card would have been prepared in the Records -Section of the Passport Office. In other words, a part of the section -which handled the files. - -Mr. COLEMAN. After you prepared the refusal sheet which is Commission -Exhibit No. 962---- - -Miss WATERMAN. Yes; I wrote that myself. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Would you then give--how would the records section know -that a lookout card should be prepared? - -Miss WATERMAN. Well, for one thing the refusal sheet would be placed -on top of the file, and I am sure there would be a note to flag the -attention of the records people that a refusal was there to be carded. - -But in any event, it would be on top of the file, and there would have -been nothing on the right hand margin. There would have been no name. -There would have been nothing put on there in our particular office. - -Mr. COLEMAN. In other words, you say---- - -Miss WATERMAN. In our adjudication part. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Are you saying that Oswald, Lee Harvey, would not have -been---- - -Miss WATERMAN. No, no; the sheet was completely blank as to the margin. -At no time would anything have been entered there, in our adjudication -part. - -Mr. COLEMAN. In Commission Exhibit No. 962, you then say when you -physically prepared the refusal sheet, the only thing that was prepared -is the typewritten material, is that correct? - -Miss WATERMAN. The typewritten red sheet. If you have the file, it is -right here. - -Mr. COLEMAN. You say that after you prepared that, you would physically -place that red sheet on the top of the passport file, is that correct? - -Miss WATERMAN. Well, now this was placed--I think there was a -communication which went out at the same time. - -Mr. COLEMAN. You are talking about the Operations Memorandum dated -March 28, 1960? - -Miss WATERMAN. I am talking about the Operations Memorandum, yes. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Which has been marked as Commission Exhibit No. 963? - -Miss WATERMAN. Now that would have gone to file, to the file with this -Operations Memorandum, and the Refusal Sheet. - -Mr. COLEMAN. You prepared the Operations Memorandum also? - -Miss WATERMAN. Yes; now I see that was mailed 3 days after it was -prepared. In the meantime someone else was looking at it. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Was it your responsibility actually to see that the -lookout card was prepared? - -Miss WATERMAN. No; I wouldn't think so, no. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Who would have that responsibility? - -Miss WATERMAN. Well, in the first place the cases were examined by -the records people before being filed, and no one would certainly be -supposed to file a Refusal Sheet without an indication that he had had -a card made. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Would the indication that the card was made be put on the -refusal sheet? - -Miss WATERMAN. Yes. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Would you look at the original of the State Department -records? - -Miss WATERMAN. Yes; I am looking at it. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Was it put on the refusal sheet? - -Miss WATERMAN. Well, it looks to me as if someone started to handle -this for the refusal card, or lookout card as you call it, because the -name was typed on. - -Mr. COLEMAN. It was written on. - -Miss WATERMAN. Written on, yes. I believe that to complete that -operation, the designation of the citizenship designation of the -Department of State at that time at least, 130, should have been placed -on there. - -Mr. COLEMAN. What does 130 mean? - -Miss WATERMAN. That is the Department's classification of citizenship. - -Mr. COLEMAN. By looking at that file, is there anything else that you -can examine to be able to tell the Commission whether in your judgment -the actual lookout card was ever prepared? - -Miss WATERMAN. No; I wouldn't be able to say. I do notice here that the -case was called for from the files a few days after it went to file, -and that apparently was occasioned by a new communication coming in -from our Embassy at Moscow. - -Mr. DULLES. Who called for it, can you tell from that? - -Miss WATERMAN. Apparently we received--this was called for from--here -is a call slip right here. I am looking at it. Which means that -something new had been received and we wanted the file again. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Could you tell me the number that is on that call sheet? -You are looking at file X. It is file X she is looking at? - -Mr. EHRLICH. Yes. - -Miss WATERMAN. X-64. - -Mr. COLEMAN. X-64. - -Miss WATERMAN. I might say that in the meantime during the time from -November 1959 up into 1960, beginning about early in February 1960, I -was replaced in this section or branch by an attorney and a member of -the bar, and at this time I was then the assistant of the section, and -not the head of it. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Well, was the attorney that replaced you G. W. Masterton? - -Miss WATERMAN. Yes. - -Mr. COLEMAN. I would like to ask you to identify Commission Exhibit No. -983. - -Is that a copy of the sheet you referred to, to indicate the file had -been called for? - -Miss WATERMAN. That is right. A new report had been received and our -control clerk, we call her, our person looking after the records in our -particular section had made that call slip for the file. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Is there anything else in the original file which you -could look at to try to advise us whether you think in your judgment a -lookout card was ever prepared? - -Miss WATERMAN. Well, I wouldn't be able to know. All I could say is -it is very surprising, because it seems to me that we had--well, I -could not say how many lookout cards and refusal cards on all kinds -of subjects. And I can only guess that this file was caught up in -some large number of files that were on hand to have refusal cards or -lookout cards made, or something of that nature, or that the process of -having the card made was interrupted by the receipt of the new material -from our Embassy at Moscow. - -Mr. COLEMAN. But---- - -Mr. DULLES. Could I ask one question? - -Who would make out lookout cards in the normal process? Would it be -quite a number of people, or one particular office? - -Miss WATERMAN. I am not sure about that, Mr. Dulles. That was -completely another area, and I don't know. - -Mr. DULLES. Outside of the Passport Department entirely, was it? - -Miss WATERMAN. Oh, no. - -Mr. DULLES. In the Passport Department? - -Miss WATERMAN. Oh, yes. - -Mr. DULLES. Miss Knight could tell us that. - -Miss WATERMAN. In the records part of the Passport Office. - -Now, at one time I know that the cards were made in a certain area. -Then I know that later on, and probably prior to this time, we had -been requested not to forward any kind of classified files to the -usual place for having these cards made--we should forward them to the -Classified Files Section, which would take it up from there, and give -them to the proper person to have a card made. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Miss Waterman, it is your testimony that based upon -the red refusal sheet that you prepared, and also the operations -memorandums which have been marked respectively Commission Exhibit No. -962 and Commission Exhibit No. 963, that you had done all you were -supposed to do, and that the file then should have been passed over to -somebody else, and a lookout card should have been prepared? - -Miss WATERMAN. Yes, yes; that was our procedure at that time at least. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Now, after March 28, 1960, and prior to February 1961, -in that period, did your department, or did you take other actions in -connection with the Oswald case, with the hope that you would finally -be able to reach a decision on Oswald, as to whether he had expatriated -himself or not? - -Miss WATERMAN. I don't think there was too much going on in the file in -1960. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Well, I would like to call your attention to---- - -Miss WATERMAN. But in 1961---- - -Mr. COLEMAN. Before we get to 1961, I would like to call your attention -to the memorandum from Mr. White to Mr. Hazelton, dated July 20, 1960, -and the next document, which is a handwritten piece of paper, dated -2-15-61. - -Do you have that? Your number should be X-49. - -I show you the document which is marked in your file X-49, and it has -been given Commission Exhibit No. 965. - -Now, is that your handwriting on that document? - -Mr. EHRLICH. Might I interject at this time? In looking at the -originals of these I notice that X-49 is actually two memorandums. They -were photostated as one, and thus probably you cannot actually read -either one. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Well, I am referring to the one on top. Is that your -writing "took initial action, action"---- - -Miss WATERMAN. No; that is Mr. Masterton--the memorandum on the little -larger size below was a memorandum, informal memorandum, which I sent -to my section chief, Mr. Masterton. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Could you indicate what you said in your memorandum? - -Miss WATERMAN. Yes; I said, "Mr. Masterton, SCS, is writing to mother -on welfare aspect of Lee Harvey Oswald. Last two paragraphs of Moscow -dispatch 585, 2-8-61 appeared to be for PPT reply." - -I believe that was a letter which had been prepared in SCS--you know -what that is. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Yes. - -Miss WATERMAN. And had been forwarded to our office for clearance, for -our initial, before it was mailed, to reply to some inquiry of the -mother. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Now, on top of that memorandum you read, that you -prepared, there is another memorandum, isn't there? - -Miss WATERMAN. Yes. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Now, could you read that into the record? - -Miss WATERMAN. Yes; "SCS. Took initial action on action copy, case of -split action. Copy our action to go to SCS." - -Mr. COLEMAN. Do you know or do you have any knowledge what they meant -about case is split action? - -Miss WATERMAN. Well, it has been a long time since I have seen the -material. But I believe that the mother, Mrs. Oswald, in writing to the -Department, to the Secretary, probably brought up various questions -about her son. Now--questions which related to his welfare or physical -repatriation, or something of that type, which would come under the -jurisdiction of the Special Consular Services, should be answered -there. Any inquiries which were about his citizenship or his passport, -anything that came within the purview of the Passport Office, should -have a reply drafted by Miss Knight's office, or elsewhere in the -office. - -Mr. COLEMAN. In other words, you are saying that the phrase, split -action, on Commission Exhibit No. 965, doesn't mean that---- - -Miss WATERMAN. The decision was split; no. - -Mr. COLEMAN. It just means that different offices in the Department -would have to make different decisions, or take different action? - -Miss WATERMAN. Yes; and I think that most of Mrs. Oswald's letters were -quite involved, and brought up several questions. - -(At this point, Mr. Dulles withdrew from the hearing room.) - -Mr. COLEMAN. Then the next document which I want to ask you questions -about is your X-55. - -Miss WATERMAN. Yes. - -Mr. COLEMAN. That we have marked as Commission Exhibit No. 966. - -Now, this letter, though signed by Miss Knight, was prepared by you? - -Miss WATERMAN. Yes. - -Mr. COLEMAN. And it was a reply to an inquiry made by Congressman -Wright? - -Miss WATERMAN. Yes. - -Mr. COLEMAN. With respect to the Oswald case. - -Miss WATERMAN. Yes; this was--we probably either received a memorandum -from SCS or telephone call, something of that sort. - -Mr. COLEMAN. The next contact you had with the Oswald case was as -a result of the Embassy Despatch dated February 28, 1961, which is -X-42(2). - -Miss WATERMAN. Are you talking about the Department's Despatch? - -(At this point, Mr. Dulles reentered the hearing room.) - -Mr. COLEMAN. Yes; despatch. The Foreign Service Despatch. - -Miss WATERMAN. Yes; our despatch to the Embassy. - -Mr. COLEMAN. I beg your pardon. It is a despatch from the Embassy to -you. - -Miss WATERMAN. Yes; that is right. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Which we have marked as Commission Exhibit No. 967. - -Miss WATERMAN. Yes. - -Mr. COLEMAN. When that was received in Washington, you got a copy of -it, did you not? - -Miss WATERMAN. Well, I think--we seem to have the original in our file. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Yes; you saw the document? - -Miss WATERMAN. Yes. - -Mr. COLEMAN. And then as a result of seeing the document on March 27, -1961, you prepared a draft of the instruction which should go to Moscow -in response, is that correct? - -Miss WATERMAN. Yes. - -Mr. COLEMAN. And that is in the file as X-46, and we have marked it -as Commission Exhibit No. 968. And the draft that you prepared which -was attached to Commission Exhibit No. 968 is the next document, which -is X-47, which we have marked as Commission Exhibit No. 969, is that -correct? - -Miss WATERMAN. You mean the copy of the---- - -Mr. COLEMAN. The proposed State Department instruction. - -Miss WATERMAN. Yes; I see that. - -Mr. COLEMAN. And it indicates on the copy that the original was not -sent, is that correct? - -Miss WATERMAN. That is right. Nothing was sent. - -Mr. DULLES. Can I get this clear now? I am not sure--which was the -document that was not sent? - -Mr. COLEMAN. That is X-47 (Commission Exhibit No. 969). - -Mr. DULLES. Could you identify that for the record--because just -reference to documents in our record would be meaningless to the -reader. I think we ought to identify each document as we can, because I -am lost completely. - -Mr. COLEMAN. It is Commission Exhibit No. 969, which is a draft of the -State Department instruction to be sent to the Embassy in Moscow, as a -result of the Embassy's dispatch of February 28. - -Mr. DULLES. And this was drafted on March 27, was it? - -Mr. COLEMAN. Yes. - -Miss WATERMAN. Yes. - -Mr. DULLES. And you, I gather, Miss Waterman, drafted this? - -Miss WATERMAN. I drafted this, and then apparently we had--everyone had -second thoughts on some of the statements in there, and I believe that -it was at this time--wait a minute. - -We sent this to Miss Knight's office for the special attention of Mr. -Hickey. - -Mr. COLEMAN. And is that the memorandum dated March 31, 1961? - -Miss WATERMAN. Yes; that is right. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Which has been given Commission Exhibit No. 970. - -Miss WATERMAN. Yes. - -Mr. COLEMAN. And from that memorandum, you indicate that your proposed -instructions were that, one, that the passport should be mailed back to -Mr. Oswald only under proper safeguards---- - -Miss WATERMAN. Now, are you talking about what wasn't sent or what -finally was? - -Mr. COLEMAN. The memorandum of March 31, 1961. - -Miss WATERMAN. Yes; these memorandums were prepared by my superiors. In -other words, this looked a little different and more important by that -time. - -Representative FORD. In other words, the State Department document No. -X-42 came back to you from higher authority? - -Miss WATERMAN. No; I prepared the instruction, and I sent it to Mr. -Kupiec, who by that time was in charge of our section--Mr. Masterton -having been given other duties. And this went into the office of the -Chief of our Division, of the Foreign Adjudications Division. And Mr. -Cacciatore, who was the Assistant Chief of the Division, drafted a -memorandum in Mr. White's name to go to Miss Knight's office, and that -is a memorandum of March 31, 1961. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Well, that has been given Commission Exhibit No. 970. - -It is in your files as X-42. - -Miss WATERMAN. Right. - -Mr. COLEMAN. And you had no part in connection with the drafting of -that memorandum? - -Miss WATERMAN. No, no; our branch had sent the case to our Division -Chief, either to comment or authorize the mailing of the instruction -which I had prepared. - -Mr. COLEMAN. And then after this memorandum of March 31, 1961, was -drafted, a decision was finally reached in the Department as to the -form of the State Department instruction which is in your file as X-38? - -Miss WATERMAN. Yes. - -Mr. COLEMAN. And we have marked it as Commission Exhibit No. 971. - -Miss WATERMAN. Yes - -Mr. COLEMAN. And that is the instruction that was actually sent to the -Embassy? - -Miss WATERMAN. Sent to the Embassy; yes. That was a replacement of -the instruction which I had originally drafted, and I redrafted that -according to the dictates of the memorandums which had been exchanged -with our office and Miss Knight's office. - -Representative FORD. May I ask a question here, Mr. Coleman? - -On the memo of March 31, 1961, Commission Exhibit No. 970, the last -sentence reads as follows: "For the best interests of the United -States, therefore, and as the possession of a passport might facilitate -his obtention of an exit visa it is believed that we should do -everything within our power to facilitate Oswald's entry into the -United States." - -Who would have prepared the March 31, 1961 memo that contained that -quotation? - -Miss WATERMAN. That was prepared by Mr. Cacciatore, who was the -Assistant Chief of the Foreign Operations Division, in which I worked. -And Mr. John White was his superior, and Mr. White initialed the memo -going to Miss Knight's office, to Mr. Hickey. - -Mr. DULLES. Who is Mr. Hickey? - -Miss WATERMAN. Who is he? - -Mr. DULLES. I meant at this time what was his position? - -Miss WATERMAN. Well, I believe at that time his title was--I wouldn't -like to say definitely--I believe he was the Deputy Chief of the -Passport Office. - -Mr. DULLES. Under Miss Knight? - -Miss WATERMAN. Under Miss Knight, yes. - -Mr. DULLES. I would like to ask one question about X-38(2). - -Mr. COLEMAN. That is Commission Exhibit No. 971. - -Mr. DULLES. That is the cable sent--cable of instructions sent on -the Lee Harvey Oswald matter to the American Embassy in Moscow. This -relates to---- - -Miss WATERMAN. Now, you are talking about the State Department -instruction? - -Mr. DULLES. That is correct. In paragraph 2 there is reference to the -circumstances under which his passport can be returned, and there is -this phrase: "His passport may be delivered to him on a personal basis -only." - -What does that mean? - -Miss WATERMAN. I think it meant deliver it to him in person. - -Mr. DULLES. I see--deliver it to him in person. - -Miss WATERMAN. Yes; I think those are the words of Mr. Hickey. I -believe that somewhere in the file there is a memorandum which Mr. -Hickey returned to Mr. White's division, giving his views. - -Mr. DULLES. And that may be qualified by the last sentence here, -suggesting that it would not be wise to send it through the mails? - -Miss WATERMAN. Yes; in other words, the memorandum which Mr. Hickey -returned to us, with our proposed instruction, was used as a basis for -our action. - -Mr. DULLES. It was to be given to him personally, and not transmitted -through the mails. - -Miss WATERMAN. I think that is what it means. - -Mr. COLEMAN. And, also, the State Department instructions were that -he was to get the passport only after the Embassy had thoroughly -questioned Oswald regarding the circumstances of his residence in -the Soviet Union, and his possible commitment of an act or acts of -expatriation? - -Miss WATERMAN. Yes. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Miss Waterman, I note on the side of the State Department -instruction a notation that CIA furnished copy "on case by me, 10-5-61." - -Do you know who wrote that, and what that means? - -Miss WATERMAN. Well, I think the person has initialed it who wrote it. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Who is CHS? - -Miss WATERMAN. I think that is Mr. Seeley--Mr. Carroll Seeley. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Carroll H. Seeley, Jr.? - -Miss WATERMAN. If that is the way his name is listed in the book. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Is he an attorney in the Passport Office? - -Miss WATERMAN. I don't know what he is now. So far as I know, he was an -attorney at that time. He was in--in the Legal Division of the Passport -Office. - -Mr. COLEMAN. I also note in the next paper which is attached to -Commission Exhibit No. 971 we have marked as Commission Exhibit 972, -there is a reference sheet---- - -Mr. DULLES. What is that paper? - -Mr. COLEMAN. It is physically attached. - -Mr. DULLES. You see, exhibit numbers won't appear---- - -Mr. COLEMAN. Well, it is a reference sheet dated 10-5-61, which -indicates that a Thermofax copy of the Department of State Instruction -No. A-173, dated April 13, 1961, was sent to the CIA. - -Is that correct? - -Miss WATERMAN. I know nothing about that. That is something that was -entirely outside of our Adjudication Division, our Foreign Operations -Division. - -Mr. COLEMAN. But the reference indicates that it was prepared by Robert -D. Johnson, Chief Counsel, Passport Office, under date of 10-5-61, is -that correct? - -Miss WATERMAN. I am looking at it. Yes. But that was nothing that -emanated from our part of the Passport Office. - -Mr. COLEMAN. After you prepared and had sent forward the Department -of State instruction dated April 13, 1961, you then, on or about May -26, 1961, received the Embassy Foreign Despatch of that date, is that -correct? - -Miss WATERMAN. Yes, yes. - -Mr. COLEMAN. And that despatch, which is your No. X-34, has been given -Commission Exhibit No. 973, states that the Embassy had received -another letter from Oswald, is that correct? - -Miss WATERMAN. Yes; I am looking at a copy. - -Mr. COLEMAN. And also the despatch---- - -Mr. DULLES. Would you identify that a little bit? - -Mr. COLEMAN. The despatch is from the Embassy to the Department of -State, and it is Commission Exhibit No. 973, written by Mr. Snyder on -May 26, 1961, and it indicates, one, that the Embassy has received -another letter from Mr. Oswald, and it also indicates that Oswald was -married to a Russian woman, and it indicates that Oswald has informed -the Embassy that he had an internal Soviet passport in which he was -designated as "without citizenship." - -And the Embassy Despatch actually has as a copy the letter which Mr. -Oswald sent to the Embassy in May 1961. - -Miss WATERMAN. Yes. - -Mr. COLEMAN. And you received that in Washington some time shortly -after March 26, 1961. - -Miss WATERMAN. We received it in our particular office on June 12. - -Mr. COLEMAN. As a result of receiving---- - -Mr. DULLES. Just one second. - -June---- - -Miss WATERMAN. I am going by our automatic clock stamps on the reverse -of the original. - -Mr. DULLES. You received it on June 12? - -Miss WATERMAN. Yes; we received it in our action office June 12, 1961. - -Mr. COLEMAN. After you received it, you then considered whether the -Embassy should return to Mr. Oswald his passport. And your decision as -finally made is reflected in the State Department instruction dated -July 11, 1961, which is your X-31, which has been marked Commission -Exhibit No. 975, is that correct? - -Miss WATERMAN. Yes; I am looking at a copy. - -Mr. COLEMAN. In those instructions, you said that Mr. Oswald could be -given his passport, is that correct? - -Miss WATERMAN. Well, yes--because we are in effect agreeing with the -suggestion of the Embassy. We are telling the Embassy that we---- - -Mr. COLEMAN. You are agreeing with their despatch of May 26, 1961, -which has been identified for the record as Commission Exhibit No. 973. - -Miss WATERMAN. What is this word? - -Oh--"seek." - -Mr. COLEMAN. Is that correct? - -Miss WATERMAN. What was your question again now? - -Mr. COLEMAN. I am saying what you were agreeing to was the proposed -action of the Embassy as set forth in its Foreign Service Despatch -dated May 26, 1961? - -Miss WATERMAN. Yes; but I see we also note that the Embassy intended -to contact the Department again before granting any documentation to -Oswald. - -Mr. DULLES. Off the record. - -(Discussion off the record.) - -Mr. DULLES. Back on the record. - -Mr. COLEMAN. I note on Commission Exhibit No. 975, which is your X-31, -that on the side there is written "Pink copy of this sent to EE:SOV -Miss James, BW7-17-61." - -Miss WATERMAN. Yes; I am looking at that. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Do you recall whether Miss James asked you to send her a -copy, or did you just send her a copy without being requested? - -Miss WATERMAN. No; I would not recall, really. We tried to keep--since -there were many interests involved here, we did try to keep the -geographic division up to date on what we were doing, so that they -would have more or less a complete picture of the case. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Then I would like to next call your attention to your -document which is X-28. - -Miss WATERMAN. Yes. - -Mr. COLEMAN. That is a memorandum which you prepared, Commission -Exhibit No. 978, in which you state that Miss James called and said -that she wanted to know what reply had you made to the Moscow despatch -29, July 11, 1961, in the case of Oswald. And you stated that the draft -reply was in preparation, and you also said that Miss James said that -the communication should be cleared with the SOV, and then you make a -comment that you never heard that the Passport Section's citizenship -decisions should be routed to SOV for clearance. - -Miss WATERMAN. That is right. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Nevertheless, you indicated in the memorandum that you -would indicate that the SOV had a special interest in the reply to the -despatch, is that correct? - -Miss WATERMAN. Yes; that is right. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Did you discuss with anybody in the Department Miss James' -request? - -Miss WATERMAN. Well, I don't recall. I don't know. I wouldn't recall -right now. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Well, is this the only time, to your knowledge, where the -SOV had made a request in connection with a passport? - -Miss WATERMAN. Oh, no; I would not say that. I don't think so; no. I -think probably a great many of our communications went out as office -memoranda, and they received copies of them in the Division anyhow. - -But I think this was probably more to avoid confusion in having -classified files be traveling around the different areas of the -Department. We could send a copy of an "OM" without trouble. But -handing the files around was another matter. And we didn't put them -around any more than we had to. - -Mr. COLEMAN. The next document in the sheaf of papers I gave you is the -Operations Memorandum dated August 18, 1961, prepared by you---- - -Miss WATERMAN. Yes. - -Mr. COLEMAN. And we have given it Commission Exhibit No. 979. - -Miss WATERMAN. Yes. - -Mr. COLEMAN. In that you indicate that you concur in the conclusion of -the Embassy that there is available no information and/or evidence to -show that Mr. Oswald has expatriated himself under the pertinent laws -of the United States. - -Miss WATERMAN. That is right. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Did you review the entire files which you had in the -Passport Office on Oswald before you wrote this memorandum? - -Miss WATERMAN. Yes; our file was all together. - -Mr. COLEMAN. And you also had the benefit of the various Embassy -Despatches which were sent prior to August 18, 1961? - -Miss WATERMAN. Oh, yes. - -Well, the part that concerned his citizenship, certainly, was with our -file. - -Mr. COLEMAN. And reviewing the whole file, you, as the adjudicator, -determined on August 18, 1961, that there was nothing in the file which -would show that Mr. Oswald had expatriated himself? - -Miss WATERMAN. That is correct. - -Representative FORD. When you say "no information and/or evidence to -show that Mr. Oswald"---- - -Miss WATERMAN. No information or evidence. - -Well, that is the way I worded it. No information or evidence. We would -have to have evidence to hold up any action on him. And, in addition to -having no evidence, we also had no information. - -Representative FORD. Did you have the information that he had come in -and presented a statement to Mr. Snyder that he wanted to renounce his -citizenship? - -Miss WATERMAN. Yes; but he hasn't done so. There was no place that he -could have done so, except at the Embassy, under a specified form, and -upon specified documents. - -Representative FORD. In other words, you were relying upon the need for -this particular document? - -Miss WATERMAN. Well, in the first place, when he came in--as I believe -Mr. Snyder said, or whoever reported from the Embassy--and threw down -his passport, he apparently was a disgruntled young man--and that -is not the first time a passport has been thrown down on a consular -officer's desk. And I think that we had--no--in other words, it looked -as if he were already regretting his first action. He was weakening a -little bit because he was not being accorded any kind of recognition in -the Soviet Union. - -In other words, he was---- - -Representative FORD. But the subsequent evidence, where you say he -was changing his mind, came about 2 years later. On the other hand, -there was some evidence, when he first went to the Soviet Union, -October 31, 1959, that he at least had an intention to renounce his -American citizenship. He simply had not signed the actual form that is -prescribed by the regulations. - -Miss WATERMAN. That is right. He had not. - -And there was no indication that actually he intended to do that. He -apparently derived some kind of satisfaction from his appearing at the -Embassy with an ambiguous statement. But there was nothing there to -show that he actually had an intention of renouncing his citizenship -under the law. - -Representative FORD. I must differ with you. That first statement that -he submitted was not very ambiguous. - -Miss WATERMAN. Well, I think probably he made several. But, in any -event--he---- - -Representative FORD. I do think I ought to read what he said on October -31. - -Miss WATERMAN. Yes; I believe I recall that. - -Representative FORD. Here is a letter or a statement in Lee Harvey -Oswald's handwriting, which says: - -"I, Lee Harvey Oswald, do hereby request that my present citizenship in -the United States of America be revoked. - -"I have entered the Soviet Union for the express purpose of -applying for citizenship in the Soviet Union, through the means of -naturalization. - -"My request for citizenship is now pending before the Supreme Soviet of -the U.S.S.R. - -"I take these steps for political reasons. My request for the revoking -of my American citizenship is made only after the longest and most -serious considerations. - -"I affirm that my allegiance is to the Union of Soviet Socialist -Republics." - -Signed, "Lee Harvey Oswald." - -I don't think that is very ambiguous. - -Miss WATERMAN. Well, perhaps not. But the procedure was explained to -him, and he, as I recall, took no interest in completing any forms to -make his renunciation of American citizenship official. - -Representative FORD. The only question that I raise, Miss Waterman, is -in light of this evidence, your statement that there is available no -information and/or evidence to show that Mr. Oswald has expatriated -himself under the pertinent laws of the United States---- - -Miss WATERMAN. I think that is correct. I think the statement is -correct. - -Representative FORD. That is a very technical response, or technical -statement. I think there was evidence that he had placed before -Government officials his desire to renounce his citizenship. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Did anyone advise you or instruct you that you should make -the adjudication that you made as reflected in the August 18, 1961, -memorandum, or is this a decision that you made after you had reviewed -the file? - -Miss WATERMAN. Well, I made the decision and prepared the communication -which went through my superiors, and they apparently agreed with me. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Can you, by looking at the file, particularly the document -marked X-27, which is the Operations Memorandum dated August 18, 1961, -tell us what superior reviewed the memorandum before it went forth to -the Embassy? - -Miss WATERMAN. Yes; the initials there, HFK, are Mr. Kupiec, who was my -area chief, and I believe that up at the top, on the second line of the -Operations Memorandum, opposite "Department of State" I believe that -those were the initials of Mr. White, who was in charge of the Foreign -Operations Division. And then this was also cleared in our Legal -Division. - -Now, that would not be for citizenship purposes, but it would be there -for reference. - -Mr. COLEMAN. And who was CHS? - -Miss WATERMAN. That is the same person you mentioned awhile ago, Mr. -Seeley. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Then as a result of determining that there was no evidence -or information showing that Mr. Oswald had expatriated himself, you -then indicated that the passport of Mr. Oswald could be renewed, is -that correct? - -Miss WATERMAN. Yes. - -Representative FORD. May I ask a question here, Mr. Coleman? - -Referring again to the memorandum of August 18, 1961, the first -paragraph, where you say, "We concur in the conclusion of the Embassy -that there is available no information and/or evidence to show that Mr. -Oswald has expatriated himself under the pertinent laws of the United -States"--where is their documentation, if any, that the Embassy has -come to that conclusion? - -Mr. COLEMAN. Sir, I think she is referring to the despatch of July 11, -1961, which is identified as Commission Exhibit No. 935. - -Representative FORD. Do you come to that conclusion based on the total -content of the July 11, 1961, memo from the Embassy in Moscow, or -something specifically set forth in that memorandum? - -Miss WATERMAN. Well, I think all of the material together. In other -words, Oswald was not documented as a Soviet citizen. Apparently he -didn't expect to be. The Embassy had questioned him. And, in addition -to their knowing that during his visits to the Embassy itself he had -not expatriated himself, they received no information from him in what -questioning they could do that he had performed any act at all to -expatriate himself under U.S. laws. - -Representative FORD. Mr. Coleman, do you have that paper we had -yesterday, where the cross-out was present? - -Mr. COLEMAN. Yes, sir; here it is. - -Representative FORD. On Commission Exhibit No. 938, Oswald crossed out -"have not"---- - -Mr. DULLES. What is the date of that, Mr. Ford? - -Representative FORD. It is dated---- - -Mr. COLEMAN. July 11, 1961, and it is Oswald's application for renewal -of passport. - -Mr. DULLES. I remember the paper. That is subsequent to this document -here that we are discussing now. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Done at the same time. The State Department document -shows--I mean the Embassy document shows that one of the covering -material sent to the State Department was the application for renewal -of passport executed by Oswald July 10, 1961. - -Mr. DULLES. And this was sent with their dispatch of July 11, 1961, -which we are now discussing. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Yes, sir. - -Representative FORD. Did you have that document at the time you wrote -the statement, "We concur," and so forth? - -Mr. COLEMAN. Which is Commission Exhibit No. 979. - -Miss WATERMAN. What is the date? - -Mr. COLEMAN. It is your X-27. - -Miss WATERMAN. Yes; I think we had that. Because we referred to it. - -Representative FORD. Well, does that statement, the way it is set forth -there, raise any questions about whether there was any information or -evidence about his expatriation? - -Miss WATERMAN. His questionnaire discloses no information. - -Representative FORD. But what about the statement on the first page? - -Will you read it, for the record--the printed part? - -Miss WATERMAN. Yes; "I have been naturalized as a citizen of a foreign -state." Well, of course, that would be prepared by the Embassy. I think -they just crossed out the wrong one. - -Representative FORD. But all we can go by is what we see. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Would you examine the original in the State Department -file, and see what was crossed out there? - -Miss WATERMAN. Yes--"I have not." I think that was an Embassy error. - -Representative FORD. That is a fairly important error, though. - -Miss WATERMAN. Yes; it is. - -Representative FORD. Will you read the full text of what is shown there -as it is shown on the original? - -Miss WATERMAN. "I have been naturalized as a citizen of a foreign -state; taken an oath or made an affirmation or other formal declaration -of allegiance to a foreign state; entered or served in the armed forces -of a foreign state; accepted, served in or performed the duties of any -office, post or employment under the government of a foreign state, -or political subdivision thereof; voted in a political election in a -foreign state or participated in an election or plebiscite to determine -the sovereignty over foreign territory; made a formal renunciation -of nationality, either in the United States or before a diplomatic -or consular officer of the United States in a foreign state; been -convicted by court martial of deserting the military, air or naval -service of the United States in time of war; or of committing any act -of treason against or of attempting by force to overthrow or of bearing -arms against the United States; or departed from or remained outside -the jurisdiction of the United States for the purpose of evading or -avoiding training and service in the military, air, or naval forces of -the United States. If any of the above mentioned acts or conditions are -applicable in the applicant's case, or to the case of any other person -included in this application, a supplementary statement under oath -should be attached and made a part hereof." - -Representative FORD. That is signed by Lee Harvey Oswald. - -Miss WATERMAN. That is signed by Lee Harvey Oswald. And his statement -here indicates and shows the performance of no such act as is described -on the first page of the application. - -Representative FORD. Any one of those conditions, however, in that -statement would indicate that he had renounced his citizenship? - -Miss WATERMAN. It could. But, in other words, he now says---- - -Representative FORD. He says some place in there he is without -nationality. Did you have that at the time---- - -Miss WATERMAN. "I am described as being without citizenship." That is -right. In other words, it is questionable whether the Embassy should -have crossed out "have not." In other words, he might have said I have -done this, but his explanation---- - -Representative FORD. That is what the document shows. - -Miss WATERMAN. But his explanation clearly shows that he had not. - -Mr. DULLES. Do you know whether that was noted at the time, or deemed -to be a clerical error, or how did you interpret that crossing out of -that particular line there? - -Miss WATERMAN. Well, in any event--I actually cannot recall, Mr. -Dulles. But the questionnaire, which was also under oath, at the -Embassy, would be the material part here. And there is no information -in here to show that he had been naturalized. He said he was not known -as a Soviet citizen, he did not have a Soviet passport. And as for the -other items of possible expatriation, I don't see how they could have -applied to him, in any event. - -Representative FORD. Mr. Coleman, I suggest that, to make the record -complete as to what the evidence was in the file, that we have -reprinted in the record at this point Commission Exhibit No. 912, -because it was a followup statement by Oswald on the status as he saw -it of his citizenship at that time. - -Mr. COLEMAN. You want the reporter to print physically in the record -Commission Exhibits Nos. 912 and 913, the two Oswald letters? - -Mr. DULLES. Just one question. I note here this is typed out. The line -I saw had been marked out. I think it is a fair inference that this was -typed out, since the typing was probably done in the American Embassy. -He had no typewriter. There is a fair inference that might have been a -mistake. - -Representative FORD. All we can go by is what the record shows. - -Mr. DULLES. I think we ought to clarify that through the record in -Moscow, because the record is not good at this point. - -Mr. EHRLICH. There is another copy, as you know, that came in from the -Embassy that we sent to you that showed in fact--it was not a carbon, -it was a separate one, in which the "have" was---- - -Mr. COLEMAN. That is Commission Exhibit No. 947. - -Mr. EHRLICH. That was in the Embassy. It was not in the Department. - -Mr. DULLES. There the "X's" were above everything, but probably were -intended to mark out the "have." - -Representative FORD. Is Commission Exhibit No. 938 the original? - -Representative FORD. This is a photostat of the original? - -Miss WATERMAN. The original is in the Department's file. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Congressman Ford, the original document is right -physically in front of you. - -Representative FORD. That one is crossing out his "have not." It is -very clear. - -Mr. DULLES. And on this one, which is the copy in the Embassy files, -the crossed out is above all three. It apparently was intended to be -crossed out, the "have." - -(At this point, Representative Ford withdrew from the hearing room.) - -Mr. COLEMAN. We just thought the record should--you recall we asked Mr. -Snyder a question about this, and he said he didn't know whether it was -a typographical error, or just what the reason for it was. - -Miss Waterman, would you be kind enough to look at the document in your -file which is X-30, and could you look at the original, in the original -State Department file? - -Now, we have marked it as Commission Exhibit No. 977. - -Now, the second page of the document that we have has inserted a -sheet of paper called a passport office lookout file. Is that stamped -physically on the back of the first page? - -Miss WATERMAN. Yes. - -Mr. COLEMAN. That indicates that the document was received on July 19, -is that correct? There is a stamp on there? - -Miss WATERMAN. Yes; July 19. - -Mr. COLEMAN. There is another stamp on there, August 3, 1961. - -Miss WATERMAN. Yes; I see that. - -Mr. COLEMAN. You also have the lookout file on the Passport Office, is -checked under "No Lookout (refusal) File Record." - -Do you see that? - -Miss WATERMAN. Yes; I see it. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Does this mean that when someone ordered a search of the -lookout record file in July or August, 1961, that there was no lookout -file record on Lee Harvey Oswald? - -Miss WATERMAN. Apparently so. That was probably done automatically. The -records people probably did that. - -Mr. COLEMAN. This was prior to the time when you had made your decision -there had been no expatriation, is that correct? - -Miss WATERMAN. I will have to look at this. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Your recommendation wasn't made until August 18, 1961. - -Miss WATERMAN. That is what we were replying to. That is one of the -communications that we were acknowledging, yes, that is right. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Well, should there have been a lookout card when the -search was made in July 1961, on Lee Harvey Oswald? - -Miss WATERMAN. Well, I would say that if one were made, it would have -been in there. - -Now, I don't know that I always would have examined the reverse of -every dispatch. If I had examined the reverse of that despatch, I -probably would have noted it. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Well, what I am saying, as a result of the refusal sheet -that you prepared in 1960, when the lookout section made the search on -August 3, 1961, should there not have been a lookout file at that time -on Lee Harvey Oswald? - -Miss WATERMAN. Are you talking about a lookout card? - -Mr. COLEMAN. A lookout card, yes. - -Miss WATERMAN. A lookout card would only have referred to this file. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Yes. - -Miss WATERMAN. Which we already had, and which we already determined -had no evidence of expatriation. - -Mr. COLEMAN. I am suggesting that you did not make that determination -until August 18, 1961. - -Miss WATERMAN. Well, Mr. Coleman, the card itself would have been -totally immaterial to the decision we made here, inasmuch as we had the -entire file, and also our refusal--the refusal sheet would be in here. - -As I said, that was not for expatriation. It was just to flag an -adverse--possible adverse interest in the case. - -Mr. DULLES. But there has been testimony given here before, Miss -Waterman, that when the question came up later of the issuance of a -passport, since there was no lookout card, this file was not consulted. - -Miss WATERMAN. Well, that could be. That was, I believe--I believe that -was after I had anything to do with the file. - -Mr. DULLES. Yes; I know. You cannot testify as to that. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Now, Miss Waterman, would you be kind enough to turn over -to the next document which you have before you, after the August 18, -1961, memorandum? - -Miss WATERMAN. Yes. - -Mr. COLEMAN. And that is in the file--your file as 1X-24. It has been -given Commission Exhibit No. 980. - -Miss WATERMAN. Yes. - -Mr. COLEMAN. And will you note that there is some typewritten material -that appears on the first page which says, "Attached report is a -summation of Subject's background and case since he renounced U.S. -citizenship and sought Soviet citizenship in the fall of 1959. As his -citizenship status does not appear to be resolved, copies of the report -are furnished to both PPT and VO." - -And the attachment is an FBI report. - -Miss WATERMAN. Yes. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Written on the side in your handwriting, I assume, is the -word "incorrect." - -Miss WATERMAN. That is correct. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Do you recall when you wrote that on that paper? - -Miss WATERMAN. Well, probably when I saw it. I would not recall when I -wrote it, but it would be--the statement--my inference there that the -statement in this memorandum is what you might call a misnomer would -have been correct at any date. - -Mr. DULLES. Who wrote this memorandum which you indicated was incorrect? - -Miss WATERMAN. I have a line there "renounced U.S. citizenship." In -other words, somebody who had nothing to do with the adjudication -of the case or citizenship had made a statement in there that this -person had renounced, and that is a rather poor thing to have in the -file which is going around to various places in the Department or -possibly elsewhere. And I did write that on, with reference only to his -renunciation. - -Mr. DULLES. With reference to that one statement? - -Miss WATERMAN. That is right. - -Mr. COLEMAN. And then on December 28, 1961, you drafted a memorandum -which purports to be from Miss Knight to Robert F. Hale, in which you -indicated that any inference in the memorandum of July 27, 1961, which -is the document I have just asked you about---- - -Miss WATERMAN. Yes. - -Mr. COLEMAN. That Oswald was not a citizen of the United States is -incorrect. - -Miss WATERMAN. That is right. - -Mr. COLEMAN. And you prepared---- - -Miss WATERMAN. In other words, this memorandum which I did make the -notation on was sent to other parts of the Department, and we wanted to -correct that impression, that there was any evidence of expatriation by -Oswald, by renunciation of U.S. citizenship, or any other way. - -Mr. COLEMAN. That has been marked as Commission Exhibit No. 981, which -is the memorandum of December 28, 1961, in which you made the statement -that any inference that Mr. Oswald had--was not a citizen of the United -States was incorrect. - -Mr. WATERMAN. Well, yes; well, that is self-explanatory. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Then on the same day you drafted an operations memorandum -to be sent to the Embassy in Moscow in which you said that the Passport -Office approves the manner of the Embassy's replies to Mr. Oswald with -respect to passport facilities for him in the future. Is that correct? -That you drafted that memorandum? - -Miss WATERMAN. Yes; I drafted that. - -Mr. COLEMAN. That has been given Commission Exhibit No. 982. - -That is December 28, 1961. It is the last document. - -Now, after December 28, 1961, did you have anything else to do as far -as the Oswald matter was concerned? - -Miss WATERMAN. I don't think so, except perhaps sending a copy of some -document or letter to our files--because I had only about a month's -work in the Department. I left work on February 2, 1962, and that was -the last day I had with any kind of performance of duties. - -I might have marked some paper or something of that sort. - -But I don't recall any action. If the file shows it, I took it. But, -otherwise, I don't remember. - -Mr. COLEMAN. When you took the various actions we have discussed this -morning with respect to Mr. Oswald, were you acting under instructions -of anyone that this was the decision you would have to make because -someone else in the Department wanted you to resolve the question this -way? - -Miss WATERMAN. What do you mean? - -Do you mean outside of the Passport Office? - -Mr. COLEMAN. Yes. - -Miss WATERMAN. Outside the Passport Office? - -Mr. COLEMAN. Yes; I am just asking you for the record. - -Miss WATERMAN. I know. But you mentioned--such as who? - -Mr. COLEMAN. Did anyone call you up and say, "Miss Waterman, this is -the way you have to resolve this case"? - -Miss WATERMAN. Oh, no. Oh, no. - -Mr. COLEMAN. And you made the decisions you made based upon the record -and your judgment as to what you thought the law was and what the facts -were? - -Miss WATERMAN. Certainly. - -Mr. DULLES. Did you consult anyone in connection with reaching that -decision in the Oswald case? - -Miss WATERMAN. Well, Mr. Dulles, in preparing this correspondence, as -I have told you, the correspondence was prepared for the signature of -my superiors, and if they didn't agree with what I wrote, that was all -right with me. But that was my impression, and I believed there had -been discussion among persons in our immediate office. And while---- - -Mr. DULLES. Your decision, then, is not final. It is subject to review -by your superiors in matters of this kind? - -Miss WATERMAN. That is right. - -But in no event--I don't know of any--as I say, my connection with the -case closed, and I never heard in the press or any other place that -indicated that Oswald expatriated himself and that he wasn't entitled -to a passport. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Your decision wasn't in any way influenced by the fact -that Miss James told you that this was a decision that would have to be -made or anything like that? - -Miss WATERMAN. Certainly not. They have absolutely nothing to do with -citizenship--nothing. - -Mr. COLEMAN. I have no further questions, Mr. Chairman. - -Mr. DULLES. Off the record. - -(Discussion off the record.) - -Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. Chairman, before we close the testimony of Miss -Waterman, I would like to move for the admission of Commission Exhibits -No. 957 through Commission Exhibit No. 983, which were the documents -that we marked. - -Mr. DULLES. They shall be admitted. - -(The documents heretofore marked for identification as Commission -Exhibits Nos. 957-983, were received in evidence.) - -Mr. COLEMAN. I would like to thank Miss Waterman for coming in. - -Mr. DULLES. We thank you very much, Miss Waterman. - -(Whereupon, at 12:50 p.m., the President's Commission recessed.) - - - - -Afternoon Session - -TESTIMONY OF THE HON. DEAN RUSK, SECRETARY OF STATE - - -The President's Commission reconvened at 3:30 p.m. - -The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Secretary Dean Rusk, we wanted to ask you a few -questions about this matter in any particular detail you wanted to -answer. Mr. Rankin would you inform the Secretary the areas we intend -to cover before we ask the questions. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Chief Justice, I think the particular area that we -would be interested in with the Secretary is just as to whether, or his -knowledge of whether there was any foreign political interest in the -assassination of President Kennedy? - -We have been getting the information in regard to other matters -concerning the State Department from other of his associates and -colleagues and employees of the Department, and we are going to -complete that and it has been helpful to us and I think we can rather -limit the inquiry to that area. - -The CHAIRMAN. Yes; very well. - -Mr. Secretary, would you rise 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? - -Secretary RUSK. I do. - -The CHAIRMAN. Will you be seated, please, and Mr. Rankin will ask you -the questions, Mr. Secretary. - -Secretary RUSK. Mr. Chief Justice, may I ask one question? - -The CHAIRMAN. Yes, indeed. - -Secretary RUSK. I would like to be just as helpful as possible to -the Commission. I am not quite clear of testimony in terms of future -publication. There may be certain points that arise where it might -be helpful to the Commission for me to comment on certain points but -there--it would be a very grave difficulty about publication, so I -wonder what the Commission's view on that is. - -The CHAIRMAN. Well, Mr. Secretary, our purpose is to have available -for the public all of the evidence that is given here. If there is any -phase of it that you think might jeopardize the security of the Nation, -have no hesitation in asking us to go off the record for a moment, and -you can tell us what you wish. - -Secretary RUSK. Thank you, sir, I am at your disposal. - -Mr. DULLES. Mr. Chief Justice, could I make a suggestion in that -connection? - -The CHAIRMAN. Yes. - -Mr. DULLES. Would it be feasible to have a discussion here of the -points that are vital from the point of view of our record, and so -forth, and maybe a little informal conversation afterward to cover the -other points. - -The CHAIRMAN. We will have a recess for a few moments then. - -Mr. DULLES. I thought between the two wouldn't that be easier than put -the two together. - -(Discussion off the record.) - -The CHAIRMAN. Back on the record. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Secretary, will you give us your name and address, -please? - -Secretary RUSK. Dean Rusk, 4980 Quebec Street, Washington, D.C. - -Mr. RANKIN. And you are the Secretary of State for the United States? - -Secretary RUSK. That is correct. - -Mr. RANKIN. You have occupied that position for some time? - -Secretary RUSK. Since January 22, 1961. - -Mr. RANKIN. In that position you have become familiar with our foreign -relations and the attitude and interest in some degree of other -countries that we deal with? - -Secretary RUSK. Yes; within the limitations of the possibilities, it is -at least my task to be as familiar as possible with those things. - -Mr. RANKIN. In your opinion, was there any substantial interest or -interests of the Soviet Union which would have been advanced by the -assassination of President Kennedy? - -Secretary RUSK. I would first have to say on a question of that sort -that it is important to follow the evidence. It is very difficult to -look into the minds of someone else, and know what is in someone else's -mind. - -I have seen no evidence that would indicate to me that the Soviet Union -considered that it had an interest in the removal of President Kennedy -or that it was in any way involved in the removal of President Kennedy. -If I may elaborate just a moment. - -Mr. RANKIN. If you will, please. - -Secretary RUSK. As the Commission may remember, I was with several -colleagues in a plane on the way to Japan at the time the assassination -occurred. When we got the news we immediately turned back. After my -mind was able to grasp the fact that this event had in fact occurred, -which was the first necessity, and not an easy one, I then, on the -plane, began to go over the dozens and dozens of implications and -ramifications of this event as it affects our foreign relations all -over the world. - -I landed briefly in Hawaii on the way back to Washington, and gave some -instructions to the Department about a number of these matters, and -learned what the Department was already doing. But one of the great -questions in my mind at that time was just that question, could some -foreign government somehow be involved in such an episode. - -I realized that were this so this would raise the gravest issues of -war and peace, but that nevertheless it was important to try to get at -the truth--to the answer to that question--wherever that truth might -lead; and so when I got back to Washington I put myself immediately in -touch with the processes of inquiry on that point, and as Secretary of -State had the deepest possible interest in what the truthful answer to -those questions would be, because it would be hard to think of anything -more pregnant for our foreign relations than the correct answer to that -question. - -I have not seen or heard of any scrap of evidence indicating that the -Soviet Union had any desire to eliminate President Kennedy nor in any -way participated in any such event. - -Now, standing back and trying to look at that question objectively -despite the ideological differences between our two great systems, I -can't see how it could be to the interest of the Soviet Union to make -any such effort. - -Since I have become Secretary of State I have seen no evidence of any -policy of assassination of leaders of the free world on the part of the -Soviets, and our intelligence community has not been able to furnish -any evidence pointing in that direction. - -I am sure that I would have known about such bits of evidence had they -existed but I also made inquiry myself to see whether there was such -evidence, and received a negative reply. - -I do think that the Soviet Union, again objectively considered, -has an interest in the correctness of state relations. This would -be particularly true among the great powers, with which the major -interests of the Soviet Union are directly engaged. - -Mr. RANKIN. Could you expand on that a little bit so that others than -those who deal in that area might understand fully what you mean? - -Secretary RUSK. Yes; I think that although there are grave differences -between the Communist world and the free world, between the Soviet -Union and other major powers, that even from their point of view there -needs to be some shape and form to international relations, that it -is not in their interest to have this world structure dissolve into -complete anarchy, that great states and particularly nuclear powers -have to be in a position to deal with each other, to transact business -with each other, to try to meet problems with each other, and that -requires the maintenance of correct relations and access to the -leadership on all sides. - -I think also that although there had been grave differences between -Chairman Khrushchev and President Kennedy, I think there were evidences -of a certain mutual respect that had developed over some of the -experiences, both good and bad, through which these two men had lived. - -I think both of them were aware of the fact that any Chairman of the -Soviet Union and any President of the United States necessarily bear -somewhat special responsibility for the general peace of the world. - -Indeed without exaggeration, one could almost say the existence of the -Northern Hemisphere in this nuclear age. - -So that it would be an act of rashness and madness for Soviet leaders -to undertake such an action as an active policy. Because everything -would have been put in jeopardy or at stake in connection with such an -act. - -It has not been our impression that madness has characterized the -actions of the Soviet leadership in recent years. - -I think also that it is relevant that people behind the Iron Curtain, -including people in the Soviet Union and including officials in the -Soviet Union, seemed to be deeply affected by the death of President -Kennedy. - -Their reactions were prompt, and I think genuine, of regret and sorrow. -Mr. Khrushchev was the first to come to the Embassy to sign the book of -condolences. There were tears in the streets of Moscow. Moscow Radio -spent a great deal of attention to these matters. - -Now they did come to premature conclusions, in my judgment, about -what this event was and what it meant in terms of who might have been -responsible for it--and ideological effect has crept into that. - -But I had the impression that the regret was genuine and that the -ordinary Soviet citizen joined with ordinary people in other parts of -the world in feeling the loss of the President in a very genuine sense. - -Mr. RANKIN. There has been some suggestion that possibly the leadership -of the Soviet Union would not have been politically interested in the -death of the President but possibly a distant wing of the Party might -have been so involved. - -Can you give us any light on that, Mr. Secretary. - -The CHAIRMAN. By suggestion you mean rumor? - -Mr. RANKIN. In the newspapers, and things of that kind, rumor. - -Secretary RUSK. I haven't been able to put a rational structure behind -that possibility. If there are dissident elements their primary problem -is within the Soviet Union. - -If these dissident elements were aiming to change the present -Government of the Soviet Union or its leadership or to return to an -early range of policy by the elimination of present leadership or -seizure of control, I don't quite see how the elimination of the -President of the United States could contribute to that purpose. - -I would also suppose that in their kind of system such elements would -be under pretty close supervision and surveillance and they would have -limited opportunities for the kind of action that would be organized in -a way in this direction, although that is a matter of some speculation. - -But, I would doubt very much that such dissident elements would have a -motive or very much of an opportunity. Again, I have seen no evidence -pointing in that direction. - -Mr. RANKIN. How could you tell us in regard to Cuba in the same general -way, your opinion and knowledge of any information or credible evidence? - -Secretary RUSK. Well, I would again repeat that the overriding -consideration is to make every possible effort to find evidence and -follow the evidence to wherever it leads. - -I think it is, at least for me, more difficult to try to enter into -the minds of the present leadership in Cuba than, perhaps, even of the -present leadership of the Soviet Union. We have had very few contacts, -as the Commission knows, with the present Government of Cuba. - -But again, I have seen no evidence that seems to point in that -direction. - -There were some exchanges, with which the Commission is familiar, -that seemed to be--seemed to come to another conclusion. But I would -think that objective considerations would mean that it would be even -greater madness for Castro or his government to be involved in any such -enterprise than almost for anyone else, because literally the issue of -war and peace would mean the issue of the existence of his regime and -perhaps of his country might have been involved in that question. - -We were under the impression that there was very considerable concern -in Cuba as to whether they would be held responsible and what the -effect of that might be on their own position and their own safety. - -But I have seen no evidence that points to involvement by them, and -I don't see objective facts which would seem to make it in their -interests to remove Mr. Kennedy. - -You see, this embarks upon, in any event it would embark upon, an -unpredictable trail for them to go down this path, but I would think -again the Commission would wish to examine the evidence as it has been -doing with meticulous care and follow the evidence in these matters. - -Mr. RANKIN. After the assassination, did you have direct communications -with Ambassador Thomas Mann while he was still Ambassador at Mexico? - -Secretary RUSK. Yes; we had a number of exchanges with Ambassador Mann -connected with the presence in Mexico of Mr. Oswald. - -I say those messages, and over a period of some days had daily -consultations about them with our Deputy Under Secretary for -Political Affairs, Mr. U. Alexis Johnson. Mr. Johnson is my principal -representative in our dealings with the various intelligence and -security agencies of the government and with the Pentagon, and he has -an office very near mine on the seventh floor of the Department of -State. - -These exchanges raised questions of the most far-reaching character -involving the possibility of the implications of another government, -and so I had a very deep personal interest in that at the time. - -Our principal concern was to be sure that the FBI and the CIA who were -the principal agencies investigating this matter would have every -possible facility at their disposal, and would--and that our Ambassador -would be given the fullest support from us in facilitating the -investigation at the Mexican end. - -So I was for a period, until this particular trail ran its course, very -much involved in those exchanges. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you have any commentary that you want to make about -those exchanges other than what you have given us? - -Secretary RUSK. I think not, sir. I think that the materials, the -information developed in those exchanges are before the Commission, and -I believe the Commission has had a chance to inquire into them both as -I understand both here and in Mexico with the appropriate agencies and -I would think that the Commission's conclusions on that would be more -valuable than mine because I have not put together all the pieces to -draw finished conclusions from them. - -Mr. RANKIN. One of the Commissioners saw a newspaper story shortly -after the assassination saying "The Voice of America beaming its -message into Russia immediately blamed the reactionary rightwing -movements after Kennedy's death." - -Do you know anything about that matter or what the source of it might -have been? - -Secretary RUSK. No; I have not anticipated that question so that I -could have a chance to investigate it, but I will, if I may, Mr. Chief -Justice, file a report with the Commission on that point. - -I can say now that there was never any policy guidance from the -Department of State or from the leadership of the Voice of America -suggesting that any broadcasters take that line. - -It is possible, and this is purely speculative at the moment, that -the Voice of America in repeating a great many news accounts, as it -frequently does in its overseas broadcasts, may have repeated some -news accounts from this country, among which might have been a story -to that effect from one source or another, but I would like if I may, -sir, an opportunity to investigate that point and make a report to the -Commission. - -The CHAIRMAN. You may do that, Mr. Secretary. - -Representative FORD. May I ask a question? Have we received in the -Commission all of the Voice of America broadcasts that were made over a -period of 2 to 7 days involved in this incident? - -Mr. RANKIN. I don't know of any. - -Representative FORD. I think the Commission ought to have them for our -own analysis as well as the analysis of the Secretary of State. - -Mr. RANKIN. Is that under your jurisdiction? - -Secretary RUSK. Yes; indeed I could provide that. - -Mr. RANKIN. If you will, please. - -Secretary RUSK. The Commission might also be interested in either -digests or the fuller materials on world reactions to the President's -assassination. - -I have here, for example, a daily summary of the 26th of November -1963, on foreign radio and press reaction which gives some interesting -treatment about this behind the Iron Curtain. - -I would be happy to furnish the Commission with any material of that -sort which you might wish. - -Mr. RANKIN. We would appreciate having that. - -The CHAIRMAN. Very well, thank you, Mr. Secretary. - -Representative FORD. Would that include the Voice of Moscow or whatever -they call it over there? - -Secretary RUSK. Yes, sir. - -Representative FORD. From the outset of the events that took place? - -Secretary RUSK. Yes, sir; you might just wish to look at the first two -or three paragraphs here to get a sample of the kind of summary that -that involves. - -Mr. DULLES. Was that prepared in the Department or by the Foreign -Broadcast Information Service? - -Secretary RUSK. This particular one is from the Foreign Broadcast -Information Service. We also have another one. We also have another one -from within the Department which is also available in terms. - -Representative FORD. I think it would be useful to have both for a -period of about a week or so. I realize this is a summary covering -several days. I think I saw that at the time. - -Mr. RANKIN. There was another statement in the paper apparently -purporting to be official that one of the Commissioners asked me to -ask about and that was the Washington Post, Sunday, November 24, 1963, -which was quoted by the Commissioner as, "Today in Washington State -Department officials said they have no evidence indicating involvement -of any foreign power in the assassination." - -Do you know anything about that or can you give us any information? - -Secretary RUSK. That was the view which we took at the time in -consultation with the investigative agencies. We did not then have -evidence of that sort nor do we now, and the implications of suggesting -evidence in the absence of evidence would have been enormous. - -Representative FORD. I don't understand that. - -Secretary RUSK. Well, for us to leave the impression that we had -evidence that we could not describe or discuss, when in fact we didn't -have the evidence on a matter of such overriding importance could have -created a very dangerous situation in terms of---- - -Representative FORD. Wouldn't it have been just as effective to say no -comment? - -Secretary RUSK. Well, unfortunately, under the practices of the press, -no comment would have been taken to confirm that there was evidence. I -mean, that would have been the interpretation that many would have put -upon no comment. - -But, Mr. Ford, I think the key thing is that at the time that statement -was made we did not have such evidence. I mean, this was a factual -statement at that time. - -Representative FORD. But, at that time, this was 2 days after the -assassination, you really didn't have much time to evaluate all of the -evidence. - -Secretary RUSK. Well, that is correct. But if the evidence or the known -facts had changed certainly that type of statement would have changed. - -In other words, such statements are based upon the situation as known -at the time the statements are made. - -Representative FORD. This statement then appeared in the Sunday -morning, November 24 issue or edition of the Washington Post. That was -a statement issued certainly on the 23d of November because it had to -be in order to get in the Sunday edition of the Post. So, that is 24 -hours after the assassination. - -Secretary RUSK. That is correct, sir, and this statement was made on -the basis of such information as was available to us in the first 24 -hours. - -Mr. RANKIN. I was also asked to inquire whether that was an official -statement if under your responsibility or if you could tell me who -would be responsible for it? - -Secretary RUSK. Well, I would have to check the actual source of the -statement. But I would have no present doubt that it was an officer of -the Department who was authorized to make that and for which I would be -fully responsible. - -Mr. RANKIN. That is all I have. - -Mr. DULLES. Could I ask a question in connection with that? - -The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Dulles. - -Mr. DULLES. There was some evidence presented here quite recently when -the district attorney of Dallas was here with regard to a message -from Washington, from the White House to the attorney general of -Texas, who was also here the other day before the Commission, on this -point: A rumor had reached Washington that in preparing the indictment -there, they were going to put in some reference to an international -conspiracy. As a matter of fact, when that was run down it was not -a correct rumor. But when that reached Washington, the reaction was -rather strong and I think entirely understandable, and word went -back to Dallas from high quarters that that should not, hoped that -that would not be included in the legal proceedings and papers that -were filed in connection with the assassination of the President and -charging---- - -Mr. RANKIN. Unless there was evidence to support it. - -Mr. DULLES. Unless there was evidence to support it. And the district -attorney, who was here, testified that he had never considered adding -that into it, putting that in the proceedings because if you put it in -you had to prove it, and it is not necessary at all. All you need to do -is allege a murder with intent, and so forth, and so on. So that that -was all pretty well cleared up. - -Mr. DULLES. Did that ever reach your attention, did you know anything -about that? - -Secretary RUSK. I don't personally recall that particular message. I do -recall---- - -Mr. DULLES. That took place, I think before you got back, because that -took place on the evening of the 22d. - -Secretary RUSK. I didn't arrive until---- - -Mr. DULLES. You didn't get back until the 23d? - -Secretary RUSK. Until the early morning of the 23d. - -Mr. DULLES. Yes. - -Secretary RUSK. I do recall being concerned if several different -authorities and agencies undertook investigations that would cut across -each other's bow or make it difficult to elicit the cooperation of -people outside the United States whose cooperation we might need in -matters of that sort, I felt myself at that time there ought to be a -complete and absolutely thorough investigation by the most responsible -authorities and I was glad to see that brought into some order at the -time but I don't remember the particular message you are talking about. - -Representative FORD. Could you check to see if somebody in the -Department of State made such a call or made such a contact? - -Secretary RUSK. Yes; I will be be glad to. - -Representative FORD. And if so so report it for the proceedings? - -Secretary RUSK. Yes, indeed; I will be glad to. - -Mr. CHAYES. I may be able to supply some information to the Commission -on this point because during the night of the 22d when we were -examining the data in my office, the files, I did receive a call from -Mr. Katzenbach who said that they had heard at the Justice Department, -that there was a possibility that this kind of an element would get -into the indictment, and said that--I can't remember the exact words -that he used--but he conveyed to me that he regarded this as not very -good, in the absence of evidence to support it, and said that he was -seeking to have Mr. Saunders, who is the U.S. attorney in Dallas, -admitted to the councils of the State officials there so that they -could discuss these matters as time went on. And that he would try to, -I don't know exactly again what he said, but that he would try to see -that in the absence of evidence no such allegation was made in the -indictment. - -I didn't in any sense authorize, and I certainly couldn't direct him -to do anything of this kind but my recollection of my reaction is -that I acquiesced fully in what he was proposing to do, and raised no -objection to it. - -I think at sometime during that evening I reported this conversation to -Mr. Ball. I am less clear about this part of the recollection, but I -think I did report the conversation to Mr. Ball, much in the same way -as I am reporting it to you, and he saw no objection either. - -I think that is the entire State Department side of that particular -transaction. - -Representative FORD. Would you check, however, Mr. Secretary, to see if -there is anything further in this regard? - -Secretary RUSK. Yes; I will. - -Representative FORD. Do I understand that you or somebody for you is -to summarize the USIA Voice of America broadcast that went out for the -first 3 or 4 days subsequent to the assassination and that would be -submitted for the record? - -Secretary RUSK. Yes, indeed. And we can, of course, have available -to the Commission such tapes or transcripts as we have of all those -broadcasts in full, but I think we can start with the summary and then -you can have the other materials if you wish to follow up particular -points. - -Representative FORD. Would they be voluminous, the originals? - -Secretary RUSK. I would think they would be fairly voluminous, but not -unmanageably so. - -Representative FORD. I would say for at least the first 24 hours it -might be well to have the full text of the USIA Voice of America -material that was sent out. - -Secretary RUSK. Right. - -Representative FORD. Do I also understand for the record that we are -to have this or others like it showing what the press reaction was -throughout the world? - -Secretary RUSK. Yes, sir. - -Now, the Foreign Broadcast Information Service material would be much -more voluminous because there we are receiving broadcasts in the clear -from most broadcasting countries. But we will be in touch with your -staff to show them everything that we have, and they can have any -part of it they wish or we will be glad to give any help in terms of -digesting or summarizing. - -Mr. RANKIN. We have been furnished some information, considerable -information, about the attitude of the foreign press as it was recited -and has come to the attention of the people from time to time, but I -don't believe we have right close, the Voice of America we don't have -right close to the date of the assassination. - -The CHAIRMAN. I read a sizable file on that that came from the State -Department and very early in the life of the Commission that seemed to -encompass all of the statements that were made around the world at that -time. - -Secretary RUSK. Yes. - -Representative FORD. This document which you handed me, Mr. Secretary, -is for Tuesday, 26 November 1963. Are these done on a daily basis? - -Secretary RUSK. I think that one was a summary of the first 2 or 3 -days, but I would---- - -Mr. DULLES. Summaries are done from time to time and there are daily -reports from Foreign Broadcasting Information Service covering the -Soviet Union and the satellites and another volume covering China and -southeast Asia, and so forth and so on. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Secretary, could you give us a brief description of -that, we have been calling it this and these. - -Secretary RUSK. Yes; this is a daily report or rather a supplement to -the daily report put out by the Foreign Broadcast Information Service -in what is called its world reaction series. - -This apparently is a supplement to the foreign radio and press reaction -to the death of President Kennedy, and the accession of President -Johnson, prepared on 26 November 1963. - -This is a daily report, the subject matter of which varies from day -to day, but I will be glad to draw together not only such digests as -we have, but also to see what we have retained in terms of the actual -broadcasts from other countries so that although it may be voluminous -it might have some material of interest to the Commission or its staff. - -Representative FORD. I think it would be particularly pertinent as far -as the Soviet Union or any of the bloc countries or Cuba, anything in -this area that could be pulled together and included in the record, -which I think would be very helpful. - -Secretary RUSK. All right, sir. - -Representative FORD. I have the recollection that some people have -alleged that Castro either prior to or subsequent to the assassination, -made some very inflamatory speech involving President Kennedy. - -Do you have any recollection of that? - -Secretary RUSK. I don't have a recollection of a speech specially -related to time. He has made more than his share of inflamatory -speeches about this country and its leaders. But I will be glad to -furnish the Commission a schedule of his speeches, and the character of -these speeches and the texts if we have them during this period. - -Representative FORD. There was one that I vaguely recall, either prior -to or subsequent to the assassination that some people construed to be -directed specifically at President Kennedy, and I think if there was -such a speech that the Commission ought to have it and it ought to be -analyzed by the staff and by the Commission. - -Secretary RUSK. We will be very glad to look into that and furnish you -with speeches made during this period or during a substantial part of -the period on both sides of the November 22 date. - -I gather the Commission has Mr. Danielle's interview with Mr. Castro on -the subject. You have the published report of that. - -Mr. DULLES. Was that the long interview with Castro? - -Secretary RUSK. Yes; that was as close to any reflection of a thing -that he might have said personally about this that went beyond the kind -of broadcast speeches you referred to that I have seen, but---- - -Mr. DULLES. Do you have that available? - -Secretary RUSK. We certainly can get it. - -Mr. DULLES. It was in the press I guess at the time. Maybe you have a -fuller copy than we have. - -Secretary RUSK. Yes; it was a rather extensive interview. - -Mr. CHAYES. I think the staff has it already. - -Secretary RUSK. I see. - -Mr. RANKIN. I think Commissioner Ford is referring to that speech of -Mr. Castro which is sometimes called the slip-of-the-tongue speech that -referred in a way that may have some implications in it. I think that -might help you to identify it, Mr. Secretary. - -Secretary RUSK. It might be well for me, just to complete the sense of -the atmosphere, to accompany that with the timing and the nature of -statements and speeches that were being made on our side as a part of -this continuing rather acrimonious discourse with Cuban leadership. But -I will provide full information on this. - -Mr. RANKIN. We would appreciate it so it would give a complete picture. - -Secretary RUSK. Yes. - -Representative FORD. Do I understand now, Mr. Rankin, that what the -Secretary provides will be put in the record as exhibits? - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Chairman, I would like to offer to do that if that is -satisfactory, as a part of this record. - -The CHAIRMAN. Yes, sir; it might be admitted. - -Representative FORD. There is one question that I think ought to be -cleared up, you mentioned Mr. Mann who was our Ambassador at Mexico -at that time. The way the record stands now it could be construed by -somebody who wanted to so construe it that the country in which he -served us was involved in what he was reporting. I think it ought to be -made clear that is not the case. - -Secretary RUSK. That is absolutely correct, sir. We never had the -slightest view that Mexico was involved in this. The problem, the -question arose because Mr. Oswald had been in Mexico, and was known to -have been in touch with some Cubans at the Cuban Embassy in Mexico. -But the Mexican authorities gave us complete and the most helpful -cooperation in full investigation of this matter. - -The CHAIRMAN. Are there any further questions? Mr. Dulles. - -Mr. DULLES. Had you finished? - -Mr. RANKIN. Yes; I have. - -(Discussion off the record.) - -The CHAIRMAN. Are we ready to go back on the record? - -All right, the Commission will be in order. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Chief Justice, I should like to offer in evidence at -this point Commission Exhibit No. 984 being the communication from -yourself as Chairman of the Commission to the Secretary of State, dated -March 11, 1964, and the Note Verbale in regard to the inquiries of the -Soviet Union. - -And Commission Exhibit No. 985 being the responses of the Soviet Union, -including all of the medical as well as all other responses together -with the transmittal letters from the Soviet Union and from the State -Department. - -The CHAIRMAN. They may be admitted under those numbers. - -(Commission Exhibits Nos. 984 and 985 were marked for identification -and received in evidence.) - -Mr. RANKIN. I would like to assign, Mr. Chief Justice, Commission -Exhibit No. 986, if I may, to those prior communications from the files -of the Soviet Embassy in Washington that were furnished to us by the -State Department. - -The CHAIRMAN. They may be admitted under that number. - -(Commission Exhibit No. 986 was marked for identification and received -in evidence.) - -Mr. RANKIN. Commission Exhibit No. 986 will be the copies of the -records from the Soviet Embassy in Washington that were supplied to the -Commission earlier by the State Department as a part of the records -that were furnished to us by the State Department. - -The CHAIRMAN. Those were the ones that were voluntarily offered by the -Russians before any request was made of them? - -Mr. RANKIN. Yes, Mr. Chairman. - -The CHAIRMAN. They may be admitted under that number. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Secretary, will you tell us whether you know of -any credible evidence to show or establish or tending to show any -conspiracy either domestic or foreign involved in the assassination of -President Kennedy? - -Secretary RUSK. No; I have no evidence that would point in that -direction or to lead me to a conclusion that such a conspiracy existed. - -Mr. RANKIN. That is all I have. - -The CHAIRMAN. Are there any further questions, gentlemen? - -If not, thank you very much, Mr. Secretary. - -Secretary RUSK. Thank you very much, Mr. Chief Justice and gentlemen. - - -TESTIMONY OF FRANCES G. KNIGHT - -The CHAIRMAN. The Commission will be in order. - -Mr. Coleman, will you state to Miss Knight, please, the reason we asked -her to come here today? - -Mr. COLEMAN. Miss Frances G. Knight is the head of the Passport Office -of the State Department. - -Miss KNIGHT. Yes, sir. - -Mr. COLEMAN. We want to ask her concerning the standard operating -notice with respect to the lookout card system which was in effect as -of November--as of February 28, 1962, and we also wanted to ask her -concerning the decision of the Passport Office that Mr. Oswald had not -expatriated himself and, therefore, he should be reissued his passport. - -Miss KNIGHT. Yes, sir. - -The CHAIRMAN. Would you raise your right hand and be sworn, Miss Knight? - -Do you solemnly swear the testimony you are about to give before the -Commission shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the -truth, so help you God? - -Miss KNIGHT. I do. - -The CHAIRMAN. Be seated. Mr. Coleman will ask you the questions. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Miss Knight, will you state your name for the record? - -Miss KNIGHT. Frances G. Knight. - -Mr. COLEMAN. What is your present address? - -Miss KNIGHT. Home address? - -Mr. COLEMAN. Yes. - -Miss KNIGHT. 2445 Wyoming Avenue NW. - -Mr. COLEMAN. What is your present position? - -Miss KNIGHT. I am Director of the Passport Office in the Department of -State. - -Mr. COLEMAN. How long have you occupied that position? - -Miss KNIGHT. Since May 1, 1955. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Do you have any independent recollection of having ever -looked at any files dealing with Lee Harvey Oswald prior to the time of -the assassination? - -Miss KNIGHT. No, sir. - -Mr. COLEMAN. I would like to mark as Commission Exhibit No. 989 a -memorandum from Frances G. Knight to Mr. William O. Boswell, which -bears the date of December 26, 1961, and is found among the State -Department file No. XI, document No. 12 and ask you whether you have -seen the original of that document? (Commission Exhibit No. 989 was -received in evidence.) - -Miss KNIGHT. Sir, you want to know whether I personally saw this before -it went out? - -Mr. COLEMAN. Yes. - -Miss KNIGHT. This is a little difficult to answer. There are a great -many communications that go out over my name particularly a memo of -this sort, which would be prepared in the Passport Office, and I -would--I might sign it or if I were not in the office at the time my -deputy might sign it for me. - -But these communications usually go out over my name. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Well, Miss Knight, does that document---- - -Miss KNIGHT. This one looks as though it was initialed by me because it -has the type of a "K" that I make. - -Mr. COLEMAN. That document indicates that it was prepared by Miss B. -Waterman, is that correct? - -Miss KNIGHT. There is no indication here, sir. It was prepared in the -foreign division of the Passport Office, but there is no indication on -this communication as to the individual who prepared it. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Would you be kind enough to read what is on the memorandum -into the record, please? - -Miss KNIGHT. Yes, sir; the memorandum is addressed to "SY," Mr. William -O. Boswell from PPT--Frances G. Knight, subject "Lee Harvey Oswald." - -"We refer to the Office Memorandum of July 27, 1961, from SY which -stated that the subject 'renounced United States citizenship'. Mr. -Oswald attempted to renounce United States citizenship but did not, -in fact, renounce United States citizenship. Our determination on the -basis of the information and evidence presently of record is that Mr. -Oswald did not expatriate himself, and remains a citizen of the United -States." - -The blue file copy would indicate who prepared this memorandum in the -Passport Office and who signed it. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Do you have the file copy? - -Miss KNIGHT. I don't think we have it with us, do we? [Note: The file -copy was shown to Miss Knight.] The memorandum was prepared by Mr. H. -F. Kupiec, who is in the Foreign Operations Division of the Passport -Office. It was signed for me by Mr. Hickey, who is the deputy. - -Mr. COLEMAN. You have no independent recollection of ever having seen -that document prior to the assassination? - -Miss KNIGHT. No, sir. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Did you ever participate or make any decision as to -whether Lee Harvey Oswald lost his citizenship? - -Miss KNIGHT. No. - -Mr. COLEMAN. In 1959? - -Miss KNIGHT. No. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Did you ever make any personal decision or participate in -any decision as to whether he should be reissued a passport in July -1961? - -Miss KNIGHT. No. - -Mr. COLEMAN. I, therefore, take it you personally had nothing or you -can't recall anything that you had to do with Lee Harvey Oswald up to -the time of the assassination? - -Miss KNIGHT. No; I had nothing to do with the papers that were involved -at that time. - -Mr. COLEMAN. But the decision that he had not renounced his citizenship -was made in your department? - -Miss KNIGHT. It was made in the Passport Office by the citizenship -lawyers. The two persons who were primarily involved were members of -the staff, of long-standing service and with a great deal of experience -in citizenship law and in expatriation. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Could you state the names, their names for the record? - -Miss KNIGHT. Yes; Miss Bernice Waterman, and Mr. John T. White. - -Both of those employees have now retired from the Passport Office. - -Mr. COLEMAN. You said both were lawyers? - -Miss KNIGHT. Miss Waterman was not a lawyer but she worked directly -under Mr. John T. White who was a lawyer in charge of the Foreign -Operations Division. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Well, since the assassination of President Kennedy, have -you had occasion to review the passport file. - -Miss KNIGHT. Well, the first time that I actually had an opportunity to -look through the passport file was last Saturday. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Did you get a chance to read each document in the file? - -Miss KNIGHT. I read through the file; yes. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Did you have occasion to form any judgment whether based -upon the information that was in the file you would have reached the -same decision as Waterman and White did with respect to Oswald? - -Miss KNIGHT. Yes; I certainly did. From that standpoint, I did go -through the papers carefully. I am convinced that insofar as any -expatriative act is concerned that we made the only decision that we -could. The same decision was reached by the consul who interviewed Mr. -Oswald in Moscow, at the Embassy, and I think, with all the facts on -record, we had to come to the conclusion that Oswald did not perform -any expatriative act. - -(At this point, the Chief Justice left the hearing room.) - -Miss KNIGHT (continuing). May I ask one question, please? - -Mr. COLEMAN. Yes. - -Miss KNIGHT. I have a statement here, some notes that I prepared this -morning which are based on the information I read in the file. These -are some comments I would make and I think they may be helpful to you. -Could I refer to them or possibly read them to you? - -Would that be all right? - -Mr. COLEMAN. That would be fine. - -Miss KNIGHT. After reading the file---- - -Mr. COLEMAN. And by "file" you mean the passport file? - -Miss KNIGHT. The passport file of Lee Harvey Oswald, I would say the -handling of the case would break down into three separate actions: One, -the adjudication of his citizenship; two, the documentation of his -repatriation loan, and, three, the issuance of a passport to Oswald on -June 25, 1963. - -As I understand it, the Commission has been furnished with detailed -information covering all these actions, and in addition we have -supplied replies which were prepared in the Passport Office by our -staff to the specific questions that were posed by the Commission. - -My comments on the citizenship and expatriation phase of the Oswald -case are these: Insofar as the Oswald citizenship status is concerned, -it is my firm belief that Lee Harvey Oswald, despite his statement to -the U.S. consul in Moscow, that he wished to divest himself of U.S. -citizenship, did not do so. - -At no time did he sign the required documents which were available to -him for that purpose. Oswald was a 20-year-old ex-Marine, and the U.S. -consul made it quite clear in his despatches to the Department, that -Oswald was arrogant and aggressive, and angry and unstable. - -I had not had the opportunity to read the file until last Saturday, -because it was taken out of the Passport Office on November 23, 1963. -However, I do not recall---- - -Mr. DULLES. By whom? - -Miss KNIGHT. It was asked for and sent to the Administrator of the -Bureau of Security and Consular Affairs, Mr. Abba Schwartz. I want to -make a correction on that date. It was on November 22 that the file was -taken out of the Passport Office. Late at night, I believe. - -I do not recall that the file, the passport folder, contained any -information that would tag Oswald as a U.S. Communist, or a Communist -sympathizer prior to his visit to the U.S. Embassy in Moscow, and there -is no record that he engaged in any public denunciation of the United -States. - -During the time Oswald's citizenship status was in question, that is -from the time he had advised the U.S. consul in Moscow that he wished -to renounce his citizenship, to the time it was determined he had not -committed an expatriative act, a period of almost 2 years, his file was -flagged and according to our records a lookout card was ordered for the -lookout file. - -On March 28, 1960, the Passport Office advised the U.S. Embassy in -Moscow that "An appropriate notice has been placed in the lookout card -section of the Passport Office in the event that Mr. Oswald should -apply for documentation at a post outside the Soviet Union." - -Mr. COLEMAN. We will note for the record that document you are -referring to--I think it is the Operations Memorandum of May 23, -1960--has been given Commission Exhibit No. 963. - -Miss KNIGHT. In view of the volume of our work it would be impossible -at this late date for a clerk in the Passport Office to remember -whether a card was actually made or not made. Apparently no card was -found in the 1961 search of the lookout file, but again it is possible -that such a card was misfiled. It is also possible if a card was made -it was destroyed in error, but whether there was a card made or not has -no bearing on the final outcome of the decision regarding the Oswald -citizenship. - -Mr. DULLES. May I ask a question there. Would you prefer to read this -entire document first? - -Miss KNIGHT. No; it is easier---- - -Mr. DULLES. Is it conceivable that the lookout card could have been -removed in 1961 when his passport was extended to return to the United -States? - -Under your procedure would that have been done? - -Miss KNIGHT. Under our procedure when he was issued the passport that -card would have been removed; yes. So that in 1961 there would not have -been a card in the file. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Even though the passport was issued specifically saying it -was only good for return to the United States and only good for 1 month. - -Miss KNIGHT. That is right. - -The passport was limited and could not be used beyond the time it was -limited for. - -Mr. DULLES. Would that have caused the card to be removed? - -Miss KNIGHT. Yes. - -Mr. DULLES. Issuance of that passport, even a limited passport would -have resulted in the card being withdrawn? - -Miss KNIGHT. The card would have been withdrawn at the time that his -citizenship was adjudicated, and when it was found that he had not -expatriated himself. The card which was put in the file related only to -his citizenship status. - -Mr. DULLES. That is what--somewhat earlier, that is several months -before the passport was extended? - -Miss KNIGHT. Oh, yes. - -Mr. COLEMAN. That would mean when he came back into the United States -and he then reapplied 2 days later for another passport it would have -gone through routinely and you would not have picked up the fact that -it was Oswald the defector that was now going to go back out of the -United States? - -Miss KNIGHT. Well, that would be possible, I think; yes. - -The experienced citizenship attorneys in the Passport Office, as well -as the U.S. consul in Moscow determined individually that Oswald had -not expatriated himself. His passport was renewed in May 1962, and -limited for return to the United States. - -In the adjudication of his citizenship, we can only deal with the -facts on record. The fact is that Oswald did not avail himself of the -prescribed procedure to renounce his U.S. nationality. - -In applying for his passport renewal, he stated under oath that he had -not committed an expatriative act. He denied an earlier statement that -he had applied for Soviet citizenship, and produced some evidence that -he had never been declared a Soviet citizen. - -Now, as far as the repatriation loan is concerned, the recording of -such a loan in the Passport office is a very routine procedure. - -Apparently there is some question as to whether a lookout card was -inserted in the lookout file at the time that the repatriation loan -was made to Oswald. The Passport Office must depend on the Office of -Finance to inform it with regard to repatriation loans. We require -certain information such as the name of the individual, the place and -date of birth, and other information which will identify the individual -in our files. - -It is very important that this information be complete and accurate -to guard against embarrassing situations which could develop from -misidentification. - -The criteria for the procedure were developed over several years by the -Office of Finance in cooperation with the Passport Office. Memorandum -between the Passport Office and the Office of Finance have been -provided to the Commission. - -The important one is dated January 16, 1962, and spells out the -criteria that we established by mutual consent. The Passport Office was -and is directly concerned with only two actions in repatriation cases. - -The insertion of an accurate and identifiable card in the lookout file -and the prompt removal of such a card when the loan has been repaid. - -Between August 1961 and December 1962 there was a purge of our lookout -file because the cards were so shoddy and unreadable that they had to -be refreshed. - -We call them cards. But they actually were not cards, merely slips of -pink paper 3 by 5 inches which were very badly worn and torn. - -More than 1 million applications are cleared over this file annually, -and it was imperative for us to find a system which would provide fast -and accurate clearances. - -During the renovation of this lookout file we found over 3,000 cards -relating to repatriation loans which were unidentifiable. They had been -in the file for decades, and they were of no value. They failed to give -us any leads to either the passport or security files. The individuals -involved may long since have passed to their reward. We did not know -what had happened to them so we took these cards out of the files. - -The record indicates that the Finance Office did not have Oswald's -place and date of birth, and did not advise the Passport Office of the -repatriation loan. - -There may have been efforts to obtain the information necessary to -make up a lookout card and this may have been suspended because Oswald -started a series of payments within 10 weeks of the loan. - -In any case, the Passport Office was notified when the loan was -fully paid about 6 months later, which was January 1963. Had a card -been placed in the lookout file it would have been removed upon such -notification. - -In other words, there would have been no card in the files relating to -the repatriation loan at the time Oswald made his application for a -passport at the New Orleans Passport Agency on June 24, 1963. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Miss Knight, when Oswald was issued the June 1963 -passport, I take it that there was no reference made to his passport -file, is that correct? - -Miss KNIGHT. No reference was made to his passport file. When he made -his application at the New Orleans agency it was handled in a routine -manner which I believe has been described to the Commission in some -documents we prepared for you. Oswald's name was included in a list -of applicants sent by teletype from New Orleans to Washington for -clearance over the lookout file. - -It was cleared within a day. There was no card relating to the -repatriation loan because Oswald had made his final payment on the loan -6 months prior to his application for the passport. - -There was no lookout card relating to loss of nationality because it -had been determined by that time he had committed no expatriative act -and therefore did not lose his citizenship. There was no lookout card -on Oswald indicating that he was under indictment or wanted by an -investigative agency or by the police. There was no fraud committed, -and there was no evidence that he was a member of the Communist Party -or active in it. In other words, there was nothing on record in our -files in June 1963 which would have given the Passport Office any -reason for delaying or denying Lee Harvey Oswald a passport. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Is it your testimony that if when the teletype had come in -from New Orleans, and someone in your office had gone and looked at the -passport file, and found out that Oswald attempted to defect in 1959 -and had made the statements that he made at the Embassy in 1959, that -nevertheless you feel that under the existing regulations you would -have to issue him a passport? - -Miss KNIGHT. Yes; we would. We wouldn't have had a lookout card based -on that at the time of his application for a passport because all the -situations we mentioned were resolved by that time. - -Mr. COLEMAN. I would like to show you a Commission document which has -already been marked as Exhibit No. 951, which is the standard operating -notice of the passport office, dated February 28, 1962, and ask you are -you familiar with this document? - -Miss KNIGHT. Excuse me for a second, please. There is one subsequent to -this. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Yes; but that is the one that was in effect as of June -1963, isn't it? - -Miss KNIGHT. Yes. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Attached thereto is a list which indicates the various -categories for the lookout card. - -Miss KNIGHT. That is right. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Would you look at category K, and I would like to ask you -whether the information which was in the file on Mr. Oswald, including -the FBI reports, which were in the file of June 1963, should have -caused Oswald to be put in category K? - -Miss KNIGHT. No; I don't think so. - -Mr. COLEMAN. How about category R? - -Mr. DULLES. Could you read category K? - -Miss KNIGHT. Yes; certainly. "K" is "Known or suspected Communist or -subversive". And "does not include those falling within categories O -and P". - -Mr. COLEMAN. Would you tell me what "O" and "P" categories are? - -Miss KNIGHT. "O" is a category of cards in which the FBI has special -interest. And "P" is also a project of the same sort. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Has the FBI ever put defectors in that category? - -Miss KNIGHT. Yes; we are given the names and we put a lookout card in -the file. But we are not told the reason why. We simply advise the -agency involved. - -Mr. COLEMAN. In other words, if the FBI merely sends you a report on a -particular person, that wouldn't cause you to put someone in "O" and -"P"? It is only when the FBI says put the person in "O" or "P"? - -Miss KNIGHT. Only when a request is specific. - -Mr. COLEMAN. How about category "R", if you will put that in the record. - -Representative FORD. May I ask a question first, what is the criteria -for the determination as to whether or not a person is a Communist? - -Miss KNIGHT. Well, the criteria are based on the information that -we get from the investigative agencies regarding his activities and -membership in the Communist Party. - -I think that it would help you very much if, for instance, I would -spell out what the lookout file actually is and how it operates in the -Passport Office and just what the categories mean to us. This would -only take a minute and I think this would clarify things. - -Mr. COLEMAN. I have picked out the categories that I think you would -have to consider, and that is the reason I put the question to you. - -Miss KNIGHT. The purpose of the file is rather important because it -is twofold. Its principal role is to identify the applications which -require other than routine adjudication in determining an applicant's -eligibility for passport services. The second role of the file is to -identify certain incoming applications and to insure expeditious action -on them. - -As background, I think it is important to know, that prior to 1955 the -lookout file was part of a master index comprising 20 million 3 by 5 -inch cards. - -Mr. DULLES. 20 million? - -Miss KNIGHT. 20 million. Within this voluminous file were 600,000 pink -slips. Now these were known in those days as "catch cards," and these -were withdrawn in 1958 to establish the nucleus of the present lookout -file. - -The reason for doing so was quite obvious. It was impossible and -totally impracticable to clear every passport application across a 20 -million card file which was expanding at the rate of 1 million cards a -year. - -Cards at that time were being made for every applicant and his -relatives who were listed on the passport application. Every individual -whose name appeared in any investigative report which was sent to the -Passport Office, whether or not the individual applied for a passport; -every individual who appeared before an investigative committee of -Congress, whether or not he applied for a passport; as well as persons -whose names appeared in such situations as gambling raids, lottery -winners, and so forth. These were all in the passport file, and part of -the master index. - -File experts from the General Services Administration estimated at that -time that 30 percent of this master index was misfiled. - -By a program of refinement in 1959 and 1960, the lookout file -was reduced to 415,000 cards. We felt we were reasonably safe in -disregarding catch cards on persons who were a hundred years old or -over. So these were eliminated from the files. - -From the standpoint of accuracy in identification, the cards that -remained still left much to be desired in the file. - -Now again I would say these were not "cards" in any sense that they had -physical substance. They were 3 by 5 inch slips of tissue-thin pink -paper. They were very mutilated and many of them were totally illegible. - -Many of them were of no significance since they contained no -identifying data, such as place or date of birth, no full names, no -reason for the inclusion in the file. As far as we could determine they -were not related to anything in the Passport Office. - -So further culling and screening reduced this basic file to the present -size of 250,000 cards. - -This project was very---- - -Mr. DULLES. Is that two or four? - -Miss KNIGHT. 250 now. - -Mr. DULLES. 250. It is different. - -Miss KNIGHT. We had reduced it to 450,000 and we culled it some more -and it is now 250,000. - -Mr. DULLES. That is a reduction from the earlier 450,000? - -Miss KNIGHT. That is right. This project was very time-consuming and -tedious but it had to be done, and it was completed in 1962, at which -time we transferred all the data on the cards we considered active onto -a permanent IBM key punch card system which was coded and legible. - -To relate this file, this tremendous file, to the Oswald case, I think -it should be remembered that the Passport Office is not a police -organization, nor is it an investigative agency. We must depend on -other sources in and out of the Government to supply us with the -information which we must adjudicate under the criteria of the passport -regulations. - -When we issued a passport to Oswald in June 1963 we felt that he had -not expatriated himself and that determination was made. - -Mr. COLEMAN. In 1963 you didn't make any judgment at all. He just -wasn't in the lookout file so you just issued it. You didn't make any -independent judgment at that time in 1963, did you? - -Miss KNIGHT. If we had thought he had expatriated himself we would have -had a card in his file. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Yes; but in 1963 no decision was made. - -Miss KNIGHT. There was no question raised. There was never a question -at that time. - -Mr. COLEMAN. It was never a question because your Office never looked -at the file. - -Miss KNIGHT. Not at the file, but his application was checked over the -lookout cards. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Yes. - -Miss KNIGHT. Oswald didn't owe money to the Government, and he was not -involved in fraud or criminal activity. So, in retrospect, I feel that -Oswald could have had a catch card inserted in the lookout file under -a very broad and undefined category which is right here, as number "R" -and that is, "Individuals whose actions do not reflect credit to the -United States abroad," but for practical reasons this category is very -narrowly construed in view of the hundreds of U.S. citizen bad-check -artists, the drunks, the con men, the psychotics who travel worldwide, -and so forth. - -My office is deluged with requests from irate U.S. citizens returning -from abroad asking us to do something about some of the people they -find traveling overseas. - -We have no such authority, and we are not in a position to determine -the good or bad behavior of U.S. citizens here or abroad. - -(At this point, Senator Cooper entered the hearing room.) - -I think it is a debatable question as to whether Oswald fell into this -broad category of "R" and finally there was no request in the file from -any Government agency or any area of the Government for a lookout card -on Oswald for this reason or any other reason at the time that his 1963 -passport was issued. - -Mr. DULLES. Who finally determines whether a lookout card should be -made? Would you determine that or in your office? - -Miss KNIGHT. That would be determined within our domestic operation -division, our foreign operation or our legal division. An adjudicator, -for instance, is the first person to make a decision. - -Mr. DULLES. If the FBI or CIA asked you to put in a card you would do -it? - -Miss KNIGHT. Yes, sir; and this is part of "O" and "P" project. - -Mr. DULLES. Would you read again that paragraph about Communist or -Communist sympathizer? - -Miss KNIGHT. Category K is, "Known or suspected Communist or -subversive." - -Mr. DULLES. And you interpret that pretty narrowly? - -Miss KNIGHT. Yes. - -Representative FORD. Why do you interpret it narrowly? - -Mr. DULLES. Well, this goes back to a question of passport regulations -and the decision, the Supreme Court decision in the Kent-Briehl case -and passport denials. I believe we sent you the regulations currently -in effect. - -Mr. COLEMAN. The record will note that it is attached to Commission -Exhibit No. 948, which is the letter from Mr. Chayes. - -Miss KNIGHT. Would you like an extra copy of it? - -Mr. DULLES. May I ask a further question there? When you issue a -passport limited solely to returning to the United States, isn't that -some indication that you don't want the fellow traveling around abroad? - -Miss KNIGHT. There would be some indication, yes, but there may be many -reasons for it. It may be a general indication that he should not be -traveling around abroad. - -Mr. DULLES. So that normally you wouldn't issue a passport with that -limitation and then let him come right into the Passport Office and -reissue a passport to go abroad. - -Miss KNIGHT. Well, if it is a case which merits a stop card we wouldn't -do it. But in this case of Oswald---- - -Mr. DULLES. In this case would there be a stop card? - -Miss KNIGHT. In the case of Oswald? - -Mr. DULLES. No; I mean in the case of anybody who is abroad and you -issue him a passport only to travel back to the United States, to get -him back to the United States, if then in the next week he went into -the Passport Office and wanted a passport to travel back to Europe, -which means Russia if he wants to go to Russia, would you issue him a -passport or would you not? - -Miss KNIGHT. I think that depends very much on the record that we would -have on him. - -The issuance of passports is pretty well defined in the new -regulations. I would say that a decade ago a passport application -for Oswald would have been denied, or at least it would have been -substantially delayed. - -But this was prior to the Supreme Court decision of June 16, 1958. -Prior to that there was very little challenge to the Secretary's -discretionary authority in the issuance of passports. - -But I think it is important to realize that the Supreme Court in -its decision held that there was no legislative authority for the -Secretary's regulations in denying a passport to persons supporting -the world Communist movement. The Court stated in that decision that -the freedom of travel is indeed an important aspect of the citizen's -liberty. - -Since that time Congress has made numerous attempts to provide -legislation to curb the travel of U.S. Communists, and those citizens -whose travel abroad is not in the best interests of the United States, -but for one reason or another Congress has failed to pass any such -legislation. - -On January 12, 1962, the Secretary of State promulgated passport -regulations which provide for the confrontation and full discovery in -all cases involving the curtailment of passport privileges. - -So, as a result, the Department's decisions in all passport cases have -to be based on an open record. - -It is quite evident that these regulations make it virtually impossible -to deny passports to U.S. Communists because the source and record and -details of their nefarious activities are not an open record, as you -well know, and quite obviously they cannot be made an open record by -the Government. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Don't you have a specific statute and a specific -regulation which says that if a person is a member of the Communist -Party after it has been required to register that you have to deny him -a passport? - -Miss KNIGHT. This is true, but with these regulations, we are directed -to issue passports to active members of the Communist Party despite the -fact that section 6 of the Internal Security Act prohibits the issuance -of passports to those individuals whom we have reason to believe or -know are members of the Communist Party. - -Mr. COLEMAN. What regulation requires you to issue them a passport? - -Miss KNIGHT. Well, the Department's regulations are very specific on -this point. They state and I quote, "In making its decision"---- - -Senator COOPER. Could you identify the regulation? - -Miss KNIGHT. Yes, sir; it is 51.138(b). - -Would you like me to read that section? - -Mr. COLEMAN. Yes. - -Miss KNIGHT. All right. - -"(b) The applicant shall, upon request by the hearing officer, confirm -his oral statements in an affidavit for the record. After the applicant -has presented his case, the Passport Office shall review the record -and advise the applicant of its decision. In making its decision, the -Passport Office shall not take into consideration confidential security -information that is not made available to the applicant in accordance -with paragraph (a) of this section. If the decision is adverse to the -applicant, he shall be notified in writing, and the notification shall -state the reasons for the decision. Such notification shall also inform -the applicant of his right to appeal to the Board of Passport Appeals -under section 51.139." - -Mr. COLEMAN. What in there says you have to issue a passport to a -person that you know is a member of the Communist Party after there has -been a decision that the Communist Party has to register under the 1950 -act? - -Miss KNIGHT. In accordance with these regulations we cannot consider -information in the passport file if that information is confidential -and can't be used in open court or in an open hearing. The information -on persons who are involved in the Communist activities is, for the -most part, confidential information and cannot be revealed in open -court. - -Mr. COLEMAN. You say, if you have an FBI report which says that "Mr. So -and So" is a member of the Communist Party, and that is in your record, -and if he applies for a passport, you have to issue him that passport? - -Miss KNIGHT. Under the regulations of the Department we would have to -issue him a passport if the information in the FBI report cannot be -made public. - -Representative FORD. There has to be information which is confidential, -however? - -Miss KNIGHT. Well, the information in the report and the determination -as to whether that information can be made public and can be used in -court is made by the investigative agency that provides it. - -Representative FORD. Well, if the agency, the security agency has -a card issued by the Communist Party to this individual, and that -information is given to the applicant, you can still deny this passport -under section 51.135, can't you? - -Miss KNIGHT. You mean if the FBI, let's say an FBI report, gave us -information that the person is an active member of the Communist Party? - -Representative FORD. That he has actually, just for illustrative -purposes, a card issued by the Communist Party and the Department gives -this information to the applicant, it is not confidential, it is given -to the applicant, can't you deny a passport under section 51.135? - -Miss KNIGHT. Yes; yes. - -Representative FORD. Well, then, I think the answer is that you do have -authority to deny passports to Communists where the information---- - -Miss KNIGHT. Is made available. - -Representative FORD. Is made available. - -Miss KNIGHT. Yes; where the information is made available and can be -used in an open hearing. - -But from a practical operation, this is very difficult to do because -most of the information in the FBI reports is confidential and by -bringing forth their informers they certainly destroy their security. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Miss Knight, the same regulation that is in effect today -was also the regulation in effect in 1963, isn't it? - -Miss KNIGHT. Yes. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Now, as of March 14, 1964, didn't the Department establish -another category for lookout cards, namely for defectors? - -Miss KNIGHT. Yes; we have that. I think that was provided to the -Commission. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Yes. - -Miss KNIGHT. Yes. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Now, you do that under whatever authority that you had as -of 1963, don't you? You haven't been given any additional congressional -authority, have you? - -Miss KNIGHT. No; but we haven't denied passports to any of them, either. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Does that mean that despite this memorandum from Mr. -Schwartz to you under date of March 14, 1964, if a known defector came -in and asked for a passport, you would issue him one today? - -Miss KNIGHT. No; we wouldn't issue. A card would be put in the lookout -file to indicate that this person was a defector, and in such a case -the file would go to Mr. Johnson's office, our legal counsel. It would -be referred to his security branch, and be adjudicated. However, I -don't believe that a passport could be denied to them on the basis of -that. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Now, you know that in October 1963 the Passport Office -received information that Mr. Oswald had been down to the Russian -Embassy in Mexico? - -Miss KNIGHT. That is correct. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Would that fact cause the Department to attempt to revoke -a passport which had already been issued? - -Miss KNIGHT. No, sir; because there are many U.S. citizens who go to -Soviet Embassies, and the fact he went there may have been for the -purpose of getting information; it certainly was not a reason to deny a -passport. - -Representative FORD. There aren't many people like Lee Harvey Oswald, -with a record of that background. It would seem to me that that, the -availability of that information, ought to have flagged some interest -some place in the State Department or the Passport Office. - -Miss KNIGHT. Well, in my opinion, passports are being issued today to -individuals whose activities and past record of behavior are patently -more detrimental to the security and best interests of the United -States than any report or any record that we had in the file of Lee -Harvey Oswald. - -Representative FORD. That may be true, and I might agree with you, but -we can only deal with the specific case, and it concerns me that this -information which was made available, somehow didn't get some attention -in the Passport Division. - -Miss KNIGHT. I think my answer to that is that there was attention -given to it but there was no action that could be taken on it. - -The fact that we gave attention to it is beside the point. - -If we had had a lookout card in the file, and under different -circumstances, there may have been some reason for seeking further -information. I do know that the FBI was reviewing his file at regular -intervals, and I think the file shows that. - -To get the full import of our action one would have to read the -security files and the records of certain individuals to whom we have -been forced to give passports, and put them beside the Oswald file. The -comparison would be very interesting. - -Senator COOPER. Might I ask just a few questions? - -First, let me say I missed part of the testimony because I was in the -Senate and could not come here until after we had voted. - -I am now looking at Federal Register, Title 22--Foreign Relations, -Chapter 1: Department of State, part 51, dealing with passports. This -title refers to the issuing officer. - -Who is the issuing officer? Does that mean you or those who are under -you, who are responsible to you? - -Miss KNIGHT. Well, this is a question. Up until recently, I think the -director of the Passport Office was considered the issuing officer. -However, passports are issued in the name of the Secretary of State, -who has the authority and the responsibility on passports. - -Senator COOPER. And you are responsible to the Secretary of State? - -Miss KNIGHT. Through the echelons. - -Senator COOPER. Yes. - -Now, Representative Ford and Mr. Dulles have gone into this, as well as -counsel, but I would like to pursue it just a little bit. - -Section 51.135, entitled "Denial of passports to members of Communist -organizations," states, "A passport shall not be issued to, or renewed -for, any individual who the issuing officer knows or has reason to -believe is a member of a Communist organization registered or required -to be registered under section 7 of the Subversive Activities Control -Act of 1950, as amended." - -Was there any evidence in the files of Lee Harvey Oswald which could -give to the issuing officer either the knowledge that he was a member -of a Communist organization or such evidence as would lead the issuing -officer to believe that he was? - -Miss KNIGHT. No, sir. - -Senator COOPER. Why do you say that? - -Miss KNIGHT. Because, there was nothing in the passport file or -in the reports that we received from investigative agencies that -would indicate that he had any Communist leanings or any Communist -affiliations prior to his sojourn in the Soviet Union. - -Senator COOPER. There wasn't anything in his file from the reports of -the State Department concerning his defection to Russia and his return -which indicated that he was a member of the Communist Party? - -Miss KNIGHT. No, sir. - -Senator COOPER. Or a Communist organization? - -Miss KNIGHT. No, sir. - -Senator COOPER. Was there anything in the files from the FBI or any -other security agency which would give you that information? - -Miss KNIGHT. None that I saw; no, sir. I do know that there were two -recent intelligence reports from the FBI, and they were dated October -31, 1963, and October 25, 1963, and these were logged into the Passport -Office on November 20, 1963, and on November 22, 1963, respectively. - -Senator COOPER. They were then, of course, would have been, received in -the office after the time. - -Miss KNIGHT. That was the date of the assassination. - -Senator COOPER. After the time that the passport had been renewed. - -Mr. COLEMAN. That included the information that he was active in the -Fair Play for Cuba Committee. - -Miss KNIGHT. That is correct, and these were referred to us by the -Office of Security, and then on 5:30 a.m. on November 23, 1963, these -reports were called for on an urgent basis by the Administrator of the -Bureau of Security and Consular Affairs and we delivered them to him at -approximately 7:30 that morning. - -I never saw these reports and no one in the Passport Office had an -opportunity to read them or see them. - -Senator COOPER. The point I am making is, am I correct or are you -correct, when you say at the time Oswald's passport was either issued -or renewed to make the trip to Mexico City, that there was no evidence -in his files of any kind which would indicate that he was a member of a -Communist organization? - -Miss KNIGHT. No, sir; there was nothing in the file. - -Senator COOPER. What weight would you give to the fact that he had -defected and had returned to the United States, and had claimed once -that he wanted to renounce American citizenship? Would that be a fact -to which you would give weight in determining whether or not you -believed he was a member of the Communist organization? - -Miss KNIGHT. Yes, sir; I understand your question. I did not adjudicate -the Oswald citizenship case. But I would say that the adjudicators must -have taken into consideration his instability which was reported in the -dispatches, his attitude, his age, he was 20 years old at the time, -and the fact that when he finally made his appeal to come back to the -United States, he denied that he had asked for Soviet citizenship, that -he was considered a Soviet citizen, and he further denied that he had -offered anybody information. - -He denied practically everything that he, in very bad temper, had told -the consul that he was going to do. This, I think, is fairly well -established in the document he signed, and which was sent to us when -his passport was renewed and limited for return to the United States. - -Senator COOPER. I am first directing my attention to the issuance or -renewal of the passport which enabled him to go to Mexico City. I want -to keep on that for a moment. - -Miss KNIGHT. He didn't have a passport for Mexico City. - -Senator COOPER. Not a passport for Mexico City. - -Mr. COLEMAN. He had the passport in June 1963. - -Senator COOPER. Yes; to go over to Cuba and different places. - -Miss KNIGHT. We did not know, and there was nothing, I think I am right -about this, there is nothing in our files to indicate that he went to -Cuba or that he went to the Cuban Embassy in Mexico City. I understand -this was brought out. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Yes; that is true. - -Miss KNIGHT. Is that right? - -Mr. DULLES. Not until October 1963. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Even then, Mr. Dulles, they didn't know. The notice they -got from Mexico only stated that he had been at the Soviet Embassy and -not that he had been over to the Cuban Embassy. - -Mr. DULLES. Is that correct? - -Mr. COLEMAN. Yes. - -Senator COOPER. The point I am trying to develop at some point in 1963 -prior to the assassination he went to the office in New Orleans. - -Miss KNIGHT. That is right, the New Orleans Passport Agency. - -Senator COOPER. And he secured a passport there. - -Miss KNIGHT. He applied for a passport. - -Senator COOPER. To travel, applied for a passport, to travel in a -number of countries. - -Miss KNIGHT. That is right. - -Senator COOPER. And that was issued to him. - -Miss KNIGHT. That is right. - -Senator COOPER. On the following day? - -Miss KNIGHT. That is right. - -Senator COOPER. At that time, of course, the issuing officer was under -the restrictions of the regulations here that we have been talking -about. What would the officer--would the officer in New Orleans have -any information available to him? - -Miss KNIGHT. No, sir. - -Senator COOPER. About Oswald? - -Miss KNIGHT. No, sir; the operation works like this: New Orleans is one -of eight passport agencies in the United States. They are connected -with the main office by teletype. Oswald made an application for a -passport at the New Orleans agency, and they TWX'd to us, his name and -identification--that is, date and place of birth, and so on. His name -was one on a list of names. There may have been 15 or 20 of them. - -Mr. COLEMAN. The record shows there were 25. - -Miss KNIGHT. 25. - -These names were then checked over the lookout file which I have -explained here. - -Senator COOPER. Here in Washington? - -Miss KNIGHT. Yes; and if there is no card in the lookout file, it is -presumed that he is clear, because if we had information that he was an -active Communist, or that we had reason to believe that there should -be further check on him, this would have been reflected in the lookout -file. There was no such card in the file. - -Senator COOPER. All right. At that time, then, when he had made his -application and the information was sent to your office, there was no -lookout card? - -Miss KNIGHT. No, sir. - -Senator COOPER. Which would indicate that he was a Communist or a -member of a Communist organization, registered, and so forth. And did -you have such a system then? - -Miss KNIGHT. Yes, sir. - -Senator COOPER. Of lookout cards? - -Miss KNIGHT. Yes, sir; we have had that system for a long time. - -Senator COOPER. Was your reason for not having a lookout card for -Oswald, that there wasn't anything in his file to indicate that he was -a member of a Communist organization? - -Miss KNIGHT. That is correct. - -Senator COOPER. Is that the reason? - -Miss KNIGHT. That is correct. Because the FBI reports which had come -to the Passport Office during his sojourn in the Soviet Union and -after, did not indicate that he was a Communist. As a matter of fact, -they were concerned with several other things, his mother's concern -regarding his whereabouts, the fact that he had made a declaration that -he wished to become a Soviet citizen; and the question of expatriation. -But there was nothing in the files to indicate that he had had any -contact or any active part in the Communist Party. - -Senator COOPER. The fact that he had married a Russian girl and brought -her to the United States have any significance in the determination -that the issuing officer would have to make? - -Miss KNIGHT. No. - -Senator COOPER. You are sure that the FBI nor any other security agency -had placed any information in that file which would fall within the -scope of this first section dealing with, applicable to passports? - -Miss KNIGHT. I am sure of that; yes, sir. - -Senator COOPER. Have you yourself examined those files? - -Miss KNIGHT. I examined the file last Saturday for the first time. - -Senator COOPER. And do you know who had charge of the file? - -Miss KNIGHT. The file was in the Passport Office up until November 22, -the day of the assassination. - -Senator COOPER. Where did it go then? - -Miss KNIGHT. It went to the Bureau of Security and Consular Affairs, to -Mr. Schwartz. - -Senator COOPER. Who is in charge there? - -Miss KNIGHT. Mr. Schwartz. He is the Administrator. - -Mr. EHRLICH. I might add he turned them over immediately, he turned -them over to Mr. Chayes who was authorized to take charge of all files -and they were maintained in the Office of the Legal Adviser. - -And anyone in the Department who wanted to review them was free to do -so but we kept them all in one place. - -Senator COOPER. Have you been testifying? - -Mr. EHRLICH. I have broken in. - -Senator COOPER. Just for the purpose of the record identify yourself. - -Mr. EHRLICH. I have not been sworn in. My name is Thomas Ehrlich, I am -Special Assistant to the Legal Adviser to the Department of State. - -Mr. DULLES. I might add Mr. Chayes testified in some detail that -he was asked by Mr. Ball, Acting Secretary of State, on the night, -afternoon, late afternoon and late evening of the assassination, to -get all the files regarding Oswald together and to prepare for him and -the Secretary of State, who was returning the next morning, a detailed -report on the whole Oswald case, and I assume that the file went from -you to Mr. Schwartz, to Mr. Chayes. - -And from there Mr. Chayes collected reports from other sources. - -Miss KNIGHT. That is right. - -Senator COOPER. I am not questioning any fact that these people -testified to but I think for the record it is important to know where -the file was and whether or not it is the same file, with the same -papers in it that were in existence on November 22, which you turned -over to your superior. - -Miss KNIGHT. Well, of course, we presume all the papers are in there. -The file was pretty thick, and, of course, it takes time to go over the -papers. We had not time to look at the file or to check it, and there -is no way of knowing whether any papers were taken in or out. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Senator Cooper, we have the files and we also have letters -from Mr. Chayes that to the best of his knowledge and ability every -piece of paper which the State Department had which in any way bore on -Oswald has now been turned over to the Commission and those letters -were marked today. - -Senator COOPER. I go a little further. - -Look at 51.136, "Limitations on issuance of passports to certain other -persons. - -"In order to promote and safeguard the interests of the United States, -passport facilities, except for direct and immediate return to the -United States, shall be refused to a person when it appears to the -satisfaction of the Secretary of State that the person's activities -abroad would: (a) Violate the laws of the United States; (b) be -prejudicial to the orderly conduct of foreign relations; or (c) -otherwise be prejudicial to the interests of the United States." - -Now, at the time this passport was issued to Oswald in New Orleans, was -there any information in his passport file about his conduct in New -Orleans in connection with the Fair Play for Cuba Committee? - -Miss KNIGHT. There was nothing in the passport file on that. It is my -understanding that there were two FBI reports that had come in and they -were logged into the Passport Office on November 20 and November 22. - -Senator COOPER. I know, but I am thinking of June 24, 1963. This -decision to issue a passport to Oswald to go to Mexico and various -other countries was made on when? - -Mr. COLEMAN. June 24, 1963. - -Senator COOPER. Was there any information in his file relative to his -participation in the Fair Play for Cuba Committee in New Orleans? - -Miss KNIGHT. No, sir. - -Senator COOPER. The first information that came to the office came in -November? - -Miss KNIGHT. November 20 and 22. - -Senator COOPER. And November 22. - -Miss KNIGHT. And I think, Senator, you would be interested to know that -these FBI reports are sent to us by the Office of Security. - -A large volume of these reports come to us in the Passport Office on a -very routine basis. - -The last 6 months of 1963 over 3,000 such reports were received, that -is 500 security reports a month, and in order to be effective and -to render the ultimate in security these reports should be read by -individuals who are knowledgeable; who are trained to spot information -of security significance. - -The staff that is assigned to this task is very limited, and it is -heavily overburdened with many assignments, some of which take priority -to the reading of reports, and it is physically impossible for the -present staff of our legal division, which is headed by Mr. Johnson, to -read and analyze the information in these reports as promptly and as -thoroughly as should be done. - -The eternal question that we are faced with is a matter of diminishing -returns. It is almost impossible to staff the Passport Office 100 -percent for security and with knowledgeability of everything that goes -on, and in the course of the year the Passport Office puts in thousands -of hours of overtime, uncompensated overtime, trying to catch up with -this work and believe me, this makes little or no impression on the -vast amount of paperwork, the reading, the reporting and the analyzing -of reports which come in to us. - -Senator COOPER. I can see your problem. - -But now, assuming that this report from the FBI about Oswald's -activities in New Orleans with the Fair Play for Cuba Committee in -which he was distributing material, and had been arrested, and was -operating under assumed names, had been known, had been in the file -at the time the application for a passport to go to Mexico and other -countries had been made, would that have been of any significance? - -Miss KNIGHT. Oh, yes, sir. - -Senator COOPER. In determining whether or not a passport should be -issued? - -Miss KNIGHT. Yes, sir; very definitely. If those reports had reached us -prior to the passport application we certainly would have put a card in -the file. - -As a matter of fact, it seems to me that if they had come to the -Passport Office we would have advised the Bureau of Security and -Consular Affairs that this had become a Cuban case. These are handled -by Mr. Schwartz personally. - -Senator COOPER. Do you know when the report from the FBI concerning -Oswald's activities in New Orleans in the Fair Play for Cuba Committee -reached the State Department rather than the Passport Division? - -Miss KNIGHT. When it reached the Department, I don't know. I think -maybe Mr. Ehrlich might know. - -Mr. EHRLICH. I will look to see if I have it. - -Miss KNIGHT. I have the dates of them. - -Senator COOPER. Will you give the date? - -Miss KNIGHT. The date of the reports? - -Senator COOPER. The date when it was sent, when it was received. - -Miss KNIGHT. The reports were dated October 31, 1963, and October 25, -1963, and they were logged into the Passport Office on November 20, -1963, and November 22, 1963. - -Senator COOPER. All of those dates are after the date of the issuance -of the passport? - -Miss KNIGHT. Yes, sir. - -Senator COOPER. I have just one more thing I want to inquire about. - -Are you familiar with the--were you the Chief of the Passport Division -at the time Oswald returned from Russia to the United States? - -Miss KNIGHT. Yes, sir. - -Senator COOPER. Who was empowered to issue passports in Moscow to -Oswald? - -Miss KNIGHT. Well, it was the consul, but he would not issue a passport -or, in this particular case even limit the passport for return to the -United States, without clearance from our office. - -Senator COOPER. Then when Oswald made his application to return to the -United States and to secure a passport to return to the United States, -that application had to be cleared by the division, your division, in -Washington? - -Miss KNIGHT. Yes. - -Senator COOPER. Did you make the determination as to whether the -passport should be issued to him? - -Miss KNIGHT. I personally did not. This was made by experienced -citizenship lawyers. - -Senator COOPER. By whom? - -Miss KNIGHT. The decision was made by experienced citizenship lawyers -in the Foreign Operations Division of the Passport Office. It was -determined that Oswald had not expatriated himself. He had signed the -necessary papers and he answered the required questionnaire under oath, -and to the satisfaction of the Passport Office. Both the consul, who -had an opportunity to talk to Oswald, and the citizenship lawyers, who -handled the case in the Passport Office, were in agreement that he had -not expatriated himself. - -Mr. DULLES. Those details are in the file in considerable extent. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Senator Cooper, for the record let me note we have -Oswald's passport which is Commission Exhibit No. 946 and it states on -page 15 thereof that the passport was renewed on May 24, 1962, and it -expired on June 24, 1962, and it also stated when Mr. Oswald came into -the United States on June 13, 1962. - -Senator COOPER. I have just two more questions then. - -One, at the time you issued the passport that Oswald was issued in -New Orleans to go to Mexico and the other countries there was no -requirement at that time that a lookout card be fixed to his file as a -defector? - -Miss KNIGHT. No, sir. - -Senator COOPER. Whatever decision has been made on that has come since -that time? - -Miss KNIGHT. When you say "defector," the answer to that is in the -questionnaire. - -Senator COOPER. When I say "defector," was there any regulation, I mean -in the Department, which required any special attention to be given to -a defector---- - -Miss KNIGHT. No, sir. - -Senator COOPER. With regard to the issuance of passports? - -Miss KNIGHT. No, sir; and we cannot deny them passports. - -Senator COOPER. My last question is, is it your statement that at the -time you issued the passport in Moscow for his return to the United -States, at the time the passport was issued in New Orleans, 1963, for -his trip to Mexico and other countries, that there was nothing in the -regulations relevant and nothing in the files which precluded you from -issuing a passport to him? - -Miss KNIGHT. This is my opinion; yes, sir. - -Mr. COLEMAN. I have no other questions. - -Mr. DULLES. I have no further questions. - -Mr. COLEMAN. Thank you, Miss Knight. We appreciate your coming in. - -(Whereupon, at 6:35 p.m., the President's Commission recessed.) - - - - -_Thursday, June 11, 1964_ - -TESTIMONY OF MRS. LEE HARVEY OSWALD AND HARRIS COULTER - -The President's Commission met at 9:45 a.m., on June 11, 1964, at 200 -Maryland Avenue NE., Washington, DC. - -Present were Chief Justice Earl Warren, Chairman; Senator John Sherman -Cooper, Representative Gerald Ford, and Allen W. Dulles, members. - -Also present were J. Lee Rankin, general counsel; Norman Redlich, -assistant counsel; Harris Coulter, interpreter; Leon Jaworski, special -counsel to the attorney general of Texas; William McKenzie, attorney -for Mrs. Lee Harvey Oswald; and Charles Murray, observer. - - -TESTIMONY OF MRS. LEE HARVEY OSWALD RESUMED - -The CHAIRMAN. The Commission will be in order. - -Shall we reswear Mrs. Oswald? - -Mr. RANKIN. I would think her former swearing would be sufficient, Mr. -Chief Justice. - -The CHAIRMAN. Very well. You consider yourself under oath, do you, Mrs. -Oswald? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mrs. Oswald, we would like to have you tell about the -incident in regard to Mr. Nixon that you have told about since we had -your last examination. Could you tell us what you know about that -incident, first, when it happened insofar as you can recall? - -Mrs. OSWALD. I am very sorry I didn't mention this before. I prefer -that you ask me the questions and that will help me to remember what -there is. - -Mr. RANKIN. Can you tell us what Mr. Nixon it is, was it Richard Nixon, -the former Vice President of the United States that you were referring -to? - -Mrs. OSWALD. I only know one Nixon and I think it was Richard Nixon -which it was all about. - -Mr. RANKIN. Can you fix the date when this occurrence did happen? -Approximately? - -Mrs. OSWALD. It was a weekend before he went to New Orleans and after -the Walker business I think. But I might be mistaken as to whether or -not this was a weekend because I am basing this on the fact that my -husband was home and he wasn't--wasn't always employed and he was at -home weekdays as well sometimes, so I can't be entirely sure that it -was a weekend. - -Mr. RANKIN. Can you place the place of the various homes you had that -this happened? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Neely Street. - -Mr. RANKIN. At the Neely Street house. Do you know what time of day it -occurred? - -Mrs. OSWALD. This was in the morning. - -Mr. RANKIN. Who was there? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Just my husband and me. - -Mr. RANKIN. Now, will you describe in detail just what happened. Mrs. -Oswald, when you are answering the questions will you try to break up -your answers, and let the interpreter try to translate; I think it -will be helpful in not having the interpreter have to try to remember -everything of a long answer. Do you understand me? - -Mr. DULLES. May I suggest also, Mr. Rankin, that I think it would -be preferable that the record be in the first person, that is, the -interpreter translate just as she said it. - -I was looking over the earlier record and that is the way it was over -the earlier record and it went quite well. - -Mrs. OSWALD. It was early in the morning and my husband went out to get -a newspaper, then he came in and sat reading the newspaper. I didn't -pay any attention to him because I was occupied with the housework. - -Then he got dressed and put on a good suit. I saw that he took a -pistol. I asked him where he was going, and why he was getting -dressed. He answered, "Nixon is coming. I want to go and have a look." -I said, "I know how you look," or rather, "I know how you customarily -look, how you customarily take a look," because I saw he was taking the -pistol with him rather than I know how you look in the sense that you -are dressed, how you look at things is what I mean. - -Mr. RANKIN. Had it come to your attention, Mrs. Oswald, that Mr. Nixon -was going to be in Dallas prior to that time? - -Mrs. OSWALD. No; it did not. - -Mr. RANKIN. Had you seen anything in the newspapers or heard anything -over the radio or television? - -Mrs. OSWALD. No; we didn't have TV. I didn't see this in the newspaper. - -Mr. DULLES. Do you know what newspaper it was in which your husband -read this report? - -Mrs. OSWALD. No; Dallas Morning News maybe. It was a morning paper. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you know whether there was any information at all in the -papers about Mr. Nixon planning to come to Dallas about that time? - -Mrs. OSWALD. I didn't ever read the newspaper and I did not know; -therefore, didn't know whether there was any information in the -newspapers prior to this time about Vice President Nixon's arrival in -Dallas. - -Representative FORD. Could we establish the date more precisely, either -by the newspapers or by testimony from Mrs. Oswald? - -(At this point, the Chief Justice left the hearing room.) - -Mr. RANKIN. Mrs. Oswald, can you help us by telling how many days it -was before you went to New Orleans that this incident occurred? - -Mrs. OSWALD. What day did I go to New Orleans? - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you recall that your husband went to New Orleans on -April 24? - -Mrs. OSWALD. April 24? My husband? - -Mr. RANKIN. Yes; and you went at a later date with Mrs. Paine, do you -remember that? - -Mrs. OSWALD. I remember it was about 2 weeks before. - -Mr. RANKIN. Two weeks before April 24? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes; but when was the incident with Walker? - -Mr. RANKIN. April 10 was the Walker incident. Does that help you? - -Mrs. OSWALD. This is a short distance, you know, I think maybe---- - -Mr. RANKIN. So you think it had to be sometime between April 10 and -April 24? - -Mrs. OSWALD. This may be 10 days or more. I think it was closer to the -time when my husband left for New Orleans than it was to the incident -of General Walker. I think it was less than a week before my husband -left for New Orleans. I did not think up this incident with Nixon -myself. - -Mr. RANKIN. What do you mean by that, Mrs. Oswald? - -Mrs. OSWALD. I had forgotten entirely about the incident with Vice -President Nixon when I was here the first time. When you asked me the -questions about it, then I remembered it. I wasn't trying to deceive -you the first time. - -Mr. RANKIN. What did your husband say that day about Richard Nixon, -when he got this gun and dressed up. Did he tell you anything about him? - -Mrs. OSWALD. No; I just didn't know what to do, you know. - -Mr. RANKIN. How did you know he was interested in doing something about -Mr. Nixon at that time? - -Mrs. OSWALD. My husband just said that Nixon is coming to Dallas. - -Mr. RANKIN. Then what did you do? - -Mrs. OSWALD. First I didn't know what to do. I wanted to prevent him -from going out. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you say anything to him? - -Mrs. OSWALD. I called him into the bathroom and I closed the door and I -wanted to prevent him and then I started to cry. And I told him that he -shouldn't do this, that he had promised me. - -Mr. RANKIN. Are you referring to his promise to you that you described -in your prior testimony after the Walker incident? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes; that was the promise. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you recall the bathroom, how the door closes? Does it -close into the bathroom on Neely Street or from the outside in? - -Mrs. OSWALD. I don't remember now. I don't remember. I only remember -that it was something to do with the bathroom. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you lock him into the bathroom? - -Mrs. OSWALD. I can't remember precisely. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you recall how the locks were on the bathroom door there? - -Mrs. OSWALD. I can't recall. We had several apartments and I might be -confusing one apartment with the other. - -Mr. RANKIN. Is it your testimony that you made it impossible for him to -get out if he wanted to? - -Mrs. OSWALD. I don't remember. - -Representative FORD. Did he try to get out of the bathroom? - -Mrs. OSWALD. I remember that I held him. We actually struggled for -several minutes and then he quieted down. I remember that I told him -that if he goes out it would be better for him to kill me than to go -out. - -Mr. DULLES. He is quite a big man and you are a small woman. - -Mrs. OSWALD. No; he is not a big man. He is not strong. - -Mr. DULLES. Well, he was 5 feet 9, and you are how tall? - -Mrs. OSWALD. When he is very upset, my husband is very upset he is not -strong and when I want to and when I collect all my forces and want to -do something very badly I am stronger than he is. - -Mr. DULLES. You meant mentally or physically? - -Mrs. OSWALD. I am not strong but, you know, there is a certain balance -of forces between us. - -Mr. DULLES. Do you think it was persuasion, your persuasion of him or -the physical force or both that prevented him from going? - -Mrs. OSWALD. I don't think it was physically, physical prevention -because if he--I couldn't keep him from going out if he really wanted -to. It might have been that he was just trying to test me. He was the -kind of person who could try and wound somebody in that way. Possibly -he didn't want to go out at all but was just doing this all as a sort -of joke, not really as a joke but rather to simply wound me, to make me -feel bad. - -Mr. McKENZIE. Mr. Rankin, if I may interpose here for a moment. Mrs. -Oswald has been interrogated at length by the FBI in connection with -this particular incident--the Nixon incident. I feel confident that the -FBI has made a written report insofar as her testimony is concerned in -their interrogation, but for purposes of the record I have no objection -whatsoever for the FBI report to be included in the record as part of -the record. - -Mr. RANKIN. Thank you, Mr. McKenzie. We will incorporate those reports -as a part of the record in regard to this incident, if that is -agreeable to the Commission. - -Mr. McKENZIE. The reason I say that is because of the fact that those -interrogations were conducted at an earlier date and closer to the -actual incident, the state of time to the actual incidents than her -interrogation here today, and insofar as dates are concerned I think -that her mind would be clearer on those dates, and I likewise know that -at that time a Russian interpreter was there. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. McKenzie, I think with the members of the Commission -here that I want to ask a number of questions about this incident -because of its importance so they can observe the witness as well as -have the benefit of her testimony. - -Mr. McKENZIE. Mr. Rankin, in no way am I suggesting otherwise but if it -would help the Commission in evaluating her testimony and evaluating -the evidence that it has had heretofore in prior testimony we have no -objection to those reports being a part of the record in any way. - -Mr. RANKIN. Thank you. - -Mrs. OSWALD. I might be mistaken about some of the details of this -incident but it is very definite he got dressed, took a gun, and then -didn't go out. The reason why there might be some confusion in my mind -about the details because it happened in other apartments in which we -lived that we quarreled and then I would shut him in the bathroom, and -in this particular case it may not have happened quite that way, but -there is no doubt that he got dressed and had a gun. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you remember what you said to him and what he said to -you at that time? - -Mrs. OSWALD. I don't remember now but I told the FBI precisely. - -Mr. RANKIN. And were your reports to the FBI in regard to this incident -accurate, truthful, and correct? - -Mrs. OSWALD. They were correct as far as I could remember. The only -detail as far as my memory served me--the only detail which might be -confused is the one with the bathroom. - -Mr. RANKIN. Had your husband said anything before or did he say -anything at that time in regard to Mr. Nixon showing any hostility, -friendship, or anything else? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Showing any hostility or friendship toward Mr. Nixon? - -Mr. RANKIN. Yes; toward Nixon. - -Mrs. OSWALD. I don't remember him saying anything--I don't remember but -he didn't tell me. I don't remember him saying anything of that sort. I -only remember the next day he told me that Nixon did not come. Excuse -me. - -Mr. RANKIN. Yes. - -Mrs. OSWALD. The FBI suggested that possibly I was confused between -Johnson and Nixon but there is no question that in this incident it was -a question of Mr. Nixon. I remember distinctly the name Nixon because -I read from the presidential elections that there was a choice between -President Kennedy and Mr. Nixon. - -Representative FORD. Where did your husband get the pistol that -morning; do you remember? - -Mrs. OSWALD. What, where? - -Representative FORD. Where. - -Mrs. OSWALD. My husband had a small room where he kept all that sort of -thing. It is a little larger than a closet. - -Representative FORD. Did you see him go in and get the pistol? - -Mrs. OSWALD. I didn't see him go into the room. I only saw him standing -before the open door and putting the pistol in his pocket. - -Representative FORD. Do you recall which pocket he put the pistol in? - -Mrs. OSWALD. It was not in a pocket. He put it in his belt. - -(Discussion off the record.) - -Mr. DULLES. Had you and your husband ever discussed Mr. Nixon at a -previous, at any previous time? - -Mrs. OSWALD. No. No. - -Mr. RANKIN. What else happened about this incident beyond what you have -told us? - -Mrs. OSWALD. He took off his suit and stayed home all day reading a -book. He gave me the pistol and I hid it under the mattress. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you say anything more than you have told us to him -about this matter at that time? - -Mrs. OSWALD. I closed the front door to the building that day and when -we were quarreling about--when we were struggling over the question of -whether or not he should go out I said a great deal to him. - -Mr. RANKIN. What did you say to him then? - -Mrs. OSWALD. I don't remember. - -Mr. RANKIN. Just tell us in substance? - -Mrs. OSWALD. I really don't remember now. I only remember that I told -him that I am sorry of all these pranks of his and especially after the -one with General Walker, and he had promised me, I told him that he had -promised me---- - -Mr. RANKIN. Did he say anything in answer to that? - -Mrs. OSWALD. I don't remember. - -Mr. DULLES. As I recall, in your previous testimony there was some -indication that you had said that if he did the Walker type of thing -again you would notify the authorities. Did that conversation come up -at this time with your husband? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes; I said that. But he didn't go at that time and after -all he was my husband. - -Mr. DULLES. Does--do you mean you said it again at the time of the -Nixon incident? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes; I told him that but you must understand that I don't -speak English very well, and for that reason I used to keep a piece of -paper with me, and I had it, you know, what piece of paper I am talking -about. At that time I didn't know how to go in police station: I don't -know where it was. - -Mr. McKENZIE. Was that the passport? - -Mrs. OSWALD. No. After the incident with Walker---- - -Mr. RANKIN. Was that paper the Walker incident note that you have -described in your testimony? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. - -Representative FORD. When you put the pistol under the mattress, what -happened to the pistol from then on? - -Mrs. OSWALD. That evening he asked for it and said that nothing was -going to happen, and that he said he wouldn't do anything and took the -pistol back. And put it into his room. - -Mr. DULLES. Did you keep the, what you call, the Walker note with you -all the time or did you have it in a particular place where you could -go and get it and show it to him? - -Mrs. OSWALD. I had it all the time. I kept it in a certain place -initially and then I put it in the pages of a book. - -Senator COOPER. Mr. Rankin, would you ask the witness to state again -what Lee Oswald's promise was to her that he had made at the time of -the Walker incident? - -Mr. RANKIN. Will you relate the promise that your husband made to you -right after the discovery of the Walker incident by you? - -Mrs. OSWALD. This wasn't a written promise. - -Mr. RANKIN. No. - -Mrs. OSWALD. But in words it was more or less that I told him that -he was very lucky that he hadn't killed--it very good that he hadn't -killed General Walker. I said it was fate that--it was fated that -General Walker not be killed and therefore he shouldn't try such a -thing again. - -Mr. RANKIN. What did he say in answer to that? - -Mrs. OSWALD. He said perhaps I am right. I myself didn't believe what -I was saying because I didn't believe that he was fated. I was just -trying to find some way of dissuading my husband to do such a thing -again. Do you understand what I mean? - -Mr. RANKIN. Yes. Did he say that he would or would not do that again, -that is what I want to know. - -Mrs. OSWALD. At the time I did definitely convince him that I was -right, and at the time he said that he would not do such a thing again. - -Mr. RANKIN. Now, when you talked to him about the Nixon incident and -persuaded him not to go out and do anything to Mr. Nixon, did you say -anything about your pregnancy in trying to persuade him? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. - -Mr. RANKIN. What did you say about that? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes; I told him that I was pregnant. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you observe his action at the time of this Nixon -incident, how he acted? - -Mrs. OSWALD. How he reacted to this? - -Mr. RANKIN. How he reacted to your interfering with him. - -Mrs. OSWALD. At first he was extremely angry, and he said, "You are -always getting in my way." But then rather quickly he gave in, which -was rather unusual for him. At the time I didn't give this any thought, -but now I think it was just rather a kind of nasty joke he was playing -with me. Sometimes Lee was--he had a sadistic--my husband had a -sadistic streak in him and he got pleasure out of harming people, and -out of harming me, not physically but emotionally and mentally. - -Mr. RANKIN. Have you told us substantially all that happened about this -Nixon incident? - -Mrs. OSWALD. That is all I can remember. - -Representative FORD. Can you tell us why you didn't mention this -incident to the Commission when you appeared before? - -Mrs. OSWALD. There were an awful lot of questions at that time, and -I was very tired and felt that I had told everything and I don't -remember, I can't understand why I didn't mention this. It would have -been better for me to mention it the first time than to make you all do -more work on it. - -Mr. DULLES. At the time of this incident did you threaten to go to the -authorities in case your husband did not desist in his intention? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes; I said that. - -Senator COOPER. I may have to go--could I ask a few questions? Mrs. -Oswald, will you repeat what your husband said that morning when he -dressed and got the pistol? - -Mrs. OSWALD. I asked him where he was going and why he was getting -dressed. He answered. "Today Nixon is coming and I want to go out and -have a look at him." - -I answered, "I know how you look," and I had in mind the fact that he -was taking a pistol with him. - -Senator COOPER. Did he say anything about what he intended to do with -the pistol? - -Mrs. OSWALD. No. - -Senator COOPER. Did you ask him if he intended to use the pistol -against Mr. Nixon? - -Mrs. OSWALD. I told him that, "You have already promised me not to play -any more with that thing." Not really play, but, you know--I didn't -mean, of course, just playing but using the pistol. Then he said, -"I am going to go out and find out if there will be an appropriate -opportunity and if there is I will use the pistol." I just remembered -this and maybe I didn't say this in my first testimony and now it just -has occurred to me that he said this. - -Senator COOPER. Did your husband say why he wanted to use the pistol -against Mr. Nixon? - -Mrs. OSWALD. No. - -Senator COOPER. Did he say where he intended to see Mr. Nixon? - -Mrs. OSWALD. He didn't say. He just said in Dallas, and since Nixon was -coming to Dallas. - -Senator COOPER. When he was talking to you about seeing Mr. Nixon and -using the pistol, what was his attitude? Was he angry or---- - -Mrs. OSWALD. He wasn't angry. He looked more preoccupied and had sort -of a concentrated look. - -Senator COOPER. Now, from the beginning, from the time that he first -told you that he was going to use the pistol, until the time that you -say he became quieted, did he again make any statement about using the -pistol against Mr. Nixon? - -Mrs. OSWALD. I told him that I didn't want him to use his gun any more. -He said, "I will go out and have a look and perhaps I won't use my -gun, but if there is a convenient opportunity perhaps I will." Strike -"perhaps" please from that last sentence. I didn't have a lot of time -to think of what we were actually saying. All I was trying to do was to -prevent him from going out. - -Senator COOPER. How much time elapsed, if you can remember, from the -time he first told you that he was going out and when he finally became -pacified? - -Mrs. OSWALD. This was maybe 30 minutes. The whole incident took maybe -20 minutes. It was about 10 minutes I took--15 minutes maybe. 15 -minutes, it took maybe 10 minutes for him to be prepared to go out and -then the incident in the bathroom took maybe 5 minutes until he quieted -down. It doesn't mean I held him in the bathroom for 5 minutes because -I couldn't do that but the general discussion in the bathroom. - -Senator COOPER. You said he stayed at the house the remainder of the -day. During the remainder of the day did you discuss again with him the -incident? - -Mrs. OSWALD. No; no. - -Senator COOPER. Did he say anything more that day? - -Mrs. OSWALD. No. He read a book. - -Mr. DULLES. Do you know what book it was, by chance? - -Mrs. OSWALD. I don't remember. It was some kind of book from the public -library. He had a two-volume history of the United States. This is not -from the library, this was his own book. - -Mr. DULLES. The incident occurred, you said just a few days after he -had told you he shot at General Walker? - -Mrs. OSWALD. It was about 10 or 12 days after the incident with General -Walker, perhaps about 3 days before we left for the departure for New -Orleans. This didn't happen right after the incident with General -Walker. It happened rather closer to a time when we departed for New -Orleans. - -Mr. DULLES. The General Walker incident made a very strong impression -on you, didn't it? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Of course. I never thought that Lee had a gun in order to -use it to shoot at somebody with. - -Mr. DULLES. Didn't this statement that he made about Vice President -Nixon make a strong impression on you also? - -Mrs. OSWALD. I don't know. I was pregnant at the time. I had a lot of -other things to worry about. I was getting pretty well tired of all of -these escapades of his. - -Mr. DULLES. Was there any reason why you didn't tell the Commission -about this when you testified before? - -Mrs. OSWALD. I had no--there is no particular reason. I just forgot. -Very likely this incident didn't make a very great impression on me at -that time. - -Mr. DULLES. Now, before the death of President Kennedy, of course, you -knew that your husband had purchased a rifle? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. - -Mr. DULLES. You knew that he had purchased a pistol? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. - -Mr. DULLES. And a knife? - -Mrs. OSWALD. No; what kind of knife? - -Mr. DULLES. Did he have a knife? - -Mrs. OSWALD. He had a little pocket knife; I think. - -Mr. DULLES. You knew that he had told you that he had tried to kill -General Walker? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. - -Mr. DULLES. And, of course, as you said you heard him make a threat -against Nixon. - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. - -Mr. DULLES. Did you have some fear that he would use these weapons -against someone else? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Of course; I was afraid. - -Mr. DULLES. What? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Of course; I was afraid. - -Mr. DULLES. You thought that he might use his weapons against someone? - -Mrs. OSWALD. After the incident with Nixon I stopped believing him. - -Mr. DULLES. You what? - -Mrs. OSWALD. I stopped believing him. - -Mr. DULLES. Why? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Because he wasn't obeying me any longer, because he -promised and then he broke his promise. - -Mr. DULLES. Would you repeat that? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Because he wasn't obeying me any more. He promised and, he -made a promise and then he broke it. - -Mr. DULLES. That is my question. Having been told that--isn't it -correct he told you that he shot at General Walker? He made a promise -to you that he wouldn't do anything like that again, you heard him -threaten Vice President Nixon, didn't it occur to you then that there -was danger that he would use these weapons against someone else in the -future? - -Mrs. OSWALD. After the incident with Walker, I believed him when he -told me that he wouldn't use the weapons any longer. - -Mr. DULLES. I remember you testified before and I asked you if you had -heard him threaten any official or other person and your answer was no. - -Mrs. OSWALD. Because I forgot at that time about the incident with -Nixon. - -Mr. DULLES. I want to ask you again: In view of the fact that you -knew--in view of the fact that he had threatened Walker by shooting -at him, and he threatened Vice President Nixon can you not tell this -Commission whether after that he threatened to hurt, harm any other -person? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Nobody else. Perhaps I should be punished for not having -said anything about all this, but I was just a wife and I was trying to -keep the family together, at that time. I mean to say. I am talking, of -course, of the time before President Kennedy's death. And if I forget -to say anything now, I am not doing it on purpose. - -Mr. DULLES. I am just asking questions. Will you say here that he never -did make any statement against President Kennedy? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Never. - -Mr. DULLES. Did he ever make any statement about him of any kind? - -Mrs. OSWALD. He used to read and translate articles from the newspaper -about Kennedy to me and from magazines, favorable articles about -Kennedy. He never commented on them and he never discussed them in any -way but because of his translations and his reading to me he always -had a favorable feeling about President Kennedy because he always read -these favorably inclined articles to me. He never said that these -articles never were true that he was a bad President or anything like -that. - -Mr. DULLES. I didn't catch the last. - -Mrs. OSWALD. He never said these articles were not true or that -President Kennedy was a bad President or anything like that. - -Senator COOPER. I think you testified before that he made statements -showing his dislike of our system of government and its economic system. - -Mrs. OSWALD. He used to complain about the educational difficulties and -about the unemployment in the United States and about the high cost of -medical care. - -Mr. McKENZIE. Right there, please, may I, Mr. Dulles when did he -complain of those things, was this in Russia or was it in the United -States after you returned from Russia? - -Mrs. OSWALD. After our return from Russia. When we were living in New -Orleans after returning from Russia. - -Mr. McKENZIE. Did he likewise make such complaints about the American -system while you were living in Russia after you were married? - -Mrs. OSWALD. He used to tell me that it was difficult to find a job and -to get work in the United States but nonetheless we would be better -there than we were in Russia. Excuse me. He was the kind of person who -was never able to get along anywhere he was and when he was in Russia -he used to say good things about the United States and when he was in -the United States he used to talk well about Russia. - -Senator COOPER. You knew, of course, because of the incidents in New -Orleans that he did not like American policy respecting Cuba. - -Mrs. OSWALD. He was definitely a supporter of Cuba. This was something -which remained with him from Russia. - -Senator COOPER. Did he ever say to you who was responsible or who had -some responsibility for our policy toward Cuba? - -Mrs. OSWALD. No. - -Senator COOPER. Had he ever mentioned President Kennedy in connection -with our Cuban policy? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Never to me. - -Mr. DULLES. Did he ever say anything---- - -Mrs. OSWALD. He might have discussed this with Paine. - -Senator COOPER. With who? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Mr. Paine, husband of Ruth Paine. - -Senator COOPER. He might have done what now? - -Mrs. OSWALD. With the husband of Ruth Paine. - -Senator COOPER. Why do you say that, did you ever hear him talking -about it? - -Mrs. OSWALD. He used to talk politics with Mr. Paine. I don't know -what they were talking about because at that time I didn't understand -English. - -Senator COOPER. Did you mean, though, to say that you believed he might -have discussed the Cuban policy with Mr. Paine. - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes; especially after we returned from New Orleans. - -Senator COOPER. Why? Why do you make that statement? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Because we only saw Mr. Paine once or twice before we went -to New Orleans. And there was more opportunity to see Mr. Paine after -we came back. - -Senator COOPER. But my question is what makes you think he might have -talked to Mr. Paine about Cuba? - -Mrs. OSWALD. I think, sir; because after returning from New Orleans -this was his favorite subject, Cuba, and he was quite--a little bit -cracked about it, crazy about Cuba. - -Senator COOPER. You mean he talked to you a great deal about it after -you came from New Orleans? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Well, in New Orleans he used to talk to me endlessly about -Cuba, but after we came back he didn't talk to me about it any longer -because I was just sick and tired of this. - -Mr. DULLES. "He" in this case is your husband? - -Mrs. OSWALD. That is right. I really don't know about what he talked -with Mr. Paine. I think that they were talking about politics, that is -to say my husband with Mr. Paine because my husband used to tell me -afterwards, "Well, he doesn't understand anything about politics." "He -is not too strong on politics." - -And, therefore, I think they were probably talking with the American -political system and the Russian political system and comparisons -between them. I think that Mr. Paine could probably tell you more about -this than I can. - -Senator COOPER. That is all I want to ask for the time being. - -Mrs. OSWALD. I think that Mr. Paine knows more about my husband's -political attitudes toward the United States than I do. - -Mr. RANKIN. You said the FBI asked you whether you could have been -mistaken about it being Mr. Nixon that your husband was interested in -going and seeing and maybe doing something to with his gun. - -Do you know what Mr. Johnson you were asking about? - -Let me rephrase the question. - -You said the FBI asked you whether you might have been mistaken about -Mr. Nixon and whether it might have been Mr. Johnson instead of Mr. -Nixon that your husband was interested in doing something to with his -gun. - -Do you know what Mr. Johnson was being referred to? - -Mrs. OSWALD. No; I didn't know who Johnson was. I am ashamed but I -never knew his name. I am ashamed myself but I didn't know who Johnson -was. - -Mr. RANKIN. You didn't know that the FBI was asking about the then Vice -President and now President Johnson? - -Mrs. OSWALD. No; I never heard of Johnson before he became President. - -Mr. DULLES. And you are quite sure---- - -Mrs. OSWALD. Maybe I am stupid, I don't know. - -Mr. DULLES. And you are quite sure that your husband mentioned the name -of Nixon to you---- - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes; I am sure it was Nixon. - -Mr. DULLES. That morning? - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you know whether this Nixon incident occurred the day -before your husband went to New Orleans? - -Mrs. OSWALD. It wasn't the day before. Perhaps 3 days before. - -Mr. McKENZIE. Mr. Rankin, may I ask a question? - -Mr. RANKIN. Yes. - -Mr. McKENZIE. Mrs. Oswald, you say or you said a few minutes ago that -Mr. Paine knew or knows more about your husband's attitude about the -United States than you do. Why did you say that? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Because my husband's favorite topic of discussion was -politics, and whoever he was with he talked to them politics and Mr. -Paine was with him a fair amount and I am not sure they talked about -politics. They went to meetings of some kind together, I don't know -what kind of meetings. - -Mr. McKENZIE. Do you know where the meetings were? - -Mrs. OSWALD. In Dallas. After they came back from some meeting my -husband said to me something about Walker being at this meeting, and -he said, "Paine knows that I shot him." - -I don't know whether this was the truth or not. I don't know whether it -was true or not but this is what he told me. - -Mr. McKENZIE. Would they go in Mr. Paine's automobile? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes; it was about 2 days after this incident with -Stevenson or the next day, or maybe it was the same place, or the next -day that a meeting was held where General Walker appeared. - -Mr. McKENZIE. It was the day before. - -Mrs. OSWALD. The day before? The day after. I think there was 1 day's -difference between them, either it was the day before or the day after. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you say that there were a number of political -meetings---- - -Mrs. OSWALD. Excuse me; but I think this was on Friday. I think that -Lee was at this meeting on a Friday. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you say there were a number of political meetings that -your husband went to---- - -Mrs. OSWALD. Excuse me; this was October 24. - -Mr. RANKIN. With Mr. Paine? - -Mrs. OSWALD. A week after his birthday--this was Friday. I think it was -a week after my husband's birthday about October 24 or something like -that or the 25th. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Reporter, can you give her the question that I asked? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Excuse me, please. - -(The question was read by the reporter.) - -Mrs. OSWALD. I only know about this one. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did the FBI tell you that the reason they were asking about -whether there was a mistake as to whether it was Mr. Nixon or Vice -President Johnson was because there was a report in Dallas papers about -Vice President Johnson going to Dallas around the 23d of April? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes; they did tell me this. They said that at this time -there was only one announcement in the newspapers of anyone coming and -that was Vice President Johnson. - -Mr. RANKIN. But you still are certain it was Mr. Nixon and not Vice -President Johnson? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes, no. I am getting a little confused with so many -questions. I was absolutely convinced it was Nixon and now after all -these questions I wonder if I am right in my mind. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did your husband---- - -Mrs. OSWALD. I never heard about Johnson. I never heard about Johnson. -I never knew anything about Johnson. I just don't think it was Johnson. -I didn't know his name. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you husband during the Nixon incident say Mr. Nixon's -name several times or how many times. - -Mrs. OSWALD. Only once. - -Mr. RANKIN. Now, you said that your husband went to get the pistol in -the room. Will you tell us what room that was that he went to get the -pistol? - -Mrs. OSWALD. It was a small sort of storeroom. Just to the left off the -balcony as you come in; it is just on the left from the balcony. - -Mr. RANKIN. Was it out, was the pistol out in the room or was it in a -closet? - -Mrs. OSWALD. This room contained only a table and some shelves, and the -pistol was not on the table. It was hidden somewhere on a shelf. - -Representative FORD. Was the rifle in that room, too? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. - -Mr. RANKIN. Where was the rifle in the room? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Sometimes it was in the corner, sometimes it was up on a -shelf. Lee didn't like me to go into this room. That is why he kept it -closed all the time and told me not to go into it. Sometimes he went in -there and sat by himself for long periods of time. - -Mr. DULLES. By closed, do you mean locked? - -Mrs. OSWALD. He used to close it from the inside. I don't remember what -kind of lock it was. Possibly it was just a--some kind of a tongue---- - -Mr. McKENZIE. Latch. - -Mrs. OSWALD. Latch or something like that. - -Mr. DULLES. How could he close it from the inside and then get out? - -Mrs. OSWALD. When he was inside he could close it from the inside so -that I couldn't come in. - -Mr. DULLES. But when he came out could he close it from the outside so -that you could not get in? - -Mrs. OSWALD. No; from the outside it couldn't be locked. - -Representative FORD. When you went to New Orleans and packed for the -trip to New Orleans, did you help to pack the pistol or the rifle? - -Mrs. OSWALD. No, no; Lee never let me pack things when we went for -trips. He always did it himself. - -Representative FORD. Did you see him pack the pistol or the rifle? - -Mrs. OSWALD. No. - -Representative FORD. Did you know the pistol and the rifle were in the -luggage going to New Orleans? - -Mrs. OSWALD. I stayed for some time with Ruth Paine after he left for -New Orleans and I don't know whether they were in his things or they -were in the stuff which was left with me. - -Representative FORD. At the time Mrs. Paine picked you up to go to the -bus station, did you intend to go by bus to New Orleans at that time? - -Mrs. OSWALD. No. - -Representative FORD. While you were living on Neely Street you didn't -tell us before of any extensive rifle shooting at Love Field or rifle -practice at Love Field. Can you tell us more about it now? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Lee didn't tell me when he was going out to practice. I -only remember one time distinctly that he went out because he took the -bus. I don't know if he went to Love Field at that time. I don't--after -all this testimony, after all this testimony, when I was asked did he -clean his gun a lot, and I answered yes, I came to the conclusion that -he was practicing with his gun because he was cleaning it afterwards. - -Representative FORD. Did he take the rifle and the pistol to Love Field -or at the time he went on the bus? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Only the rifle. - -Mr. McKENZIE. Just a minute. Let me ask her a question. May I ask a -question? - -Representative FORD. Yes, sir. - -Mr. McKENZIE. Representative Ford, I wasn't here as you know when Mrs. -Oswald testified before. I have been with her when she was interrogated -by the FBI relative to practicing the rifle shooting. This is the first -time that I have heard the use of the words "Love Field." Has there -been prior testimony by Mrs. Oswald here that he was practicing at Love -Field, because the reason I ask this is because she has steadfastly -in the past told me and the FBI that she didn't know where he went to -practice and that is the reason I wanted to know. - -Mr. RANKIN. The record is---- - -Mrs. OSWALD. I don't know where he practiced. I just think that the bus -goes to, went to Love Field. - -Mr. RANKIN. Her testimony before was that the bus that he took, that -she knows about when he went, was a bus that went to Love Field, and -she thought he went to some place in that area to do his practicing. - -Mr. McKENZIE. The reason I ask the question, Mr. Rankin, is because -I don't believe there is any practice area at Love Field for rifle -practicing. - -Mr. RANKIN. Well, the investigation that the Commission has made shows -that there is a place near Love Field where people do shooting and -practicing. - -Mr. McKENZIE. Not at Love Field. - -Mr. RANKIN. It is right adjacent, in the neighborhood. - -Mrs. OSWALD. Once we went out with Kathy Ford with the children to -watch airplanes landing and these airplanes made a tremendous noise -and for that reason I thought that maybe my husband was practicing -somewhere in that area because you couldn't hear the sound of shots. -I don't know if there is any place near there where one can practice -shooting, though. This idea just came to me a little while ago when we -were out there, watching the airplanes because it was a couple of weeks -ago that this happened. Just sort of a guess of mine. - -Mr. DULLES. How did he pack the gun or conceal the gun when he went out -on the bus toward Love Field? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Are you talking about the gun or the rifle? - -Mr. DULLES. I am talking about the rifle. - -Mrs. OSWALD. He used to wrap it up in his overcoat, raincoat. - -Mr. RANKIN. So that the record will be clear on this, Mr. McKenzie, the -prior testimony did not purport to indicate that Mrs. Oswald thought -he was practicing right on Love Field where the airplanes were landing -or anything like that. It was that he took that bus and took the rifle -and came back with the rifle and that the bus went to Love Field and -the investigation has shown that there is at least one place in that -immediate neighborhood where there is gun practice carried on. - -Mr. DULLES. Is there testimony, Mr. Rankin, as to more than one trip or -should we get that from the witness? - -Mr. RANKIN. She testified right now she only knew of this one although -she knew of his cleaning his guns a number of times. She just testified -to that. Do you want more than that? - -Mr. DULLES. I thought the record was a little fuzzy. Maybe you should -clarify it. - -Mr. McKENZIE. I think you should ask the question. - -Mr. RANKIN. Will you tell us, Mrs. Oswald, how you thought your husband -might have been practicing in the area near Love Field or how you -concluded that he might have been practicing with the rifle in the area -near Love Field. - -Mrs. OSWALD. Only because that is the bus, only because that is where -the bus goes. He never told me where. - -Mr. RANKIN. And you don't know whether he was practicing at a place -near Love Field or some place between where he got on the bus near your -home and Love Field; is that right? - -Mrs. OSWALD. No; I don't know, even now I don't know where it is. - -Senator COOPER. Can I just ask a question? Do you know how many times -he took the rifle from your home? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Well---- - -Mr. DULLES. You are speaking of Neely Street. - -Mrs. OSWALD. I only saw---- - -Senator COOPER. When you were living on Neely Street--strike that. You -have told about his taking the rifle from the house on Neely Street and -then later cleaning the rifle. Do you know how many times that occurred? - -Mrs. OSWALD. I saw him take the rifle only once when we were living -on Neely Street but he cleaned the rifle perhaps three or four times, -perhaps three times--three times. - -Senator COOPER. Did he ever tell you that he was practicing with a -rifle? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Only after I saw him take the gun that one time. - -Senator COOPER. Did you ask him if he had been practicing with the -rifle? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes, I asked him. - -Senator COOPER. What did he say? - -Mrs. OSWALD. He said yes. - -Senator COOPER. Did he ever give any reason why he was practicing with -the rifle to you? - -Mrs. OSWALD. He didn't give me a reason. He just said that for a man it -is an interesting thing to have a rifle. I considered this some kind of -a sport for him. I didn't think he was planning to employ it. I didn't -take it seriously. - -(At this point, Senator Cooper left the hearing room.) - -Mr. RANKIN. At the time of the Nixon incident did you know who Mr. -Nixon was? - -Mrs. OSWALD. I didn't know what position he held. I thought he was Vice -President. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you ever check to see whether Mr. Nixon was in fact in -Dallas anytime around that date? - -Mrs. OSWALD. No. - -Mr. RANKIN. After the day of the Nixon incident did you ever discuss -that incident again with your husband? - -Mrs. OSWALD. No. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did the Nixon incident have anything to do with your -decision to go to New Orleans to live? - -Mrs. OSWALD. After the incident with Walker it became clear to me that -it would be a good idea to go away from Dallas and after the incident -with Nixon insisted--I insisted on it. - -Mr. RANKIN. After the Nixon incident did you ever discuss that Nixon -incident again with your husband? - -Mrs. OSWALD. No. I don't know why. Perhaps it didn't make a very strong -impression on me and that is why I didn't mention it in my first -testimony. Perhaps it is because the first incident with Walker made -such a strong impression that what happened afterward was somewhat -effaced by it. I was so much upset by this incident with General Walker -that I only just wanted to get away from Dallas as fast as possible. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you discuss the Nixon incident with anyone other than -your husband before the assassination of President Kennedy? - -Mrs. OSWALD. No. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you ever consider telling the police about the Walker -and Nixon incidents? - -Mrs. OSWALD. I thought of this but then Lee was the only person who was -supporting me in the United States, you see. I didn't have any friends, -I didn't speak any English and I couldn't work and I didn't know what -would happen if they locked him up and I didn't know what would happen -to us. Of course, my reason told me that I should do it but because of -circumstances I couldn't do it. - -Mr. RANKIN. When did you first tell something about the Nixon incident? - -Mrs. OSWALD. It was after the assassination; we were in Martin's house -and I think Robert was there also. That is when I first mentioned that. -I don't remember whether I told them both at the same time or told -Martin first and Robert second or Robert first and Martin second. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you know about when that was with reference to the time -you moved in with the Martins? - -Mrs. OSWALD. I think it was in the first month. I don't remember which -day it was, though. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you recall whether you first told Robert about it some -time in January of this year? - -Mrs. OSWALD. I think it was earlier than that, early in December. -Perhaps in the beginning of January, but I think it was before New -Year's. - -Mr. RANKIN. If Robert has stated that it was on a Sunday, January 12 of -this year, do you think he is in error then? - -Mrs. OSWALD. I don't think that Robert would make a mistake. I might -make a mistake myself but I don't think he would make a mistake because -he doesn't have quite as many, because he has not been in contact -with quite as many of these events and doesn't have quite as much to -remember as I have. And in general, I have a bad memory for figures. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you discuss the Nixon incident at anytime with Mr. -Thorne or Mr. Martin, your agent? - -Mrs. OSWALD. I told Martin about it but I don't think I told Thorne -about it, and if Thorne learned about it it must have been from Martin. - -Mr. RANKIN. You just related how you told Mr. Martin about it and the -occasion in your testimony a moment ago; is that right? - -Mrs. OSWALD. I am certain that these were the circumstances in which I -told Martin about this. Whether or not the--it's possible I was just -talking with Martin and his wife about Lee and it just came into my -mind and I don't remember whether Robert was there or not, or whether I -told Robert later. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did anyone at anytime advise you or tell you not to tell -the Commission about this incident? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Martin told me that it is not necessary to mention this. -But when they were asking me here in the Commission whether I had -anything to add to my testimony, I really forgot about it. When Martin -and I were talking about it he said, "Well, try not to think about -these things too much." - -Mr. RANKIN. Did he say anything about why it wasn't necessary to tell -about this incident? - -Mrs. OSWALD. I don't remember. I don't think he told me why. Maybe -he told me and I just didn't understand because I didn't understand -English very well. - -Mr. RANKIN. When you were telling about the Nixon incident you referred -to your husband's sadistic streak. Do you recall that? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. - -Mr. RANKIN. Can you tell us a little more about that, how it showed? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Anytime I did something which didn't please him he would -make me sit down at a table and write letters to the Russian Embassy -stating that I wanted to go back to Russia. He liked to tease me and -torment me in this way. He knew that this--he just liked to torment -me and upset me and hurt me, and he used to do this especially if I -interfered in any of his political affairs, in any of his political -discussions. He made me several times write such letters. - -Mr. DULLES. I have just one question: What did you or your husband do -with these letters that you wrote? Did any of them get mailed or did -they all get destroyed? - -Mrs. OSWALD. He kept carbons of these letters but he sent the letters -off himself. - -Mr. DULLES. To the Russian Embassy? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes; he didn't give me any money to buy stamps. I never -had any pocket money of my own. - -Mr. RANKIN. But the letters to the Embassy you are referring to are -actual letters and requested--requests--they weren't practice letters -or anything of that kind to punish you, were they? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes; they were real letters. I mean if my husband didn't -want me to live with him any longer and wanted me to go back, I would -go back, not because I wanted to go back but I didn't have any choice. - -Mr. RANKIN. I misunderstood you then because I thought you were -describing the fact that he made you write letters as a part of this -sadistic streak that would never be sent but what he actually did was -have you prepare the letters and then he proceeded to send them, is -that your testimony? - -Mrs. OSWALD. He did send them and he really wanted this. He knew that -this hurt me. - -Mr. RANKIN. Those are the letters to the Russian Embassy we have -introduced in evidence in connection with your testimony; is that right? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes; those are the letters. - -Representative FORD. Did he ever show you replies to those letters? - -Mrs. OSWALD. At first--yes; there were. At first I didn't believe that -he was sending off those letters. - -Representative FORD. But you did see the replies? - -Mrs. OSWALD. I received answers from the embassy. - -Mr. RANKIN. Now, I will turn to another subject, Mrs. Oswald. - -Mr. DULLES. Would you like to have a 5-minute recess? We will proceed. - -Mr. RANKIN. Now, Mrs. Oswald, I would like to ask you about the Irving -Gun Shop in Dallas. - -Mrs. OSWALD. The what? I don't know anything about this at all. - -Mr. RANKIN. Your counsel tells me I should correct that, that Irving -is not a part of Dallas. It is the city of Irving. A witness has said -that you and your two children and your husband came into a furniture -shop asking the location of a gunshop in that area in Irving, and after -appearing there that you and your husband, with your husband driving -the car, along with your two children, got in the car and went up the -street in the direction of where the gunshop was. Did you recall any -incident of that kind? - -Mrs. OSWALD. This is just a complete fabrication. Lee never drove a car -with me. Only Ruth Paine drove a car with me. And I never took my baby -with me. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you ever go into such a furniture store in Irving? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Never. - -Mr. RANKIN. That you recall? - -Mrs. OSWALD. I was only twice in a store in Irving where they sell, -like a cafe, where you can buy something to eat and where they sell -toys and clothes and things like that; a little bit like a Woolworths, -a one-story shop but without any furniture in it. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you know a Mrs. Whitworth who works in a furniture store -in Irving? - -Mrs. OSWALD. I was never in Irving in any furniture store. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you know a Mrs. Whitworth? - -Mrs. OSWALD. It is the first time I have ever heard that name. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you know a Mrs. Hunter, a friend of Mrs. Whitworth? - -Mrs. OSWALD. No. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you ever go on a trip with your husband to have a -telescopic lens mounted on a gun at a gunshop? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Never. No; this is all not true. In the first place, -my husband couldn't drive, and I was never alone with him in a car. -Anytime we went in a car it was with Ruth Paine, and there was -never--we never went to any gun store and never had any telescopic lens -mounted. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did the four of you, that is, your husband, you, and your -two children, ever go alone any place in Irving? - -Mrs. OSWALD. In Irving the baby was only 1 month old. I never took her -out anywhere. - -Representative FORD. Did you ever go anytime---- - -Mrs. OSWALD. Just to doctor, you know. - -Representative FORD. Did you ever go anytime with your husband in a car -with the rifle? - -Mrs. OSWALD. I was never at anytime in a car with my husband and with -a rifle. Not only with the rifle, not even with a pistol. Even without -anything I was never with my husband in a car under circumstances where -he was driving a car. - -Representative FORD. Did you go in a car with somebody else driving -where your husband had the pistol or the rifle? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Never. I don't know what to think about this. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mrs. Oswald, I will hand you Commission's Exhibit No. 819 -and ask you particularly about the signature at the bottom. - -Mrs. OSWALD. That is Lee's handwriting, and this is mine. - -Mr. RANKIN. Were the words "A. J. Hidell, Chapter President" on -Commission Exhibit No. 819 are in your handwriting? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. - -Mr. RANKIN. Would you tell the Commission how you happened to sign that? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Lee wrote this down on a piece of paper and told me to -sign it on this card, and said that he would beat me if I didn't sign -that name on the card. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you have any other discussion about your signing that -name? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. - -Mr. RANKIN. What discussion did you have? - -Mrs. OSWALD. I said that this sounded like Fidel. I said, "You have -selected this name because it sounds like Fidel" and he blushed and -said, "Shut up, it is none of your business." - -Mr. RANKIN. Was there any discussion about who Hidell, as signed on the -bottom of that card, was? - -Mrs. OSWALD. He said that it was his own name and a there is no Hidell -in existence, and I asked him, "You just have two names," and he said, -"Yes." - -Mr. RANKIN. Was anything else said about that matter at any time? - -Mrs. OSWALD. I taunted him about this and teased about this and said -how shameful it is that a person who has his own perfectly good name -should take another name and he said, "It is none of your business, -I would have to do it this way, people will think I have a big -organization" and so forth. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you ask him why he needed to have the other name in -your handwriting rather than his own? - -Mrs. OSWALD. I did ask him that and he would answer that in order that -people will think it is two people involved and not just one. - -Mr. DULLES. Did you ever sign any more such cards with the name -"Hidell"? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Only this one. - -Mr. DULLES. And you never signed the name "Hidell" on any other paper -at any time? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Only once. - -Representative FORD. Where did this actual signing take place, Mrs. -Oswald? - -Mrs. OSWALD. In New Orleans. - -Representative FORD. Where in New Orleans? - -Mrs. OSWALD. In what is the name of the street where we lived, in an -apartment house. - -Representative FORD. In your apartment house? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes; in our apartment house. - -Representative FORD. What time of day, do you recall? - -Mrs. OSWALD. It might have been 8 or 9 o'clock in the evening. - -Mr. DULLES. Had you ever heard the name "Hidell" before? - -Mrs. OSWALD. I don't remember whether this was before or after Lee -spoke on the radio. I think it was after. - -Mr. DULLES. Did he use the name Hidell on the radio? - -Mrs. OSWALD. I think that he might have when he was talking on the -radio said that Hidell is the President of his organization but, of -course, I don't understand English well and I don't know. He spoke on -the radio using his own name but might have mentioned the name Hidell. -This is what he told me. When I tried to find out what he said on the -radio. - -Mr. DULLES. This might have been on television also? - -Mrs. OSWALD. It was on the radio, not on television. He told me that -someone had taken movies of him for to be shown later on television but -I don't know if they ever were. - -Mr. DULLES. Did you ever sign the name Hidell at any subsequent time to -any document? - -Mr. McKENZIE. If you recall signing it. Do you recall signing his name -to any other document? - -Mrs. OSWALD. I only remember this one occasion. - -Mr. RANKIN. Was the way you signed on this Commission's Exhibit No. 819 -your usual way of writing English? - -Mrs. OSWALD. My English handwriting changes every day, and my Russian -handwriting, too. But that is more or less my usual style. - -Mr. RANKIN. You weren't trying to conceal the way you sign anything? - -Mrs. OSWALD. I tried to do it, I just tried to write it as nicely as -possible. - -Mr. DULLES. Did you make some practice runs of writing this name before -you actually put it on the card? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes; because it was difficult for me to write English -properly. - -Mr. DULLES. So you mean you wrote it several times on another sheet of -paper and then put it on this card? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. - -Representative FORD. Was there anybody else present at the time of this -incident? - -Mrs. OSWALD. No; only Lee. - -Representative FORD. Did he have you sign only one card? - -Mrs. OSWALD. This was the only time when I--when Lee asked me to do -this and I did it. I might have signed two or--cards and not just one -but there weren't a great many. - -Representative FORD. Did the other cards have someone else's name -besides Lee Harvey Oswald on it? - -Mrs. OSWALD. No; only Lee Oswald. - -Representative FORD. But you think you might have signed more than one -such card? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Maybe two, three. This is just 1 day when I was signing -this. It just happened on one occasion. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mrs. Oswald, turning to another subject, I would like to -ask you about some correspondence with the Dallas Civil Liberties -Union. - -Do you recall that they inquired as to whether you were being kept from -seeing and speaking to people against your will? - -Mrs. OSWALD. This letter was translated by Ruth Paine and I answered on -the basis of the translation. - -Mr. McKENZIE. May I see those letters, Mr. Rankin? - -Mr. RANKIN. Yes. - -Mrs. OSWALD. I didn't want to answer this letter. It was simply a -matter of courtesy on my part. - -Mr. RANKIN. Now, you received a letter from the local chapter of the -Civil Liberties union in Russian, did you not? - -Mrs. OSWALD. There was a letter that was in English and there was a -translation which came with it, and it was stated that the translation -was done by Ruth Paine. - -Mr. RANKIN. What did you do with the translation or the--I will ask you -the translation first. Did you keep that? - -Mrs. OSWALD. I don't remember what I did with it. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you know what you did with the part that was in Russian? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Perhaps it is somewhere among my papers but I didn't pay -any special attention to it. - -Mr. RANKIN. I will hand you Commission Exhibit No. 331 and ask you if -that is the letter in English that you referred to? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes; it is the letter. - -Mr. RANKIN. I call the Commission's attention to the fact that that has -already been received in evidence. - -Mr. McKENZIE. Mr. Rankin, did you write Mr. Olds about this? This -appears to be a letter in reply to a letter from you. - -Mr. RANKIN. That is right. I asked for it. - -Mrs. Oswald, will you examine Commission Exhibits Nos. 990 and 991 and -state whether you know the handwriting in these exhibits? - -Mrs. OSWALD. This is all mine, my handwriting. This is the answer to -that letter. - -Mr. RANKIN. And the letter, Exhibit No. 990, and the envelope, Exhibit -No. 991, in your handwriting were your response to the inquiry of the -Dallas Civil Liberties Union on the Exhibit No. 331? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes; this was my answer to this letter, Exhibit No. 331. - -Mr. RANKIN. I offer in evidence Commission Exhibits Nos. 990 and 991. - -Mr. DULLES. You want them admitted at this time? - -Mr. RANKIN. Yes; Mr. Chairman. - -Mr. DULLES. They shall be admitted. - -(Commission Exhibits Nos. 990 and 991 were marked for identification -and received in evidence.) - -Mr. RANKIN. Mrs. Oswald, I will ask you to examine Exhibit No. 988 and -with the help of the interpreter, advise us whether or not it is a -reasonably correct translation of your letter, Exhibit No. 990. - -Mrs. OSWALD. This is not an accurate translation. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mrs. Oswald, can you tell us what errors were made, where -the corrections should be to make it a correct translation? - -Mrs. OSWALD. There is one place here in which it refers to the third -sentence of the English text which states: "What you read in the papers -is correct." - -Mr. RANKIN. How would you correct that? - -Mrs. OSWALD. This is incorrect. A better, a proper translation, -although unofficial of this passage, and the Russian text of my letter -would read, "Your concern is quite unnecessary although it is quite -understandable if one is to judge from what is written in the papers." - -Mr. RANKIN. Now, will you proceed with any other corrections? - -Mrs. OSWALD. This, the letter, the spirit of the letter reflects my own -spirit in my own Russian text--although the translation is somewhat -inaccurate and tends to shorten my own text somewhat. - -There is another inaccuracy which is more important than the others--it -is not more important, the first one is more important--there is -another which should be called to the Commission's attention. - -The last sentence of the English text reads: "Please let Mrs. Ruth -Paine know I owe to her much and think of her as one of my best -friends." - -Whereas the letter only states that: "Of course, consider her my -friend." - -Mr. RANKIN. Mrs. Oswald, I call your attention to Commission Exhibit -No. 990 and ask you to note the date which appears to be December 7, -1964. - -The Dallas Civil Liberties Union letter, you will note, was dated -January 6, 1964 which I will hand you so you can examine it. Could you -explain that discrepancy? You might wish to examine them. - -Mrs. OSWALD. It can't possibly be the 7th of December 1964 because it -hasn't even come yet. - -Mr. RANKIN. You might wish to examine the envelope, Exhibit No. 991, -that may help you as to the correct date. - -Mrs. OSWALD. January 8. I wrote this January 7. It was just my mistake. -I wrote it on January 7 and mailed it on the 8th. I just out of habit -still writing December. - -Mr. McKENZIE. Mr. Rankin, may I ask the Commission, on Commission -Exhibit No. 988, which purports to be a translation of Mrs. Oswald's -letter to the Dallas Civil Liberties Union, do you know who translated -this letter or could you tell us who translated the letter? - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. McKenzie---- - -Mrs. OSWALD. They wrote me that I can answer them in Russian, and which -I did but I haven't any idea who translated my answer. - -Mr. RANKIN. The Commission Exhibit No. 987 which I will now offer -states that the translation was handled by Mrs. Ford and later seen by -Mrs. Paine. - -The translation of the exhibit that you now have in your hand, what is -the number of that? - -Mr. McKENZIE. This is Commission Exhibit No. 988 in English which -purports to be a translation of Mrs. Oswald's letter to the Dallas -Civil Liberties Union and I am asking does the Commission know who -translated the letter? - -Mr. RANKIN. We were informed by the Dallas Civil Liberties Union in -Exhibit No. 987 that the translation was made by Mrs. Ford and later -seen by Mrs. Paine, and I now offer all exhibits together with Exhibit -No. 987 as part of the testimony of this witness. - -Mr. DULLES. The exhibits shall be admitted. Have we the numbers of all -of these exhibits? - -Mr. RANKIN. Yes; the reporter has them. - -(Commission Exhibit No. 987 was marked for identification and received -in evidence.) - -Mr. RANKIN. Mrs. Oswald, I will hand you the cameras of your---- - -Mr. DULLES. I wonder before we finish this---- - -Mr. McKENZIE. I would prefer, Mr. Rankin, for the purposes of the -record so that the record will be complete, to have a correct English -translation of Mrs. Oswald's letter in the record in lieu of Commission -Exhibit No. 988. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Chairman, if it is agreeable to the Commission, I would -like to ask counsel to furnish such a translation and we will then make -it the next number, Exhibit No. 992, as a part of this record. - -Mr. DULLES. That shall be admitted then as Exhibit No. 992, the other -already being in the record I think, probably has to stay there -particularly in view of all this discussion of it. - -Mr. RANKIN. If you will furnish it. - -Mr. McKENZIE. You are putting the onus or burden back on me, Mr. -Rankin, when the Commission has a fully qualified, I presume, Russian -interpreter here, and if the Commission would not mind going to the -further expense of having the interpretation of the letter made, I -think it would expedite the Commission's report. - -Mr. RANKIN. If it is satisfactory to Mr. McKenzie, then, Mr. Chairman, -I would like to ask Mr. Coulter if he would make a translation and -submit it to Mr. McKenzie for submission to his client for approval, -and then we will have that marked the Exhibit No. 992 and made part of -this record. - -Mr. DULLES. Excellent, that will be admitted as such, Commission -Exhibit No. 992. - -Mr. McKENZIE. Thank you, Mr. Rankin and thank you Mr. Chairman. - -(Commission Exhibit No. 992 was marked for identification and received -in evidence.) - -Mr. RANKIN. Mrs. Oswald, will you examine the cameras of your husband -and tell us which one took the pictures that showed your husband with -the rifle and the pistol, as you will recall? - -The pictures I am asking you about are Exhibits Nos. 133-A and 133-B -which you recall are the ones that you said in your prior testimony you -took yourself. - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. - -Mr. RANKIN. With one of these cameras. - -Mrs. OSWALD. This is the first and last time in my life I ever took a -photograph and it was done with this gray camera. - -Mr. REDLICH. Mr. Rankin, the Commission exhibit numbers of the two -cameras, one is Commission Exhibit No. 136 and one is Commission -Exhibit No. 750. - -Mr. McKENZIE. And the gray camera she is referring to, Mr. Rankin, for -the purpose of the record is Commission Exhibit No. 750, isn't that -right, Mrs. Oswald? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. - -Mr. RANKIN. That is the gray camera you just said you took pictures -with, is that correct? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. The other camera also belonged to Lee but I don't use -it. - -Mr. RANKIN. Turning to another subject now, Mrs. Oswald, while you and -Lee Harvey Oswald were at Minsk in the Soviet Union, can you tell us -how Lee Harvey Oswald spent his leisure time while he was there? - -Mrs. OSWALD. I don't know how he spent his time before we were married -but afterwards he was a great lover of classical music and used to go -to concerts a lot, and theaters, and movies, symphony concerts, and we -used to go out on the lakes around Minsk. There are some lakes in the -confines of Minsk and outside where we used to go. - -Mr. RANKIN. While there did he read much? - -Mrs. OSWALD. He didn't read very much because there wasn't a very great -choice of books in English except the ones on Marxism. - -Mr. DULLES. He could, however, read books in Russian, could he not, at -this time? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes; but it was a lot of work for him and he really didn't -enjoy it very much. But he did go to Russian films and understood them. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did he go to the rifle club there? - -Mrs. OSWALD. He belonged to a hunters--a club of hunters and had a -rifle but he never went to the practice meetings of this club. He only -paid his membership dues, and I think that he joined this club in order -to be able to acquire a rifle because only apparently members of such -hunting clubs have the right in the Soviet Union to own a rifle. Only -once did he go out with a group of some of my friends and take his -rifle and try and shoot some game but he didn't catch anything. - -Representative FORD. Did he buy the rifle or was it given to him? - -Mrs. OSWALD. He bought it. - -Representative FORD. What did you do with it when you went to the -United States? - -Mrs. OSWALD. I think he sold it. - -Representative FORD. Was it a rifle of--much like the one that was used -in the assassination? - -Mrs. OSWALD. All rifles look alike to me. - -Mr. McKENZIE. Did it have a telescopic sight on it, Marina? - -Mrs. OSWALD. No. - -Mr. McKENZIE. But it was similar to the same rifle that he had in the -United States? - -Mrs. OSWALD. No. It wasn't identical but it might have been similar, -seeing as how they are both single barrel rifles. I don't understand -anything about rifles at all and I really am not qualified to talk -about them. - -Mr. RANKIN. You mentioned that he went to the rifle club on one -occasion or the hunting club on one occasion with some friends to hunt -squirrels or rabbits or things of that sort. Did he go to the hunting -club on other occasions to practice to shoot? - -Mrs. OSWALD. When I first saw the rifle here in the United States I -didn't pay much attention to it because I thought this was the rifle he -had brought from Russia. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did he practice shooting the rifle in Russia? - -Mrs. OSWALD. No. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you see him or observe him cleaning the rifle in Russia? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. - -Mr. RANKIN. And would he clean the rifle, did he clean it on several -occasions? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes, several times. - -Mr. RANKIN. The hunting club that he belonged to, did it have an -instructor in shooting the rifle? - -Mrs. OSWALD. I don't know but there should have been one. - -Mr. RANKIN. Now, he had to have a permit to purchase the rifle in -Russia. - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes; you can't possess a rifle without a--permission in -the Soviet Union. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did he purchase the rifle from a government agency? - -Mrs. OSWALD. You buy these rifles in special stores, but to buy them -you have to have a paper from the hunting club stating that you have -the right to buy a rifle. - -Mr. RANKIN. And the authorized government official gave him authority -to buy the gun through the hunting club? - -Mrs. OSWALD. The hunting club issues this permit. He used to clean the -rifle but he never used it. It always hung on the wall. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mrs. Oswald, will you describe what you were saying off the -record in regard to his going out to use the rifle in the country as -distinguished from using it in the club? - -Mrs. OSWALD. We all went out together in a group of boys and girls in -order to get--to swim a little and to get a suntan. It was a lake which -is just on the edge of town not far from Minsk, and the men had guns, -and they all went out to try to shoot some kind of rabbit or bird or -something like that, and the men went off together and I heard several -shots and they came back and they hadn't caught anything so we laughed -at it. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did that happen more than once? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Only one such trip. And even that time he didn't want to -take the gun with him. He took it only because one of my friends was -laughing at him and said, "You have a gun hanging here and you never -use it. Why don't you bring it along and see if you can use it." - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you and your husband have any friends other than -Russians while you were at Minsk? - -Mrs. OSWALD. There were friends. We had some friends from Argentina but -they didn't come on this excursion with us. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you have any friends there who were from Cuba? - -Mrs. OSWALD. There were Cuban students studying in Minsk, and this -Argentinian girl had a Cuban boyfriend and possibly Lee met this -boyfriend, this Cuban student, but I never met him. - -Mr. DULLES. Do you know where the Cuban students were studying, what -particular school? - -Mrs. OSWALD. They study in various educational institutions in Minsk, -some are in the medical institute, others are in the agricultural and -others are in the polytechnical institute. - -Mr. DULLES. Could you tell us a little more about these Argentinians, -were they there for educational reasons or what was the reason they -were there? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Excuse me; I am mixed up with Cubans. You talk about -Argentinians? - -Mr. DULLES. I asked about Argentinians but I would be glad to have you -add the Cubans to it, too. - -Mrs. OSWALD. There is agreement between the Cuban Government and the -Russian Government; and the Cuban Government under this agreement sends -Cuban students to study in the Soviet Union. - -From what I could tell from what Lee said, many of these Cuban -students were not satisfied with life in the Soviet Union, and this -Argentinian girl told me the same thing. Many of them thought that, -they were not satisfied with conditions in the Soviet Union and thought -if Castro were to be in power that the conditions in Cuba would become -similar to those in the Soviet Union and they were not satisfied with -this. They said it wasn't worth while carrying out a revolution just to -have the kind of life that these people in the Soviet Union had. - -Representative FORD. Would you have any idea how many Cubans were in -school in Minsk? - -Mrs. OSWALD. I heard the figure of 300 but I never knew even a single -one. - -Representative FORD. Could you be more helpful in the kind of schools -they went to, what were the schools? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Most of them were in agricultural institutes. Some were -in the institute of foreign languages where they spent a year studying -Russian in order subsequently to go on into some other institute -where they could study some more formal subject or some more formal -discipline. - -Representative FORD. About how old were these students? - -Mrs. OSWALD. About between 17 and 21. - -Mr. DULLES. Was your husband absent from you during any protracted -period after your marriage, and during your stay in Minsk other than -the trip I think he took one trip to Moscow without you. - -Mrs. OSWALD. Once I went to Kharkov, and he stayed in Minsk. Other than -that there were no absences on his part, except, of course, for the -trip to Moscow. Do you want to talk about the Argentinian students? - -Mr. DULLES. Yes; if you have more to say about that. - -Mrs. OSWALD. These are people who left Poland about 30 years previously -for Argentina. Then after the second World War the part of Poland where -they had been living became part of the Soviet Union and the father of -this family was an engineer and worked in the same factory where Lee -worked, his name was Zieger. - -They had two daughters born in Argentina, and the wife was very -homesick for her native country, so they came back and the Soviet -Government gave them Soviet citizenship before they got on the boat to -come back. Then she told us what she had been reading in the newspapers -was just propaganda and they thought the life was a little better than -what they found out what it was when they arrived. Now, they have been -there 7 or 8 years and they would prefer to go back to Argentina but -they can't. - -Mr. DULLES. In connection with your husband's work in the factory -did he have any indoctrination courses as a part of that in Marxism, -Leninism, or in anything of that kind in connection with his work in -the factory? - -Mrs. OSWALD. I think there are such courses in the factory for party -members and for people who want to become party members but Lee never -went to them. When he was in Russia he didn't like Russian Communists. -He thought they were all bureaucrats. I don't actually know what he -liked except himself. - -Mr. DULLES. Do you know whether your husband received any special pay -or special funds through the Russian Red Cross or through any other -channel in addition to his regular pay in the factory? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Before we were married he apparently--he told me he was -getting some assistance from the Government, but he told me this after -we were married, and I don't know from whom or in what way he got it. - -Representative FORD. Did you have any idea how much extra he was -getting over his wages? - -Mrs. OSWALD. I don't know how much it was but he had quite a lot of -money in the beginning. Maybe he wrote about this in his diary. - -Representative FORD. Did you know how much he was earning each week -while he was employed? - -Mrs. OSWALD. In Russia they don't pay for every week. Eighty rubles a -month. - -Representative FORD. Eighty rubles a month? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. - -Mr. DULLES. Those are the new rubles? - -Mrs. OSWALD. New rubles. - -Mr. DULLES. Those were the new rubles, revalued rubles, that is about -$90; is it not? - -Mrs. OSWALD. $90 or $80. - -Representative FORD. While you were married did you know of any extra -money he was getting? - -Mrs. OSWALD. He didn't receive any--he didn't receive any extra money -while we were married, he had a little bit left over from what he was -getting before, that is all. - -Representative FORD. Did he handle all of the money that he received or -did he give you some while you were in the Soviet Union? - -Mrs. OSWALD. I was working at the same time, and I gave him my salary -and he in turn would give me some money every now and then to buy -groceries with and that sort of thing, but I didn't ever get any money -from his salary. - -Representative FORD. So the only income that you know about was the -money you earned and the money that he earned? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. - -Representative FORD. And how much did you earn? - -Mrs. OSWALD. 45. - -Representative FORD. 45 rubles a month? - -Mrs. OSWALD. A month. - -Representative FORD. There were no other funds, to your knowledge, that -he received after you were married? - -Mrs. OSWALD. No. - -Representative FORD. He paid all the bills? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. You didn't have too much bills in Russia. - -Mr. DULLES. Did he take your money, too? What was your rent, do you -recall at that time, rent of the apartment? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Seven rubles and 50 cents, kopeks. - -Mr. DULLES. Was it 7 rubles and 50 kopeks? A week? - -Mrs. OSWALD. A month; the rent in Russia are usually about 10 percent -of wages a month. - -Mr. McKENZIE. Wages are low, too. - -Mrs. OSWALD. Of course, people who get more, higher wages have bigger -apartments. - -Mr. DULLES. Mr. Rankin, I think, is it all right to adjourn at this -point? - -We will reconvene at 2 o'clock. - -(Whereupon, at 12:50 p.m., the President's Commission recessed.) - - - - -Afternoon Session - -TESTIMONY OF HARRIS COULTER - - -The President's Commission reconvened at 2 p.m. - -(Members present at this point: Chief Justice Warren and Representative -Ford.) - -The CHAIRMAN. The Commission will come to order. You may proceed, Mr. -Rankin. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Chief Justice. Mr. McKenzie has asked that we develop -in the record a little bit about the qualifications of Mr. Coulter as -an interpreter, so it would be clear that he is able to translate back -and forth. - -The CHAIRMAN. Very well. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Coulter, I think you should be sworn for this. - -The CHAIRMAN. Would you rise and be sworn, please? Do you solemnly -swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so -help you God? - -Mr. COULTER. I do. - -Mr. RANKIN. Will you please state your full name? - -Mr. COULTER. Harris Livermore Coulter. - -Mr. RANKIN. Where do you live? - -Mr. COULTER. Glen Echo Heights, Md. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you have a position in the Government at the present -time? - -Mr. COULTER. Yes; I am an interpreter with the State Department. - -Mr. RANKIN. How long have you been in that capacity? - -Mr. COULTER. About 3 months. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you have any special field of foreign languages that you -are working in? - -Mr. COULTER. Russian is my best foreign language. I also work in French -and in Yugoslavian. - -Mr. RANKIN. What training have you had for interpreting or translating -Russian? - -Mr. COULTER. Russian language and area studies was my major subject -at Yale University when I was an undergraduate. I also took 4 years -of graduate work at Columbia University in Soviet area studies. In -addition to that, I studied at the University of Moscow for 6 months. -And I have been studying Russian since 1950. - -Mr. RANKIN. Can you tell us what period of time you studied at the -University of Moscow? - -Mr. COULTER. I was there from December 19--excuse me--from September -1962 until January 1963. - -Mr. RANKIN. Have you been acting as an official interpreter in -Government work? - -Mr. COULTER. Yes; for the last 3 months I have been. - -Mr. RANKIN. And will you describe the nature of that activity? - -Mr. COULTER. I have been escorting delegations from Yugoslavia both -around the United States and in Washington. I have been working with -French delegations here in the State Department. I would have been -working with Russians if there had been any. There just haven't been -any yet. - -In July I will be going to Geneva to be an interpreter at the -disarmament negotiations between the United States and the Soviet Union. - -I worked 3 years as simultaneous interpreter at the United Nations, in -Russian and French. - -Mr. RANKIN. And have all these various activities since you have been -employed by the Government been as a part of your Government work? - -Mr. COULTER. Yes. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you have facility in the reading of the Russian language? - -Mr. COULTER. Yes; I read it fluently. - -Mr. RANKIN. Have you had any difficulty understanding Mrs. Oswald? - -Mr. COULTER. Not in the slightest; no. - -Mr. RANKIN. I will ask you to ask her if she has had any difficulty -understanding you. - -Mrs. OSWALD. In the Russian language? - -Mr. RANKIN. Yes. - -Mrs. OSWALD. No. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. McKenzie, do you have anything else? - -Mr. McKENZIE. I would like to ask a couple of questions. Mr. Coulter, -prior to your service with the State Department which commenced some 3 -months ago, where were you employed? - -Mr. COULTER. I was unemployed from June 1963 until March 1964. I was in -the process of being cleared for a Government job at the time. - -I terminated my employment with the United Nations in June 1963. - -Mr. McKENZIE. And you have been cleared for Government security -purposes? - -Mr. COULTER. That is right. The clearance began about August. I had -some part-time jobs, freelance work, between the dates, but nothing -permanent. - -Mr. McKENZIE. But for a number of years you were an interpreter at the -United Nations? - -Mr. COULTER. About 3 years. - -Mr. McKENZIE. And then you started getting a security clearance, and -for the past 3 months you have been employed by the State Department as -an interpreter? - -Mr. COULTER. Yes. - -Mr. McKENZIE. You were the interpreter present this morning when Mrs. -Oswald commenced her testimony on this occasion? - -Mr. COULTER. I was. - -Mr. McKENZIE. And all the above and foregoing testimony previously -testified to from the beginning of this session this morning up through -now, you have interpreted; have you not? - -Mr. COULTER. I have. - -Mrs. OSWALD. I appreciate Mr. Coulter helping me. - -Mr. McKENZIE. Mr. Rankin, the purpose and reason behind my asking -you to show his qualifications, the interpreter's qualifications, is -that the record will reflect that Mrs. Oswald was asked questions in -English, and they were interpreted into Russian, and she has answered -in Russian--and so that the record will show she was not answering in -English. - - -TESTIMONY OF MRS. LEE HARVEY OSWALD RESUMED - -Mr. RANKIN. Mrs. Oswald, I would like to turn now to the pictures of -your husband that I asked you about earlier, when you identified the -gray camera as the one that was used in taking the pictures. And I -called your attention to Commission Exhibits Nos. 133-A and 133-B. I -now wish to ask you specifically whether you used that camera that you -saw identified for the taking of both of these pictures. And in so -doing, I wish to call your attention to the fact that there were two -different positions in the exhibits. - -Mrs. OSWALD. I took both these pictures at the same time, and with the -same camera. - -Mr. RANKIN. And in giving that answer, you have examined the pictures, -and you know they are different positions--that is, your husband -has the rifle in different positions and the newspaper in different -positions in the two pictures--do you? - -Mrs. OSWALD. I am aware of that. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mrs. Oswald, did you ever have a discussion with your -husband about when he decided that he would like to become a citizen of -the Soviet Union? - -Mrs. OSWALD. We discussed this and he said that the Soviet Government -wanted him to become a Soviet citizen and furnished him the necessary -papers, but he apparently refused. But the way it appears in his diary, -of course, is quite different--in fact, the exact opposite. - -Mr. RANKIN. By the exact opposite, you mean that it shows in his diary -that he was the one that wanted to be a Soviet citizen, and the Soviet -Union refused to allow that; is that right? - -Mrs. OSWALD. That is correct. - -Representative FORD. When did this conversation on this subject take -place, Mrs. Oswald? - -Mrs. OSWALD. About 3 months after we were married. - -Representative FORD. While you were living in Minsk? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. - -Representative FORD. Do you remember how the discussion came up? - -Mrs. OSWALD. When Lee wrote the American Embassy requesting return to -the United States and requesting an American passport, he told me that -it was very lucky that he hadn't become a Soviet citizen, and that his -passport was still in the American Embassy. And that if he had become a -Soviet citizen, it would have been difficult if not impossible to leave. - -Before I found out about his diary, I didn't realize that the Soviet -Government had refused to grant him citizenship, because he never -talked about this, never mentioned it. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Chief Justice, that is the end of the questioning that -I planned to examine Mrs. Oswald about. I understand that Congressman -Ford has some. - -I would like before closing to make an offer of what has been marked -now as Commission Exhibit No. 993, which is the story that Mrs. Oswald -developed in Russian that was furnished to us, and I want to inform the -Commission that it was furnished to us for the purpose of trying to -examine Mrs. Oswald the first time, and that counsel at that time and -present counsel wanted to make it very clear that they didn't want to -lose any property interest in that document. And all rights that they -might have to publish it and use it commercially and any other way that -she might have, and that it was merely furnished to the Commission for -official purposes and very strictly limited in that manner. But I would -like to offer it and the Commission may want to reserve its decision as -to whether it should be made a part of the record and published. But I -think it should at this time be offered for your consideration in that -manner. - -The CHAIRMAN. Yes. Does counsel wish to add anything to that? - -Mr. McKENZIE. Yes, Mr. Chairman; I would, if I may, sir. - -The CHAIRMAN. Yes. - -Mr. McKENZIE. I appreciate Mr. Rankin's remarks in connection with the -offering of Mrs. Oswald's memoirs, or manuscript of her memoirs, which, -I understand, is Commission Exhibit No. 993. The manuscript prepared -by Mrs. Oswald was heretofore voluntarily presented for the sole and -exclusive purpose of assisting the Commission in its official duties -for the Commission's use and benefit and to help the Commission in -evaluating Mrs. Oswald's testimony as well as the testimony of others -in arriving at a report setting forth its findings and conclusions to -the President and the American people. - -Mrs. Oswald and her two minor children have property rights that are -private to her and to them in the publishing and use of the memoirs -set forth in her manuscript, which was written solely for her use -in writing a book for commercial purposes. She does object to the -inclusion of the manuscript in the record, or the publishing of same, -and she does not waive or relinquish or in anyway legally or otherwise -give away her proprietary rights in this regard, to the manuscript. - -She respectfully requests that the Commission honor her request in -what has heretofore been deemed and what she now deems to be her -assistance to the Commission--and I will say this--that she has told -me repeatedly that she has sought to assist the Commission in every -possible and conceivable way. But in light of that, she does respect -the Commission's indulgence in not publishing this manuscript, and asks -that this only be used as it was presented for the purpose of assisting -the Commission in its official duties, in evaluating the evidence. - -The CHAIRMAN. Do you have any suggestions as to how we might use it and -at the same time not permanently deprive the public of an opportunity -to see it? - -Before you answer that, I want to say this. I am sure no member of the -Commission wants to--has any desire to in anyway interfere with the -property rights of Mrs. Oswald. She did cooperate with us in bringing -this. We feel grateful that she did do it. On the other hand, we do -want eventually to have this in the record so the public will know -that they are getting everything that the Commission has. I am just -wondering if perhaps while you are contemplating writing something on -the subject, and protecting her property rights, if we could seal this -with a notation that it was not to be opened for public view until that -has been done. And you could let us know when that day has passed. -Would that protect her rights? - -Mr. McKENZIE. Well, Mr. Chief Justice, I would be the last one in the -world to suggest anything either to yourself or to the Commission -insofar as the way this matter should be handled. I do have, or feel, -that the manuscript was given to the Commission, the Commission has -had more than adequate opportunity to interrogate Mrs. Oswald. She is -willing to stay here now as long as the Commission desires, and will do -so voluntarily without the issuance of a subpena or any other way. - -I think through the interrogation that Mr. Rankin has conducted--I -might remark, most ably--that certainly the matters covered in the -manuscript have already been covered in direct sworn testimony. And -with that thought in mind, it was my feeling, and it is my feeling -that the Commission and its staff, through the help and assistance -of the manuscript and Mrs. Oswald, have had the benefit of all the -matters previously written down by Mrs. Oswald, and that if there -are any questions that have not been covered that are covered in the -manuscript, I am sure that counsel for the Commission could adequately -cover those questions. The manuscript was prepared by Mrs. Oswald -in the form of memoirs. And was not prepared for the use of the -Commission. And I think without the Commission's knowledge--it was -prepared beforehand. And she brought it so the Commission could have -the effect of it and the use of it. Now, if the Commission feels that -it should be finally published as part of the Commission's report, I -would certainly hope that the Commission would honor her request and -withhold the publishing of the manuscript until such time as she has -had the opportunity to conclude any negotiations which she might have -or might possibly have for the publishing of a book. - -I ask this not so much for Mrs. Oswald herself, but more for her two -minor children. - -The CHAIRMAN. Well, we will do at least that. We will take the matter -under consideration and having in mind her rights and our desire not -to interfere with them we will try to work out a solution that will be -satisfactory to you and to her. - -Mr. McKENZIE. I thank you very much, Mr. Chief Justice. And I might -also add that the Chief Justice and all members of this Commission and -its staff know full well, or at least I feel would know full well that -just as soon as this report is published and distributed to the public, -or distributed to the press, regardless of what property rights she -may have now or may have then, it will be extremely difficult for Mrs. -Oswald to protect those rights--if not impossible. - -The CHAIRMAN. I would like to say, also, for the record that there is -nothing sensational or nothing of a secretive nature in the document. -It is something that, as you say, was written for publication, and we -assume that it will be some day published, probably, and that if it is -not given to the public, it will not be because there is anything of a -secret nature in there. It would only be a question of whether it could -be done consistent with the rights of the witness. And we will bear -those in mind, you may be sure. - -Mr. McKENZIE. I thank you, Mr. Chief Justice. - -And if I may add one other thing. I have heretofore made a request on -Mr. Rankin in connection with a diary which was presented by Robert -Oswald at the time of his testimony to the Commission, that Robert -Oswald had prepared shortly after November 22, and which not only -has he furnished the diary to the Commission, but has also narrated -that diary by reading same on dictaphone tapes, and I have, in turn, -furnished it to Mr. Jenner, a member of the Commission's staff. - -I have requested the Commission not to print Robert Oswald's diary -for the same reasons that I have heretofore outlined in connection -with Mrs. Oswald's manuscript. And I would hope that the Commission -could consider Robert Oswald's diary in the same light that you -would consider this manuscript. I am not saying that either have any -commercial value, but if they do I would hope that they would inure to -the benefit of Mrs. Oswald's family and the benefit of Robert Oswald's -family. - -The CHAIRMAN. Yes. We will consider that, also. But there are some -portions of the diary of Mr. Oswald that are in the record already -as a result of his examination, as there are things involved in this -document of Mrs. Oswald's that are in the record by question and answer. - -Mr. McKENZIE. There is one other thing, and then I will close on this -particular subject. Mrs. Oswald does not have a copy of the manuscript -of her memoirs. Her former attorney, Mr. Thorne, or her former -so-called business manager, Mr. James Martin, reportedly to me has -such a copy. But at the present time she does not have a copy of this -manuscript nor do I have a copy of the manuscript. - -The CHAIRMAN. You may have one immediately. - -Mr. McKENZIE. Fine, sir--I would like to say at the Commission's -expense. - -The CHAIRMAN. Yes; of course, we will see you have one. - -Mr. McKENZIE. At the time that Robert Oswald gave his testimony to -the Commission, Mr. Jenner and Mr. Liebler followed the practice of -taking originals and photostating them or Xerox copying them and giving -the originals back. Before we do close today, I would like to make a -request on the record to have all the articles that Marina has brought -up here in the way of letters and things of that sort returned to her, -with, of course, adequate copies for the Commission and its use. And I -don't know whether you have any or not. - -Mr. RANKIN. You have made your request. - -The CHAIRMAN. We will consider that along with the other things. Mr. -Rankin, will you continue now? - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Coulter, could you state for the record whether you -have related this colloquy to Mrs. Oswald, so that she is informed of -it? - -Mr. COULTER. I gave it to her in general terms, that they were -discussing the question of the rights to her manuscript and the rights -to the originals of the various objects in her possession, which she -had made available to the Commission. - -Mr. RANKIN. Thank you. - -(At this point, Mr. Dulles entered the hearing room.) - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Chief Justice, I have one other offer to make, and -I would like to offer it under Exhibit No. 994, and that would be a -translation of this document, that would present the same problems. - -We have a translation that was made by Mr. Gopadze, the Secret Service -agent, who is quite familiar with the Russian language. But we earlier -today had a letter that Mrs. Oswald wrote to the Civil Liberties Union -of Dallas, and she questioned some of the translation from Russian into -English, which was not done by any of our people, of course. And we are -not so sure about Mr. Gopadze's translation. So we would like to follow -what was suggested at that time, that Mr. Coulter make a translation -of this, which we would submit to counsel for Mrs. Oswald, and Mrs. -Oswald, for them to be satisfied it is a correct translation, and then -make that translation a part of the record, subject to your deciding -later whether it should be. - -The CHAIRMAN. Well, instead of referring it to Mr. Coulter, we will -refer it to Mrs. Oswald's attorney, and he can have prepared any -translation that he wishes, and then we will have it for comparison -with the other. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Chief Justice, I thought we would save them the expense. - -The CHAIRMAN. I would rather deal directly with the counsel, and then -we are not in any cross purposes. He can have it done any way he wants. - -Mr. McKENZIE. Mr. Chief Justice, with your kind indulgence, sir, and -the Commission's kind indulgence, Mr. Coulter's translation of this -document would be more than satisfactory with Mrs. Oswald and with -myself. And, quite frankly, the funds which she has available to her -for such a purpose are so extremely limited that it would be an extreme -hardship on her to employ an interpreter to translate it. - -The CHAIRMAN. That is perfectly all right, that Mr. Coulter should do -it. I have no objection at all to Mr. Coulter. Only when we are dealing -with a client of a lawyer, we like to deal directly with him, and he -can deal with the translator if he wishes. - -Mr. McKENZIE. I think we are both trying to serve the same purpose. -But Mr. Rankin and I, I think, are in full agreement on Mr. Coulter's -interpretation of this manuscript--if that is satisfactory with the -Commission. - -The CHAIRMAN. Yes; if it is satisfactory with you, it is satisfactory -with me. There is no question about that. - -Mrs. OSWALD. Maybe in this manuscript many details are lacking which -have been developed in my testimony, because I wrote it mainly for -public consumption. - -Mr. RANKIN. We understand, Mrs. Oswald. I am sure the Commissioners -all understand that the manuscript is something that was referred to -in order to inquire from you during your giving of testimony, and that -your testimony, together with the manuscript, should be considered if -there is any question, because you do not purport to cover everything -in the manuscript. Is that what you are saying? - -Mrs. OSWALD. I am very ashamed that there is so much unnecessary -information in this manuscript and that it caused the interpreter so -much difficulty in translating it. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Chief Justice, I then offer under Exhibit No. 994, and -I make, without repeating them, the same suggestions I did about the -Russian document, Exhibit No. 993, and ask that we follow the procedure -of getting the translation, and then make it a part of this record, -subject to the Commission's determining that it should be. - -The CHAIRMAN. It may be done in that manner. - -Mr. RANKIN. That is all. - -The CHAIRMAN. Congressman Ford, do you have some matters? - -Mrs. OSWALD. I would like to know if the Commission wants me to make -some comment on any differences in substance between the manuscript -and the testimony which I have given, or between the manuscript or the -translation, whichever translation may be accepted, or both. - -The CHAIRMAN. The Commission will ask the questions, if there is -anything of that nature. Now, Congressman Ford, do you have some -questions? - -Representative FORD. Yes, Mr. Chief Justice, I have a few questions. In -the Soviet Union, when a marriage application is applied for, what are -the steps that you take? - -Mrs. OSWALD. There are certain applications which have to be filled out -by the boy and girl. - -Representative FORD. Do you have to go down together to make the -application? - -Mrs. OSWALD. It is necessary for both to appear with their passports -and fill out this application. - -Representative FORD. In other words, Lee Harvey Oswald had to take -his passport down to--at the time that he applied for a marriage -application? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Lee Oswald did not have his passport at the time since it -was in the American Embassy. He went with his residence permission to -the office. But our marriage was entered into his American passport -after we were married and before we left the Soviet Union for the -United States. - -Representative FORD. So it is not the passport in the sense that we -think of a passport, that we get to travel to a foreign country? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Since most marriages are concluded between Soviet -citizens, they only present their internal passports to the marriage -license bureau. But if there is a marriage between a Soviet citizen -and a foreigner, he presents his residence permission and his foreign -passport, also, if he has one. If he doesn't have it, the residence -permission is enough. - -Representative FORD. Do we have the document that he presented at the -time he applied for marriage? - -Mrs. OSWALD. I don't know. I think he had to turn that in before he -left the Soviet Union. - -Mr. McKENZIE. Are you referring to his American passport? - -Representative FORD. No; I am referring to the document that he -presented at the time he applied for marriage. - -Mr. McKENZIE. Which would be a Russian instrument? - -Representative FORD. Right. - -Mrs. OSWALD. I don't know if it is available. I think he had to turn it -in before he left the Soviet Union. - -Representative FORD. In other words, both you and Lee Harvey Oswald -signed the necessary documents for marriage? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. - -Representative FORD. During your period in Minsk, following your -marriage, did you and Lee Harvey Oswald have any marital difficulties, -any problems between the two of you? - -Mrs. OSWALD. We had some difficulties in connection with the fact that -I told my uncle and aunt that we were going to leave for the United -States. Lee did not want me to tell anybody that we were preparing to -leave for the United States. - -Representative FORD. That was the only difficulty you had? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. - -Representative FORD. Was your vacation trip to Kharkov--was that a -vacation, or did that result from any marital difficulty? - -Mrs. OSWALD. My aunt invited me to Kharkov, and that is why I went. It -was not the result of any marital difficulties. - -Representative FORD. You testified a few minutes ago, Mrs. Oswald, that -there was a difference in the historic diary and what Lee Oswald told -you concerning the status of his application for Soviet citizenship. -You have read the historic diary? - -Mrs. OSWALD. I have only read what the FBI agents translated, those -parts of the diary which were translated into Russian by the FBI. - -Representative FORD. Was that much of it or a small part of it? - -Mrs. OSWALD. It was the part about his attempt at suicide. - -Representative FORD. And also the part concerning the status of his -Soviet citizenship? - -Mrs. OSWALD. I think that that is the part which deals with his -application for Soviet citizenship. I don't know of any other parts of -the diary in which this would be set forth. - -Representative FORD. You have no idea of when he wrote the historic -diary? - -Mrs. OSWALD. I don't know when he began, but I know that after we were -married he spent the evenings writing his diary. I think that is the -reason why he didn't want me to study English while we were still in -Russia, because he didn't want me to be able to read his diary. - -Representative FORD. He never read you the diary in Russian? - -Mrs. OSWALD. No. - -Representative FORD. On the trip back to the United States, Lee Oswald -wrote on the Holland-American Line paper some additional comments. Did -you see him write this on the trip? - -Mrs. OSWALD. I saw him writing this when we were in the cabin on the -ship. I thought they were just letters, though, and I didn't read them. -He didn't write these when I was around. - -Representative FORD. He didn't write them while you were present? - -Mrs. OSWALD. No. - -Mr. REDLICH. I might mention for the record that this document has -already been introduced as Commission Exhibit No. 25. - -Representative FORD. If you didn't see him write it in the cabin how -did you know he wrote it? - -Mrs. OSWALD. In the first place, because the paper was from the -Holland-American Line, and then I think--in the second place, because I -saw these pages covered with writing in the cabin, and I think that he -must have gone some place else on the ship, such as the library, to do -the actual writing. - -Representative FORD. Have you read that which he wrote on the ship? - -Mrs. OSWALD. No; I have not read them, because I don't understand -English. - -Representative FORD. He never read it to you in Russian? - -Mrs. OSWALD. No. - -Representative FORD. At any time on the trip back, from the time you -started to leave the Soviet Union until you arrived in the United -States, did you have any trouble at the border of the Soviet Union or -any other country? - -Mrs. OSWALD. We had no difficulty with the authorities of any kind -on any border. I think that my husband may have had some financial -difficulties in New York, when he arrived. - -Representative FORD. You left the Soviet Union by what means, now? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Train and boat. - -Representative FORD. You went from the Soviet Union to Poland by train? - -Mrs. OSWALD. We took a train from Moscow to Amsterdam, through Poland -and Germany. - -Representative FORD. You had no difficulty going into Poland, going -through Germany? - -Mrs. OSWALD. No. - -Representative FORD. Or into Holland? - -Mrs. OSWALD. No. And there were no difficulties in our entering the -United States, either. - -Representative FORD. When you were living at Elsbeth Street, did you -and Lee have any domestic trouble? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. - -Representative FORD. Could you relate how frequently and how serious -they were? - -Mrs. OSWALD. The first difficulty we had was at Elsbeth Street when I -told the landlady that I was from Russia. My husband had told her that -I was from Czechoslovakia, and he became very angry with me for telling -her I was from Russia, and said that I talked too much. - -Representative FORD. That was the first incident? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. - -Representative FORD. Were there others? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Then we had difficulties because I had a number of Russian -friends in Elsbeth Street, around there, in Dallas, and he was jealous -of me, and didn't want me to see them. - -Representative FORD. During this time, did he physically abuse you? Did -he hit you? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. - -Representative FORD. Did Mr. De Mohrenschildt reprimand Lee for his -abuse to you? - -Mrs. OSWALD. I don't know. He didn't support this. He didn't favor this -conduct of my husband's. But I don't think he ever said anything to him -about it, or told him that he shouldn't do it. - -Representative FORD. Mr. De Mohrenschildt didn't say anything to Lee -Oswald in your presence about his abuse towards you? - -Mrs. OSWALD. No; not in my presence. - -Representative FORD. Did Mr. De Mohrenschildt take you to Mellers, was -it? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Anna Meller--no; he did not. - -Representative FORD. Mr. De Mohrenschildt did not take you there? - -Mrs. OSWALD. No; we had a quarrel, and I took the child and took a -taxi, and went by myself there. - -Representative FORD. Did you have money to pay for a taxi? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Anna Meller paid for the taxi. - -Representative FORD. When you got to Anna Meller's? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. - -Representative FORD. I believe that is all, Mr. Chairman. - -The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Dulles, do you have any questions? - -Mr. DULLES. A couple, Mr. Chief Justice. - -You have described this morning briefly the manner of your life in -Minsk. I wonder if you would also now discuss that in the United -States. What did you do with your leisure time, how did Oswald handle -his leisure time when he wasn't working? - -I am speaking of your stays in Dallas, Fort Worth, and New Orleans. - -Mrs. OSWALD. My life in the United States was not quite as carefree -as it had been in the Soviet Union. I was occupied all the time with -housework, and I couldn't go anywhere. Lee spent a good deal of time -reading. - -Mr. DULLES. Were you together most of the time? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. - -Mr. DULLES. So that you knew where Lee was. Lee wasn't away on trips -much of the time, except for his trip to Mexico, and when he was absent -in New Orleans? - -Mrs. OSWALD. That is correct. We were together. - -Mr. DULLES. Do you know what he was reading in those days? - -Mrs. OSWALD. He read nonfiction almost entirely and mainly historical -works. - -Mr. DULLES. Was he reading Russian books or mostly English books? - -Mrs. OSWALD. He could read Russian, but he read only English works. - -Mr. DULLES. Was he doing much writing in this period, during the -American stay? - -Mrs. OSWALD. When we were living on Elsbeth Street, he wrote something, -and also on Neely Street, I think it was in connection with the Walker, -General Walker incident. - -Mr. DULLES. Do you know what happened to that particular writing? - -Mrs. OSWALD. I know that he destroyed this after the Walker business. - -He had a map of Dallas, and he used to go off by himself and think -about the map, and work on it. I think you have this map in among the -materials of the Commission. He used to work on it, and the least -disturbance used to upset him very much when he was working on this map. - -Mr. DULLES. When you say he used to go away, do you mean go away in the -house or outside the house with the map? - -Mrs. OSWALD. In the house, in the kitchen, and would tell me not to -come in, not to make any noise at all. - -Mr. DULLES. Could you specify as to time and date, as to about when he -acquired this map and began this study of the map? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Could I ask the Commission just when we were living on -Elsbeth Street, since I have forgotten? - -Mr. REDLICH. November 1962 to March 1963. November 3, 1962 to March 2, -1963. - -Mrs. OSWALD. I think it was at the end of January, it was after New -Years. I think he had a map all the time, but he started becoming -particularly occupied with it at the end of January 1963. - -Mr. DULLES. 1963? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. - -Mr. DULLES. Did Oswald, to your knowledge, have friends, associates, -other men whom he saw, in addition to the considerable number whom -you have described as your friends in Dallas and Fort Worth, whom you -have already described? Did he have any business friends or any other -friends you can think of that used to come to the house? - -Mrs. OSWALD. No one, except for my friends whom I have already told you -about. - -Mr. DULLES. That is all I have, Mr. Chief Justice. - -The CHAIRMAN. Congressman, did you have any more? - -Mr. DULLES. I was speaking of the United States. - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes; he told me that he was working on this map in -connection with the bus schedules. He had a kind of bus schedule, -and--a paper with bus schedules on it, and he was somehow comparing -them or working on them, or doing something with these two documents. - -The CHAIRMAN. Congressman Ford? - -Representative FORD. When you left the Soviet Union, Lee borrowed money -from the U.S. Government to pay for your transportation back to the -United States. Did you have any other money of your own at that time? - -Mrs. OSWALD. We had--it is permissible to exchange a certain amount of -Soviet rubles into American dollars in such cases, and we did exchange -some Soviet rubles--I think about $180 worth--when we left. But that -wasn't enough to pay the whole trip. - -Representative FORD. Lee had borrowed from the Government approximately -$600? - -Mr. RANKIN. $450, and then the exchange made a total of $600 and -something. - -Representative FORD. This $180 was used with the State Department money -for the transportation and the funds for the trip? - -Mrs. OSWALD. I don't know, since my husband took care of that whole -matter. He never talked about money with me. - -Representative FORD. Would you describe one of the border crossings? -What did the Government officials do when you went from Poland into -Germany, for example? Tell us what actually happened. - -Mrs. OSWALD. The train stopped and people come in and check your -documents. - -On the Russian border, of course, people come in and look at your -bags--that is to say, they don't rifle through everything, but they -pick things at random and look at them. - -Representative FORD. Did Lee carry all the documents? - -Mrs. OSWALD. He carried all the documents, since I had the baby to look -after. - -Representative FORD. At the Polish-German border, did they actually -examine the documents? - -Mrs. OSWALD. More carefully between Russia and Poland than between -Poland and Germany. - -Representative FORD. Did Lee make any acquaintances on the train and -the boat? - -Mrs. OSWALD. No. - -Representative FORD. Did---- - -Mrs. OSWALD. On the boat there were two Rumanian girls we talked with, -since I had studied a little bit of Moldavian before, which is similar -to Russian, and could speak a little. And on that basis we met and -talked a little. - -Representative FORD. Did George De Mohrenschildt at any time take you -any place from the Elsbeth Street residence? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Only to his house. - -Representative FORD. Did Lee accompany you at that time? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes; once he took us both home to see his daughter. He -took us--took me to see his daughter, at a time when I was living in -Fort Worth, and Lee was living in Dallas. I might be confused about -just who went, and when. - -Representative FORD. But he only took you once from one place to his -house? - -Mrs. OSWALD. No; we went several times to his house. Maybe two or three -times. - -Representative FORD. Did Lee accompany you on any of these occasions? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Mr. De Mohrenschildt took us once to the Ford's house. It -was on New Year's, I think, Katya Ford's house. It was either Christmas -or New Year's. I don't think that Mr. De Mohrenschildt is as dangerous -as he sounds. This is my personal opinion. - -Representative FORD. I wasn't implying that he was dangerous. I was -just trying to---- - -Mrs. OSWALD. He talks all the time. Did he appear before the Commission -or not? - -Mr. RANKIN. We have his testimony. - -Representative FORD. I have nothing further. - -The CHAIRMAN. I think that is all, Mrs. Oswald. Thank you very much. - -Mr. McKENZIE. I have some questions, if I may. - -The CHAIRMAN. Yes; Mr. McKenzie. - -Mr. McKENZIE. You mentioned earlier, in response to some question, that -your husband had stated that the Soviet Government wanted him to become -a Soviet citizen, but that his diary says the opposite. - -When did you first learn that the Soviet Government wanted Lee Harvey -Oswald to become a Soviet citizen? - -Mrs. OSWALD. I heard this 3 months after we were married, from Lee. - -Mr. McKENZIE. Did any Soviet---- - -Mr. DULLES. Who did you hear it from? - -Mrs. OSWALD. From Lee. - -Mr. McKENZIE. Did any Soviet Government official come to see you or Lee -after you were married, and visit with you? - -Mrs. OSWALD. No. - -Mr. McKENZIE. Did Lee, from time to time, have to report to any Soviet -Government agency after you were married? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. - -Mr. McKENZIE. And how often did he make a report to a government -official or to a government agency? - -Mrs. OSWALD. He had to go every month or every 3 months. I don't -remember how often. It was either every month or every 2 or 3 and get a -stamp in his residence permit. - -Mr. McKENZIE. And how long would he be gone on those occasions from -home, or from work? - -Mrs. OSWALD. About half an hour. - -Mr. McKENZIE. You have mentioned that he had Cuban friends and friends -from the Argentine in Minsk. Did he ever have any Mexican friends in -Minsk? - -Mrs. OSWALD. No. - -Mr. McKENZIE. Did he ever mention to you anyone that he knew in Mexico, -either from Cuba or from the Soviet Union or from any other place, any -name of anyone? - -Mrs. OSWALD. He might have had some, but I don't know anything about -any of them. He never mentioned it. - -Mr. McKENZIE. It has been reported that--in the papers--that at the -time you left New Orleans, or at the time that Lee Harvey Oswald left -New Orleans, that he had two books on Marxism and a fiction book -written by Ian Fleming called "To Russia With Love." Do you recall -seeing that book there in the apartment? - -Mrs. OSWALD. I only knew about the two books on Marxism and Leninism. I -don't know anything about this third one. - -Mr. McKENZIE. And those books you know about, were they books from the -public library in New Orleans? - -Mrs. OSWALD. I think these were his own private possession. I think he -had even a book in English when he was in Russia on Marxism. - -Mr. McKENZIE. After your arrival in the United States, and after you -had left Fort Worth, and had moved into your own apartment, did your -husband have any money? - -Mrs. OSWALD. When he left Dallas for Fort Worth? - -Mr. McKENZIE. Yes. - -Mrs. OSWALD. I think he had some money saved up. He always was saving -money for a rainy day. - -(At this point, Representative Ford withdrew from the hearing room.) - -Mr. McKENZIE. From what source did he save that money? Where did the -money come from? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Only from his salary, from his wages. - -Mr. McKENZIE. When he was not working, did he have any other source of -money, or did he have money? - -Mrs. OSWALD. When he wasn't working, he got some unemployment -compensation from the place where he had been working. - -Mr. McKENZIE. Did he ever receive money to your knowledge from any -other sources, other than from the Government or from his work? - -Mrs. OSWALD. The only sources I know of were the companies where he -worked. - -Mr. McKENZIE. Who did your husband consider as good friends of his in -Dallas, Tex.? - -Mrs. OSWALD. He was most friendly with George De Mohrenschildt. -However, this is not a very nice thing to say for Mr. De -Mohrenschildt's reputation. This has been--had a harmful effect on Mr. -De Mohrenschildt's reputation as a result of the assassination, the -fact that he was friendly with my husband. - -Mr. McKENZIE. Did your husband have any other good friends? For -example, did he consider Michael Paine a good friend of his? - -Mrs. OSWALD. No; he didn't like Michael Paine. Therefore, I was -surprised when they went to this meeting together. Perhaps they became -friends after this. But it didn't seem so to me. He didn't show it to -me. - -Mr. McKENZIE. Did your husband ever give you money or did you ever -handle money in caring for the household, or did he take care of the -money? - -Mrs. OSWALD. He never gave me any money. We would go shopping together, -and he would make all the payments. - -Mr. McKENZIE. Were there not times when you didn't have enough money -and food in the house, and friends had to help you? - -Mrs. OSWALD. It never happened that there was no food in the house and -that friends had to help us. The only time when this might have been -the case was immediately after our arrival in the United States, when -I gave some Russian lessons to Mr. Gregory and his son, and he paid -me for it. And once after we arrived Mr. George Bouhe saw that I was -rather thin and took us to a grocery store and bought us a lot of stuff. - -Mr. McKENZIE. And did Mr. George Bouhe or Mrs. Ford have to take you to -the hospital at one time or another? - -Mrs. OSWALD. No. - -Mr. McKENZIE. For June? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Not Mrs. Ford and not Mr. Bouhe. - -Mr. McKENZIE. Who was it? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Lydia Dymitruk took me to the hospital. - -Mr. McKENZIE. That is all I have, Mr. Chief Justice. - -The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Mrs. Oswald, I think that will be all. - -Mr. McKENZIE. Mr. Chief Justice, before we close for the day I do have -one request I would like to make of the Commission on the record. - -The CHAIRMAN. Yes. - -Mr. McKENZIE. On behalf of Mrs. Oswald, I would like to have returned -to her the original or original copies of all letters which she has -previously furnished to the Commission, diaries, pictures, or any -personal property of Lee Harvey Oswald that was presented to the -Commission, including his personal effects and his diary, in particular -his wedding ring, a watch, belt buckles, or any personal effects -belonging to either Lee Harvey Oswald or Mrs. Oswald that have been -presented as original exhibits to the Commission. - -The CHAIRMAN. The Commission will consider that in connection with all -the other things that you asked for in connection with her writings. - -Mr. McKENZIE. And may I respectfully ask this. In the Commission's -consideration of our request, in connection with the original -instruments or documents, or whatever it may be, do you at this time -have any idea how long it would be before the Commission would decide? - -The CHAIRMAN. Well, I think---- - -Mr. McKENZIE. Mind you, I ask that as respectfully as I possibly can. - -The CHAIRMAN. Well, I answer you as well as I can. We are driving to -conclude the work of the Commission, and we believe that it will be -completed in the next month--we hope so, anyway. - -Mr. McKENZIE. Of course she has no objection whatsoever for the -Commission to have the documents which it now has as long as the -originals are returned to her. - -The CHAIRMAN. We will give consideration to that, because there are -some things that are evidence here, that belonged to him, that perhaps -will have to remain evidence. I can't make any analysis of all of those -things at the present time. But, for instance, let us say, the gun. - -Mr. McKENZIE. We want that, too. - -The CHAIRMAN. I say, we will give consideration to that. But I cannot -give you any assurance of it at this time. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Chief Justice, I would like to have the record show at -this point--we have no objection to what you propose and say we should -do about supplying new copies of material, but I don't want the record -to indicate we took their copies away from them, because we understand -their manager and former counsel kept the copies or the originals, and -have them. So that we are not just taking them for ourselves. I don't -want the record to appear---- - -Mr. McKENZIE. Mr. Rankin, I would not have the record reflect that, -either. And I say that at all times that they were voluntarily given -to the Commission. And the only thing I am asking for is a return of -everything Mrs. Oswald has previously furnished the Commission, with -the understanding that the Commission has the copies of them--she wants -the originals back. In particular, there is a wedding ring that I would -like to ask the Commission to return at this time. - -The CHAIRMAN. Well, these things will have to be considered, all -of them, by the whole Commission, Counsel. But we will give them -consideration. We won't be turning anything back today, because we want -the whole Commission to see what is essential. - -Mr. McKENZIE. Thank you, sir. - -The CHAIRMAN. All right. I think that will be all. The Commission will -adjourn. - -(Whereupon, at 3:35 p.m., the President's Commission recessed.) - - - - -_Tuesday, June 16, 1964_ - -TESTIMONY OF ROBERT ALAN SURREY - -The President's Commission met at 10:15 a.m., on June 16, 1964, at 200 -Maryland Avenue NE., Washington, D.C. - -Present were Chief Justice Earl Warren, Chairman; Senator John Sherman -Cooper, and Representative Hale Boggs, members. - -Also present were J. Lee Rankin, general counsel; and Albert E. Jenner, -Jr., assistant counsel. - -(Members present: Chief Justice Warren, Senator Cooper, and -Representative Boggs.) - - -The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Surrey, we have asked you to come here to testify -concerning two things. The first is we want to ask you concerning the -printing of a publication entitled, "Wanted for Treason" that appeared -on the streets November 22, 1963, in Dallas. And then we propose to ask -you also some questions about the home of General Walker, in connection -with an attempt that was made on his life some time before the 22d of -November. You are prepared to testify, are you? - -Mr. SURREY. I talked to Mr. Jenner. I am prepared to testify as -concerns the Walker episode. I do not wish to testify as concerns the -wanted poster, or the "Wanted for Treason." - -The CHAIRMAN. For what reason--what reason do you assign for not -wanting to? It is not a question of whether a witness wants to testify -here. He is subpenaed to testify, and he must testify unless he has a -privilege. - -Mr. SURREY. I believe that my answers would tend to incriminate me -under the fifth amendment. - -The CHAIRMAN. Very well. You are entitled to raise that question. -And, if you do, that privilege will be respected. But we will ask you -a question concerning it, and if you claim your privilege it will be -respected. And then if you want to testify--are willing to testify -about the other matters, you may do so. - -Would you rise and raise your right hand and be sworn? You solemnly -swear that 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. SURREY. I do. - -Representative BOGGS. Mr. Chairman, I would suppose that we would not -be limited to one question. If he wants to plead the fifth amendment, -of course that is his privilege. But I would hope that we could ask -him several questions, and if he wants to plead he can plead on each -question. - -The CHAIRMAN. Well, on any phase of it that you wish to ask him a -question, of course it is all right. - -Mr. Jenner will conduct the examination. - -Mr. SURREY. Is it my understanding that if I do invoke the fifth -amendment to begin with, then I do not have the privilege of later on -invoking it, is that correct? - -The CHAIRMAN. Well, I believe it is a fact that on any phase of your -testimony, if you testify in part about that phase, you can be required -to testify fully concerning it. But if there is one phase of your -testimony that you want to claim the privilege on, and are willing -to testify as to other matters not connected with it, you can do so -without waiving your privilege. Does that answer your question? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes, sir. - -The CHAIRMAN. Very well. Mr. Jenner? - -Mr. JENNER. Thank you, Mr. Chief Justice. - -Mr. Chief Justice, I offer in evidence as Commission Exhibit No. 995 -the original of the subpena served upon Mr. Surrey. - -The CHAIRMAN. Yes. A subpena was served on you, was it, Mr. Surrey? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes; it was. - -The CHAIRMAN. Very well, it may be admitted. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 995 for -identification, and received in evidence.) - -Mr. JENNER. You are appearing in response to the subpena? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes; I am. - -Mr. JENNER. Were you furnished with copies of the Senate joint -resolution, or legislation which created--authorized the creation of -the Commission? - -Mr. SURREY. At a previous time; yes. - -Mr. JENNER. And President Johnson's Executive order, and the rules and -regulations of the Commission as to taking of testimony? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes; I was. It was hard to read them. - -Mr. JENNER. Yes; they are a little bit difficult to read. - -In order that you may exercise the rights that you have indicated to -the Chief Justice, I will question you first about the pamphlet, after -asking you the preliminary questions as to your name. - -Mr. SURREY. Robert Alan Surrey. - -Mr. JENNER. And what is your address? - -Mr. SURREY. 3506 Lindenwood, Dallas, Tex. - -Mr. JENNER. How long have you resided there? - -Mr. SURREY. Eight years. - -Mr. JENNER. And what is your age? - -Mr. SURREY. Thirty-eight. - -Mr. JENNER. Where were you born? - -Mr. SURREY. Oak Park, Ill. - -Mr. JENNER. When did you move to Texas? - -Mr. SURREY. First moved there in 1948, and then left for 2 years, from -1951 to 1953, and then moved back to Texas. - -Mr. JENNER. You are a college graduate; are you not? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes; I am. - -Mr. JENNER. What university or college? - -Mr. SURREY. Northwestern. - -Mr. JENNER. In Evanston, Ill? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. When did you receive your degree? - -Mr. SURREY. 1948. - -Mr. JENNER. You are married? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes; I am. - -Mr. JENNER. Is Mrs. Surrey a native born American? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes; she is a Dallasite. - -Mr. JENNER. She is a Dallas girl? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. What is your business, occupation, or profession? - -Mr. SURREY. I am a printing salesman. - -Mr. JENNER. For what company? - -Mr. SURREY. For Johnson Printing Co. - -Mr. JENNER. Is that located at 2700 North Haskell, in Dallas? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes; it is. - -Mr. JENNER. How long have you been employed by Johnson Printing Co.? - -Mr. SURREY. Seven years. - -Mr. JENNER. Would you tell us in a general way what Johnson Printing -Co. does? I appreciate the name in the title of the company indicates -printing, but what kind? - -Mr. SURREY. Commercial printing, advertising printing, house -organs--just general commercial work. - -Mr. JENNER. Did you have some military service? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes; I did. - -Mr. JENNER. Would you state what it was? - -Mr. SURREY. I was 4 years in the Navy, in World War II. - -Mr. JENNER. Are you also the president of a book publishing company -located in Dallas? - -Mr. SURREY. The American Eagle Publishing Co? - -Mr. JENNER. Yes, sir. - -Mr. SURREY. Yes; I am. - -Mr. JENNER. The only volume I have seen--there was a publication of -reprints of newspaper stories. - -Mr. SURREY. Called the Assassination Story, yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. And your name appeared, I think, in that as the president -of the company. - -Mr. SURREY. A cover letter that was on the back cover. - -Mr. JENNER. And---- - -Mr. SURREY. This was not our only publication. We have done many -publications before that. - -Representative BOGGS. Do we have a copy of this publication? - -Mr. JENNER. Of this particular one? - -Mr. SURREY. Mr. Alger's office came to me and requested two copies for -the Warren Commission, which I furnished to him. - -Representative BOGGS. Whose office? - -Mr. SURREY. Congressman Bruce Alger's office. - -Representative BOGGS. Did we make such a request through Congressman -Alger? - -Mr. JENNER. I am not advised as to whether we did or not. - -Mr. RANKIN. I am quite sure we did not. - -The CHAIRMAN. Did we receive any such copies? - -Mr. JENNER. There is none among our exhibits in the exhibit room. - -Mr. SURREY. His secretary called, and they came out to the house and -got two copies of it. - -Representative BOGGS. How long ago was this? - -Mr. SURREY. Oh, I would say 3 weeks. - -Representative BOGGS. When did you publish this book? - -Mr. SURREY. I believe it was finally ready on January 1, right after -January 1--January 1, 2, or 3, right in that area. - -Representative BOGGS. What does the book allege? - -Mr. SURREY. We took the 10-day period following the assassination from -both Dallas papers, the Dallas Morning News, and Dallas Times Herald, -and just all the clippings pertaining to it were in chronological -order, and just shot them cold, and published them. - -Representative BOGGS. Nothing else--just newspaper clippings? - -Mr. SURREY. Just newspaper clippings. - -Representative BOGGS. No editorial comment of any kind? - -Mr. SURREY. Outside of the letter on the back; no. - -Representative BOGGS. And what is the letter on the back? - -Mr. SURREY. It said--this is just to the best of my knowledge, I -don't recall exactly--"This is the local report of what happened when -President Kennedy was assassinated. It is difficult to muzzle a local -reporter in his own local paper. And we feel that some of the news that -might not get out would be included in this book. We do not guarantee -the accuracy of the information, but it will pose some questions, a -few perhaps that the Warren Commission will not see fit to answer," I -believe was in there. - -Representative BOGGS. Not see fit to what? - -Mr. SURREY. To answer. - -Representative BOGGS. What was the implication of that? - -Mr. SURREY. The implication being, as I see it, in Dallas--a local -reporter--this is, for example. A local reporter from the Times -Herald went down to the Western Union office several days after the -assassination, and was told by the people in the Western Union office -that, yes, they remembered Oswald, he had been in, he had gotten money -orders, either the day before or just recently he had sent a wire to -somebody, and they recalled his Swahili handwriting, and so forth. -Well, I feel that surely Western Union knows who sent Oswald money, and -so forth. Now, I don't know if this will come out of this Commission or -not. - -Representative BOGGS. The implication was that this Commission would -not investigate these allegations? - -Mr. SURREY. No--perhaps. - -Representative BOGGS. Well, what did you mean by the word "muzzle"? - -Mr. SURREY. Of the press? - -Representative BOGGS. You used "muzzle" in this letter--written. I -don't have the letter before me. I would like to have it. - -Mr. SURREY. I don't, either. I would like to know what the exact -wording was on it, sir. - -Representative BOGGS. Did you write it? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes. - -Representative BOGGS. And the implication was that this Commission -would not seek out the entire truth of the incidences arising---- - -Mr. SURREY. Oh, no, sir; this was not the implication of the muzzling. -This was not the implication. - -Representative BOGGS. What was the implication of the statement you -made a moment ago, about questions that would not be asked by this -Commission? - -Mr. SURREY. News happens in an area, and after it has been up to the -national news system, and then comes back through, and analyzed and so -forth, I don't put full credit any longer. - -Representative BOGGS. Your theory is that in a matter as significant as -the assassination of the President of the United States, that the news -as reported outside of Dallas would be untruthful? - -Mr. SURREY. Possibly. - -Representative BOGGS. Is that the substance of the book? - -Mr. SURREY. No. No; the substance of the book is strictly newspaper -clippings. - -Representative BOGGS. Plus a letter. - -Mr. SURREY. The letter is on the back cover of the book, just a cover -letter. - -Representative BOGGS. Tell me more about what the letter says. - -Mr. SURREY. I would much rather have the letter. I don't recall exactly -what it does say, sir. - -The CHAIRMAN. Did you write it yourself, or did somebody write it for -you? - -Mr. SURREY. I wrote it myself. - -The CHAIRMAN. You don't remember what you wrote? - -Mr. SURREY. No; not as per specific words, I do not. - -Representative BOGGS. Well, not specific words. The sense. - -Mr. SURREY. You picked the specific word "muzzling" out of it. - -Representative BOGGS. You used that word; I didn't use it. "Muzzle" -when you refer to a bipartisan Commission, established by the President -of the United States, with a mandate to obtain the truth, is a rather -serious word. I didn't use it--you used it. - -Mr. SURREY. Based on some past experience that I have had--I was in -Oxford, Miss., with General Walker. Based on past experience of the -newspaper reports I heard coming out of national news media on that -incident, which I saw with my own eyes, I could not believe any longer -things which I read in the newspaper. - -Now, the local paper there--and I was not privileged to read the local -papers at the time--may have had some of the truth that went on there. -But there certainly wasn't a good deal of it coming out in the national -news media. - -Senator COOPER. Did you select the clippings that were in the book? - -Mr. SURREY. Pardon? - -Senator COOPER. Did you select the newspaper clippings? - -Mr. SURREY. No; I did not. - -Senator COOPER. Who selected them? - -Mr. SURREY. A couple named Osburn that lived in Dallas. - -Senator COOPER. Who are they? - -Mr. SURREY. Just some people that live in Dallas. - -Senator COOPER. Do you know their names? - -Mr. SURREY. Just Osburn. - -Senator COOPER. Do you know their address? - -Mr. SURREY. No; I do not. - -The CHAIRMAN. How did you happen to be associated with them? - -Mr SURREY. Mrs. Osburn works at Walker's offce. - -The CHAIRMAN. You are speaking of General Walker? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes. - -Representative BOGGS. Well, now, go ahead. I would request, Mr. -Chairman, that this book and this letter be made a part of the record -of this Commission. - -The CHAIRMAN. Will you supply us with a copy of the book? - -Mr. SURREY. If I have one, sir. They are out of print. And I don't -know---- - -The CHAIRMAN. Are they all sold? - -Mr. SURREY. Well, we were going into reprint, right at that particular -time the attorney from the Times Herald called and put a cease and -desist on them. - -The CHAIRMAN. How many copies did you have printed? - -Mr. SURREY. 3,000. - -The CHAIRMAN. Were they sold? - -Mr. SURREY. Some of them were; yes, sir. - -The CHAIRMAN. How many were sold? - -Mr. SURREY. I would say about 900 to a thousand. - -The CHAIRMAN. What became of the rest of them? - -Mr. SURREY. They were sent to our presubscriber list, and given away. - -The CHAIRMAN. Is this company that published them a corporation? - -Mr. SURREY. No; it is a partnership. - -The CHAIRMAN. Who are the partners? - -Mr. SURREY. Myself and General Walker. - -The CHAIRMAN. And General Walker? - -Representative BOGGS. Was this pamphlet that you printed included in -the book? - -Mr. JENNER. Excuse me. That is---- - -Representative BOGGS. "Wanted for Treason"? - -Mr. JENNER. Commission Exhibit No. 996. - -Mr. SURREY. No. - -Representative BOGGS. That was not included? - -Mr. SURREY. No. - -Representative BOGGS. You didn't make that a part of the record of the -events surrounding the assassination of President Kennedy? - -Mr. SURREY. I did not make it a part of the record? - -Representative BOGGS. In this record that you published. - -Mr. SURREY. I had nothing to do with making it a part of the record. - -Representative BOGGS. You published the book, didn't you? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes; but these were newspaper reprints. - -Representative BOGGS. You published this, too, didn't you? - -Mr. SURREY. No, sir. - -Representative BOGGS. You didn't publish it? - -Mr. SURREY. No, sir. - -The CHAIRMAN. You are speaking of the book now? - -Representative BOGGS. I am talking about your printing company. - -Mr. SURREY. You are talking about my printing company? - -Representative BOGGS. The company you work for. - -Mr. SURREY. Yes, Johnson Printing Co. - -Representative BOGGS. Didn't you publish this? - -Mr. SURREY. No. - -Representative BOGGS. Who printed it? - -Mr. SURREY. I decline to answer on the grounds it may tend to -incriminate me. - -Representative BOGGS. Mr. Chairman, I, of course, fully appreciate -the right of the witness to plead the fifth amendment. But I would -simply like to make the observation that this is the only witness out -of hundreds who has pled the fifth amendment, and that obviously if -each witness had done this, then the charge of being muzzled would be -something that we would really be confronted with. I would simply like -to make that observation. - -The CHAIRMAN. You may proceed, Mr. Jenner. - -Mr. JENNER. Thank you. Does the American Eagle Publishing Co. have a -bookstore subsidiary or outlet? - -Mr. SURREY. No; we do not. - -Mr. JENNER. What is the American Eagle Book Store? - -Mr. SURREY. There is no American Eagle Book Store. - -The CHAIRMAN. Do you have a headquarters? - -Mr. SURREY. No, sir. - -The CHAIRMAN. Do you have a telephone? - -Mr. SURREY. No, sir. - -The CHAIRMAN. Are you listed with the local authorities under a -fictitious or assumed name? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes--doing business as? - -The CHAIRMAN. Doing business as, yes. - -Mr. SURREY. Yes. - -The CHAIRMAN. And the names given are yourself and General Walker? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes, sir. - -The CHAIRMAN. Where is that filed--with your county clerk? - -Mr. SURREY. County clerk in Dallas. - -Mr. JENNER. We have talked about General Walker. That is General Edwin -A. Walker, now resigned? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. And do you know a Robert G. Krause? - -Mr. SURREY. I refuse to answer on the grounds the answer may tend to -incriminate me. - -Mr. JENNER. Was he not formerly employed by Johnson Printing Co.? - -Mr. SURREY. I refuse to answer for the same reason. - -Representative BOGGS. Excuse me. Mr. Chief Justice--we will have -testimony from Mr. Krause, I presume? - -Mr. JENNER. Yes; do you know of a company, a printing company, -Lettercraft Printing Co.? - -Mr. SURREY. I refuse to answer--same reason. - -The CHAIRMAN. For the reason it would tend to incriminate you? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. Did you not prepare the copy for Commission Exhibit No. 996? - -Mr. SURREY. I decline to answer on the same reason; that it would tend -to incriminate me. - -Mr. JENNER. And, in turn, turn that copy over to Robert G. Krause, of -the Lettercraft Printing Co. for reproduction? - -Mr. SURREY. I decline to answer, same reason. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 996 for -identification.) - -Mr. JENNER. Exhibiting again Exhibit No.--Commission Exhibit No. 996 to -you, you will notice a front and profile view of President Kennedy. Did -you bring to Robert Krause photographs of which this is a reproduction? - -Mr. SURREY. I decline to answer on the grounds it may incriminate me. - -Mr. JENNER. In fact, did you not bring to Robert G. Krause two slick -paper magazine photographs of President Kennedy and request and engage -him to make photographs of the slick paper magazine photos for the -purpose of reproduction? - -Mr. SURREY. I decline to answer; same reason. - -Mr. JENNER. And did you not pay Robert G. Krause and his wife for -printing some 5,000 to 10,000 of these handbills, of which Commission -Exhibit No. 996 is a copy? - -Mr. SURREY. I decline to answer on the grounds it may incriminate me. - -Mr. JENNER. Did you thereafter--did you not in fact thereafter, -yourself--well, I will ask you first--yourself, distribute duplicates -of Exhibit No. 996 in and about the streets of Dallas, Tex., on -November 22 and days preceding? - -Mr. SURREY. Point of order. Can I ask a question? If I now answer one -or two in through here, does this---- - -The CHAIRMAN. Well, this is connected with the entire situation--the -publication, the distribution of it is one and the same subject matter, -I would think. - -Mr. SURREY. I decline to answer on the grounds it may incriminate me. - -Mr. JENNER. Mr. Chief Justice, I might bring this out. Having received -the rules and regulations of the Commission with respect to the taking -of testimony, you are aware of the fact that you are entitled to have -counsel present? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes; I am, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. And you appear without counsel? - -Mr. SURREY. I cannot afford to bring counsel. - -Mr. JENNER. But you do appear without counsel? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes; I do. - -Representative BOGGS. I think, Mr. Chief Justice, the record should -show if this man requested counsel he would be entitled to counsel, -would he not? - -Mr. JENNER. He certainly would. And he has not requested it. - -Representative BOGGS. I just want the record to show that. - -The CHAIRMAN. Yes. - -Senator COOPER. Did you request counsel? - -Mr. SURREY. From whom, sir? - -Senator COOPER. Did you request the Commission to appoint counsel for -you? - -Mr. SURREY. No; I did not. I did not know this was available. - -Representative BOGGS. I might say it is still available. - -Mr. SURREY. Would this be a court-appointed? - -The CHAIRMAN. Beg pardon? - -Mr. SURREY. Would this be a court-appointed attorney? - -The CHAIRMAN. No; it would be an attorney appointed by the Commission. - -Mr. SURREY. Thank you. - -The CHAIRMAN. Proceed, Mr. Jenner. - -Representative BOGGS. You prefer not to have an attorney appointed by -the Commission? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes, sir. - -Representative BOGGS. We might let the record show at this point, also, -that the American Bar Association has been closely associated with the -Commission. - -Mr. SURREY. What does that mean? I mean what is the purpose of that -remark? - -Representative BOGGS. To show that the attorneys appointed are -completely objective. - -Mr. SURREY. I did not imply they were not, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. Do you know Mrs. Clifford Mercer, Dorothy Mercer? - -Mr. SURREY. I decline to answer on the grounds it may incriminate me. - -Mr. JENNER. Do you know Mr. Clifford Mercer? - -Mr. SURREY. I decline to answer; same reason. - -Mr. JENNER. Do you know of a photoengraving company in Dallas, 2027 -Young Street, Monks Bros.? - -Mr. SURREY. I decline to answer on the grounds it may incriminate me. - -Mr. JENNER. Do you know J. T. Monk or J. T. Monk, Jr.? - -Mr. SURREY. I decline to answer, same grounds. - -Mr. JENNER. Did you have one of the workmen, printing workmen, at -Johnson Printing Co., set type for the copy which appears on Commission -Exhibit No. 996? - -Mr. SURREY. I decline to answer on the grounds it may tend to -incriminate me. - -Mr. JENNER. And thereafter, after that type was set, have photographs -made of that type? - -Mr. SURREY. I decline to answer; same reason. - -Mr. JENNER. Do you know Mr. Bernard Weissman? - -Mr. SURREY. No. We are in another field now, I gather. - -Mr. JENNER. Well, I don't want to represent to you that it is. - -Mr. SURREY. I decline to answer on the ground it may tend to -incriminate me. - -Mr. JENNER. Have you had any business relations with a man by the name -of Bernard Weissman? - -Mr. SURREY. If this is in your opinion still part of the -other--concerning these leaflets, then I will plead the fifth amendment. - -Mr. JENNER. Mr. Chief Justice, with the policy of the Commission to be -fully fair to all witnesses, may I respond to the witness and say to -him there is that possibility. - -The CHAIRMAN. There is that possibility; yes--that is a sufficient -statement. - -Mr. JENNER. And being that possibility, do you wish to decline to -answer the question on the ground an answer may tend to incriminate you? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. Mr. Chief Justice, unless you or other members of the -Commission have some questions on this line of examination, I will not -ask further questions with respect to it--unless you gentlemen desire -to ask questions. - -The CHAIRMAN. Any further questions, Congressman Boggs? - -Representative BOGGS. Was anyone associated with you in the publication -of this leaflet? - -Mr. SURREY. I decline to answer on the ground it may tend to -incriminate me. - -The CHAIRMAN. Did General Walker have anything to do with it? - -Mr. SURREY. I decline to answer on the ground it may tend to -incriminate me--but, no. - -The CHAIRMAN. What? Now you have opened that up, sir--if you say--was -your answer no, or is your answer that you claim the privilege? - -Mr. SURREY. My answer is that I claim the privilege, sir. - -The CHAIRMAN. That is different. - -Senator COOPER. May I just ask one question? To return for a moment -to this book that you printed with newspaper clippings--what was your -purpose in printing it? - -Mr. SURREY. As a memento, primarily. - -Senator COOPER. You had no other purpose? - -Mr. SURREY. No, sir. - -Senator COOPER. Didn't you really have the purpose of impugning the -work of this Commission and giving the implication that it would not go -fully and thoroughly into all questions? - -Mr. SURREY. No, sir. This was not the intent; no. - -Representative BOGGS. What was the allegation in the cease and desist -order which was issued against you by the Dallas newspaper? - -Mr. SURREY. That this would be in competition to a book which they -were going to promote--I believe the AP. At the time--the Osburns had -this, and they were gathering it together, and they brought it over -one day, and it looked like a real good idea. Other people had stacks -and stacks of papers. And this was a compilation of clippings of the -paper. And everybody thought it was such a good idea that we thought we -would publish it. So I got it into brownline form, which is a proof, a -preliminary proof--silver prints, you may call them in Washington. - -The CHAIRMAN. For how much did you sell these books a copy? - -Mr. SURREY. We gave them free to our presubscriber list. - -The CHAIRMAN. I didn't ask you that. - -Mr. SURREY. They were $5 per copy. - -The CHAIRMAN. And how many did you say you sold? - -Mr. SURREY. About 900 to a 1,000. - -The CHAIRMAN. What happened to the money? - -Mr. SURREY. It was put into the American Eagle Publishing Co. account. - -The CHAIRMAN. Do you have a regular bookkeeping system? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes, sir. - -The CHAIRMAN. And those figures would be available, showing how many -you had sold, would they? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes, sir. - -The CHAIRMAN. In your books? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes, sir. - -Representative BOGGS. Is the American Eagle Publishing Co. an -incorporated company? - -Mr. SURREY. No. - -Representative BOGGS. What is it? - -Mr. SURREY. Partnership, sir. - -Representative BOGGS. Who are the partners? - -Mr. SURREY. Myself and General Walker. - -Representative BOGGS. And this presubscription list, how many people on -that? - -Mr. SURREY. I would say 700, 800. - -Representative BOGGS. You publish a newspaper? - -Mr. SURREY. No; we don't. - -Representative BOGGS. What do you publish besides this book? - -Mr. SURREY. Pamphlets--pamphlets. - -Mr. JENNER. You receive part of your income from the American Eagle -Publishing Co.? - -Mr. SURREY. No; I do not. - -Mr. JENNER. You serve as president, but you receive no compensation for -that? - -Mr. SURREY. That is true. - -Mr. JENNER. Would you tell us, please, the address of the American -Eagle Publishing Co.? - -Mr. SURREY. P.O. Box 750, Dallas 21. - -Mr. JENNER. It has no physical office itself--just the post office -address? - -Mr. SURREY. That is correct. That mail comes to my desk at Johnson -Printing Co. That is the same post office box as Johnson Printing Co. - -Mr. JENNER. I see. And where do you keep--where does American -Publishing Co. warehouse or keep or store its pamphlets and books? - -Mr. SURREY. 4011 Turtle Creek Boulevard, Mr. Walker's residence. I have -a room. - -Mr. JENNER. That is General Walker's residence? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes. - -The CHAIRMAN. That is General Walker's residence? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes; it is. - -The CHAIRMAN. Who owns the Johnson Printing Co.? - -Mr. SURREY. It is--the stock is split, four or five different people. - -The CHAIRMAN. A corporation? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes; it is. - -The CHAIRMAN. Who are they? - -Mr. SURREY. Mr. Bryan Snyder is chairman of the board. Mr. Emil Borak -is president, and Mr. Lewis C. Owens is treasurer. I believe some stock -is held by Oliver Snyder, and I have some stock. And Mr. Fallon Snyder. - -The CHAIRMAN. It is a commercial company? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes; it is. - -The CHAIRMAN. Is General Walker connected with it? - -Mr. SURREY. No; he is not. - -The CHAIRMAN. Or with the other people, as far as you know? - -Mr. SURREY. No, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. Is Mr. Borak the general manager of the plant itself? - -Mr. SURREY. No; he is president of the company. - -Mr. JENNER. I see. Who is the general manager of the plant? - -Mr. SURREY. Mr. Owens. - -Mr. JENNER. Mr. Owens. - -Did you acquaint Mr. Owens or Mr. Borak, either of them, with the fact -that you had Commission Exhibit No. 996 printed at the Lettercraft -Printing Co.? - -Mr. SURREY. I decline to answer on the ground it may tend to -incriminate me. - -Mr. JENNER. Did you make either or both of them aware of the fact that -some of the copy or all of the copy with respect to Commission Exhibit -No. 996 was prepared by way of printing at Johnson Printing Co.? - -Mr. SURREY. I decline to answer on the ground it may tend to -incriminate me. - -Mr. JENNER. How many printers do you have at Johnson Printing Co.? - -Mr. SURREY. How many employees? - -Mr. JENNER. No--that operate linotypes or operate these machines that -produce these slugs--what is the name of that kind of machine? - -Mr. SURREY. Well, it would be a monotype or a linotype or a Ludlow. - -Mr. JENNER. Are these lines on Exhibit No. 996 Ludlow productions? - -Mr. SURREY. I decline to answer on the ground it may tend to -incriminate me. - -Mr. JENNER. Who are the Ludlow machine operators at Johnson Printing -Co.? - -Mr. SURREY. Oh, I would say there are probably 10 or 15 that operate -the Ludlow machine. - -Mr. JENNER. Does your recollection serve you to name those who operated -the Ludlow machines any time during the first 22 days of November 1963? -If so, name them. - -Mr. SURREY. I decline to answer on the ground it may tend to -incriminate me. - -Mr. JENNER. Are you able to name any of the linotype operators who were -employed during the first 22 days of November 1963? - -Mr. SURREY. Who were employed at Johnson Printing Co.? - -Mr. JENNER. Yes, sir. - -Mr. SURREY. Well, I gather this has nothing to do with this. So may I -answer? - -Mr. JENNER. I don't want to lead you to believe it doesn't, sir. - -Mr. SURREY. I decline to answer on the ground it may incriminate me. - -Mr. JENNER. From whom was the paper purchased on which appears the -imprinting on the exhibit identified here as Commission Exhibit No. 996. - -Mr. SURREY. I decline to answer on the same grounds. - -Mr. JENNER. Did you see another reproduction of Commission Exhibit No. -996 at any time from the 1st of November 1963 to and including the 22d -of November 1963? - -Mr. SURREY. I decline to answer on the grounds it may incriminate me. - -Mr. JENNER. Mr. Chief Justice, I will now depart from this particular -phase, if that is permissible. - -The CHAIRMAN. Very well. - -Mr. JENNER. I am now going to turn, Mr. Surrey, to the attempt on the -life of General Walker. - -First I would like to have you examine a series of photographs which -purport to be photographs of the area of the Walker house. - -Mr. Chief Justice, may I approach the witness for this purpose? - -The CHAIRMAN. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. I show the witness Commission Exhibit No. 2, Item No. 7, -and subdivision item No. P-2. Do you see that, sir? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes; I do. - -Mr. JENNER. Examining the subitem, P-2, is the area depicted in that -photograph familiar to you? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes; it is. It is the alley in behind Mr. Walker's -residence, looking west. - -Mr. JENNER. Looking west? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. Would you be able to help us as to an estimate, perhaps -from the nature of the foliage, and your familiarity with the Walker -premises, as to when that photograph might have been taken, as to -season of the year? - -Mr. SURREY. I would say late fall. - -Mr. JENNER. Could it have been the early spring, mid-March, for -example? 1st of March, along in there? - -Mr. SURREY. It could have been; yes. - -Mr. JENNER. Either in the fall, when there is a deleafing or lack of -foliage on trees, or the early spring? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. I show you what purports to be the same thing, also -marked--it is a larger photograph--Commission Exhibit No. 2, Item -No. 7. Directing your attention to the subdivision P-2 you have just -testified about, are they photographs---- - -Mr. SURREY. Basically the same thing. It looks like this one was taken -a little closer to the ground. - -Mr. JENNER. When you say this one, you mean the larger of the two? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. On Commission Exhibit No. 3, Item 14, subitem P-1, -directing your attention to that, you recognize that? - -Mr. SURREY. That is a picture of the back of the residence of 4011 -Turtle Creek. - -Mr. JENNER. General Edwin Walker's home? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. I perhaps should have asked you this: You are familiar with -the area surrounding General Walker's home? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes, I am. - -Mr. JENNER. You have been there a good many times, have you? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes, I have. - -Mr. JENNER. On all sides of the home? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. And are you familiar with the inside of the home? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes; I am. - -Mr. JENNER. And have you worked there from time to time over the years? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. How long have you been associated with General Walker? - -Mr. SURREY. Since the beginning of his campaign, when that was--I think -the spring--about 3 years now. - -The CHAIRMAN. What campaign is that? - -Mr. SURREY. When he ran for Governor of Texas. - -Mr. JENNER. That initiated your association with him? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. And what are your duties in your association with General -Walker? - -Mr. SURREY. I am just a volunteer helper, whatever he needed, volunteer -help in doing, I would help. - -Mr. JENNER. Are you compensated? - -Mr. SURREY. No; I am not. - -Mr. JENNER. You have never received any compensation? - -Mr. SURREY. No; I haven't. - -Mr. JENNER. You have never received any compensation from the -publishing company we have identified that published that book? - -Mr. SURREY. No, sir. - -The CHAIRMAN. Do you handle any funds for General Walker? - -Mr. SURREY. Of General Walker's fund? - -The CHAIRMAN. Yes. - -Mr. SURREY. No, sir. - -The CHAIRMAN. Or any funds---- - -Mr. SURREY. Except what---- - -The CHAIRMAN. Or any funds that come to General Walker? - -Mr. SURREY. No; only that comes to American Eagle Co., which is in -fact, I guess, technically his funds. - -The CHAIRMAN. Well, what funds do come to American Eagle Co.? - -Mr. SURREY. Funds for purchasing of materials, and some donations. That -is it. - -The CHAIRMAN. Outside of donations, how do you get your funds for -publishing? - -Mr. SURREY. From the sale of materials. - -The CHAIRMAN. And the rest of it is all donations? - -Mr. SURREY. Donations are extremely small, as a matter of fact, yes. We -operate on the sale of materials. - -The CHAIRMAN. How much in the aggregate of donations have you had? - -Mr. SURREY. To American Eagle Publishing Co.? - -The CHAIRMAN. Yes. - -Mr. SURREY. I would say a hundred dollars. - -The CHAIRMAN. A hundred dollars? - -Mr. SURREY. Over 2 years or 2-1/2 years. - -The CHAIRMAN. Where did you get the money to publish your book? - -Mr. SURREY. At the beginning of American Eagle Publishing Co., we -started with a backlog of books which had been used in the campaign. -This was Mr. Walker's contribution to the American Eagle Publishing Co. - -The CHAIRMAN. Did General Walker sell his campaign books? - -Mr. SURREY. I don't know if he did or not. - -The CHAIRMAN. Well, you don't pay publishing funds with books, do you? - -Mr. SURREY. From the sale of the books which were turned over to -American Eagle Co. at its inception, from the sale of those books, we -have accumulated funds to go on with others. - -The CHAIRMAN. At its inception, where did you get the money to publish? - -Mr. SURREY. I don't understand your question, sir. - -The CHAIRMAN. Well---- - -Mr. SURREY. At its inception we didn't have any money. - -The CHAIRMAN. When you publish books, you have to have some capital of -some kind. - -Mr. SURREY. The capital was raised from the sale of a book called -"Walker Speaks Unmuzzled" which sells for 35 cents. We started with -that. - -The CHAIRMAN. You published that first? - -Mr. SURREY. No, sir. - -The CHAIRMAN. Who published that? - -Mr. SURREY. I believe General Walker did. - -The CHAIRMAN. And how much money came from the sale of those books? - -Mr. SURREY. I do not know offhand, sir. - -The CHAIRMAN. Approximately. - -Mr. SURREY. We are still selling them. - -The CHAIRMAN. Beg pardon? - -Mr. SURREY. We are still selling them. - -The CHAIRMAN. But you handle the funds, don't you, for the company? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes; but I don't know specific items. - -The CHAIRMAN. Well, I am not asking you for specific items. But I would -like to know approximately how much money. - -Let me put it this way: How much money have you handled for that -company in the last--since it has been established? - -Mr. SURREY. Oh, as a rough estimate, $10,000 to $15,000. - -The CHAIRMAN. And only a hundred dollars of that was contributions from -outsiders? - -Mr. SURREY. I would say that would be it. - -The CHAIRMAN. And was there any of that $10,000 or $15,000 that came -from any individual other than from people who purchased the hooks? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes; at one time the General put some more money into the -company. - -The CHAIRMAN. How much money did he put into it? - -Mr. SURREY. I believe a thousand dollars. - -The CHAIRMAN. That is all? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes. - -The CHAIRMAN. Anybody else put any money into it? - -Mr. SURREY. No, sir. - -The CHAIRMAN. Did you? - -Mr. SURREY. No, sir. - -The CHAIRMAN. Very well. - -Mr. JENNER. Mr. Chief Justice, may I revert to the other subject -matter? I have an additional question I would like to ask. And I warn -the witness in advance I am returning to the pamphlet. - -The CHAIRMAN. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. Your questions have stimulated me to ask another question. - -The CHAIRMAN. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. Were any of the funds that reached Eagle Publishing Co. by -way of contributions or proceeds of sale of materials employed or used -to pay for the leaflet, Commission Exhibit No. 996? - -Mr. SURREY. Now, I understand that if I answer that question, it opens -up the whole thing again. So I decline to answer on the grounds it may -incriminate me. - -The CHAIRMAN. Gentlemen, I have asked our Chief Counsel, Mr. Rankin, to -have a search of our files made and our telephone calls to see if we -have received anything from Congressman Alger concerning this book. And -Mr. Rankin, will you report to us what your finding is, please? - -Mr. RANKIN. I had a search made of our files, and any incoming calls -from the Congressman to see if we had received any such material, and -such a search showed that we had not received any such material. I -then called Congressman Alger's office to ask there if there had been -any communication from them, and was informed that they had not sent -anything to us, but that one of the booklets had been given away by -Congressman Alger, and they had one left, and I have sent for that one -to have for our records. - -Representative BOGGS. I would like to see it when it gets here. You -expect it pretty soon? - -Mr. RANKIN. I sent him on the run. - -Representative BOGGS. Good. - -Mr. JENNER. Mr. Surrey, I will return to the General Walker incident -now. - -I would like you particularly to examine the next photograph, which -appears in Commission Exhibit No. 4, Item 6, as subletter P-5. - -This depicts, Mr. Chairman, and gentlemen, a railroad track--in the far -distance a tall building. Is that area at all familiar to you? - -That is undoubtedly the MKT line, or some spur line. - -You are familiar with the MKT line, are you not? - -Mr. SURREY. This I do not recognize the area. - -Mr. JENNER. I will ask you this. Is there a railroad near General -Walker's home? - -Mr. SURREY. Facing out of the house, facing Turtle Creek, across the -creek, and then another half block or so, there is a railroad. - -Mr. JENNER. Within a half a block? - -Mr. SURREY. Well, it would be a full city block to the railroad. -Perhaps even more. I have never been in that area, as a matter of fact. - -Mr. JENNER. Having that in mind, I show you a photograph, aerial view -photograph, which we have marked Commission Exhibit No. 998. - -Mr. Chief Justice, that is a copy of the exhibit. - -That purports to be an aerial photograph taken of the vicinity of -General Walker's residence. And you will notice there is an encircled -building and the designation "A." - -First, do you recognize that general area? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes; I do. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit 998 for -identification.) - -Mr. JENNER. And does the encirclment of the home there appear to be -General Walker's home? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes, sir; it does. I don't see a house that should be in -the corner. - -Mr. JENNER. You say corner--you mean---- - -Mr. SURREY. Right there. - -Mr. JENNER. To the left? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes; there is a house there between Walker's residence and -the next house, and the street here, which is Avondale, I believe. - -Mr. JENNER. And you are talking about the street here--you are pointing -to a street that runs obliquely from left to right towards the upper -corner of the picture? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. To the left of the house encircled as General Walker's -house? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes. Oh, I see, I am sorry. It is much further back from -the street. That is the house. - -Mr. JENNER. Now, the house you say that is next is the one immediately -to the left of the one encircled? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes; I was looking in this area for the houses. That is -correct. That is General Walker's residence, as depicted in the picture. - -Mr. JENNER. And the house to the left is the house you thought at first -was not shown, but in fact it is shown? - -Mr. SURREY. It is. - -Mr. JENNER. And who is the owner of that home? - -Mr. SURREY. I do not know. A doctor. - -Mr. JENNER. A lady doctor? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes; it is a woman, runs the household. - -Mr. JENNER. Dr. Ruth Jackson? - -Mr. SURREY. It sounds familiar, but I do not know. - -Mr. JENNER. Does she have a dog that is sometimes obstreperous, does a -lot of barking? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes; she does. - -Mr. JENNER. You are quite familiar with that fact, are you? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes, sir; I am. - -Mr. JENNER. How and why did you become familiar with that fact? - -Mr. SURREY. Anyone approaching the house, generally her house or -General Walker's house, would be barked at, in the middle of the night -noises. - -Mr. JENNER. And you have approached General Walker's house, I assume, -at night, have you? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. If the dog is out in Dr. Jackson's yard, the dog is alerted -and barks? - -Mr. SURREY. Not so much any more. Evidently he knows who I am now. - -Mr. JENNER. I see. But before the dog became familiar with you, he did -bark? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. What kind of a dog is it, by the way? - -Mr. SURREY. A small Collie, I guess--shaggy, brownish dog. - -Mr. JENNER. Do you recall whether or not at or about the time of the -attempt on General Walker's life that dog became or was ill. - -Mr. SURREY. Yes; it was. This was reported to me. I do not know of -firsthand knowledge. - -Mr. JENNER. I would prefer not to have your hearsay. You have no -knowledge firsthand, however? - -Mr. SURREY. No; I do not. - -Mr. JENNER. Unless, Mr. Chairman, you desire to pursue the hearsay---- - -The CHAIRMAN. No, no. - -Mr. JENNER. Continuing with Exhibit No. 998, and looking at the -footnotes, would you tell us whether that footnoting is accurate--A -through G? - -Mr. SURREY. I am not familiar with Gilbert Street. - -Mr. JENNER. Which is designated as G? - -Mr. SURREY. It very well could be Gilbert Street. I just don't know the -names of those streets. - -Yes; to the best of my knowledge that is accurate. - -Mr. JENNER. There is a tall building to the left, rather nice-looking. -Are you familiar with that building? - -Mr. SURREY. No; there are several new ones going right up in that area. -I think that is the Spa, or something. - -Mr. JENNER. I am referring, Mr. Chief Justice, to the tall building -with a lattice design immediately to the right of the letter "A". - -What did you think that was? - -Mr. SURREY. A new development in there called 21 Turtle Creek, the Spa, -or something. I only know it from newspaper ads. - -Mr. JENNER. I see. Was that building in that condition or being erected -in the spring of 1963? - -Mr. SURREY. If that is the building I think of, it has just been -finished a month or so now. - -Mr. JENNER. How long has it been under construction? - -Mr. SURREY. Possibly a year, a year and a half. - -Mr. JENNER. Does that photograph fairly depict and represent the area -it shows as that area existed in the spring of 1963? - -Mr. SURREY. No; you are missing a Jesuit high school which was here. - -Mr. JENNER. When you say was here, I have to identify the spot to which -you are pointing. And the spot to which you are pointing is the open -field area that is shown immediately to the right of the building we -have identified, near which the letter "A" appears? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. Tell us about that. - -Mr. SURREY. That was the old Jesuit high school, which has been torn -down just recently. I believe just recently finished tearing it down. - -Mr. JENNER. All right. I will identify these other photographs rather -quickly. In each instance, will you look at the photograph and tell us -whether the sub-lettering is correct. - -I have now handed the witness Commission Exhibit No. 999. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 999 for -identification.) - -Mr. SURREY. I believe that to be generally correct. This area of -Walker's residence here is difficult---- - -Mr. JENNER. It is some distance away, and the area of Walker's -residence to which the witness referred is a circle to which the letter -"A" is affixed? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. Otherwise, this is an accurate representation of that area -and as it existed in the spring of 1963? - -Mr. SURREY. Again, the high school is--I don't believe that that Jesuit -high school was to the ground as it shows here, in the spring of 1963. - -Mr. JENNER. I now call your attention to the building that appears -immediately to the right of the circle. - -Mr. SURREY. That is, I believe, the same building that shows in the -previous exhibit. - -Mr. JENNER. Thank you. That is just exactly what I was going to ask -you. All right. Now, would you look at Commission Exhibit No. 1000. - -(The documents referred to were marked Commission Exhibits Nos. 1000 -and 1002 for identification.) - -Mr. JENNER. Are those footnotings correct? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes, sir; I believe they are. - -Mr. JENNER. Would you look at 1002. - -Mr. SURREY. Yes, sir; I believe they are substantially correct. - -Mr. JENNER. All right. For the purposes of the record, Mr. Reporter, -Commission Exhibit No. 1000 also has a sticker on it marked Commission -Exhibit No. 1001. Would you please note in the record we will not be -using Commission Exhibit 1001. It got on there by mistake. Now, you -just covered Exhibit No. 1002. Now, Exhibits Nos. 1003, 1004. - -(The documents referred to were marked Commission Exhibits No. 1003 and -1004, respectively, for identification.) - -Mr. SURREY. Yes; that street previously mentioned was Avondale. That is -the street immediately to the west. - -Mr. JENNER. And it appears on Commission Exhibit No. 1003? - -Mr. SURREY. That is correct. - -Mr. JENNER. Have you yet examined Commission Exhibit No. 1004? - -Mr. SURREY. No; I have not. - -Mr. JENNER. The witness is now examining Commission Exhibit No. 1004. - -The CHAIRMAN. Very well. - -Mr. SURREY. I believe that is correct, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. All right. I will ask you a general question to be sure we -have covered all of these. - -Calling your attention to Commission Exhibits Nos. 998, 999, 1000, -1002, 1003, and 1004, which are aerial photographs--are they aerial -photographs of the vicinity of General Walker's house? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes; they are. - -Mr. JENNER. And do they, except for the high school matter which you -have pointed out to us--do they represent fairly the area as it was in -the spring of 1963? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes, I would say that is generally correct. - -Mr. JENNER. All right, sir. Now, the Commission is interested, Mr. -Surrey, in whether there are some open areas or fields near General -Walker's house in which an object such as a firearm or rifle could be -buried. - -Mr. SURREY. Directly across from in front of the house--of course, -Turtle Creek Boulevard, and across from Turtle Creek Boulevard is -Turtle Creek itself, with a lawn area coming up to the street of 20 to -30 yards in some places. - -Mr. JENNER. Using the blank sheet of paper I hand you, would you just -give us a diagram--a rough diagram of the area of General Walker's -house, so that I can locate the field about which you now speak? - -Mr. SURREY. It is not actually a field. - -Mr. JENNER. And we will mark that as Commission Exhibit No. 1005. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 1005 for -identification.) - -Mr. SURREY. This is Turtle Creek. [Witness draws.] - -Mr. JENNER. Now, is Turtle Creek a street? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes; it is a street, a boulevard. - -Mr. JENNER. All right. - -Mr. SURREY. Mr. Walker's residence is here. [Witness draws.] - -Mr. JENNER. Is the top of this sheet north or south, west or east? When -I say that I refer to Commission Exhibit No. 1005. - -Mr. SURREY. This is north. - -Mr. JENNER. All right. Put an arrow and the letter "N" at that point. -Now, would you put south on the other side, and then east and west -where they belong? - -Mr. SURREY. These are not exact. They are several points off. But -generally. - -Mr. JENNER. You are just making a rough sketch, sir, for the purpose -of helping with your testimony. You have now drawn in General Walker's -house. Would you put in the word "Walker"? - -Now, having done that, you have now described an area--told us of an -area where a firearm--a field where a firearm might be buried that is -in the vicinity of General Walker's home. Would you indicate where that -would be? - -Mr. SURREY. Here is Turtle Creek. [Witness draws.] - -Mr. JENNER. You are now drawing a wavy line. Would you write in there -"Turtle Creek." And that is a stream, is it? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. Does it always have water in it? - -Mr. SURREY. To my knowledge; yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. All right. - -Mr. SURREY. Now, this area across Turtle Creek Boulevard. - -Mr. JENNER. That is to the south of General Walker's house. - -Mr. SURREY. And going down to the creek is a grassy, leafed, brushed, -tree area. - -Mr. JENNER. It is not an open field? - -Mr. SURREY. No. - -Mr. JENNER. But it is an area in which a firearm could be buried? - -Mr. SURREY. It is down near the creek--there are rocks. - -(At this point, Representative Boggs withdrew from the hearing room.) - -Mr. SURREY. In addition to that--here is Avondale, here is the doctor's -residence. [Witness draws.] - -Mr. JENNER. This is Dr. Jackson's residence you have now drawn? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. Would you please---- - -Mr. SURREY. And this entire block here is---- - -Mr. JENNER. You are pointing to the west? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. Along Turtle Creek Drive? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. Would you put the word "drive" there. - -Mr. SURREY. It is boulevard. - -Mr. JENNER. All right. Would you repeat your testimony in that -connection? - -Mr. SURREY. Another block of residences---- - -Mr. JENNER. To the west? - -Mr. SURREY. To the west. And then you come to that field where the new -building is going up and the Jesuit high school was. - -Mr. JENNER. And that is the new building you identified in one of the -earlier exhibits, and the high school has now been torn down? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. All right. And there was--in the spring of 1963, was there -a field there? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes; there still is. - -Mr. JENNER. Where a firearm could have been buried? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. We understand there is a church, a church house, near the -Walker home. Am I correct? - -Mr. SURREY. That is correct. - -Mr. JENNER. Would you locate it, please? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes; directly to the east. [Witness draws.] Their driveway -comes up between the Walker house, into their parking lot [witness -draws], and here is that back alley you showed me a picture of earlier. -[Witness draws.] - -Mr. JENNER. Excuse me. For the purpose of the record, the witness has -now drawn in what looks like a parking lot area, is that correct? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. Is that the church parking lot? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes; it is. - -Mr. JENNER. And where is the church house itself located? - -Mr. SURREY. This entire area. I don't know about the shape of it. But -it is in this area. - -Mr. JENNER. Write the word "church" in there. [Witness does so.] What -church is that? - -Mr. SURREY. It is a Mormon church. - -Mr. JENNER. And about how far distant from the Walker house is the -Mormon church? - -Mr. SURREY. It is on the next lot--I would say 400 feet, maybe. - -Mr. JENNER. What is there intervening, if anything, between the Mormon -church buildings and General Walker's home? - -Mr. SURREY. In the way of a fence, you mean? - -Mr. JENNER. Well, first; are there any buildings? - -Mr. SURREY. No. - -Mr. JENNER. Or any sheds or anything of that character? - -Mr. SURREY. No. - -Mr. JENNER. Are there any trees? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes; there are trees. - -Mr. JENNER. Is it heavily or lightly wooded? - -Mr. SURREY. Lightly. - -Mr. JENNER. There is a fence? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. A wooden fence? - -Mr. SURREY. A wooden fence--about 5-foot tall. - -Mr. JENNER. I see. Is that a lattice fence or a solid fence? - -Mr. SURREY. Along this side here it is a solid fence. - -Mr. JENNER. When you say this side, you are pointing to the driveway -leading to Turtle Creek Boulevard? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes; the fence actually is here. [Witness draws.] - -Mr. JENNER. You have now put--he is indicating the fence. And that is a -lattice or slat fence? - -Mr. SURREY. That is a solid fence there. And then it is latticed along -the alley. - -Mr. JENNER. Which way does the front of General Walker's house face--on -Turtle Creek Boulevard? - -Mr. SURREY. On Turtle Creek. - -Mr. JENNER. All right. That will be helpful to us. We will just set -that exhibit aside for the moment. - -Some of these photographs I am now about to show you--I now show you a -photograph, Commission Exhibit No. 5, Item No. 369. Do you recognize -that? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes, I do. It is a photo of the back of General Walker's -home. - -Mr. JENNER. All right. Now, returning to your plat, Commission Exhibit -No. 1005, is that the side of General Walker's house that faces the -church? - -Mr. SURREY. No. - -Mr. JENNER. It is the side--is it the side that faces Dr. Jackson's -home? - -Mr. SURREY. No. - -Mr. JENNER. Is it the side that faces onto or toward Turtle Creek -Boulevard? - -Mr. SURREY. No; it is not. - -Mr. JENNER. Is it the side that faces toward the alley which you have -drawn on Commission Exhibit No. 1005? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes; it is. - -Mr. JENNER. Fine. Now, you will notice in that photograph an -automobile, but no license plate, and there appears to be obliterated -an area in which a license plate might have appeared on that car. - -Now, first, you do see the automobile? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes; I have seen this photo before. Mr. Barrett of the FBI -in Dallas brought this to my attention. - -Mr. JENNER. Do you recognize the automobile? - -Mr. SURREY. Not positively, but I think it belongs to Mr. Charles Klihr. - -Mr. JENNER. And who is Mr. Charles Klihr? - -Mr. SURREY. He is a volunteer worker of Mr. Walker's, also. - -Mr. JENNER. Are you sufficiently familiar with Mr. Charles Klihr's -automobile--you already identified it---- - -Mr. SURREY. No; I did not identify it. I cannot do that, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. To the best of your ability is all I am suggesting, sir. - -Mr. SURREY. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. Do you have a recollection as to whether there was a -license plate or license plate fixture in or about the area in which -the black spot on the automobile appears? - -Mr. SURREY. I have seen Mr. Klihr's automobile many times. I have not -seen it without a license plate, which I think I would note if it were -not there. - -Mr. JENNER. Yes; but located at or about in the vicinity of that black -spot? - -Mr. SURREY. I would say to the best of my knowledge; yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. Thank you, sir. Were you at General Walker's home the -evening of the attempted assassination, or attempt on his life? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes, I was. After the shot. I was not there at the time. - -Mr. JENNER. How soon after the shot were you there? - -Mr. SURREY. About 15 minutes. - -Mr. JENNER. How did you become aware that there had been an attempt on -his life? - -Mr. SURREY. He called me on the telephone at my home. - -Mr. JENNER. And how far did you live from General Walker's home? - -Mr. SURREY. About 2 miles. - -Mr. JENNER. And you immediately drove over there? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. What kind of an automobile do you own and drive? - -Mr. SURREY. A 1961 Ford convertible. - -Mr. JENNER. And did you arrive at his home in that convertible? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes, I did. - -Mr. JENNER. What time of the day or night was this? - -Mr. SURREY. This was about 9 to 9:30 in the evening. - -Mr. JENNER. What day? I mean date. - -Mr. SURREY. April 10th. - -Mr. JENNER. What year? - -Mr. SURREY. 1963. - -Excuse me. This is 1964, isn't it. - -Mr. JENNER. Yes, sir. - -Mr. SURREY. So this would---- - -Mr. JENNER. Was this a year ago? - -Mr. SURREY. It would be 1963, yes. - -Mr. JENNER. I have marked a series of photographs as Commission -Exhibits Nos. 1006 through 1012. - -(The photographs referred to were marked Commission Exhibits Nos. 1006 -through 1012, respectively, for identification.) - -Mr. JENNER. These purport to be photographs of portions and places -in--both inside and outside General Walker's home relating to the -incident in question. - -Would you be good enough to take them seriatim, identify them by -exhibit number---- - -Mr. SURREY. Take them how? - -Mr. JENNER. Seriatim, in series--commencing with Commission Exhibit -1006. And tell us if you are familiar with the photograph and whether -it depicts a portion of General Walker's home, and, if so, what portion. - -Mr. SURREY. I don't know what this is here in the back yard, but -outside of that it looks like a picture of the window facing towards -the alley which the shot came through. - -Mr. JENNER. From the direction the shot came? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. And the marring on the molding of the window is the point -of the screen and the window through which the bullet came? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. Did you examine that that evening? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes; I did. - -Mr. JENNER. Did you see the breach in the casement which is depicted on -Commission Exhibit No. 1006? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes; I did. What is this in the back? Do you happen to know? - -Mr. JENNER. No; I don't. But I think I can bring it out. These -photographs, I think, were taken fairly recently. - -Have you been at General Walker's house in the last couple of weeks? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes; I have. - -Mr. JENNER. And have you had occasion to notice whether or not any -repair whatsoever has been made or was made with respect to the marring -of the molding? - -Mr. SURREY. I don't believe it has. - -That looks like a stack of cardboard back there. I am not familiar with -it. - -Mr. JENNER. Yes; it looks like heavy asbestos, or some wood out in the -yard. - -Mr. SURREY. I am not familiar with that. - -Mr. JENNER. Now, look at Exhibit No. 1007. - -Excuse me--the photograph Exhibit No. 1006 represents that casement in -its present condition? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes, sir; to the best of my knowledge. - -Mr. JENNER. And also as it was when you saw it that night, April 10? - -Mr. SURREY. No; the window was closed when I saw it that night. - -Mr. JENNER. But the breach in the molding is the same on this -photograph as it was when you saw it that night? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. All right. Now, the next photograph is Exhibit No. 1007, -and purports to be a photograph taken from the outside of General -Walker's home with the camera pointed into his home. - -Mr. SURREY. That is correct. - -Mr. JENNER. And---- - -Mr. SURREY. It shows the same breach allegedly caused by a bullet---- - -Mr. JENNER. That is shown on Exhibit 1006? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. And in the case of Exhibit No. 1006, that photograph -represents the present condition of that casement and that window and -that screen, as well as it was when you saw it on the evening of April -10, 1963? Insofar as the breach is concerned? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes; I seem to recall more cobwebbing effect than it shows -in the photograph. - -Mr. JENNER. Exhibit No. 1008 purports to be a room in General Walker's -home, and a wall with a bullet hole shown in it. - -Mr. SURREY. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. Do you recognize that room? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes; I do. - -Mr. JENNER. And is that a picture of one of the rooms in General -Walker's home? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes; it is. - -Mr. JENNER. Where is it with respect to the room shown in Commission -Exhibit No. 1007? - -Mr. SURREY. It is the same room. - -Mr. JENNER. The same room? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes; all this material has been turned around, from that -night. - -Mr. JENNER. You are referring in your last comment to Commission -Exhibit No. 1007, some pamphlet materials you see shown in that -photograph? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. Now, turning your attention to Commission Exhibit No. 1008, -does the wall that is shown on that exhibit face the casement window -shown on Exhibit No. 1007, or is that the reverse side? - -Mr. SURREY. It is the other wall, the other side of the room from the -window. - -Mr. JENNER. Is that the wall in which the bullet entered, or the wall, -the side of the wall from which the bullet exited? - -Mr. SURREY. That is the side of the wall that it entered. - -Mr. JENNER. All right. Then I show you Commission Exhibit No. 1009. - -Mr. SURREY. Yes; this is the next room now where the bullet exited. - -Mr. JENNER. Now, taking Exhibits Nos. 1008 and 1009, am I correct, -sir, that Exhibit No. 1008 shows the wall on the entry side of the -bullet, and Exhibit No. 1009 is the reverse side of the wall shown on -Commission Exhibit No. 1008? - -Mr. SURREY. That is correct. - -Mr. JENNER. In other words, the side of the wall that the bullet exited? - -Mr. SURREY. That is correct. - -Now, this picture was taken at the time, or soon thereafter, because -this material was in this position. - -(At this point, Senator Cooper withdrew from the hearing room.) - -Mr. JENNER. All right, sir. - -You are able to say, from your familiarity with the condition of -matters on the evening of April 10, 1963, that both Commission -exhibits---- - -Mr. SURREY. No; that one I don't know. - -Mr. JENNER. That Commission Exhibit No. 1009 depicts the condition of -that room, which is the room to the reverse side of Commission Exhibit -No. 1008, as it was the evening of April 10, 1963. - -Mr. SURREY. Substantially the same; yes. - -Mr. JENNER. And even including the boxes and packages of material? - -Mr. SURREY. That is correct. - -Mr. JENNER. You will notice in substantially the center of that exhibit -a rupture appears to be in the wall. Was that in fact a rupture? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes; it was. That is where the bullet came out of the wall, -and when the police came they found the bullet on top of these packages. - -Mr. JENNER. On top of the packages shown on Commission Exhibit No. -1009. I show you Exhibit No. 1011, which appears to be a photograph of -a fence, lattice fence. Are you familiar with that? - -Mr. SURREY. I believe it is the same type of thing as is in back of -Walker's home, in the alleyway. - -Mr. JENNER. Is it not in fact a picture of the fence that is--surrounds -to the rear General Walker's home? - -Mr. SURREY. I don't know. It is the same type, it looks the same. - -Mr. JENNER. It looks the same to you? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. When you made your diagram, Exhibit No. 1005, you drew a -wavy line along the alley, and I think you said that was a lattice -fence. - -Mr. SURREY. Yes; I drew it too far. This is Jackson's back yard. - -Mr. JENNER. Well, that is all right. The lattice fence you -identified---- - -Mr. SURREY. Is of the same type and construction. - -Mr. JENNER. As shown on Exhibit No. 1011? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. All right, sir. Thank you. Is the area depicted on -Commission Exhibit No. 1012 familiar to you? - -Mr. SURREY. It looks like a picture taken from the top of that lattice -fence towards the back of Walker's home. - -Mr. JENNER. Next is Commission Exhibit No. 1010, which is a photograph -of a tire imprint. On the evening of April 10 or the next day, April -11, when it was light, did you tour around General Walker's home with -him or without him? There was a search made to see---- - -Mr. SURREY. Yes; there was. - -Mr. JENNER. To find some identification in the way of automobile tire -impressions? - -Mr. SURREY. It is my impression that the police were looking primarily -for a casing from a shell. I did not see them take any---- - -Mr. JENNER. So that the particular portion of the Walker vicinity shown -on Commission Exhibit No. 1010 is not familiar to you? - -Mr. SURREY. I wouldn't know where it was in the area. - -Mr. JENNER. Yes, sir. - -The CHAIRMAN. Those have all been formally introduced, Mr. Jenner? - -Mr. JENNER. No; they have not, Mr. Chief Justice. If it suits your -convenience I was going to offer all exhibits at once, so I don't -overlook any. - -The CHAIRMAN. Yes; very well. - -Mr. JENNER. Thank you. Some of the exhibits the witness has identified -have already been introduced. They were exhibited to Marina Oswald. - -The CHAIRMAN. Yes; I recall. - -Mr. JENNER. Would you help us, also--I hand you a map of Dallas, which -we will mark Commission Exhibit No. 1013--or I should correct myself--I -hand you what purports to be a map of Dallas. - -There is indicated by brush pencil a cross in the center of that map as -representing the area of the residence of Maj. Gen. Edwin A. Walker, -resigned, at 4011 Turtle Creek Boulevard in Dallas. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 1013 for -identification.) - -Mr. SURREY. Yes; that is correct. That is the area. - -Mr. JENNER. That is a scale map of Dallas that appears to have been -obtained from the Dallas Transit Co. in Dallas, Tex. - -Mr. SURREY. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. Now, you received a telephone call from General Walker? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. The evening of April 10. It was about 9 o'clock? Please try -to fix that time as accurately as you can. - -Mr. SURREY. I would say it was closer to 9:15. - -Mr. JENNER. And you arrived 15 minutes later? - -Mr. SURREY. 10 to 15 minutes later. - -Mr. JENNER. Now, would you very carefully, calling on your most -accurate recollection, recite for us--you came to the door, you -entered, what did you see, who was there, and what was said to you by -anyone, if anyone was there--just the course of events as best you are -able to recall them that evening. And I will try not to interrupt you. - -Mr. SURREY. When I pulled--I pulled up in front on Turtle Creek, got -out of my car. A police car was there. - -Mr. JENNER. Was there anything in addition to a police car? - -Mr. SURREY. No. - -Mr. JENNER. You pulled your car up on Turtle Creek Boulevard? - -Mr. SURREY. Behind the police car. - -Mr. JENNER. Would you be good enough, when you refer to Turtle Creek -Boulevard, to say boulevard, because we have talked about Turtle Creek, -a stream. - -Mr. SURREY. Turtle Creek Boulevard. - -Mr. JENNER. There was one squad car there at that time? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes; just as I was getting out of the car, another squad -car came up. - -Mr. JENNER. Turning to your plat, would you put an "X" with a circle -where you drove up? The witness has now done that. All right. Now, you -are on Turtle Creek Boulevard. Then what did you do? You parked? - -Mr. SURREY. I parked and got out of my automobile, and walked up the -front walkway into the house. - -Mr. JENNER. I see. All right. - -Mr. SURREY. There were several policemen in the house, just arriving. -Mr. Walker was sitting at his desk in this back room. - -Mr. JENNER. All right. - -Now it will be helpful to the Commission--let's take this blank sheet -of paper--you draw us a floor plan, will you please, of General -Walker's home, and we will mark that Commission Exhibit No. 1014, so as -to assist you in telling us what you did. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 1014 for -identification.) - -Mr. SURREY. This is the ground floor. - -Mr. JENNER. All right. Now, first let's locate the house. It is a -rectangle that you have drawn. Is the rectangle facing the same as the -rectangle marked "Walker" on Commission Exhibit No. 1005? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes; it is. - -Mr. JENNER. So that the lower portion is east? - -Mr. SURREY. Do we need these directions exactly, because that Turtle -Creek Boulevard winds all around. - -Mr. JENNER. All I want to do is tie it up with Commission Exhibit No. -1005. - -Mr. SURREY. Yes; it is the same direction. - -Mr. JENNER. Realizing that you have that problem of obliqueness, -but relating it solely to Commission Exhibit No. 1005, the foot of -Commission Exhibit No. 1014 represents an easterly direction, correct? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. And the top a westerly direction. And the right, northerly, -and the left, southerly. All right. Now, we have it located. - -Which is the doorway into General Walker's home? - -Mr. SURREY. This is the--this is the front door. [Witness draws.] - -Mr. JENNER. You have now put two oblique lines on the line facing -southerly. - -Mr. SURREY. That is correct. - -Mr. JENNER. And then as you enter, there is a long hallway. - -Mr. SURREY. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. And which is the rear of the house towards the alley? - -Mr. SURREY. Toward the north. - -Mr. JENNER. All right. Now, in what room, if any of those rooms on the -first floor, was General Walker the night of April 10, 1963, when this -incident occurred, as you learned when you reached there? - -Mr. SURREY. His desk was positioned right there. - -Mr. JENNER. You have now drawn a small but rather elongated rectangle, -which appears to be opposite two lines you have drawn which I take it -represents a window. - -Mr. SURREY. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. And from what you learned from General Walker on that -occasion in the presence of the policemen, was he seated at the desk? - -Mr. SURREY. He was seated at his desk. - -Mr. JENNER. His back to the window you have drawn, or facing the window? - -Mr. SURREY. To the window. - -Mr. JENNER. So he was facing to the window? - -Mr. SURREY. No; his back was to the window. - -Mr. JENNER. He was facing away from the window? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. And you have drawn a little circle by the figure -representing a desk, indicating where General Walker was seated? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. And facing westerly? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. Now, locate for us, put a circle with a cross, the wall, -the side of the wall indicated by Commission Exhibit No. 1008. - -Mr. SURREY. It is right here, sir. [Witness draws.] - -Mr. JENNER. All right. Now, that is shown, for the purpose of the -record, to the left of the blank circle which the witness drew to show -General Walker sitting at his desk. And that area that is shown on--the -wall shown on Commission Exhibit No. 1009, I take it, is precisely the -other side. - -Mr. SURREY. The other side. - -Mr. JENNER. You have done that by showing an area? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. All right. Then we have that located. - -Did General Walker in your presence relate what occurred? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. Tell us what he said about how it occurred, when he became -aware of it? - -Mr. SURREY. I walked in the front door, and there were several -policemen standing around in various areas. I walked in through here. - -Mr. JENNER. When you say "through here" [witness draws two lines to -represent door.]---- - -Mr. SURREY. Through the front---- - -Mr. JENNER. You came in from the south, the front, and you went down -the hallway? - -Mr. SURREY. It is not really a hallway. It is mostly glass doors here. -And I walked through those glass doors. - -Mr. JENNER. You have put three strikes on your sketch. What is that? - -Mr. SURREY. Those are glass doors. - -Mr. JENNER. You walked through the glass doorway. You walked into -the room, the wall of which is shown on Commission Exhibit No. 1009. -Correct? - -Mr. SURREY. That is right. - -Mr. JENNER. All right. - -Mr. SURREY. And I went right through this room. - -Mr. JENNER. Into the room in which General Walker's desk is located? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. The wall of which on that side appears shown on Commission -Exhibit No. 1008? - -Mr. SURREY. That is correct. - -Mr. JENNER. All right. - -Mr. SURREY. The General was sitting at his desk. - -Mr. JENNER. When you arrived? - -Mr. SURREY. When I arrived. - -Mr. JENNER. Was he facing---- - -Mr. SURREY. He was---- - -Mr. JENNER. Westerly? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes, talking to a policeman in uniform. And I walked in and -I said, "What happened? What's going on?" And he pointed to this hole -in the wall. - -Mr. JENNER. Shown on Commission Exhibit No. 1008? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes. And I facetiously said, "Oh, you found a bug." - -Mr. JENNER. Would you explain your facetious remark? I don't get the -fact that it is facetious. - -Mr. SURREY. Well, actually, it may not be. It is a common joke around -the General's house that there may be microphones. - -Mr. JENNER. That kind of a bug? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. That is, you saw the hole in the wall and you remarked -facetiously that he had discovered the house had been bugged by an -electronic device? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes; and, therefore, had chopped a hole in the wall. - -And he said, "No; I have been shot at." And he pointed to the hole in -the window. - -Mr. JENNER. Which is shown on Commission Exhibits Nos. 1007 and 1006? - -Mr. SURREY. That is correct. Except the window was closed at this -time--both casements were together. - -Mr. JENNER. Yes; and there is a screen on that window? - -Mr. SURREY. I believe there is. - -Mr. JENNER. All right. - -Mr. SURREY. And then---- - -Mr. JENNER. Excuse me, sir. That would be the window which is the lower -of the two sets of strikes appearing on the northerly line of your -Exhibit No. 1014. - -Mr. SURREY. Yes. I will mark it with an "A" and a circle. - -Mr. JENNER. Good. - -Mr. SURREY. And then a policeman asked him a question, and I noticed -that his arm was bleeding. - -Mr. JENNER. General Walker's arm? - -Mr. SURREY. General Walker's arm, was bleeding in four or five places. - -Mr. JENNER. How was he dressed? - -Mr. SURREY. In a dress shirt of a color, as I recall, but it was not a -sport shirt--and slacks. - -Mr. JENNER. It was not a uniform of any character? - -Mr. SURREY. No; and without a tie. - -Mr. JENNER. Short sleeved or long sleeved? - -Mr. SURREY. Long sleeved, rolled up. - -Mr. JENNER. And his right arm, was it? - -Mr. SURREY. His right arm, yes; on his forearm. And---- - -Mr. JENNER. Was he bleeding profusely? - -Mr. SURREY. No. And he said "The jacket of the bullet must have come -apart when it went through the window." And he brushed plaster--I -assume it came from this wall--out of his hair, which was in his hair, -also. - -Mr. JENNER. What color hair does General Walker have? - -Mr. SURREY. Brown; a dark brown. - -Mr. JENNER. He has a fairly full head of hair, does he? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. And plaster and that sort of thing would be quite apparent, -would it, to anyone who saw it in his hair? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. And you noticed it? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. And you noticed him brushing plaster out of his hair? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. Now, that leads me to ask you this, Mr. Surrey: That bullet -hole is how high from the floor? I am showing you now Commission -Exhibit No. 1009. - -Mr. SURREY. You mean how high is the hole---- - -Mr. JENNER. From the floor. - -Mr. SURREY. From the floor? Well, the police went into the next room -and so did I, and sighted through the hole in the wall to the window. - -Mr. JENNER. Yes, sir. - -Mr. SURREY. And when Walker sat down at his desk, it went right through -his head. - -Mr. JENNER. So he was seated on a chair substantially the height of the -one you are seated on? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes, and he is approximately a little taller than I am. - -Mr. JENNER. He is a little taller than you are. So that would be about -4, 4-1/2 feet. - -Tell the Commission the distance from the wall, the point at which -you have marked an "X" with a circle, and the place at which General -Walker's chair was located. - -Mr. SURREY. I would say 18 inches. - -Mr. JENNER. He was that close? - -Mr. SURREY. To the wall there; yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. So that the representation you have made on Commission -Exhibit No. 1014 is distorted? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes; it is. The desk was right up against the wall, and he -was seated in the middle of the desk. - -Mr. JENNER. His chair was much closer to the wall than would appear to -have been as you have roughly diagramed on Exhibit No. 1014? - -Mr. SURREY. That is correct. - -Mr. JENNER. All right. In other words, he was close enough to the wall -when seated at that chair so that when a bullet penetrating the plaster -wall could have splattered plaster into his hair? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. All right. Proceed, sir. - -Mr. SURREY. So I went over and looked at his arm, and there was a piece -of metal in one particular spot in his arm, that I noticed, in addition -to the other scratches, and I went looking for some first aid equipment -and found tweezers upstairs, and came back downstairs and picked that -piece of metal and two others out of his right forearm. - -Mr. JENNER. And what was done with those pieces of metal? - -Mr. SURREY. They were--I believe the police took them. - -Mr. JENNER. But you recall that you, in fact, yourself took the pieces -of metal from General Walker's right forearm? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. And--all right. Go ahead, sir. - -Mr. SURREY. Well, then it became just a matter of the police -questioning the general and myself. I don't recall which detective or -which policemen and myself went out in the back and looked in the back -area. - -Mr. JENNER. Is that what you did next, after you took the metal out of -General Walker's forearm? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. You immediately went out of the house---- - -Mr. SURREY. Not immediately; no. We talked. I would say within 2 or 3 -minutes. - -Mr. JENNER. But you did not go into any other room? That is what I am -getting at first. You went outside first? - -Mr. SURREY. I don't recall if we went in the other room then or later -on. - -Mr. JENNER. When you say the other room, it is the room opposite the -one and to the left of the one shown on your diagram---- - -Mr. SURREY. As I recall, I merely looked around the separation here -when they said that the bullet came clear through into the other room. - -Mr. JENNER. Who said that? - -Mr. SURREY. One of the policemen. - -Mr. JENNER. And did you go around and look then? - -Mr. SURREY. I just looked around the doorway; yes. - -Mr. JENNER. What did you find when you looked around--what did you see? - -Mr. SURREY. I saw these books stacked, as shown in this picture. - -Mr. JENNER. Identify the picture, please. - -Mr. SURREY. Exhibit No. 1009. - -Mr. JENNER. Had--you mentioned a bullet as having been found. - -Mr. SURREY. Yes, the policeman said he had found that bullet, on top of -the packages. - -Mr. JENNER. Shown in Exhibit No. 1009? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. Was that portion of the bullet exhibited to you on that -occasion? - -Mr. SURREY. No. - -Mr. JENNER. You did not see it? - -Mr. SURREY. No. - -Mr. JENNER. Was the statement that the bullet had been found on the -opposite side of that wall made in the presence of General Walker? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. What did General Walker say when that statement was made in -his presence, if anything? - -Mr. SURREY. I don't recall that he made any statement. - -Mr. JENNER. Did he say anything about where the spent bullet had been -found? - -Mr. SURREY. Not at that time, no. Not to me. - -Mr. JENNER. Well, did he say it to an officer in your presence? - -Mr. SURREY. Not that I recall. - -Mr. JENNER. Was it uttered by him at all in your presence on that -evening? - -Mr. SURREY. Not that I recall. - -Mr. JENNER. That is, that the spent bullet had been found on the -opposite side of the wall next to which he had been sitting? - -Mr. SURREY. No; I think the policeman said it, and that is all that was -said. - -Mr. JENNER. But it was said in General Walker's presence? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes; it was. - -Mr. JENNER. What did the policeman say? - -Mr. SURREY. He said the bullet went clean through the wall and they -found it laying on the packages in the other room. - -Mr. JENNER. Did he say they found it or "I found it"? - -Mr. SURREY. He said, "I found it" as I recall. - -Mr. JENNER. Proceed in your chronology, please. - -Mr. SURREY. That is all there was to it. Then he started getting calls -from newsmen, and newsmen coming to the door. - -Mr. JENNER. First, you went out and looked around the premises. - -Mr. SURREY. Yes; but it was quite dark at this time, and they said, "We -will come back in the morning." - -Mr. JENNER. I should have asked you this. Perhaps I just assumed it. -Was it dark when you arrived at General Walker's home? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes; it was. - -Mr. JENNER. When does it get dark in Dallas, Tex., in this area in the -spring? - -Mr. SURREY. I would say 7. - -Mr. JENNER. Do you have daylight saving time in Dallas? - -Mr. SURREY. No; we don't. - -Mr. JENNER. And you are on what time? - -Mr. SURREY. Central standard. - -Mr. JENNER. Central standard time? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. Well---- - -Mr. SURREY. It is 2 hours from here. - -The CHAIRMAN. Two hours from here when we have daylight savings. - -Mr. SURREY. You have daylight saving now? - -The CHAIRMAN. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. Only 1 hour then. - -Mr. SURREY. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. After looking around, you say newspapermen began to come. - -Mr. SURREY. That is right. - -Mr. JENNER. And interview General Walker? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. In your presence? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. And in the presence of the policemen? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. When did you leave General Walker's home that night? - -Mr. SURREY. I stayed that night. - -Mr. JENNER. Did you hear General Walker being interviewed? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. What did he say about what had occurred, if anything? - -Mr. SURREY. He said, "Somebody took a shot at me." This is the general -tenor of the interviews as to what happened, and he said, "Somebody -took a shot at me." I guess--"That is the closest I have ever been -missed in 30 years of military service." - -Mr. JENNER. Did he say anything about whether he was seated--whether he -had been moving about? - -Mr. SURREY. No; he said he had been seated at his desk when it -happened. Working on his income tax. - -Mr. JENNER. Now, Mr. Surrey, was there an occasion preceding -October--April 10, 1963, that you noticed an automobile and some people -in the automobile in and about General Walker's premises? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes; that was 2 nights before, on Monday evening. - -Mr. JENNER. That would be April 10? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. I mean April 8, I am sorry. - -Mr. SURREY. April 8; yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. What time? - -Mr. SURREY. About 8:30 to 9. I am not sure about what time it was. - -Mr. JENNER. I take it, then, it was dark? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes; it was. - -Mr. JENNER. And tell the Commission what led up to that, what you said, -and what you did. This incident that you have in mind. - -Mr. SURREY. I was coming from my home, came down Turtle Creek -Boulevard, passed in front of the general's house, and took a -right-hand turn on Avondale, to come up to the alley. - -Mr. JENNER. Have we put Avondale into your plat? You are now turning to -Commission Exhibit No. 1005. [Witness draws.] - -Mr. SURREY. The normal route into the parking lot behind the general's -house---- - -Mr. JENNER. He does have a parking lot? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes; this is the parking area back in here. - -Mr. JENNER. Now, would you crossline that, so we know it is the parking -lot? [Witness draws.] - -That is fine. - -Mr. SURREY. I came up Turtle Creek Boulevard and turned right on -Avondale prior to turning again up the alleyway, to go into the parking -lot in back of General Walker's house. And I noticed a car parked 30 -feet--about 20 yards actually---- - -Mr. JENNER. You have now drawn a rectangle on the edge of the sheet of -paper, Exhibit No. 1005, marked with the letter "N." Would you write -the word "car" in there? - -The CHAIRMAN. What is this designed to establish, Mr. Jenner? We are -getting a little afield, it seems to me. - -Mr. JENNER. Mr. Surrey, Mr. Chief Justice, was interviewed and related -this particular incident, and we want to dissipate any possibility--I -don't want to put it this way---- - -The CHAIRMAN. If it has some relevancy, all right. But let's don't take -too long, because it is getting to be quite collateral. Go right ahead. - -Mr. SURREY. Well, the gist of the matter is that two nights before -the assassination attempt, I saw two men around the house peeking in -windows and so forth, and reported this to the general the following -morning, and he, in turn, reported it to the police on Tuesday, and it -was Wednesday night that he was shot at. So that is really the gist of -the whole thing. - -The CHAIRMAN. All right. - -Mr. JENNER. I show you an exhibit marked Garner Exhibit No. 1. At -anytime prior to April 10, 1963, were you familiar with the person who -is shown on Garner Exhibit No. 1? - -Mr. SURREY. No. - -Mr. JENNER. When I say familiar, I mean did you know of or had you seen -consciously a person with that physiognomy and physical appearance? - -Mr. SURREY. No; I have not. - -Mr. JENNER. That is a side view. - -I show you Commission Exhibit No. 520. The man in the center--had you -prior to April 10, 1963, ever seen a man with that physiognomy, facial -showing, and body? - -Mr. SURREY. No. - -Mr. JENNER. All right, sir. I take it, then--I ask you this question. -Neither of the two men that you saw in that automobile on the 8th of -April 1963, at least to your present recollection, was the man shown on -Garner Exhibit No. 1, and Commission Exhibit No. 520? - -Mr. SURREY. I don't believe either of them was. - -Mr. JENNER. All right. - -The CHAIRMAN. May I ask--is this what you spoke of as the book? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes, sir. - -The CHAIRMAN. I notice on here that there is no price of any kind. You -say you sold this for $5? - -Mr. SURREY. That was an afterthought. The original intent was not a -sale. - -The CHAIRMAN. Was it ever advertised to the public as for sale from $5? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes. - -The CHAIRMAN. Where was it advertised? - -Mr. SURREY. In just a flier that we included with some materials we -were mailing out. - -The CHAIRMAN. I see. I would like to ask you if you were present -when--at the time that they had--that there was the demonstration -against Ambassador Adlai Stevenson? - -Mr. SURREY. No; I was not. - -The CHAIRMAN. Did you have anything to do with that demonstration? - -Mr. SURREY. No, sir. - -The CHAIRMAN. Were you present when the demonstration was against then -Vice President Johnson in Dallas? - -Mr. SURREY. No, sir. - -The CHAIRMAN. Did you have anything to do with that? - -Mr. SURREY. No, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. Mr. Chief Justice, we have marked the book as Commission -Exhibit No. 1015. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 1015 for -identification.) - -Mr. JENNER. Would you please examine it? You need no more than just -to look at it, so you will be able to testify that that is a true and -correct copy of the book you have testified about, published by Eagle -Publishing Co., which contains on its reverse cover side the letter to -which you made reference. - -Mr. SURREY. Yes, sir; it is. - -The CHAIRMAN. What did it cost you to publish that? - -Mr. SURREY. It came to $2.50 and some cents. In a limited -quantity--3,000. - -The CHAIRMAN. Do you now propose to offer all of the exhibits? - -Mr. JENNER. Yes; I have three more FBI photos, and then I will have -completed. - -The CHAIRMAN. Very well. - -Mr. JENNER. Mr. Surrey, I show you three more photographs which are -identified first as Commission Exhibit No. 997. Would you read the -material that appears on the reverse side of that first, please? - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 997 for -identification.) - -Mr. JENNER. Looking now at the face of the photograph, Commission -Exhibit No. 997, does--do the inscriptions on the reverse side -correctly describe that area of General Walker's home and the Mormon -church references? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes; they do. - -Mr. JENNER. You are familiar with that area? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes; I am. - -JENNER. And its physical appearance, except for the foliage on the -trees, is as that area looked on the night of April 10, 1963? Is that -correct? - -Mr. SURREY. That is correct. - -Mr. JENNER. I hand you Commission Exhibit No. 1016. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 1016 for -identification.) - -Mr. JENNER. Read the inscription on the reverse side, please. You are -familiar with that area shown on the photograph? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes; I am. - -Mr. JENNER. Do the descriptions on the reverse side of the photograph -correctly describe that area? - -Mr. SURREY. With the exception that I do not know these cars and so -forth. - -Mr. JENNER. I am talking about the area. - -Mr. SURREY. The physical area; yes, they do. - -Mr. JENNER. And that area looks the same today as it did on the evening -of April 10, or the day of April 10, 1963? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. I now hand you the last of these, Commission Exhibit No. -1017, and ask you first to read the inscription and then examine the -photograph. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 1017 for -identification.) - -Mr. SURREY. Yes, sir; these are substantially correct. - -Mr. JENNER. As of today, as well as as of April 10, 1963? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. All right. - -Now, Mr. Chief Justice, I offer in evidence the various exhibits which -we have identified in the record with the exhibit numbers, and ask that -the exhibits take the exhibit numbers I recited in each instance as to -each exhibit, being Exhibits Nos. 996 through 1000 and 1002 through -1017. - -The CHAIRMAN. They may all be admitted under those numbers. - -(The documents heretofore marked Commission Exhibits Nos. 996 through -1000 and 1002 through 1017 were received in evidence.) - -Mr. JENNER. That includes, Mr. Chief Justice, the diagrams which the -witness has prepared for us. - -The CHAIRMAN. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. As I reported to you, Mr. Chief Justice, the file on the -Walker incident reached us about 20 minutes before we opened this -morning. I think I have covered everything. Could I have the privilege -of 5 minutes to take a look? - -The CHAIRMAN. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. I will do it very quickly. - -The CHAIRMAN. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. Who is Mr. Coleman? Do you know a man by that name? - -Mr. SURREY. Not personally. - -Mr. JENNER. Walker Kirk Coleman. - -Mr. SURREY. As I just read on the back of your exhibit, he is the -boy that reported seeing several automobiles at the time of the -assassination. - -Mr. JENNER. That is immaterial to this issue. - -You have never seen either of the two men you have mentioned before or -since the occasion you saw that automobile with the two men in it on -the evening of April 8, 1963? - -Mr. SURREY. Not to my knowledge. I never was very close to them. - -Mr. JENNER. Were you able to--what kind of an automobile was it, do you -know? - -Mr. SURREY. It was a Ford, a new Ford at that time. - -Mr. JENNER. Sedan? - -Mr. SURREY. Four-door sedan. - -Mr. JENNER. And it was new? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. To your knowledge, have you ever seen that automobile -before or since? - -Mr. SURREY. No, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. What color was it, if you noticed? - -Mr. SURREY. It was either a dark brown or a maroon. - -Mr. JENNER. You followed it awhile and then gave up the chase? - -Mr. SURREY. That is correct. Actually, they made a turn which--I -am familiar with downtown Dallas--and they made a turn which would -indicate they were doubling back or not going in a straight direction. -And I thought perhaps I had been spotted in my convertible. So I left -them there. - -Mr. JENNER. I will close, Mr. Chief Justice, by asking the witness--was -the Mormon church in session? Had there been---- - -Mr. SURREY. There had been services. - -Mr. JENNER. The evening of April 10? - -Mr. SURREY. They were still dispersing. - -Mr. JENNER. When you arrived at approximately 9:30 in the evening of -April 10, were people still leaving the Mormon church? - -Mr. SURREY. Yes; they were. - -Mr. JENNER. I have no more questions. - -The CHAIRMAN. That will be all, Mr. Surrey. You may be excused now. - -The Commission is adjourned. - -(Whereupon, at 12:20 p.m., the President's Commission recessed.) - - - - -_Thursday, June 18, 1964_ - -TESTIMONY OF JAMES J. ROWLEY AND ROBERT CARSWELL - -The President's Commission met at 9 a.m., on June 18, 1964, at 200 -Maryland Avenue NE., Washington, D.C. - -Present were Chief Justice Earl Warren, Chairman; Senator John Sherman -Cooper, Representative Hale Boggs, Representative Gerald R. Ford, and -Allen W. Dulles, members. - -Also present were J. Lee Rankin, general counsel; and Samuel A. Stern, -assistant counsel. - - -TESTIMONY OF JAMES J. ROWLEY - -(Members present at this point: Chief Justice Earl Warren.) - -The CHAIRMAN. The Commission will come to order. - -Chief, it is our procedure to read a little statement as to the purpose -of the meeting, for the benefit of the witness. - -Chief Rowley will be asked to testify with respect to the protective -measures taken by the Secret Service in Dallas, changes in such -measures made as a result of the Dallas experience, and with regard to -the investigation of the assassination and any information he may have -respecting the assassination of the President. - -Would you raise your right hand and be sworn? - -You solemnly swear the testimony you are about to give before the -Commission will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the -truth, so help you God? - -Mr. ROWLEY. I do. - -The CHAIRMAN. Will you be seated, please. Mr. Rankin will conduct the -examination. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Chief Justice, before starting the examination, I would -like to make a brief statement for your benefit and for the benefit of -the Commission, of the problems that are probably going to develop in -this area with regard to the security of the country, and a suggestion -about how we might handle them as we proceed with the witness. - -I have suggested to Chief Rowley that as he moves along in his -testimony he might have various matters that he would think should -not be on the record because of the security of the country, and -if he would just suggest that, when he came to that point, and say -specifically that it did involve the security of the country, then -we would proceed to go off the record, if it was satisfactory to the -Commission, and consider those questions off the record. And then -return to the record as soon as we had completed those security matters. - -Would that be satisfactory? - -The CHAIRMAN. I think that is an appropriate way to proceed. - -Mr. RANKIN. Chief Rowley, will you state your name and address for the -record, please? - -Mr. ROWLEY. James J. Rowley, 3501 Rittenhouse Street NW., Washington, -D.C. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you have an official position with the Government? - -Mr. ROWLEY. I have, as Chief of the U.S. Secret Service. - -Mr. RANKIN. How long have you occupied that position? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Since September 1, 1961. - -Mr. RANKIN. What is the nature of the duties of that position? - -Mr. ROWLEY. The nature of the duties is the general overall supervision -of the activities of the Secret Service. - -Mr. RANKIN. And, in a general way, what is the official responsibility -under the statutes of the United States of the Secret Service? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Well, we are responsible under title 18, section 3056, -to investigate all violations that affect the currency, securities, -and coinage of the United States. That involves Government bonds, -Government checks, and such other functions and duties as are -authorized by law, subject to the direction of the Secretary of the -Treasury. - -In addition, we have the responsibility of the protection of the -President, members of his immediate family, the Vice President, -President-elect, Vice President-elect, and the former President for a -reasonable period of time as he leaves office. - -Mr. RANKIN. Will you please tell us what experience you had with the -Secret Service prior to the time that you became chief. - -Mr. ROWLEY. I was in charge of the White House detail from 1946 to 1961. - -Mr. RANKIN. Now, will you tell us briefly the training that you had in -regard to Government Service? - -Mr. ROWLEY. I first entered the Government as a member of the FBI -in 1937, and spent a year with the FBI, after which I went back to -New York for a period of 9 months. I entered the Secret Service on -September 12, 1938. I spent time in criminal investigation in the New -York City office, and the Utica office of Secret Service and in April -of 1939, I was assigned to Washington, eventually to the White House -detail. - -(At this point, Mr. Dulles entered the hearing room.) - -Mr. ROWLEY. I served as a member of the White House detail, as an agent -on a shift, as an assistant agent in charge, agent in charge of the -shift, and advance man, in preparing for Presidential visits, both -domestically and abroad. - -Mr. RANKIN. What educational training did you have? - -Mr. ROWLEY. I had 2 years of college toward a B.S., then I was -graduated from law school, and secured a master's degree in law. - -Mr. RANKIN. Was one of the duties of your position as chief of the -Service to have general supervision over the trip of President Kennedy -and Vice President Johnson to Dallas around November 22, 1963? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Well, that would be part of my job--the general supervision -of the trip. The actual direct supervision would have been under the -jurisdiction of Mr. Behn, who was in charge of the White House detail. - -Mr. RANKIN. Could you describe briefly the nature of Mr. Behn's -responsibilities in that work? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Well, it would have been, as mine was in the period I was -there, that he was responsible for developing all arrangements with -the members of the White House staff, designating the members of the -detail to develop advance work, assigning agents to the various shifts, -directing their training as it applied to the White House detail, -and participating in any event that he thought would be necessary in -connection with his work at the White House. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you become familiar with what did happen on that trip, -in your position as chief? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes; I was first informed while addressing a graduating -class of our Secret Service school on that day. I was summoned by Mr. -Behn to the White House, at which time he told me that the President -had been shot. He was then at the hospital, and subsequently we were -notified that the President had died; that the Vice President would -take the oath of office in the airplane at Love Field. - -In the meantime, I asked my deputy, who was in his office while I -was at the White House, to arrange with the Immigration Service to -close the border, Texas being in close proximity to the border. There -might have been a conspiracy or something, we didn't want to take -any chances. And then I immediately dispatched an inspector from my -staff to the Capitol to protect the Speaker, and directed the other -activities as we got the information from Dallas. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you learn in connection with the trip when the -assassination occurred that certain of the Secret Service agents had -been in the press club and what is called the Cellar, at Fort Worth, -the night before? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Well, that came to my attention through a broadcast that -Mr. Pearson made, that the agents were inebriated the night before at -the Fort Worth Press Club. I immediately dispatched Inspector McCann to -Fort Worth to investigate the report, and to interview the agents. - -Mr. RANKIN. What did you learn? - -Mr. ROWLEY. I learned that there were nine agents involved at the Press -Club. And I might say this--the agents on duty throughout that day -had no opportunity to eat. When they arrived at Fort Worth, they were -informed that there was a buffet to be served at the Fort Worth Club. -This is what I ascertained in personal interviews. Upon going over -there, they learned there was no buffet, and some of them stayed for -a drink. Three, I think, had one Scotch, and others had two or three -beers. They were in and out--from the time they arrived, I would say -roughly around 12:30, until the place closed at 2 o'clock. - -Now, after that some of them went to the Cellar. This is a place that -does not serve alcoholic beverages. They went there primarily, I think, -out of curiosity, because this was some kind of a beatnik place where -someone gets up and recites, or plays the guitar. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you learn whether or not there were any violations of -the regulations of the Secret Service by these men? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes; there was a violation. At that time there was a -section in our manual in effect that said that during---- - -Mr. RANKIN. Will you give us first the number? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Section 10. - -Mr. RANKIN. Is that chapter 1, page 7? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Chapter 1, page 7; yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. Now, will you tell the Commission about what the regulation -was? - -Mr. ROWLEY. "The use of liquor. Employees are strictly enjoined to -refrain from the use of intoxicating liquor during the hours they are -officially employed at their post of duty or when they may reasonably -expect that they may be called upon to perform an official duty." - -The one that applies here--"However, all members of the White House -detail and special agents cooperating with them on presidential and -similar protective assignments are considered to be subject to call for -official duty at any time while in travel status. Therefore, the use of -intoxicating liquor of any kind, including beer and wine, by members -of the White House detail and special agents cooperating with them or -by special agents on similar assignments, while they are in a travel -status, is prohibited." - -Mr. RANKIN. Can you tell the Commission how many men were involved in -these trips to the Press Club and the Cellar, where these things were -done? - -Mr. ROWLEY. There were 9 men involved at the Press Club, and there were -10 men involved at the Cellar. - -Mr. RANKIN. Now, how many men, of those 10 men, were in the -Presidential motorcade on the day of the assassination? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Four--four men were in the followup car. - -The CHAIRMAN. Who were they? - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you know their names? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes; Landis, Hill, Ready, and Bennett. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you make any investigation to determine whether or not -their violation of the Secret Service regulations had anything to do -with the assassination of the President? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes. They performed their duties from the time they -departed in the followup car from Love Field until the point of the -tragedy in a most satisfactory manner. There was nothing deficient in -their actions or their alertness. They went through the heaviest part -of downtown Dallas, through the crowds, and performed in an exemplary -manner. - -Mr. RANKIN. How do you know that? - -Mr. ROWLEY. From the reports that I got from their superiors. - -Mr. RANKIN. In the work that you did with the White House detail before -you became Chief of the Secret Service, did you know the various -responsibilities of the members of the White House detail? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you ever participate in such motorcades yourself? - -Mr. ROWLEY. I have; yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. How much? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Well, I have participated, in rough numbers, over a period -of 22 years--roughly, maybe, a thousand or more. - -Mr. RANKIN. Will you briefly describe the functions of the Secret -Service agents in connection with the President's car? - -The CHAIRMAN. Have you finished this other matter? - -Mr. RANKIN. No; I just wanted to---- - -The CHAIRMAN. All right. Go right ahead. - -Mr. ROWLEY. When the President's car leaves the airport or a railroad -station or any other location, the agents accompany him to the car and -stand to the right and left, in the same order as their designated -positions on the followup car, and screen him. And then the car moves -out, slowly, because the rest of the cars have to have an opportunity -to follow in the motorcade, so that none lingers behind, or is left -behind. And then the agent in the lead car determines that the -motorcade is intact and is moving, then he steps up his speed, which is -a cue to the Presidential driver to step up his speed, and then they go -at a speed consistent with the crowd that is there, and so forth. - -Now, upon leaving the airport, if there is a huge crowd there, the -men are still on the ground running on the right and left side of the -President, both rear and front of the vehicle. After they get out of -the crowd, then the men in the front beside the Presidential vehicle -drop back and take their positions in the followup car. - -This is so that they are not in the way of the men running on the right -and left rear. They move back last and have a clear opportunity to jump -onboard the followup car in the event the speed of the motorcade is -stepped up. - -When the motorcade comes to intersections or turns which are always -vulnerable points, in that if you make a right turn, that is the -closest point for someone to come out, the agents on the right side -before reaching that point, will jump off, to be available alongside -the President's car in the event someone darts out with some malicious -plan. - -There have also been times when, innocently, ladies and young people -will come out to throw a bouquet of flowers. And then if there is a -crowd that is sparse, they return to their position in the followup car. - -Now, when they come into a big crowd, they take it on foot, and at a -little jog, if necessary. - -In some instances, if the crowd continues for a prolonged distance, -the agents work together. In other words, there are rear steps on the -right and left rear of the Presidential car with handrails. These have -two purposes. One, for agents to ride on and to screen the President -from anything from above; the second, in a situation like this, to keep -an additional man available in case of trouble, and also to alternate -with the men to the right rear of the President, who are jogging along -warding off the crowd. - -Mr. RANKIN. Now, what positions did the four men that you referred to -that were involved in the press club and the Cellar matter occupy on -the day of the assassination? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Well, Mr. Ready occupied the right front, Mr. Landis to his -rear---- - -Mr. RANKIN. What do you mean by right front? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Right front running board position of the followup car. It -was his responsibility or duty to jump off in crowds and to take the -position at the right rear of the President's car. - -Mr. Landis, if necessary, to jump off if the occasion demanded and take -the right front of the President's car. - -Mr. Hill was on the left front running board of the followup car, and -his responsibility was at the rear of the President's car. His position -was assigned there because he was in charge of the First Lady's detail, -and she was seated on the left side. - -And Mr. McIntyre was to his rear on the left running board. So his -assignment would have been up to the left front of the President's car. -Mr. Bennett was in the rear seat of the followup car. - -Mr. RANKIN. Now, how can you tell that the fact that they were out as -they were the night before and violated the regulations, had nothing to -do with the assassination? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Well, based on the reports of my investigating agents and -the facts as to how they performed at the time of the tragedy. Mr. -Hill, who was on the left side, responded immediately--as he looked -toward the Presidential car, being on the left side, he scanned from -left to right, and when he saw there was something happening to the -President following a noise, he immediately jumped from his position to -get aboard from his side. - -Mr. Ready scanned to the right so he was looking away from the -President, because he was looking around from the right side. As a -consequence, he wasn't aware of what was happening in the front. The -car was also going on a turn at that time. - -Mr. RANKIN. What about the other two? - -Mr. ROWLEY. The other two were watching--they reacted normally--the man -on the left side looked to his left rear, and the man, Landis, looked -to his right rear. - -Mr. RANKIN. Have you done anything to discipline these men for -violation of the regulations of the Secret Service? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Well, I did consider what type of punishment would be -provided. - -Then I also considered the fact that these men in no way had--their -conduct had no bearing on the assassination. And, therefore, I thought -that in the light of history, to place a stigma on them by punishing -them at that time, from which inevitably the public would conclude that -they were responsible for the assassination of the President--I didn't -think this was fair, and that they did not deserve that, with their -family and children. - -(At this point, Representative Ford entered the hearing room.) - -Mr. DULLES. May I ask one question there? - -You described the assignment of the four men with respect to the -followup car and the President's car. Do they have different -assignments with regard to watching what is happening around them, or -does that depend on the circumstances in which they are? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Both. When they start off they have a certain area that -they have to watch. Like the man in the right front would naturally -watch slightly to the right and in front of him. The fellow on the -side, behind him, will watch to the right and rear. In other words, -as they are going by a building, he should scan the building. In the -meantime, he picks up where the man in the front has finished. In other -words, the scan of the man in the front will cover the building to his -front and side; the fellow behind will scan alongside from rear to -forward. Their scanning joins. This is the way they are accustomed to -doing it. - -Mr. DULLES. Who would cover straight ahead? - -Mr. ROWLEY. The man in the front seat has that responsibility. - -Mr. RANKIN. Chief Rowley, how do you construe subparagraph (c) of your -regulation 10 regarding the use of alcoholic liquors? - -The CHAIRMAN. Will you read it for the record? - -Mr. RANKIN. Will you kindly read it? - -Mr. ROWLEY. "Violation or slight disregard of the above paragraphs -or the excessive or improper use of intoxicating liquor at any time -will be cause for removal from the service. In interpreting the words -'excessive' and 'improper,' slight evidence tending to indicate -unusual or questionable conduct will be considered proof that the use -of liquor has been improper or excessive. Association with others who -drink to excess will be considered as an indication of using more -than a moderate amount of liquor. The excuse that liquor was used for -medicinal purposes will not be accepted." - -Mr. RANKIN. How do you construe and apply that? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Well, in this instance, it was wrong. - -Mr. RANKIN. Now, were these men under this regulation considered to be -on travel status, so that they should not be using intoxicating liquor? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. And there is no question about that in your mind? - -Mr. ROWLEY. No, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. Has anything been done to reprimand and cause them to -realize that this is a violation of your regulations? - -Mr. ROWLEY. They were interviewed by the inspector at the time. The -seriousness of the matter was impressed upon them. And I think they -recognize the seriousness of their acts. - -The men we recruit are men that are college graduates and mature, -and we screen them very carefully, particularly before we assign -them to the White House detail. They know and we know that they are -in a fishbowl 24 hours a day, and that, therefore, their conduct -is always subject to scrutiny, and so forth, and that they are -responsible individuals. Their records have indicated that they have -been performing in a high degree. They have worked endless hours of -overtime. They are dedicated. And if they were not, they would not be -on the detail. - -They realize the seriousness of the violation, and I went over it with -my special agent in charge. He understands it. And I am quite sure that -they all understand it at this time. - -Mr. RANKIN. I would like to have you examine Commission Exhibit No. -1018, Chief Rowley, and see if that is the regulation of the Secret -Service that you have been referring to. - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes; that is what I have been reading here, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Chief Justice, I would like to offer as a part of the -record the regulation, Commission Exhibit No. 1018. - -The CHAIRMAN. It may he admitted. - -(The document was marked for identification as Commission Exhibit No. -1018, and received in evidence.) - -Mr. RANKIN. Chief Rowley, have you had any other complaints similar -to this in regard to the conduct of the Secret Service agents on the -Presidential or White House detail? - -Mr. ROWLEY. We had one in the last month. We had charges leveled at us -by an agent of the Secret Service---- - -Mr. RANKIN. Will you tell us about that? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Who is currently under indictment, and who will be brought -to trial on criminal charges on the 29th of June. And, for that reason, -while I have no reluctance to discuss it, I think we should go off the -record, because I don't want to in any way prejudice the case. - -The CHAIRMAN. There is no reason to discuss that case here, Chief. - -Is there anything in particular that would affect this situation you -wanted to know about, Mr. Rankin? - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Chief Justice, the only thing would be the -investigation as to whether or not there was comparable conduct. -I didn't know whether the Commission would like to know what that -investigation was and what the results of it were. - -The CHAIRMAN. Well, I suppose there is no objection to the Chief -telling us what this complaint was, but not insofar as it bears on the -crime that he is charged with. - -Mr. ROWLEY. Well, it ties in with the crime, because he said he was -framed. - -Now, he said he was framed because he was prepared to go before your -Commission, sir, to testify about this thing that happened 3 years -ago, and in the charges he said he advised me, as well as others, and -nothing was done. He said he was framed for this reason. - -The CHAIRMAN. Had he ever made any complaint to you before? - -Mr. ROWLEY. He had never made any complaint to me. It came as a -complete surprise. - -Representative FORD. The complaint to you came subsequent to the filing -of criminal charges against him? - -Mr. ROWLEY. He said he had made the charges at the time the alleged -incidents occurred, Mr. Congressman, that he notified me, before he -left an assignment 3 years ago. - -Let me give you the background, so there is no misunderstanding. We -have what we call an orientation program. The men we recruit from the -colleges, and the type of men that we want, we cannot always get off -the civil service roster. Therefore, we have an understanding with -Civil Service that we can take men under schedule A. Within a period of -2 years, they will have to be assigned to the White House or dropped -from the Service. - -Now, in order to determine their ability and fitness for assignment, -since some people are better criminal investigators than they are in -protection work, we have an orientation program which includes duty -on the White House detail. Mr. Bolden was one of the men selected to -come in the summer of 1961. He was also a replacement for some regular -agent on the detail who was on leave. It was a 30-day assignment. This -afforded us an opportunity to observe him, determine whether he was -equipped and so forth. - -And he was on the White House detail for this short period of time. The -time that he describes was a 5-day weekend up in Hyannis Port. - -Mr. RANKIN. I don't think that quite answers---- - -Mr. ROWLEY. I am giving the background. - -Mr. RANKIN. I think the question is as to when you got the complaint. - -Mr. ROWLEY. Well--excuse me. [Continuing.] Before he left his detail -assignment, you see, he alleges that he told me about the condition -that was going on up in Hyannis. - -Representative FORD. Before he left on this 30-day assignment? - -Mr. ROWLEY. When he left to return to his office in Chicago. - -Mr. RANKIN. And what is the fact in that regard? - -Mr. ROWLEY. The fact is he never informed me. He never informed any of -his supervisors or anyone on the detail. - -Mr. RANKIN. I think the record should show, Mr. Chairman, that we -were never advised that he wanted to testify, nor had we any inquiry -or anything about the matter, until after we learned about it in the -newspapers. And, even then, he didn't ask to testify. And we asked the -FBI to check into it, and he had counsel, and they refused to tell -anything about the matter at that time. - -Mr. DULLES. Could I ask a question? - -Did I understand you to say that the Civil Service prescribes that -certain men must be assigned to the White House for a certain detail? - -Mr. ROWLEY. No, Mr. Dulles; we have an arrangement with the Civil -Service that they will permit us to recruit these men, not from -the register, but under what they call schedule A. They give us an -opportunity, 2 years, to train these men, with the understanding that -within 2 years' time they will have to be assigned to the White House -detail or we will not be able to retain them in the Service. - -However, during that 2 years, we urge them to take the civil service -examination, so that they get on the register. And then when they -do--quite frequently this occurs--they are selected from the register, -and once they become permanent, if they are not interested in the White -House detail, then they continue their work as a criminal investigator -in the field. - -Mr. DULLES. But if they do not take that special examination, then--and -become a part of the civil service, then they have to be assigned to -the White House, to stay on? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes. - -Mr. DULLES. I was a little worried when you said certain people had -to be assigned to the White House, that you were under compulsion to -assign certain people to the White House in order to retain them. - -Mr. ROWLEY. No; anyone who works in the White House, whether he is -an electrician, a painter, or anything, for a period of 2 years, he -automatically becomes eligible for permanent civil service status. - -Representative FORD. Is that by law or by regulation? - -Mr. ROWLEY. That I cannot say. I would always interpret it as under -law. I may be wrong on that, Mr. Ford, but this is what happens. When -our men spend 2 years on the detail at the White House, they come -within that classification. - -Mr. RANKIN. Chief, can you clarify Commissioner Dulles' inquiry? The -Civil Service does not direct that you put certain people in the White -House? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Oh, no; we do that in order to--I see your point, sir. We -do that in order to give them the permanency that they should have to -continue their employment with the Secret Service. - -Mr. RANKIN. But that is the choice of the Secret Service rather than -anybody else? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes, sir. - -Mr. DULLES. I gather the Civil Service prescribed if they did not do -this, they could not be retained. Is that correct? - -Mr. ROWLEY. That is right. In other words---- - -Mr. DULLES. There is some pressure, I should think. - -Mr. ROWLEY. There is no pressure, because we voluntarily entered into -an agreement with them, sir, for this arrangement, explaining that we -frequently don't get from the register the type of men that we want, -and that, therefore, we want the opportunity to recruit the men from -the universities or colleges. Once they have served on the White House -detail for a period of 2 years, then they would get this permanent -status. However, during the 2 years, they have an opportunity and they -are encouraged to take the civil service examination, so they get -career status. But there is no pressure from the Civil Service. It is a -convenience or agreement that they have arranged with us. - -Mr. RANKIN. Maybe I can help, Chief. Schedule A is an exemption from -the regular civil service roster, is it not? - -Mr. ROWLEY. That is correct. - -Mr. RANKIN. And the register is a list of employees from which you have -to otherwise select Government employees if they are not exempt by -reason of their positions, is that correct? - -Mr. ROWLEY. That is right. - -Representative FORD. In other words, Civil Service Commission has set -up for the White House detail all inclusive---- - -Mr. ROWLEY. Not necessarily for the White House detail, Mr. Ford. For -the Secret Service--to allow us to get the type of individuals that we -want for both criminal investigation and protective work. Because if -you say exclusively for the White House detail, the fellow might not be -equipped for the White House detail. - -Representative FORD. In other words, every person recruited by Secret -Service for any capacity is recruited in the first instance under -schedule A. - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes; if he hasn't--if he is not on the register for -civil service. We first go to the Civil Service, when we want to -select somebody, to see if there is anyone on there that meets our -qualifications. And then, if not, then we hire them under schedule A, -which is sort of a blanket exemption. - -Representative FORD. But I gather from what you have said, or I think -you are intimating that most of your recruiting actually is from -colleges, and they are under schedule A. - -Mr. ROWLEY. That is right; yes, sir. Most of them from your State, -sir--Michigan State University. - -Representative FORD. It is a fine school. - -Mr. ROWLEY. That is where it started, actually. They were the first -ones. Now we also recruit on the west coast, in California, they have -terrific schools out there. - -Mr. RANKIN. Chief Rowley, I don't think you covered the Bolden matter -as to whether you had an investigation made. Did you? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes; I did, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you find out anything about the conduct of your agents? - -Mr. ROWLEY. I found out there was no truth to the charges of -misconduct. There were 11 charges lodged against us. - -One charge, the ninth charge, a part of it was true. The boys did -contribute for food. In other words, up there in Hyannis, when they are -up there for a week, or a weekend, they would be assigned to a house, -which economically was beneficial to them. One shift, and some of the -drivers would be in this house. This house was in a remote area from -the shopping area and so forth. So they agreed when they arrived there -to contribute, to buy food for breakfast, it being an 8 to 4 shift. -Eight to four meant they would have breakfast there and dinner. - -Mr. RANKIN. What do you mean by that, Chief? Did they get a certain -house and were able to live together there to reduce their expenses? - -Mr. ROWLEY. That is correct. - -Mr. RANKIN. And then they each contributed to that common expense? - -Mr. ROWLEY. That is correct. - -Mr. RANKIN. And did someone cook for them? - -Mr. ROWLEY. One of the agents who enjoyed it as a hobby cooked the -meals for them, while the others took care of the dishes. - -Mr. RANKIN. They did contribute to supporting that? - -Mr. ROWLEY. They contributed to supporting that, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. Was there criticism of that action? - -Mr. ROWLEY. There was criticism of the action to this extent: That when -they went shopping they bought two or three cases of beer which they -had available in the icebox when the men came off duty in the evening. - -Mr. RANKIN. Now, were they on a travel status or subject to---- - -Mr. ROWLEY. Not on travel status under our regulations. They could -be there a week, and they would be working their 8 hours. They were -not working any longer than their 8 hours. It was comparable to their -assignment here in Washington. - -Mr. RANKIN. So it was really a summer White House position? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Summer White House is what we called it. - -Mr. RANKIN. And did you investigate the charges to see whether they -were valid? - -Mr. ROWLEY. I investigated. This portion was correct. There was some -substance to that portion. - -He also said he was left on post for a period of 2 hours and wasn't -relieved. That an agent had used this time to take care of his private -car. We established there was no agent up there who had a private car. - -Further, we established that he was left on post because according -to our arrangements it was routine that whenever the President went -out for a cruise, the agents on the outer perimeter at the time would -remain on duty, and the agents in the inner perimeter would accompany -the President on the cruise in the followup boat. Naturally, when they -were out on the boat, there was no one available to start what we -call the push, to rotate the men from one post to another. In other -words, in the White House or any place where we establish posts, every -half hour one man starts from the office and starts making the push. -The first man is relieved and he relieves the next one, so there is -no monotony on their jobs. They each have a different area. They are -conversant or acquainted with each and every phase of the physical -area. But because he was on one post, and not relieved, he complained. - -So the next day, to bend over backwards, and show there was not any -prejudice, the agent in charge took him on the cruise, so he would not -feel he was being ignored. - -Mr. RANKIN. Now, from your investigation, did you find any violation at -Hyannis of the regulations of the Secret Service? - -Mr. ROWLEY. No, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. Have you been informed of any other claims that Secret -Service agents had been violating the regulations while on duty? - -Mr. ROWLEY. No, sir; I haven't been informed of any others. And it -seems in the last few days or few weeks we have been getting complaints -that we haven't had in many years. And I think, as I mentioned earlier, -because of the fact that we are very careful with the type of men we -screen, their record has been above reproach over the years. They have -conducted themselves in an exemplary manner. My files are replete with -commendations on behalf of the agents wherever they have traveled and -worked with committees and individuals in connection with Presidential -travels, both here and abroad, which testifies to the impression that -they have made. - -Mr. RANKIN. Have you ever had a Secret Service agent indicted or a -complaint filed against him, a criminal complaint, prior to this time? - -Mr. ROWLEY. This is the first time I remember anything like this -happening since I have been with the Secret Service. - -Representative FORD. Mr. Rankin, I don't recall Chief Rowley saying -precisely what the reprimands were specifically for these violations of -the regulations in this one instance. - -You spoke highly of their background, and you spoke very high in their -praise. But I did not hear what reprimand, if any, had actually been -lodged against them. - -Mr. ROWLEY. There was no reprimand. You are talking about the current -thing? - -Representative FORD. I am talking about the Dallas trip. - -Mr. ROWLEY. I stated in considering what would be an appropriate -punishment at the time, I felt that these men, by their conduct, had -no bearing on the assassination of the President in Dallas. That to -institute formal punishment or disciplinary action would inevitably -lead the public to conclude that they were responsible for the -assassination of President Kennedy. I did not think in the light of -history that they should be stigmatized with something like that, or -their families or children. And, for that reason, I took the position -that I did. - -Representative FORD. So there was no official reprimand or disciplinary -action? - -Mr. ROWLEY. No, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you talk to the agents, to indicate and make it plain -to them that this was a violation of the regulations? - -Mr. ROWLEY. I talked to some of the agents, as did my inspector at the -time, who interviewed each and every one of them. - -Mr. RANKIN. And I think the Commission would be interested in whether -you can be assured, or assure them that the action you took was -sufficient so that this would not happen again. - -Mr. ROWLEY. Well, I am confident that it would not happen again, Mr. -Rankin. - -Mr. RANKIN. Can you tell us why you think so? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Because they realize the seriousness of their action. - -Initially I can understand the situation--they thought they were going -for a dinner, buffet, and they got into the place and it wasn't there. - -I talked personally with the agents there, and they just thought while -they were there they would have a drink. It was one of those situations. - -The important thing was that it was pointed out to them this was wrong, -this was a violation. These men are young men with futures, they -realize the true situation, innocent as they may have seemed to think -it was. - -But I am quite confident that we will not have a repetition of that. - -And in talking to Mr. Behn--I am confident, too, in him--I know that he -will see to it that they are well supervised. - -Mr. RANKIN. When they are out on a trip of this kind, Chief Rowley, -as I understand your regulations, it is understood by the regulations -and by the Secret Service that they are on duty all the time--that is, -subject to call? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. And even though it is late in the evening or they had gone -to bed in the early hours of the morning, they could be called to go on -duty and perform their responsibility of taking care of the President -or the Vice President, or whoever they are charged with; is that right? - -Mr. ROWLEY. That is right. - -Mr. RANKIN. So that do they understand that when they are out on that -kind of duty, they are subject to call at all times, and anything they -do contrary to regulations is a violation, because they are subject to -the call and must be ready at any moment to perform their duties. - -Mr. ROWLEY. They certainly do, because there have been situations, -whether or not they have had it with the Kennedy administration I don't -know--but I know there have been situations where we have moved fast, -all hours of the night. I remember one instance, that has never been -disclosed--as Mr. Dulles knows, you never advertise your successes, you -just get the other things--that I would like to give you as an example -off the record, to answer your question, if I may. - -The CHAIRMAN. Off the record. - -(Discussion off the record.) - -The CHAIRMAN. Back on the record. - -Chief, it seems to me that on an assignment of that kind, to be alert -at all times is one of the necessities of the situation. And I just -wonder if you believe that men who did what these men did, being out -until early morning hours, doing a little--even a small amount of -drinking--would be as alert the next day as men should be when they are -charged with the tremendous responsibility of protecting the President. - -Mr. ROWLEY. Well, we checked on that, Mr. Chief Justice, and the agent -in charge reported that they were in good physical condition. I don't -condone these late hours; no. This is not a rule. This case is an -exception. However, because of the activities of any travel such as the -Presidents today make from one place to another, to maybe seven States -in a weekend, there is constant going. - -I don't condone this at all. But these men are young. They are of such -age that I think that they responded in this instance adequately and -sufficiently as anyone could under the circumstances. - -The CHAIRMAN. Well, I am thinking of this. As you go along in the -motorcade, you have men who are scanning the buildings along the way, -don't you? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes, sir. - -The CHAIRMAN. And they have submachineguns in one of the cars. - -Mr. ROWLEY. No; for security reasons, I would like to--we don't have -machine-guns now, sir. - -The CHAIRMAN. I just thought I heard that from the record here, that -they had some kind of guns. - -Mr. ROWLEY. They had a weapon, a new weapon; yes, sir. - -Mr. CHAIRMAN. Well, whatever it is. - -Now, other people, as they went along there, even some people in the -crowds, saw a man with a rifle up in this building from which the -President was shot. Now, don't you think that if a man went to bed -reasonably early, and hadn't been drinking the night before, would be -more alert to see those things as a Secret Service agent, than if they -stayed up until 3, 4, or 5 o'clock in the morning, going to beatnik -joints and doing some drinking along the way? - -Mr. ROWLEY. If I remember that witness' testimony--and that was one of -the first statements that he made--that witness was with his wife, and -he happened to look up there, and I think he said, "There is a man with -a rifle, it is a Secret Service man," and let it go at that. He didn't -inform any of the authorities. - -The CHAIRMAN. No; nobody did. But I say wouldn't an alert Secret -Service man in this motorcade, who is supposed to observe such things, -be more likely to observe something of that kind if he was free from -any of the results of liquor or lack of sleep than he would otherwise? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Well, yes; he would be. But then, on the other hand, Mr. -Chief Justice, in some instances the men come in from a trip at 1:30 in -the morning, which there have been cases on travels that I have made, -and have to be up at 3:30 or 4 o'clock, and out in time for a 5 o'clock -departure. Then you go all that day until 1 or 2 o'clock the next -morning. This is what has happened in the past. - -The CHAIRMAN. I am not talking about the past. We are talking about -nine men here who were out until rather unusual hours of the morning. - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes, sir. - -The CHAIRMAN. They were to be on duty the next day. - -The next day--or if not sooner. - -The next day they were supposed to be alert to anything that might -occur along the line of march. Don't you think that they would have -been much more alert, sharper, had they not been doing these things? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes, sir; but I don't believe they could have prevented the -assassination. - -The CHAIRMAN. Isn't it a substantial violation of these rules to do a -thing of that kind? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes, sir--on the basis of this section here. - -The CHAIRMAN. Yes. - -Now, Chief I noticed, also, in reading some of the reports that three -of these men whom you speak of, were actually on night duty, protecting -the life of the President. And around 4 o'clock in the morning, when -they were protecting him at the Texas Hotel, they said that they had a -coffee break, and they went from the hotel over to the beatnik joint. -Now, is that consistent with your regulations? - -Mr. ROWLEY. In this case, I talked to these three agents. They were -relieved at different times--because their posts are in the corridor of -a stuffy hotel---- - -The CHAIRMAN. Of the what? - -Mr. ROWLEY. The corridor that they were on post outside the President's -suite was a stuffy one, and they went downstairs to get a breath of -fresh air. And they walked--it was a block--and out of curiosity they -went into this place. One fellow looked in and left, he didn't buy -any coffee. Another fellow went in and felt, I suppose, when he went -in that he would buy a cup of coffee. But they were on what we call -reliefs, the same as we relieve them around the White House. There are -only so many posts, but you have a group of men in one of the rooms -of the hotel where they are available, like an alert squad, and they -relieve everyone on post every half hour. It is a part of the rotation -of positions we have. - -The CHAIRMAN. Do you have any regulations concerning where they shall -remain when they are relieved for this short period of time? - -Mr. ROWLEY. No, sir. - -The CHAIRMAN. They can go any place they want? - -Mr. ROWLEY. No; not any place. They usually stay within the immediate -confines. That is understood. The hotel or the residence. - -The CHAIRMAN. Well, they didn't do that here, did they? - -Mr. ROWLEY. No, sir. - -The CHAIRMAN. They went to the beatnik joint. - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes, sir. - -The CHAIRMAN. Now, is that consistent with their duty? - -Mr. ROWLEY. No; it is not consistent or inconsistent with their duty. -But as they explained to me, they wanted to get a breath of fresh air. -If they are at a residence in a remote place, and they want to walk -around the area, they might walk maybe a city block or so, which is -what they do on a lot of these assignments--particularly in hotels. -This was not an air-conditioned hotel. - -The CHAIRMAN. It would seem to me that a beatnik joint is a place -where queer people of all kinds gather anyway, and that the mere fact -that these men did leave their post of duty might be an indication to -someone that the President was not being protected, and might leave an -opening for them to go there and try to do something. - -Mr. ROWLEY. They were relieved, Mr. Chief Justice. They didn't leave -their post of duty. They would not leave their post of duty until they -were relieved by someone. - -The CHAIRMAN. As I understood the report, they said they left for a -coffee break. - -Mr. ROWLEY. Well, it is an expression. They left to have coffee, sir. - -The CHAIRMAN. Was there any place for coffee in the hotel? - -Mr. ROWLEY. I think there was a coffee shop in the hotel; yes, sir. - -The CHAIRMAN. That was the only place in town, as I understood, from -the reports, outside of the beatnik place they could. But they went -down to the beatnik place. Did they do that by prearrangement with the -other agents? - -Mr. ROWLEY. No, sir; it was curiosity on their part. They hadn't seen -the other agents. There was no arrangement of any nature at all, sir. - -The CHAIRMAN. But they did there meet other agents? - -Mr. ROWLEY. They saw other agents--those that were in the place at the -time they looked in. I think they came in after most had left, though. - -Mr. DULLES. Were these men off duty for the night or were they going -back on duty immediately after this break? - -Mr. ROWLEY. No; they were on duty. They were the midnight shift, Mr. -Dulles, from 12 to 8 a.m. - -Mr. DULLES. They were going back on duty? - -Mr. ROWLEY. They were going back on duty; yes, sir; in 10 minutes, 15 -minutes. - -Mr. DULLES. I see. - -Representative FORD. And they did go back on duty and relieve somebody -subsequent to this? - -Mr. ROWLEY. That is right; yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. Chief Rowley, did you give the Commission a letter as of -May 5 of this year in regard to this Dallas matter concerning the Press -Club and the Cellar? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. And is that letter correct in regard to what happened as -far as you know? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. And did you make available to the Commission the statements -of each agent signed by the agent? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes, sir. - -Mr. DULLES. I think you said Dallas. Did you not mean Fort Worth? - -Mr. RANKIN. Yes--it should be Fort Worth, I am sorry. Thank you. - -I hand you Commission Exhibit No. 1019 and ask you if that is your -letter of May 5 that we have just referred to. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 1019 for -identification.) - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Chairman, I offer in evidence Commission Exhibit No. -1019. - -The CHAIRMAN. It may be admitted. - -(The document heretofore marked for identification as Commission -Exhibit No. 1019, was received in evidence.) - -The CHAIRMAN. Chief, I notice in the report that was made that while -your inspector found that no one--no member of the Secret Service was -intoxicated at the club--but that there was someone connected with the -group who was intoxicated. - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes, sir. - -The CHAIRMAN. I wonder if that also wasn't a violation of that portion -of the rule which says, "In interpreting the words 'excessive' and -'improper' slight evidence tending to indicate unusual or questionable -conduct will be considered proof that the use of liquor has been -improper or excessive. Association with others who drink to excess will -be considered as an indication of using more than a moderate amount of -liquor." - -Did you call that to the attention of your people? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes, sir. They ran into that individual as they were -entering--two agents ran into this individual as they were entering the -Fort Worth Club. - -The CHAIRMAN. Go ahead. - -Mr. RANKIN. Chief Rowley, I hand you Commission Exhibit No. 1020, and -ask you if that is a document that you had prepared for the Commission. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 1020 for -identification.) - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. And that includes, under capital letter A, the transmittal -from Inspector McCann; B, the report of the investigation by Inspector -McCann; C, the Drew Pearson article? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. D, the statements of the supervisors; and, E, the -statements of the special agents; F, the statements of witnesses; and, -G, the memorandum of May 19, 1964, by Agent Sorrels, is that right? - -Mr. ROWLEY. That is right. - -Mr. RANKIN. And are those various documents a part of the official -report by the Secret Service to the Commission of this matter? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Chairman, I offer in evidence Commission Exhibit No. -1020. - -The CHAIRMAN. It may be so admitted. - -(The document heretofore marked for identification as Commission -Exhibit No. 1020, was received in evidence.) - -Mr. DULLES. Off the record, may I ask a question? - -The CHAIRMAN. Yes. - -(Discussion off the record.) - -The CHAIRMAN. Back on the record. - -Chief, I notice--I have read this report. At any place in here, did any -of your investigators, Inspector McCann, or your special agents, or -anybody else, indicate that there had been any violation of any kind on -the part of your people, or particularly any violation of this section -10, chapter 1, page 7 of the Secret Service manual? - -Mr. ROWLEY. I think what happened in this instance, we responded -to the broadcast of Mr. Pearson and his charge that the men were -inebriated. We were primarily concerned with that at that time. And to -get the statements from the men. But I do know that in the course of -his interviewing of these individuals at the time, and taking their -statements, he impressed upon them the fact that there was a violation. - -The CHAIRMAN. Has there been any report made to the Commission to the -effect that there was any violation of---- - -Mr. ROWLEY. No, sir; unless it is contained in this document here, sir. - -The CHAIRMAN. I have not seen anything in there. It seems to me they -were all given a complete bill of health. And I just wonder if that is -quite consistent with the facts that the Commission should have. - -Mr. ROWLEY. No, sir; as I said earlier, we don't condone their actions, -nor do we try to belittle the violation. But in the circumstances, I -took the decision that I thought right in view of the tragedy and so -forth. In any other circumstance it would have been entirely different. -But as I said earlier, I don't think that these people should be blamed -for the tragedy that happened at that time, and that any attempt to -assess formal punishment would in the light of history stigmatize them -for the rest of their life, as well as their families. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Chairman, I plan to leave that subject now--unless -there is some further question. - -The CHAIRMAN. Any further questions? - -Very well. - -Mr. RANKIN. Chief Rowley, will you tell us whether you learned anything -about the preparations in Dallas for the visit of the President on -November 22? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes; I read the report of Special Agent Lawson, who was -designated as the advance agent for that visit. - -Mr. RANKIN. And do you know that that report has been furnished to us? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. A copy of it. - -And have you examined it to determine whether it is accurate, as far as -you can determine? - -Mr. ROWLEY. It is accurate; yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you have any additions or corrections? - -Mr. ROWLEY. No; I have no corrections to make, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. Were you--are you satisfied, now examining that report, -with the manner in which the advance preparations for the trip of the -President were handled? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes, sir. - -The report follows the standard procedure that we have exercised -over the years, and in many of the trips we had taken with the late -President. He covered everything with the police and all that we have -normally covered on such visits. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you have enough agents at that time to perform the -required duties in connection with this trip for both Dallas and the -other cities in Texas to be visited? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Well, we never have enough agents for the activities that -the President today is engaged in. We draw from the field to supplement -or augment the agents from the White House detail. We move the agents -from one point to another where we can--particularly in the area of the -advance men. - -But in Dallas we had sufficient agents with prior experience in -Presidential protection who assisted Mr. Lawson in the advance -preparations. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you furnish to the Commission a statement of the -preparations that were made for the trip? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. And that included the various protective activities, did it? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. I hand you Commission Exhibit No. 1021, and ask you if that -is the report you made in regard to the trip. - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes, sir. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 1021 for -identification.) - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you have any corrections or additions that you care to -make to it? - -Mr. ROWLEY. No, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Chairman, I offer in evidence Commission Exhibit No. -1021. - -The CHAIRMAN. It may be admitted. - -(The document heretofore marked for identification as Commission -Exhibit No. 1021, was received in evidence.) - -The CHAIRMAN. Chief, I have wondered about this question. Some months -before Ambassador Adlai Stevenson had been handled very roughly in -Dallas. Did you make--did your people make any investigation as to that -group that caused that disturbance for him, to see if there might be -some possibility of the same thing happening to the President? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Not immediately at the time of the incident that occurred -to Mr. Stevenson, but when the advance man came down, that was one of -the things that we assigned a local agent to inquire into, to ascertain -the hard core of that group, if you will, that were responsible for -stimulating that activity. And he contacted an informant, and with the -local police, who are members of a special squad that are involved in -this kind of activity, they went and identified through pictures, which -they saw in the newsreel, the principal members. They had photographs -made, and they issued them to the agents on their visit there, to be on -the lookout for these men as potential troublemakers. - -(At this point, Representative Boggs entered the hearing room.) - -The CHAIRMAN. Did they do the same thing concerning the incident that -Vice President Johnson had a year or so before that? - -Mr. ROWLEY. No, sir; not at that time. That was more or less in the -heat of a political campaign. I don't think that was a similar type of -activity. - -The CHAIRMAN. I see. - -But you did do it with the Stevenson matter? - -Mr. ROWLEY. That is right. - -Mr. RANKIN. Chief Rowley, did you make a report to the Commission with -regard to the publicity concerning the trip of the President? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. And is Commission Exhibit No. 1022 that report? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes, sir. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 1022 for -identification.) - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you wish to make any additions or corrections of that -letter? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Of that letter? No. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Chairman, I offer in evidence Commission Exhibit No. -1022. - -The CHAIRMAN. It may be admitted. - -(The document heretofore marked for identification as Commission -Exhibit No. 1022, was received in evidence.) - -Mr. RANKIN. Chief Rowley, could you inform the Commission about the -advance publicity concerning trips of the President to various parts of -the country? There has been the question raised as to whether that is a -threat to the President, and might make the work of the Secret Service -and others who are doing protective work more difficult. - -Mr. ROWLEY. Well, we have found that it is. And we always consider it -as a potential threat in that it might give someone the opportunity -who had any plans, whether it be an individual as in this case, or a -group, to select an area, if they knew what the route was, or conduct -a reconnaissance, if you will. I have always been opposed to it, and I -have always tried to prevail upon the staff of the various Presidents -who might be responsible for the release, not to release it too far in -advance. - -Mr. RANKIN. Could you tell the Commission what the problem is in that -regard? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Well, in this regard, it is a political thing, and the -President cannot be contained in a vacuum. If he wants to go out and -meet the people under our form of government, he will in his own -way. Each and every President has his own thoughts and methods as it -pertains to these visits, and the need for publicity. This trip in -Dallas was an opportunity for the people to see the President, as are -the trips of any President. I remember well when President Truman -started his trip across the country in June 1948, the purpose being to -get the feel of the people and let the people see him at the time. - -And it was then, as a result of that trip, that he determined he would -run for reelection. That I know of my own personal knowledge. - -But these are the things that are hard in security, as far as -developing a close screen on the President. - -Mr. RANKIN. Is the Protective Research Section of the Secret Service -under your direction, too? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes, sir; that is part of the White House area, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. Are you familiar with the testimony of Robert Bouck -concerning that Section? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you know whether that accurately describes the conduct -of that Section? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Well, at that time. The Section was established by us -some 20 years ago, and primarily to process threats, obscene letters -and suicide notes. Over the years, and particularly during the last 9 -years, the work has evolved to a point where we find that it requires -further expansion. - -It had a broad and general concept in the criteria of what it needed -for Presidential protection in knowing what risks were about the -country. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did the Secret Service have a written communication to -other intelligence agencies as to the criteria for information that -they sought? - -Mr. ROWLEY. At that time? - -Mr. RANKIN. Yes; at that time. - -Mr. ROWLEY. No; it was more or less of an informal arrangement that we -had with the agencies, as we developed the Section. - -Mr. RANKIN. Will you tell the Commission what the standard was that you -told the agencies you would like to have information concerning? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Well, if there were any threats to the President, we were -interested in being informed about it. We were in touch with the FBI, -the CIA and others. - -In the basic schools of the Treasury, and through coordination, our -agents in charge of the areas, in coordination meetings, would inform -representatives of other agencies of the type that we were interested -in, the nature of the threats that we asked that they refer to us. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you know that this standard only developed about 400 -names from all over the country? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. And that it produced none in the immediate Dallas vicinity? - -Mr. ROWLEY. That is right. - -Mr. RANKIN. Now, have you done anything about that standard since the -assassination? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Well, we have had a complete reexamination of the -Protective Research Section. - -Mr. RANKIN. Can you describe---- - -Mr. ROWLEY. We infused new blood. We have asked the Rand Corp., -the Research Analysis Corp., the President's Scientific Advisor, -and the medical people for a study of this, and we are in constant -consultation. We have brought in experienced agents who now are -processing, evaluating, and analyzing all reports we receive, and -indexing the information as we receive it from the various agencies. We -have more recently issued and forwarded to the intelligence community -in Washington our criteria at the present time regarding what we would -ask them in a more formal manner. This is the beginning of what we hope -to be a more thorough and practical approach to this problem. - -Mr. RANKIN. Chief, I will hand you Commission Exhibit No. 1023, dated -June 17, 1964, and ask you if that is a communication from you to the -Commission describing the new criteria. - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes, sir. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 1023 for -identification.) - -Mr. RANKIN. Does it accurately state that criteria? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes, sir; it does. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Chairman, I offer in evidence Commission Exhibit No. -1023. - -The CHAIRMAN. It may be admitted. - -(The document heretofore marked for identification as Commission -Exhibit No. 1023, was received in evidence.) - -Mr. ROWLEY. If I may read---- - -Mr. RANKIN. Would you tell us the gist of the new criteria, and what -the difference is as you conceive it from the old standard? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Well, if I may do this. We have sent this criteria to the -intelligence agencies that we think would be of help to us, with a -covering letter in which we say that studies are now underway, "by -which we hope to develop more detailed criteria. Our experience with -the attached guidelines will also be carefully evaluated with a view -towards amendments if required. We will appreciate your cooperation -and suggestions concerning these guidelines, so that the person of the -President will be protected to the best of our combined abilities and -resources." - -Another thing today now that we have to concern ourselves with, is that -we get an expanding file of information. - -Mr. RANKIN. Has that happened since the assassination? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Well yes; we have gotten some 9,000 reports on the members -of the Communist Party from the FBI. At this time we have read and -evaluated and catalogued them and indexed them. There has been a small -percentage that have been to date of interest to us. But this is the -beginning. And except for the indexes, we are more or less current as a -result of that. This is through the long hours and hard work by the new -group that I brought in to develop this department. - -Mr. RANKIN. Now, how is the standard described in Exhibit No. 1023 -different from the prior standard? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Well, we have always had the basic standard. The other -standard was the threat to harm or embarrass the President, however, -this time we added three factors. - -Mr. RANKIN. And these are in addition to the threat of harm to the -President? - -Mr. ROWLEY. That is correct. - -Mr. RANKIN. All right, proceed. - -Mr. ROWLEY. The interest of the individual or the organization, -capabilities of the individual or the organization, and the activities -of the individual or organization. The interests of the individual or -organization is the prime factor to be considered in the criteria, but -must be coupled with the capability and activity of the individual or -organization in any determination for referral to the Secret Service. - -"The interest must be towards the President, or others named, or other -high Government official in the nature of a complaint, coupled with an -expressed or implied determination to use a means other than legal or -peaceful to satisfy any grievance, real or imagined. After the interest -phase of the criteria is met, then the activity which encompass -previous history, that is, mental instability, history of violence and -the capability of the individual or organization for furthering this -interest will dictate whether the case should be referred to the Secret -Service. In making referrals to the Secret Service, it is requested -that the agency furnish all pertinent background information relating -to each of the three factor criteria." - -Mr. RANKIN. Now, is the Secret Service operating under the standard or -criteria described in Exhibit No. 1023 at the present time? - -Mr. ROWLEY. At the present time, it is, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. And when did that become effective? - -Mr. ROWLEY. That became effective in the last 3 weeks as we developed -and explored and examined the many reports that we were receiving. - -Mr. RANKIN. Now, the language that you read into the record, where you -invited comment and suggestions from the various other agencies to whom -you sent communication, what did you mean by that? Is that asking them -for their ideas so that you may further change the criteria? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Where we may get in a position later on to break it down -into categories. In other words, if every agency forwards and inundates -us with many reports--say we expand to 3 million, obviously, the whole -intelligence family could not cope with that. You have to get it down -to a workable number. On the other hand, if you try to restrict the -categories too much, then you find yourself in a position that you may -miss another Oswald, and then the utilities of your file are of no -consequence. So you have to try to reach the level in between there -where it is going to be practical for us to react or develop the type -of risks that we think should be covered by our organization in the -protection of the President of the United States. - -Mr. RANKIN. Are you doing anything about the use of equipment that -might help you to secure information about any particular locality the -President was going to travel to more readily? - -Mr. ROWLEY. In connection with the PRS? - -Mr. RANKIN. Yes. - -Mr. ROWLEY. Well, we have conferred with the IBM. Can I go off the -record on this? - -The CHAIRMAN. Yes. - -(Discussion off the record.) - -The CHAIRMAN. Back on the record. - -Mr. RANKIN. Chief Rowley, you have described off the record certain -matters that involve the security of the country and cannot be made -public. But can you tell us whether you have done anything in the past -to try to improve your methods in testimony that can be made public? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Well, I have tried to secure in the appropriations funds to -enable us to procure the equipment and personnel that we thought would -be necessary. - -With the approval of the Congress, we were able 2 years ago to secure -funds to enable us, in our check forgeries program, to try to adapt the -characteristics of handwriting to an ADP processing program. We are -hopeful this will work out. And we have used the Bureau of Standards to -assist us in this program. We have prints out and have programmed part -of the operation. - -Now, it was my thought that if we succeeded in that area, we could also -apply it to PRS. So we are working quite hard on this other area. And I -knew the need would be eventually for us to get into the PRS stage on -the electronic machine situation. - -Mr. RANKIN. Now, did you know that we had asked Mr. Bouck when he -testified if he could inform us at a later date about people who were -in institutions or otherwise might be dangerous, and with regard to -whom you asked that the Secret Service be notified, so that they could -make adequate protection for the President? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you know how many such cases you now have? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Approximately a thousand. - -Mr. RANKIN. Would you tell the Commission what your practice was for -the Secret Service concerning the route of the motorcade at the time -of the assassination--that is, whether you made inspection of adjacent -buildings? - -Mr. ROWLEY. At that time, and prior to that time, except for the -inaugurations in Washington, and other parades, involving the visit of -foreign dignitaries in Washington, in which the President would ride -in the motorcade with the head of state, where we had ample time to -make these surveys, we had never conducted on trips out of Washington -surveys of this nature. I have here a statement of the conditions that -prevailed in Dallas as well as other areas--if I may read this. - -Mr. RANKIN. Yes. - -Mr. ROWLEY. "Except for inauguration or other parades involving -foreign dignitaries accompanied by the President in Washington, it -has not been the practice of the Secret Service to make surveys or -checks of buildings along the route of a Presidential motorcade. For -the inauguration and certain other parades in Washington where the -traditional route is known to the public long in advance of the event, -buildings along the route can be checked by teams of law enforcement -officers, and armed guards are posted along the route as appropriate. -But on out-of-town trips where the route is decided on and made public -only a few days in advance, buildings are not checked either by Secret -Service agents or by any other law enforcement officers at the request -of the Secret Service. With the number of men available to the Secret -Service and the time available, surveys of hundreds of buildings and -thousands of windows is not practical. - -"In Dallas the route selected necessarily involved passing through -the principal downtown section between tall buildings. While certain -streets thought to be too narrow could be avoided and other choices -made, it was not practical to select a route where the President could -not be seen from roofs or windows of buildings. At the two places in -Dallas where the President would remain for a period of time, Love -Field and the Trade Mart, arrangements were made for building and -roof security by posting police officers where appropriate. Similar -arrangements for a motorcade of 10 miles, including many blocks of -tall commercial buildings, is not practical. Nor is it practical to -prevent people from entering such buildings or to limit access in every -building to those employed or having business there. Even if it were -possible with a vastly larger force of security officers to do so, many -observers have felt that such a procedure would not be consistent with -the nature and purpose of the motorcade to let the people see their -President and to welcome him to their city. - -"In accordance with its regular procedures, no survey or other check -was made by the Secret Service, or by any other law enforcement agency -at its request, of the Texas School Book Depository Building or those -employed there prior to the time the President was shot." - -Mr. RANKIN. Chief Rowley, I will ask you not to describe any procedure, -because of security considerations, but I would like to have you tell -on the record, as I think it is proper, whether there has been a change -in this regard in the procedures of the Secret Service? - -Mr. ROWLEY. There has been a change in this regard. - -Mr. RANKIN. I will not make an inquiry about that, unless the -Commission wishes to go into it off the record. - -Representative FORD. Is it my understanding that the Commission has -such documents that we could analyze ourselves as to these changes? - -Mr. RANKIN. I don't think we have any report of this. - -Representative BOGGS. Why can't we get it off the record? - -The CHAIRMAN. All right. - -(Discussion off the record.) - -The CHAIRMAN. Back on the record. - -Mr. RANKIN. Chief Rowley, did you give us---- - -Mr. DULLES. Could I ask one question with regard to Exhibit No. 1023? - -This, as I understand it, is the new specifications with regard to -persons with respect to whom you wish to have alert information. - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes, sir. - -Mr. DULLES. It is called, "U.S. Secret Service Protective Information -Guidelines." The top of page 2 of this exhibit is a paragraph that -reads, "The interest"--and that is the interest of the suspect, I -assume---- - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes, sir. - -Mr. DULLES. "The interest must be towards the President, or others -named, or other high Government officials in the nature of a complaint -coupled with an expressed or implied determination to use a means other -than legal or peaceful to satisfy any grievance real or imagined." - -I wonder if you could explain that a little more? I ask this question -because I have been studying the previous assassinations a good -deal. And in many of these cases, it seems to me this definition -would not have covered the assassin. That is, there has been in some -cases opposition to government, opposition to people in authority, -but there has been no expressed hatred toward or animus against a -particular President. And I was wondering whether this went too far on -a definition to meet your purposes. - -Mr. ROWLEY. This is a beginning, as I indicated to you here. We hope to -improve it. But this is one of the things where we want to include the -Oswald-type individual. - -Now, Oswald wrote to the Governor intimating that he would use whatever -means was necessary to obtain the change of his undesirable, or as he -called it, dishonorable discharge. All legal means had been used in -his case, where the Navy Review Board had examined it and came to a -decision. - -And this is an example of what we were trying to include in the area of -this type of individual. Now, the other people---- - -Mr. DULLES. But that was not a threat directed against the President. -That was directed against the Secretary of the Navy. - -Mr. ROWLEY. That is right; but then, on the other hand, they transfer -the threats. I am quite sure that the Congressmen here get many -threats, and that sometimes they may not come off. But these people are -obsessed. - -You take the individual that attempted the assassination of the late -President Roosevelt in Miami that time. His original purpose was to -shoot President Hoover. But then when he heard Roosevelt was there, he -transferred. - -Now, I remember a situation involving a member of Truman's staff, where -a fellow stalked this man at his home. And finally we got into the case -on his request. We satisfied ourselves that he wasn't a real threat to -him--but we picked up the paper a year later and found out he shot at -an assemblyman in Staten Island. So if they make a threat or something -like this, even though it is against the Government as a group, or have -some grievance, they transfer it--particularly, to the President. They -use that father complex, as indicated in the research work that these -different agencies have submitted to us. - -Representative FORD. Under these criteria, which you are now following, -Oswald would have been designated? Is that your judgment? - -Mr. ROWLEY. That is correct; yes, sir. - -Mr. DULLES. I had some questions about that in reading it. That did -not occur to me, because Oswald had never expressed any antagonism -toward the President, as far as I know, up to this time--the President -personally, or even afterward. - -Mr. ROWLEY. That is right; but under this criteria he would. Namely, he -had the interest because of the letter he wrote to Governor Connally. -The activity, because he was a defector, and he demonstrated for the -Fair Play for Cuba Committee. The capability, because he traveled, and -he had knowledge of firearms. - -Mr. DULLES. Yes; but those do not come, it seems to me, within this -definition. Maybe I interpret it differently than you. The last -interest Oswald showed was directed toward General Walker. It wasn't -against--of course, that wasn't known. - -Mr. ROWLEY. No; it wasn't known but the first interest of this type was -the letter to Governor Connally as Secretary of the Navy, in which he -said he would use whatever means he could to correct that discharge, -inferring, of course, that he would apply illegal means if he could. - -Representative FORD. If we only had the letter that he wrote to -Governor Connally, and no other information, how would that threat, or -that course of action, become known to the Secret Service? - -Mr. ROWLEY. It would not, unless it was furnished by the Navy -Department or Secretary of the Navy's office. - -Just like you gentlemen get letters that never come to our attention. -But you might pick up a paper some day and read that this fellow hit -somebody, and he was in to see you or wrote you letters. - -Representative FORD. Would this criteria be circulated among the -50 Governors, for example, or their staffs, so that if threats are -received against a Governor, then the Governor's staff in that -particular State would so notify the Secret Service? - -Mr. ROWLEY. It could. In this case it would be a help. But they refer -all their complaints to the FBI. Threats of this kind. - -Representative FORD. The State? - -Mr. ROWLEY. The Governors do in most cases. So that the FBI under this -system would bring it to our attention. - -Mr. DULLES. I would think, Mr. Rowley, this might be subject to -misinterpretation as being rather narrower than you suggest. - -Mr. ROWLEY. Well, this is something--actually, we have to develop -something, and we have to, if you will, have a crash program; we are -working constantly to develop the categories and breakdowns as I -indicated earlier. - -(At this point, Senator Cooper entered the hearing room.) - -Mr. RANKIN. Chief Rowley, did you supply to us the statements of the -Secret Service agents who were informed about the assassination in -Dallas? You gave us written statements, did you? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes. - -Mr. RANKIN. I hand you Commission Exhibit No. 1024, and ask you if that -is the letter of transmittal, together with the attached statements -that you have just described from the various agents about the events -at Dallas. - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes, sir. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 1024 for -identification.) - -(At this point, Mr. Dulles withdrew from the hearing room.) - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Chairman, I offer in evidence Commission Exhibit No. -1024. - -The CHAIRMAN. It may be admitted. - -(The document heretofore marked for identification as Commission -Exhibit No. 1024, was received in evidence.) - -Mr. RANKIN. I would like to inform the Commission that these are copies -of the statements you already have in connection with the Secret -Service report, but we wanted to make it part of the record. - -The CHAIRMAN. Very well. - -Mr. RANKIN. Chief, did you write me a letter for the Commission on -April 22, in which you enclosed the statements of five of your agents -in regard to President Kennedy's views about agents riding on the back -of the car? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. I will hand you Commission Exhibit No. 1025, and ask you if -that is your transmittal letter with the statements attached. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 1025 for -identification.) - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Chairman, I offer in evidence Commission Exhibit No. -1025. - -The CHAIRMAN. It may be admitted. - -(The document heretofore marked for identification as Commission -Exhibit No. 1025, was received in evidence.) - -Mr. RANKIN. Chief Rowley, I should like to have you state for the -record, for the Commission, whether the action of President Kennedy in -making these statements was understood by you or properly could have -been understood by the agents as relieving them of any responsibility -about the protection of the President. - -Mr. ROWLEY. No; I would not so construe that, Mr. Rankin. The agents -would respond regardless of what the President said if the situation -indicated a potential danger. The facilities were available to them. -They had the rear steps, they would be there as a part of the screen. -And immediately in the event of any emergency they would have used them. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you know why there was no one riding on the rear step at -the time of the assassination? - -Mr. ROWLEY. From normal practice, based on my own experience over the -years, I know that the agent in charge in the front or any experienced -agent, who is either on the right front or the left front of the -followup car, without being told, will react immediately. If he -determines there is a situation here, there is a big crowd, and so -forth, he will immediately leave that followup car. - -Now, the running board on the followup car has an important place in -the setup. It is a much better place to be than on the rear step if you -see a situation, and you want to move fast. Suppose someone is coming -toward the President's car--you would be surprised how fast you are -propelled by jumping off that car, and you are in motion fast, where -you can either tackle somebody, or block him or anything like that. So -this is an important part. You cannot do that from the rear step of the -President's car. - -Now, when the agents are in a heavy crowd, as we have been abroad, in -places where we had to run, say, for 10 miles alongside the car, agents -could stand on the rear steps and screen the President. In addition, -there would be agents on the side, protecting him on his right side. -The crowd is surging close to him, you are bouncing off the car, and -the people, trying to ward them off from touching the President. - -After a period of time you are weary. But with the aid of this step, -you can be replaced by the agent there, and he takes your place until -you revive yourself, and you are acting as a screen. - -Now, if the thing gets too sticky, you put the agent right in the back -seat, which I have done many times with past Presidents. - -When you come out of a big crowd like that, and the crowd is sparse, -and it doesn't look like there is a potential danger, you return to the -followup car to be ready for any emergency in the event somebody darts -across. - -In this instance, when the Presidential car was coming toward the -freeway and the people were sparse, the men at some point came back to -this car. This is one of the automatic operations, if you will, that -the agents respond to. So it wasn't until the first shot was fired -that, as I said earlier, Hill had the opportunity to scan from his left -to his right, that he saw the President--the action of the President. -Then he responded immediately. That is why he got up to the President's -car. - -Mr. RANKIN. Has it ever been the practice of the Secret Service to have -an agent ride all of the time on the back step? - -Mr. ROWLEY. No; it hasn't. Because there are times when you pick up -your speed, for instance on a freeway. And when you pick up your speed, -it is the most difficult thing on a step maybe 10 to 12 inches wide, -and a grip, to stand up. And you would not be a very good screen going -that fast, because you would have to bend down. That has happened to -me, because I have been caught on it. - -Now, I was in Costa Rica and worked the followup car. Whenever I was -on a trip abroad, I would work the followup car to see how the agents -work, and work myself, because it wasn't what you might refer to as a -routine trip. - -But the followup car conked out. The crowds were surging around the -President's car. We had two men next to the President's car. I left the -followup car immediately, from my experience, and jumped on the step, -to the right rear of the President, and held onto the handgrip, and -was there. And then when the man came back, I relieved him and took my -position on the side--until, for a distance of a mile or two, until -such time as the followup car got underway, and the other people came -up. But you had to stay with the President under those circumstances. - -So those are the different things that occur in a given situation. - -The CHAIRMAN. Chief, as I understand this, President Kennedy did not -give any general instructions to the agents never to ride on his car. -It was only in specific circumstances where for one reason or another -he did not want them on there at that particular time. - -Mr. ROWLEY. No President will tell the Secret Service what they can or -cannot do. - -(At this point, Representative Boggs withdrew from the hearing room.) - -Mr. ROWLEY. Sometimes it might be as a political man or individual he -might think this might not look good in a given situation. But that -does not mean per se that he doesn't want you on there. And I don't -think anyone with commonsense interprets it as such. - -The CHAIRMAN. Yes. - -Mr. ROWLEY. I think there are certain things that you have to allow the -man who is operating as a politician, and not as head of state. I mean -this makes a difference in your operation. - -Mr. RANKIN. Chief Rowley, did you give us a report of the activities in -protecting the President at and around Parkland Hospital? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. And is that Commission Exhibit No. 1026? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes, sir. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 1026 for -identification.) - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Chairman, I offer in evidence Commission Exhibit No. -1026. - -The CHAIRMAN. It may be admitted. - -(The document heretofore marked for identification as Commission -Exhibit No. 1026, was received in evidence.) - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you have any additions or corrections you care to make -in that exhibit? - -Mr. ROWLEY. No, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. Chief Rowley, did you give us a report about protective -activity subsequent to Dallas on behalf of the Secret Service? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. I will hand you Commission Exhibit No. 1027 and ask you if -that is the report that you have just referred to. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 1027 for -identification.) - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. Chief Rowley, I ask you, are there any problems with regard -to Commission Exhibit No. 1027 concerning security, and whether that -should be--that document should be made public? You just take your time -if you want to glance over it. - -Mr. ROWLEY. No; as I read it, it is general enough, sir, that it can be -included. - -(At this point, Mr. Dulles entered the hearing room.) - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Chairman, I offer in evidence Commission Exhibit No. -1027. - -The CHAIRMAN. It may be admitted. - -(The document heretofore marked for identification as Commission -Exhibit No. 1027, was received in evidence.) - -(At this point, Representative Boggs entered the hearing room.) - -Mr. RANKIN. Are there any of the various answers that you give in the -answers to the questions attached to Commission Exhibit No. 1027 that -you care to elaborate on at this time? - -I am not asking you or urging you to do it, because I assume that you -answered them with care at the time. I just wanted to give you that -opportunity. - -Mr. ROWLEY. No; not at this time. - -Mr. DULLES. May I ask a question there? - -You consider that the criteria as now furnished by you to the FBI and -other investigative agencies would cover a case like Oswald's? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes, sir. - -Mr. DULLES. You think they would? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes, sir. - -Mr. DULLES. You think they understand that? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Well, as we stated in the covering letter when we sent this -out--we haven't gotten any reaction--we asked for their cooperation and -suggestions in connection with such guidelines. - -Mr. DULLES. Defectors are not specifically covered, are they, by your -criteria? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Well, they are given to us now. We are being furnished the -names of defectors, and they are being investigated, so that their -background and history will be furnished to us, and we will be in a -position now to determine whether they represent a risk or not. - -Mr. RANKIN. Chief Rowley---- - -Representative BOGGS. May I ask a question there? - -Would you have any notion as to why names of defectors were not -provided to you prior to November 22? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes; under the broad picture, Mr. Congressman, there was -no indication that they had made any threat toward the President -or members of his family. Whenever there was a threat made, we were -furnished promptly by the different agencies the information on the -individual's name. And this was done in voluminous reports by the FBI, -and the other agencies. When they got any information, they would -notify the local office, notify their liaison, who notified us by -telephone, and confirmed by memorandum. The same obtained with respect -to the CIA. - -Representative BOGGS. This fellow was interviewed by the FBI several -times--he was interviewed in New Orleans when he allegedly had his -Fair Play Committee. If my memory serves me correctly, Mrs. Paine was -interviewed about him shortly before the visit of the President, after -he had gone to work at the Texas School Book Depository. I agree that -there had been no indication of a threat on the President's life. But, -obviously he was a person in the FBI files who was under some degree of -surveillance. It would seem to me strange that the FBI did not transmit -this information to the Secret Service. - -Mr. ROWLEY. The FBI, Mr. Congressman, are concerned with internal -security. And I think their approach was internal security as it -related to this individual, whether or not he was a potential recruit -for espionage, intelligence, or something like that. - -Their concern was talking to him in this vein, in the course of which -there was no indication that he bore any malice toward anyone, and -particularly to the President of the United States. If someone said -that Henry Smith didn't like the President, and we got his file, we -would get to the point where you have 3 million names in the file. How -effective are you going to be then? - -Representative BOGGS. Well, that is right. - -Mr. ROWLEY. And then you get in the area of civil rights and all, if -you start going into individuals---- - -Representative BOGGS. And if I remember correctly, there has never -been--we have had no testimony from anyone that Oswald ever threatened -the President of the United States. Is that correct? - -Mr. RANKIN. That is correct. - -Representative BOGGS. That was the only question I had. - -Mr. DULLES. Along that line, I just raise the question as to whether -maybe too much emphasis is not put on the threat angle, because a -clever fellow, if he is going to assassinate the President, the last -thing he is going to do is go around and talk about it and threaten it. - -Mr. ROWLEY. That is right. Well, this has been so with loners, too. - -As you say, you read the assassinations. Some of them just kept to -themselves, and traveled, and the next thing you know they confronted -their victim. Sometimes they were successful, other times they were not. - -Mr. DULLES. I recognize the difficulty of working out adequate -criteria. But I just think you ought to do some more seeking, and there -is more work to be done on that. - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes, sir. - -Senator COOPER. May I ask this question: It hasn't been clear to me. -Is it correct that now a defector does come within the scope of your -Service? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes, sir; we are furnished the names of defectors by the -FBI. And they investigate these people. And then in their report, if it -shows that the individual has emotional instability or propensity for -violence, we pick it up from there. But all the reports on the known -defectors in this country are submitted to us, and then we evaluate -from the case history of the report whether or not he would be a risk -for us subject to investigation. - -Senator COOPER. I understood that was the procedure before. But my -question is now, is the defector per se classed as one of those against -whom you would take protective measures? - -Mr. ROWLEY. No, no, sir; not unless we had---- - -Senator COOPER. Since the assassination? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Not unless we had these three categories of factors we just -enunciated. - -Senator COOPER. I would suggest--first, I understand there are not many -defectors who have returned to the United States. - -Secondly, it seems to me a man who has defected from the United -States to go to Russia or a Communist country indicates that he has -pretty strong convictions against the United States, or else there is -something questionable about his mental processes. - -I would think that fact alone would make it important to watch his -activities when he came back. - -Mr. ROWLEY. It would. And I think the FBI properly conducts the -investigations, from the standpoint of internal security, and furnishes -us a report. And then if there is something in the report that -indicates he could be a risk to the President or the Vice President, we -could take it from there. - -Representative BOGGS. Mr. Rankin. I have to go to a meeting in 2 or 3 -minutes. There is just one question I would like to ask before leaving. - -Is it not a fact that probably the greatest deterrent that you have is -the very fact that the public knows that there is a Secret Service? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes, sir. - -Representative BOGGS. That you do guard the life of the President. And -that the chances of an assassin escaping with his own life are pretty -remote. So this psychological weapon is one of the things you rely on? - -Mr. ROWLEY. That is correct. - -Representative BOGGS. And you must necessarily keep a degree of secrecy -about the methods you employ. - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes, sir; otherwise they could develop countermethods, to -thwart anything we might set up. - -Representative BOGGS. Exactly. Thank you very much. - -Mr. RANKIN. Chief Rowley, do you in the Secret Service obtain the -benefit of cooperation with other governmental agencies in the -protection of the President? - -Mr. ROWLEY. We receive cooperation from every agency. If I may name a -few--we were scheduled to visit Puerto Rico in 1948 or 1947--I am not -quite certain--with President Truman, who was then vacationing at Key -West. We had no office in Puerto Rico at the time. We did not know the -situation other than that it could be sticky because of the Nationalist -Party of Puerto Rico. - -(At this point, Representative Boggs withdrew from the hearing room.) - -Mr. ROWLEY. Our advance man called me and asked me if I would not -talk to Mr. Hoover to see whether or not we could have the assistance -of some of their agents who were down there in an office established -there. And I communicated then with the Assistant Director, who said, -"I will get back to you" and got the approval. That was an example of -the beginning of the cooperation, when I was at the White House, with -the FBI. - -Now, in the years subsequent to World War II, anytime we were abroad, -I made personal contact with Mr. Dulles, and I think for national -security we should go off the record on this, because this is something -that pertains today. - -(Discussion off the record.) - -The CHAIRMAN. Back on the record. - -Mr. RANKIN. Now, Chief Rowley, are you familiar with the provisions -in the appropriation act with regard to the FBI concerning their -protection of the person of the President? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes. - -Mr. RANKIN. You know of that, do you? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes; I do. Historically, that was first passed in 1910. It -stated that because of the limited number of Secret Service men at that -time, that appropriation--a certain given figure--was to be used by the -U.S. marshals to assist the Secret Service. - -Mr. RANKIN. Was the Secret Service opposed to that provision in the -appropriation act for the FBI? - -Mr. ROWLEY. No; it has never opposed that provision over the years. I -started to say, Mr. Rankin--subsequently, after the founding of the -FBI, this was transferred, apparently, from the marshals to the FBI, -and it has been in the appropriations as long as I can remember. We -have never objected to that appropriation. - -Mr. RANKIN. Now, there is some language in H.R. 4158, I understand, -which deals with the permanent organization of the Government that you -are objecting to; is that right? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes; that has to do with the codification, wherein -it states that the Attorney General will appoint--I think, in -substance--officials for the protection of the President of the United -States. And this is a feature in the codification of the law we object -to, because the Secretary of the Treasury authorizes and directs the -protection of the President. - -Representative FORD. Is that a bill, Mr. Rankin, that is before the -House Committee on the Judiciary and the Senate Judiciary Committee? - -Mr. ROWLEY. They are preparing it, and they asked for our opinions. It -must be now. This is a month or so ago, Mr. Ford. - -Mr. RANKIN. I think I can give the Commission the exact language. It -is chapter 33 of the House rule that I have just described, and it is -under section 534, and the words are: "The Attorney General may appoint -officials"--and then in quotes below that, in (2) "to protect the -person of the President" and--and then it deals with other matters. - -Now, will you tell why you have an objection to that? Just briefly -summarize it. - -Mr. ROWLEY. Because of the long history of Presidential protection we -have been directed--it has been under the jurisdiction of the Treasury -Department, authorized by the Secretary of the Treasury. But this would -confuse and be a conflict in jurisdiction. Conflicts would naturally -arise in the future as to who had jurisdiction. - -If anything happened like Dallas, we would get into an Alphonse and -Gaston pantomine. - -Mr. RANKIN. You would get into a jurisdictional dispute? - -Mr. ROWLEY. That is right. - -Mr. RANKIN. And that is why you object? - -Mr. ROWLEY. That is right. - -Mr. RANKIN. But as far as any provision that has been made historically -for the FBI to have funds so they can supplement and assist you, you -have no objection to that? - -Mr. ROWLEY. No objection at all. - -Representative FORD. Do you know how much in the way of funds have been -utilized through that provision? - -Mr. ROWLEY. No; I would not know of my own knowledge, Congressman, -because that would be under the jurisdiction of the FBI and the Budget -Bureau. - -Representative FORD. In other words, they don't take money that they -get through their appropriation bill, and transfer it to the Secret -Service? - -Mr. ROWLEY. No. - -Representative FORD. This is simply a provision which authorizes them -to use whatever funds they get for this purpose? - -Mr. ROWLEY. That is correct. - -Mr. RANKIN. Chief Rowley, I understand that regarding H.R. 4158, the -Treasury and the Justice Department have agreed that the language may -be changed so that it will read "Assist", is that right? - -Mr. ROWLEY. That is correct. - -Mr. RANKIN. And that is satisfactory? - -Mr. ROWLEY. That is right. That is what we worked out. - -Mr. RANKIN. Now, in connection with your protection of the President, -have you drawn upon various people in the Government and consultants to -assist you in regard to scientific problems? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes; some 8 or 9 years ago, we evolved a relationship -with the Defense Department--I think more specifically in the last 4 -years--a relationship with the President's Scientific Advisor. - -This is off the record. - -Mr. RANKIN. Why, Chief? - -Mr. ROWLEY. That has to do with national security. - -(Discussion off the record.) - -The CHAIRMAN. Back on the record. - -Mr. RANKIN. Chief Rowley, do you find in work of the Secret Service -that you have need for scientific advice and consultation concerning -problems that develop regarding the protection of the President, so -that if you had some arrangement whereby you could have the assistance -of either the President's Scientific Advisor or consultation with -independent consultants, it would assist and in fact be necessary to -your work? - -Mr. ROWLEY. I think it would be a great help, and it is necessary -today, because under the crash program that we are endeavoring to -undertake, I think it is important that we know, in Presidential -protection, what the current devices are that are available and are -efficient in connection with countermeasures against eavesdropping and -other things that we have been researching over the years. But this is -not necessary on a day-to-day basis, and it could be on an informal -basis with other agencies. I think it is necessary to have somebody of -that type, who is conversant with the subject, a trained expert, who -knows precisely where to go. - -We might spend a lot of time going around the paths, but by having an -expert, he knows precisely the organization, the contracting company, -what they have, whether it is suitable, whether it is efficient for our -purposes. - -Representative FORD. Mr. Rankin, is the letter of April 22, 1964, from -Mr. Rowley to you with the enclosures a Commission exhibit? - -Mr. RANKIN. Yes; that has been offered. That is Commission Exhibit No. -1027. - -Representative FORD. In this enclosure, Chief Rowley, on page 4, -under subheading (c), the following is stated: "The Secret Service -has no funds for research and very limited funds for the acquisition -of protective devices. In the fiscal year 1964 budget, the Service -requested $23,057 for two positions for technical specialists. The -Congress did not make any appropriation covering this request, and it -was repeated in the 1965 budget request, and has been included in the -appropriation passed by the House several weeks ago." - -Could you define more particularly what you had in mind for these -so-called technical specialists? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes, sir; this was someone that knew something about -electronics or electronic engineering for the sweeping of different -places. We felt that to date we were utilizing the services of agents -who primarily came with us on the basis of criminal investigation, and -that, therefore, it was my feeling that we should have this type of -expert. - -As I said earlier, I realize the shortcomings and the requirements -which we are operating under--and I was endeavoring to get the funds -from Congress, the personnel that I thought were necessary, as well -as the equipment I thought we should have, primarily to have this -operation under control for us. - -Now, I might say that the CIA has been most helpful. The equipment -we used in the early days were from that organization and the State -Department. - -But now they have gotten so busy, as you well know, that they haven't -got much time to assist us. - -So that we feel we want to have our own equipment, our own experts, and -people that know our work, and devote their time to it. - -Representative FORD. When you talk about technical specialists here, -you are referring to electronics specialists? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes, sir. - -Representative FORD. You are not referring to a general research and -development program, however? - -Mr. ROWLEY. No, sir; this confusion is why it was refused a year ago. - -Representative FORD. Let me ask this, then, Chief Rowley. Would -these technical experts, or technical specialists, have been on duty -in Dallas on this particular trip if you had had the funds and had -employed them? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes; but they would have been employed in something -entirely different. - -Representative FORD. They wouldn't have had any relationship to the -motorcade? - -Mr. ROWLEY. No, sir. If I may go off the record. - -Mr. RANKIN. Will you tell us why you are going off the record? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Because it involves national security. - -(Discussion off the record.) - -The CHAIRMAN. Back on the record. - -Representative FORD. As I understand it, then, the deletion of these -funds for these technical specialists in fiscal year 1964 did not -in any way handicap your operation in Dallas at the time of the -assassination? - -Mr. ROWLEY. No; we have never said that. We are just saying that if -we had the equipment--in other words, what I am trying to do, Mr. -Congressman, is to move forward. And the only way I know, after a -period of years, is to ask for a sum of money, but then my experience -is that sometimes the Congress becomes alarmed. But this is a need that -we have. And this is what I am trying to explain. This is an example of -what we are trying to do, in equipment and manpower. - -Representative FORD. Mr. Chairman, or Mr. Rankin, I have to go shortly -over to a session of the House. And since we are in the budget area, I -think it might be well for the record to develop some facts concerning -your budget--what they have in the past and what you are suggesting -they might be in the future. - -Mr. ROWLEY. Well, I have here a summary of the appropriation -allocations as it applies to manpower and equipment, and the number of -persons on the roll. - -Representative FORD. Do you receive your appropriations in a lump sum -or how do you receive Secret Service appropriations? - -Mr. ROWLEY. I guess it is on a warrant. When the warrant is signed---- - -Representative FORD. Your budget is included as a part of the Treasury -Department budget? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes, sir. - -Representative FORD. Now, do you have it in a separate part of the -Treasury Department budget? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes, sir. - -Representative FORD. Is it specifically earmarked for the Secret -Service? - -Mr. ROWLEY. It is; yes, sir. - -Representative FORD. It is a lump sum for the Secret Service? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes, sir. - -Mr. DULLES. That is a public appropriation, it is made public? - -Mr. ROWLEY. That is correct; yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. Congressman Ford, if I may interrupt just a minute, I can -ask Chief Rowley if Commission Exhibit No. 1028 is the one he just -referred to in answer to your question about the budget. - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes, sir. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 1028 for -identification.) - -Mr. RANKIN. I then offer in evidence Commission Exhibit No. 1028. - -The CHAIRMAN. It may be admitted. - -(The document heretofore marked for identification as Commission -Exhibit No. 1028, was received in evidence.) - -Mr. RANKIN. Exhibit No. 1028, Chief Rowley, does include in this--so it -will be understandable to the Commission, the figures for your proposed -budget of 1966, doesn't it? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. And those are shown in that manner on the exhibit? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes, sir. - -Representative FORD. Is the figure we see here---- - -Mr. ROWLEY. This is what we call a tentative budget. - -Mr. RANKIN. That has been presented to the Budget Bureau? - -Mr. ROWLEY. It has not been presented to the Budget Office of the -Treasury, which is the first step. Then it goes to the Budget Bureau, -and then subsequently to the House and Senate. - -Mr. RANKIN. You said it has not been. - -Mr. ROWLEY. No; this is a tentative proposal that we have made. - -Mr. RANKIN. At this stage, so we get the record clear--that is a -consideration of what you think you should have, but it hasn't gone -through the steps you have just described, is that right? - -Mr. ROWLEY. That is right. But it does not include--necessarily, until -we complete our thorough examination--what our requirements will be -under the new revisions of our organization. Particularly as it relates -to manpower, we want to be sure that we have the proper justification. -And so we hope by October or November to have a good estimate at that -time. - -Representative FORD. Well, the figure that is shown here for fiscal -year 1965 is $7,550,000. - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes, sir. - -Representative FORD. Is that the budget submission to the Congress? - -Mr. ROWLEY. To the Congress; yes, sir. - -Representative FORD. And do you recall what the House approved in its -version of the bill? - -Mr. ROWLEY. $7,500,000. They cut $50,000. - -Representative FORD. Do you recall what the reduction was predicated on? - -Mr. ROWLEY. No; I don't. I think it was just cut to a round figure. - -Representative FORD. What is the footnote here which is entitled -"Pending action by the Senate"? Is that a $669,000 increase? - -Mr. ROWLEY. That is right. - -Representative FORD. Is that a supplemental? - -Mr. ROWLEY. No, no; we are just showing the increase--this has nothing -to do with the $669,000. We show--this was passed by the House, but it -is now pending in the Senate for approval. In other words, you have -your markup or something, and then it hasn't been submitted to the -House for a--to the Senate for approval. - -Representative FORD. But there is an asterisk there. - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes; this is the 1965 budget. This figure that was reduced -by $50,000, by the House. Now, it goes before--for a markup--it will be -placed before the Senate for approval. - -Mr. RANKIN. Chief Rowley, when you say "this" it doesn't show on the -record what you are talking about. So if you can tell what item on that -Exhibit No. 1028. - -Representative FORD. On the same line with the language, "Pending -action by Senate," on the right-hand side is $669,000, which is labeled -as an increase. That increase relates to what? - -Mr. ROWLEY. It relates to the difference--the increase between 1965 -and our proposed budget of 1966. The asterisk here relates to the 586 -positions. - -Mr. RANKIN. Is there any connection between those two? Chief Rowley, -is there any connection between the asterisk, and the wording "Pending -before the Senate," and the item on the right-hand column of the -increase? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes; it represents the increase that we are asking for in -the 1966 budget. - -Senator COOPER. You are not asking the Senate, though, to increase the -House figure of $7,500,000, by $669,000. - -Mr. ROWLEY. No, no; there is no connection between these increases. -This should have been down here, where you explain what the asterisk -is, where we have 586. Maybe it was put in the wrong position there. -In other words, it is like a footnote. This is pending action--meaning -that the House has passed the 1965 budget, but the Senate has yet to -pass it. - -Mr. RANKIN. But to clarify, there is no connection between the -increased figure and the fact that it is pending before the Senate? - -Mr. ROWLEY. That is right. It happens to be on the same line. - -Mr. RANKIN. But there is no connection? - -Mr. ROWLEY. No, sir. - -Senator COOPER. What you mean is the House has passed an appropriation -of $7,500,000, and the Senate has not yet acted upon it. - -Mr. ROWLEY. That is correct. - -Senator COOPER. The $669,000 is an increase that you hope will be voted -in the next fiscal year. - -Mr. ROWLEY. That is correct. - -Mr. DULLES. Do you present the budget yourself, or does the Secretary -of the Treasury, or someone else in the Treasury Department--present -and defend it? - -Mr. ROWLEY. The Secretary presents the overall Treasury budget, but -then in detail, we appear before the appropriations subcommittee -ourselves to justify our request. - -Mr. DULLES. The Secret Service justifies its own request in the overall -budget of the Department of the Treasury? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes, sir. - -Representative FORD. Chief Rowley, on page 5 of Exhibit No. 1027, -the statement is made, "In the fiscal year 1965, the Secret Service -has requested funds for an additional 25 positions. The House of -Representatives has included the requested funds in the Treasury-Post -Office appropriation bill which passed several weeks ago. These funds -will not be sufficient to take the additional measures which we -believe are required. However, since the 1965 budget figures had to be -submitted in November 1963, it was not possible to make specific and -properly justified requests at that time. We should be in a position to -do so in the fiscal year 1966 budget submission." - -You are not saying that you won't have whatever additional personnel -you need now, or from now until the beginning of fiscal year 1966, for -the protection of the President? - -Mr. ROWLEY. No; we are not saying that. We are saying that in view of -the circumstances of what happened in November, that this budget of 25 -positions had already been submitted, and there was nothing you could -do to take it back. - -The 1966 budget was also prepared and submitted. But, as I explain -later, in all consideration, we cannot at this time helter skelter -say we need so many men, taking advantage of the tragedy. We want to -experiment and develop what we need in protective research in the way -of manpower and equipment, and what we need in the field, because -necessarily we will have to have special agents added to the field to -conduct any investigations on risks that may be forwarded to them. - -Representative FORD. But if in the process of your analysis of -your needs, you develop that you need more personnel, you need new -devices, you need equipment of any sort whatsoever--you won't delay -the submission of that request just because of the fiscal year budget -coming up for fiscal 1966? - -Mr. ROWLEY. No, sir. - -Representative FORD. Because we do have, as you well know, supplemental -and deficiency appropriation bills. - -Mr. ROWLEY. That is right. - -Representative FORD. So if you need something, you can request it -of the Bureau of the Budget, and if it can be justified, it can be -submitted to the Congress in one of the other forms besides the regular -appropriation bills. - -Mr. ROWLEY. That is right. Because now as I understand it the same -committee handles the supplemental. - -Representative FORD. That is correct. - -Mr. ROWLEY. We are aware of that. That is what we would do when we -arrive at what our requirements would be. - -Representative FORD. We can have your assurance that if you come -up with requirements, you won't wait for fiscal 1966 to make your -submission. - -Mr. ROWLEY. That is right. - -Mr. RANKIN. Chief Rowley, you are in the process of trying to arrive at -your estimates of what you need in additional personnel and equipment -and other assistance to make the protective services and the Secret -Service in its work of protecting the President as efficient as -possible, are you? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. And you are seeking the help and advice of people that you -have named, such as the Rand Corp., and others? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. And do you have any estimate now that you can give the -Commission as to when you might have your estimates in that regard? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Well, I think, No. 1, with regard to the protective -research, I think we need some expert there to assist us in developing -our requirements, particularly in the criteria, on a full-time basis. -We have assigned what we thought were sufficient men at this time to -cope with the volume of work and reports that we have been receiving, -which are now being received from the various organizations of -approximately a hundred reports a day. So that we have cut down to a -considerable point. - -Now, following the evaluation and the processing of these reports, we -will determine just what we actually need in the way of manpower. - -Mr. RANKIN. You also have the problem of being able to get that -material out once you have it, don't you? - -Mr. ROWLEY. That is right. And this is the point that we have to -develop with IBM, or, as I said initially, with the CIA. - -Now, they have facilities that would be available to us, if it works. - -Mr. RANKIN. And you are also inquiring into the question of the -sufficiency of the number of agents you have for this area as well as -other Secret Service tasks? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. And you are going to present that to the Congress as soon -as you have something definite that you can support? - -Mr. ROWLEY. That is right--in response to Congressman Ford's inquiry. - -Mr. RANKIN. Now, I think the Commission would be interested in the -requirements or standards that you have for agents. Do you require a -college education now? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. And are there any other conditions or standards that you -would like to describe? - -Mr. DULLES. May I inquire for one point? Is that a college education -for the White House detail? - -Mr. ROWLEY. No; that is for all the agents that we recruit for our -work, for both criminal and protective, Mr. Dulles. We require a -minimum academic achievement of 4 years of college or university, and -preferably those who attend police administrative schools, where they -have in their curricula subjects on science, criminology, and law. We -find that these people are better adapted, they have an inclination, -and they are interested. - -But we do take people with B.A.'s and B.S.'s, because they, too, have -been most satisfactory. But we find when we need to recruit the men, -we go to these colleges with special courses. As I mentioned earlier -we first started recruiting them from Michigan State, because that was -one of the first universities with a police administration curriculum. -And we found each and every one of them have been most satisfactory and -have excellent records. - -As a matter of fact, a good portion of them are agents in charge of our -65 offices throughout the country. - -Mr. RANKIN. What do you do as a matter of procedure in assigning your -agents? Do you keep them in Presidential protection, or do you shift -them from that to other functions in the Secret Service? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Well, when they are first sworn into duty, we assign them to -an office, so during the period, the first 6 months, you would call it -inservice training, because we are not in the position that the FBI is -where they take in, say, a given number of agents--let's set a figure -at 30--and then they can start them immediately with their school of -12 weeks. We are not in a position to hire that many at a time. We are -in a position to hire 10. So that after 6 months, 10 now, after the -character investigations are completed, and then we may get 10 more -later. - -Then we send them to what we call the Treasury Basic School, after -which we try to send them as soon as practical to our Secret Service -School. - -Now, sometimes a new man might be a year in the Secret Service, and -during that period he is on probation, after which we determine through -the agent in charge whether his service is satisfactory, and whether he -will develop into an agent. - -Mr. DULLES. Is the FBI School open to any of your respective recruits? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Well---- - -Mr. DULLES. FBI Academy. - -Mr. ROWLEY. The Police Academy would be if we had occasion to send them -there, if there was something they could benefit from. We do send the -White House Police to the FBI Police Academy, because that is more in -connection with their police function. - -Mr. RANKIN. How does your agent get into the Presidential protection? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Well, some of the agents have indicated in their personal -history questionnaires submitted each year whether they wish to select -an office of duty preference, and there are three offices listed. If an -agent wants for one reason or another after a period of 3 years on the -White House detail to make a request for a transfer, we consider which -of the three offices he selected has a vacancy, and we assign him to -that office. Then we bring in one of the new men from the field service -to replace him. We then train him in the protective work. - -Necessarily, you have to have a nucleus. So there are also a number of -men in supervisory positions who have been on the White House detail -for 20 or more years. - -Mr. RANKIN. But your theory is that they should be able to be trained -so that they could be shifted to any part of the service? - -Mr. ROWLEY. That is right. And it has this advantage: Once they are -trained in Presidential protection, if for some reason the White -House detail gets instructions that the President is going to fly to -one of the cities, or some hamlet across the country, and we do not -have time to get an agent aboard a plane and send him there, or maybe -the Air Force has no plane available to transport him there, we pick -up the phone and call an agent at the nearest place--and here is an -agent that has been trained, he knows the mechanics of the operation, -and the procedure, and he goes to work, and effectively lays out the -arrangements. - -Representative FORD. Mr. Chairman, this Commission Exhibit No. 1028, -which shows the budget and the positions, I think is helpful. But in -the submission of the budget by the Secret Service to the Congress, -they have a greater breakdown of their personnel setup. - -I think it might be wise to include what they submitted to the -Congress, or something comparable to it, because I think it is far more -complete than this. - -Mr. ROWLEY. That is correct. - -Representative FORD. And I think it might be helpful for the record. - -Mr. ROWLEY. We do not disclose the number of men on Presidential -protection. - -Representative FORD. I understand that. But you are familiar with -the presentation you might submit for your overall budget, including -personnel? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Right. - -Representative FORD. Can that not be submitted for our record, just as -it is submitted to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations? - -Mr. ROWLEY. It is a matter of public record. But whether or not the -tentative one, the 1966 can be, before the Budget Bureau sees it, is -something else again. - -Representative FORD. I would not expect that it would. - -Mr. ROWLEY. No; but the others can be. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask leave to secure a copy of -that and insert it in the record. - -The CHAIRMAN. It may be admitted when you obtain it. - -Representative FORD. May I ask one other question, and then I have to -leave? - -In listening to the testimony, Chief Rowley, sometime ago, I was a -little concerned--more than a little, I should say--with the process -by which the man in charge of a Presidential trip undertakes his -relationship with the local law enforcement agencies. - -As I recall the testimony, the man in charge has contact with the local -police and the sheriff's department and any other local law enforcement -agency. But the impression that I gained was that there was no clear -delineation of responsibility. They sat around, they talked about what -this local law enforcement agency would do and what another one would -do. - -But it seems to me that a more precise checklist, a clear -understanding, would be wholesome and better. - -What is your reaction on that? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Well, No. 1, in our revised Manual on Presidential -Protection, this is part of the thing. - -Now, I would hesitate to prepare a checklist for everybody, because you -may be embarrassed to find it in the press some day, because of the -activity of reporters around the police. - -I do not want to downgrade any police department, but this is what -happens through no fault of theirs. There are variations in different -cities. - -Now, I think what you are referring to, Mr. Congressman, is that they -complained they did not have a sufficient notice of the route and -so forth, so they could make the proper preparations. That is true. -Neither did we have sufficient notice. Because they were going back and -forth trying to establish--until they were told they had 45 minutes -allotted to them for this route, and first our man had to go, which is -a natural operation, to look over the route to see whether or not it -could be negotiated within that particular period of time. - -Once establishing that it could, and the thing looked safe, then they -notified the police and went over it with the police. And then with the -police they indicated what they would like done here at intersections -and so forth, and other features. - -Now, it is true in most cases we ourselves like to get sufficient -advance information, we like to send our men out in advance so they -do not have to cope with these fast operations, because when a police -department has sufficient notice of the route and so forth, then -they have adequate time to get out instructions to their own police -department--whether by precinct or by group commanders, and so forth. -And this is what I think in this instance that they are complaining -about. - -Representative FORD. As I understand it, however, at the present time, -and for the future, there will be a more precise procedure for the -relationships of the Secret Service on the one hand and local law -enforcement agencies on the other. - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes, sir. - -Representative FORD. That is set forth in your manual as presently -revised? - -Mr. ROWLEY. In our present revised manual. - -Representative FORD. So that when your agent-in-charge goes to city X, -he now has the procedures set forth for many to follow on, so there are -no uncertainties, if that is possible? - -Mr. ROWLEY. That is right. And you have to necessarily do that, because -you have agents, as I said--as I cited an example where an agent had -been trained in the White House, but you have to utilize his services, -because you cannot get a regular White House man out there. He has this -information, and he follows it accordingly. It is a check for him as -well as for the police. - -Representative FORD. Other countries have protection problems of their -chief executive. - -I am sure in recent months the French have had considerable problems in -this regard. - -Do you ever have an exchange of methods with other governments for your -benefit or their benefit? - -Mr. ROWLEY. We have been approached, Mr. Congressman, for instructions -on security and so forth, but we, for reasons--for national security -reasons, I would like to go off the record. - -(Off the record.) - -(At this point, Representative Ford left the hearing room.) - -The CHAIRMAN. Back on the record. - -Mr. DULLES. You have referred to the dry runs which you made in Dallas, -and you usually make, I understand, to establish a route. - -First I think you said you did this yourself, and then with the local -police. - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes, sir. - -Mr. DULLES. Do you have any reason to believe that those dry runs were -observed by the President or known to the President, or received any -publicity? - -Mr. ROWLEY. No; they did not receive any publicity. - -The CHAIRMAN. Chief, you were referring a little while ago to the -revised rules. - -When did the last revision take place? Has it been since the -assassination? - -Mr. ROWLEY. No. - -The overall revision of the Manual of the Secret Service, was -undertaken before I took office, and because it was delayed, I took it -upon myself to assign a man to sit down 7 days a week, to bring this -manual up to date. The overall manual has been completed. Now we have -almost completed the revised advance manual. - -The CHAIRMAN. And--but there has been--as yet there has been no -revision since the assassination? - -Mr. ROWLEY. No, sir; It is in the process. - -The CHAIRMAN. It is in the process of being done? Very well. - -Senator COOPER. I would like to ask a question. I think you stated -that you took part in the procedures and methods for the protection of -President Kennedy when he was--prior to his visit to Dallas. - -Mr. ROWLEY. No, sir. - -Senator COOPER. I thought you said that you participated in a dry run. - -Mr. ROWLEY. Oh, no; I was describing what the advance agents do. - -Senator COOPER. Anyway--you know what the agents of the Secret Service -did in preparing for the visit, of President Kennedy to Dallas? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes, sir. - -Senator COOPER. And you know what procedures they followed during the -actual route of the motorcade on that day? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes, sir. - -Senator COOPER. Now, reviewing those, is there any failure that you -know about on the part of the Secret Service in those procedures or in -the methods which they used on the day of the assassination? - -Mr. ROWLEY. No, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. Chief Rowley, would you tell us the salary scale for your -agents for the first 2 years? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes; we recruit an agent at grade GS-7, at $5,795. - -Mr. RANKIN. How does that compare with the starting salary for the FBI? - -Mr. ROWLEY. I think it is a difference of three grades. As I -understand, the lowest FBI grade is GS-10. - -Mr. RANKIN. $10,000. - -Mr. ROWLEY. Grade 10. - -Mr. RANKIN. What salary would that be? - -Mr. ROWLEY. It might be--for example, GS-11 is $8,410. Now, it could be -somewhere between $7,500 and $8,000. - -Mr. RANKIN. Are you able to get at that salary the quality of men that -you should for this kind of work? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes; we have found to date that we have been able--we -have been selective. And, of course, the fact that we have only -appropriations for a limited number of men. - -For example, today we have well over 40 men waiting to be accepted, -with completed investigations, some a year or more. Sometimes when we -put in requests for a given number of men, we want to put those men on -at the beginning of the fiscal year, so we undertake to recruit them -and complete their investigation, so that everything--the character and -the physical is up to date--and we can put them on, if we get the funds -precisely at the beginning of the fiscal year. - -Mr. RANKIN. You recognize that your starting salary is not favorable in -comparison with some police forces, do you not? - -Mr. ROWLEY. I recognize that. But at the same time, we are guided by -the Treasury law enforcement examinations, and the other Treasury -investigative standards. But we are below some of the west coast police -organizations, for example. They are well-paid and great organizations. - -Mr. RANKIN. Now, what kind of a workload do your agents have on an -average? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Well, at the present time we have a caseload of 110.1 cases -per man. - -Mr. RANKIN. How does that compare with other intelligence agencies? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Well, I think--a satisfactory caseload per man per month is -from 14 to 15 cases. - -Now, I am quite certain that in other agencies it is a little more than -that. But whether or not it is as high as ours at the present time, I -have no way of knowing at this time. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you thing that is a handicap to your operation? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Well, it is a handicap. But I think it is testimony to the -dedication and the industry of our men, that we are not complaining. We -are conducting ourselves and performing our services for the Government -to the point that even though we are understaffed, nevertheless we are -not quitters, and we are carrying on the work within the responsibility -entrusted to us. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you write the Commission a letter telling the history -of the early development and growth of the Secret Service operation -over the years? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. Is Commission Exhibit No. 1029 that information that you -gave us? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes, sir; this also included the White House police. - -Mr. RANKIN. Will you examine Commission Exhibit No. 1029, and inform us -as to whether or not any of that should not be included on the public -record in light of the national security problem? - -Mr. ROWLEY. I have no objections, because in the years past--this is -part of the public record. So I would not see any objection at this -time. - -(At this point, Senator Cooper left the hearing room.) - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Chairman, I offer in evidence Commission Exhibit No. -1029. - -The CHAIRMAN. It may be admitted. - -(The document was marked for identification as Commission Exhibit No. -1029, and received in evidence.) - -Mr. RANKIN. Chief Rowley, did you write us a letter with regard to -proposed legislation, dated June 11? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. And is Commission Exhibit No. 1030 that letter that you -wrote us with an attachment telling about possible legislative changes -that you thought might be desirable? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes, sir. - -(The document was marked for identification as Commission Exhibit No. -1030.) - -Mr. RANKIN. I offer in evidence Commission Exhibit No. 1030. - -The CHAIRMAN. It may be admitted. - -(The document heretofore marked for identification as Commission -Exhibit No. 1030, was received in evidence.) - -Mr. RANKIN. Can you briefly state the contents of the attachment to -that exhibit, Chief Rowley? - -You recall that it is a commentary on the suggestion of legislation -about the assassination of the President? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes; it is a recommendation on the bills being proposed, -that the assassination of a President or Vice President or possible -successors to the Presidency be made a Federal crime. - -(At this point, Senator Cooper reentered the hearing room.) - -Mr. ROWLEY. Currently there is such a law whereby when people of lesser -rank in the Government are murdered, that is investigated by Federal -agencies. - -Mr. RANKIN. Would you tell the Commission briefly what your idea is as -to whether or not it would be helpful to have such a statute? - -Mr. ROWLEY. I think today it would be helpful, because it would be -a continuation of the present law, and it would be under Federal -jurisdiction--because this is a Federal employee. And I think it -properly should be under Federal statute. There would then be an -opportunity particularly today in the case of the President or Vice -President, for the investigation to be pursued immediately, and the -assassin or groups of defendants to be interrogated as promptly as -possible to develop and ascertain whether or not there is a conspiracy, -and not wait as we have to do under the present law because of the -State statute. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you have any suggestions in your proposal about who -would have jurisdiction to investigate and report in regard to any -violation of that law? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Currently the Federal enforcement agencies--namely, the -FBI--have the responsibility of conducting investigations, on most of -the Federal laws in the country, and therefore it might properly be -their responsibility in a situation like this. - -However, we do have a reservation with respect to an attempt or threat -on the President, because we would like to work out an agreement -whereby we would jointly conduct an investigation because the threat -phase of it has been under our jurisdiction, under section 3056, for -many years. It ties in with our responsibility for protection of the -President. - -Mr. RANKIN. In connection with the investigation of the assassination -of President Kennedy, have you personally participated in working with -regard to that, in supervision of that investigation? - -Mr. ROWLEY. In the early stages when we assigned our men to inquire -into the background of Oswald and all. But then eventually, when the -President authorized the FBI to conduct the investigation, we pulled -out and only continued and finished up those reports that we initiated. - -Mr. RANKIN. And since that time, after the FBI was given the authority -to proceed with the investigation, you have cooperated with the -Commission through the staff, your staff, in helping with various items -of information from time to time. Is that right? - -Mr. ROWLEY. That is correct. - -Mr. RANKIN. Now, do you have any information of a credible nature that -would suggest to you that Oswald was or could have been an agent or -informant of any Federal agency? - -Mr. ROWLEY. I have no credible information of that kind; no, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. Was he an agent or informant or directly or indirectly -connected with the Secret Service in anyway? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Not in any way. We did not know of him until the event. - -Mr. RANKIN. From the way that the Secret Service employment is -arranged, and the records are kept, and the payments are made, if he -had ever been placed in any such capacity with the Secret Service, -would it have come to your attention? - -Mr. ROWLEY. It would; yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. And you are certain that he never was hired directly or -indirectly or acted in that capacity. - -Mr. ROWLEY. He was never hired directly or indirectly in any capacity. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you have any credible information that would cause you -to believe that Lee Harvey Oswald was an agent of any foreign country. - -Mr. ROWLEY. I have no such credible information. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you have any credible information to cause you to -believe that he was involved in any conspiracy in connection with the -assassination, either domestic or foreign? - -Mr. ROWLEY. I have no credible information on any of those. - -Mr. RANKIN. Are there any areas of the investigation of the Commission -that you would suggest that further work should be done, as far as you -know the work of the Commission? - -Mr. ROWLEY. I do not. - -Mr. RANKIN. From your knowledge of the investigation, do you have any -opinion as to whether Lee Harvey Oswald was involved in the killing of -the President? - -Mr. ROWLEY. From what reports I have read, I would say that he was -involved in the killing of the President, but I do not have complete -knowledge of it. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you have any opinion from your knowledge of the -investigation as to whether Mr. Ruby was associated with anyone else -directly or indirectly in the killing of Lee Harvey Oswald? - -Mr. ROWLEY. I have incomplete knowledge with respect to Ruby. -Consequently, I could not say, other than what I saw on television or -read in the newspapers, whether he had any connections. - -Mr. RANKIN. Is there anything in connection with the work of the -Commission or what you know about our inquiry here that you would like -to add to or suggest that the Commission do beyond what you know of it? - -Mr. ROWLEY. No, sir. - -Senator COOPER. May I ask a question? - -Mr. Rankin asked you several questions. He asked you if you had -credible information, which I think was a proper question. But may I -ask if you have any information based upon any facts that you know or -based upon any information given to you by persons who claim to have -personal knowledge, that there were persons engaged in a conspiracy to -kill President Kennedy? - -Mr. ROWLEY. I have no such facts, sir. - -Senator COOPER. I address the same question as to whether you have any -information that the killing of President Kennedy had any connection -with any foreign power? - -Mr. ROWLEY. I have no such information. - -The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Dulles, any questions? - -Mr. DULLES. Yes, sir; I have one general question. - -From the testimony, and from my own study, it would seem to me that it -was likely that there would be parallel, somewhat parallel structures -to develop the investigative capabilities with regard to possible -suspects in the area of Presidential protection. And my question is -as to whether, in order to avoid that undue expense, you think there -would be any advantage in putting the responsibility of that within the -FBI, who would then be responsible for advising you as to potential -suspects and possibly following up on that, rather than putting that -responsibility now to a certain extent on the Secret Service--whether -there is not a division of responsibility in this field which is -unfortunate and may possibly lead to greater expense, personnel doing -somewhat duplicative work? - -Mr. ROWLEY. As it applies to this law now? - -Mr. DULLES. As it applies to the situation today, without the law which -is recommended in your memorandum, and might apply also after that, -because the investigation would be required in either case to turn up -possible suspects. - -My question is, where should that responsibility be primarily centered -in order to avoid undue duplication and expense, and yet accomplish our -objective? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Well, when you mention duplication, I do not think there -has been much duplication in this case, when the President directed the -FBI to conduct the investigation to determine whether or not there was -a conspiracy. - -Mr. DULLES. I am not talking about now. I am talking about -investigation prior to, say, the President's visit to city X in the -United States. - -Mr. ROWLEY. I see. - -Mr. DULLES. Or abroad--where you have the problem of the Secret Service -and the CIA. - -Mr. ROWLEY. Well, I think you want to keep the concept of Presidential -protection by a small, closely knit group, because of the intimate -relationship. But if you want to expand it and give it to another -group, to take the long-range view, you do not know what may develop -from something like that--whether a police organization could lead to -a police state or a military state--if you want to delegate it to some -organization like that. - -The CHAIRMAN. I suppose also, Chief Rowley, that if your people were -not doing the spadework on this thing, and keeping their minds steeped -in this protection matter, but were obliged to rely on the written -records of someone else presented to you, that they would not be in the -proper state of mind, would they, to be alert to it? - -Mr. ROWLEY. That is right. There would be a tendency to relax and say -John Jones is taking care of it. This is always the possibility that -you might encounter something like that. - -The CHAIRMAN. And in law enforcement, you have to have the feel of the -situation, do you not? - -You have to do the spadework in order to be aware of every possibility -that might develop? - -Mr. ROWLEY. That is true. Because you see in this, Mr. Dulles, on the -Presidential detail, it is a unique detail. This is something that they -think 24 hours a day. They do it 24 hours a day. They are not otherwise -involved. For example, they have the principle of screening the -President and being always ready to make a quick exit. They do not have -to stop to investigate or identify any person, whoever the assailant -might be. Their responsibility is only to protect the President at all -times. - -Mr. DULLES. But they have to know against whom to protect him. - -Mr. ROWLEY. That is right. But they are ready for anything under the -present close screening. - -But if I understand your question, Mr. Dulles, you also want to know -whether or not in the screening or the investigation of certain -groups, like the Communist group, and so forth, since it is their -responsibility and not ours, because they have the internal security of -the United States, this is something that we have to develop. - -Mr. DULLES. Is "they" the FBI? - -Mr. ROWLEY. The FBI. - -That is something that we have to have a formal arrangement about, -because it enters the realm of internal security. We do not want to -conflict with them, if that is what is uppermost in your mind. We have -to be most correct about that, in any of the agencies, as you know. - -Mr. DULLES. How much larger staff do you think you are going to have to -have to cover that situation in the future? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Well, I would not know until we see the volume of reports -that we get that we have to refer to the field for investigation. Since -we are processing them now, we have to wait to make that determination. - -Mr. DULLES. Should you do field investigations as contrasted with the -FBI--the FBI have a large number of people in a large number of cities -throughout the United States. You do not have that? - -Mr. ROWLEY. No; but on the basis of the criteria we discussed earlier, -the FBI would give us the information, and if in our evaluation we -determined that it should be referred to the field for investigation, -particularly in the case of individuals, we would conduct our -investigation, to determine whether this individual is a high risk to -the President. - -Now, where it comes to the group, this is something for the FBI to do, -because it ties in with their responsibility for internal security. - -Now, if there is a close connection between the two, then we would have -to have a formal agreement. But because of our responsibility, and the -fact that this is part of the work that we have to undertake, then -we would conduct our own investigation, because we know what we are -looking for. - -Mr. DULLES. If the name of Lee Harvey Oswald had been submitted to you -by the FBI, what would you, in the normal course, have done? - -Would you have referred that back to them for investigation, or would -you have carried on an independent investigation? - -I am talking now if that name had been referred to you when you knew -you were going to go to Dallas. - -Mr. ROWLEY. If we knew we were going to go to Dallas and we had this -present criteria, then we would investigate him. - -Mr. DULLES. You would carry on the investigation? - -Mr. ROWLEY. Yes, sir. - -Mr. DULLES. Thank you. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Chief Justice, I am through with Chief Rowley -now--except I would like to ask him to supply a copy of the information -about their appropriation request, and insert it with Commission -Exhibit No. 1028. [The information subsequently furnished by the Secret -Service was inserted in the record as a part of Commission Exhibit No. -1028.] - -We have Mr. Carswell here. As you recall, there was some difficulty -at one meeting about the testimony about what the Secret Service was -doing in regard to the Speaker. And while he is here, I would like to -straighten that record out. - -The CHAIRMAN. Very well. - -Mr. RANKIN. It will be very brief. - -The CHAIRMAN. Chief, I want to take this opportunity to thank you and -the members of your Secret Service for the cooperation you have given -to this Commission. They have been very diligent, very helpful, as you -personally have been. And we appreciate it. - -Mr. ROWLEY. Thank you, sir. - - -TESTIMONY OF ROBERT CARSWELL - -The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Carswell, you have been sworn, have you not? - -Mr. CARSWELL. Yes, sir. - -The CHAIRMAN. Very well. You may proceed. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Chief Justice, if the Commission will bear with me -just a minute, I would like to tell about my own conversation with -the Speaker about this matter prior to his answering in regard to -correction of the record. - -The CHAIRMAN. Very well. You may proceed. - -Mr. RANKIN. After the matter came up before the Commission, I was asked -by one of the Commissioners to see the Speaker, Mr. McCormack, and I -did that at his office. And he informed me that the Secret Service -and also the FBI had undertaken to try to give him protection because -of his position in the line of succession, and that because of the -interference that he felt and his wife felt with their relationship -over the years in being alone and together in their family life, he -did not like to have that interference, and he asked them not to -participate any more in furnishing that protection for him. He said it -was his own responsibility in taking that action, and he wanted that to -be clear, and that he thought that as far as any protection he needed, -he had plenty of protection with the kind of protection that the -Congress had around him in the performance of his duty. - -It came to Mr. Carswell's attention, right immediately after he had -testified, that his statements in that regard were inaccurate because -of the change that had occurred that had not come to his attention. He -called me and he said he would like to correct the record. - -Mr. Carswell, will you tell us now what the facts are as you have -learned? - -Mr. CARSWELL. When I testified here before I was asked, I believe, what -protection the Secret Service was providing the Speaker. I said that we -were providing protection comparable to that previously provided to the -Vice President. I did that on the basis of checking with Chief Rowley -immediately after the assassination of President Kennedy, and he told -me at that time such protection was being provided to the Speaker. - -I understood that that was the case the next day--because at that time -we were not certain what was going on. I had not heard anything about -it after that. And I assumed that the situation continued as it was -immediately after the assassination. But that was not the case. - -As Mr. Rankin has stated, the Speaker requested the Secret Service to -discontinue assigning agents to him for protection, and we did what he -requested. That is the present situation. - -Mr. RANKIN. That is all I have. - -The CHAIRMAN. Very well. - -Thank you, Mr. Carswell. - -Well, gentlemen, I think that will be all today. The Commission will -adjourn now. - -(Whereupon, at 12:35 p.m., the President's Commission recessed.) - - - - -_Tuesday, June 23, 1964_ - -TESTIMONY OF BERNARD WILLIAM WEISSMAN AND ROBERT G. KLAUSE - -The President's Commission met at 10:30 a.m., on June 23, 1964, at 200 -Maryland Avenue NE., Washington, D.C. - -Present were Chief Justice Earl Warren, Chairman; Senator John Sherman -Cooper, Representative Hale Boggs, Representative Gerald R. Ford, and -Allen W. Dulles, members. - -Also present were J. Lee Rankin, general counsel; and Albert E. Jenner, -Jr., assistant counsel. - - -TESTIMONY OF BERNARD WILLIAM WEISSMAN, ACCOMPANIED BY THOMAS A. -FLANNERY, ESQ. - -(Members present: Chief Justice Warren, Representative Ford, and Mr. -Dulles.) - -The CHAIRMAN. The Commission will be in order. Mr. Flannery, you are -here representing Mr. Weissman? - -Mr. FLANNERY. Yes; Your Honor. - -The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Jenner, would you mind making a brief statement of -the testimony we expect to develop here? - -Mr. JENNER. Yes; Mr. Chief Justice. - -Mr. Bernard William Weissman, who is the witness today, played some -part in the preparation of and the publication of the advertisement -in the Dallas Morning News on the 22d of November 1963, and we will -seek to develop the facts with respect to that. It has been marked as -Commission Exhibit No. 1031, entitled "Welcome, Mr. Kennedy." - -The CHAIRMAN. Yes. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 1031 for -identification.) - -Mr. JENNER. Mr. Weissman's deposition was taken in part. He was not -then represented by counsel, and he had some qualms about it and raised -the issue, and as soon as it was raised we suspended the deposition. He -appears this morning with Mr. Flannery as his counsel. - -Mr. Flannery, would you be good enough to state your full name? - -Mr. FLANNERY. Thomas A. Flannery. - -The CHAIRMAN. And you are a practitioner in Washington? - -Mr. FLANNERY. Yes; Your Honor, I am a partner in the firm of Hamilton -and Hamilton. - -The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Weissman; will you raise your right hand and be sworn? - -Do you solemnly swear the testimony you shall give will be the truth, -the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I do. - -The CHAIRMAN. Will you be seated? Mr. Jenner will question. - -Mr. JENNER. Your full name is Bernard William Weissman? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. That is right. - -Mr. JENNER. And you now reside in New York City, do you not? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Mount Vernon, N.Y. - -Mr. JENNER. Would you give your address? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. 439 South Columbus Avenue, Mount Vernon, N.Y. - -Mr. JENNER. You were born November 1, 1937? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. That is right. - -Mr. JENNER. You are almost 27 years old? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. All right. I would like some vital statistics, if I may, -Mr. Weissman. Are you presently employed? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. And where are you employed presently? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Carpet Corp. of America, 655 Clinton Avenue, Newark, N.J. - -Mr. JENNER. I see. Is that connected in any fashion with the Carpet Co. -by which you were employed in Dallas, Tex., last fall? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. None whatsoever. - -Mr. JENNER. You are a native born American? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. And your folks are as well? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Excuse me? - -Mr. JENNER. Your folks are as well, mother and father? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. And you have two brothers? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes; I do. - -Mr. JENNER. And they likewise are native born Americans? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. What is your marital status at the present time? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Separated. - -Mr. JENNER. You were married or are married to Jane Byrnes Weissman? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. She is a native born American, also? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. You have been separated since when? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. May 16, 1963. - -Mr. JENNER. So you became separated from her before you went to Dallas -in the fall of 1963? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I was in the service at the time. - -(At this point, Senator Cooper entered the hearing room.) - -Mr. JENNER. Now, are you acquainted with a gentleman by the name of -Larrie Schmidt? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes; I am. - -Mr. JENNER. When did you first meet him? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. In Munich, Germany, about July or August of 1962. - -Mr. JENNER. His middle name is Henry. Are you aware of that? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. No; I am not aware of that. - -Mr. JENNER. Where does he reside? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Well, he was in Dallas. I understand he has dropped from -sight. I don't know where he is now. - -Mr. JENNER. Was he residing in Dallas in the fall of 1963 when you were -there? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. When did you arrive in Dallas? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. In Dallas, on the 4th of November 1963. - -Mr. JENNER. And was Mr. Schmidt aware that you were about to come to -Dallas? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. And what was the purpose of your coming to Dallas? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I will be as brief as possible. It was simply to follow -through on plans that we had made in Germany, in order to develop a -conservative organization in Dallas, under our leadership. - -Mr. JENNER. Did that conservative organization, or your purpose in -going to Dallas, as well, have any business context in addition to -politics? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I would say 50 percent of the purpose was business and -the other 50 percent politics. We figured that only rich men can -indulge full time in politics, so first we had to make some money -before we could devote ourselves to the political end completely. - -Mr. JENNER. In short compass; would you tell the Commission your -background up to the time that you entered military service, and give -us the date of the entry of military service? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Do you mean as far as my schooling and where I lived -before then? Before I went into the service? - -Mr. JENNER. Let's take it from high school. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I graduated from Edison Technical High School in Mount -Vernon in June of 1956, went to work for the Nuclear Development Corp. -as an experimental machinist in July of that year and left them in -August of 1957. I then went on the road with my brother, Joe, and -his wife, working as demonstrators or pitchmen, you might say, in -department stores, selling some patent medicines and the like. Did this -for about--oh, that was from the 18th of November 1957 up until about -April or May of 1958. - -Mr. JENNER. Your brother Joe is a little bit older than you? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. He is 20 months older, yes. - -Mr. JENNER. And his given name is Joe, and not Joseph? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Joseph. Then--let's see--I went to work for the American -Schools of Music, which my brother founded in Jersey. - -Mr. JENNER. Which brother? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. My brother Joe--in New Jersey. And I stayed with him as -his sales manager for a little over a year. - -Then I went to work for Encyclopedia Americana, Harvard Classics -Division, as a district sales manager. I was with them about a -year--until 19--I believe it was September of 1960. - -I was starving, so I went to work for Underwood Olivetti, in Newark, -N.J., and I sold typewriters and calculators up until May of 1961, at -which time I quit, tried to go into business for myself in costume -jewelry, formed a corporation known as Jane Williams Co., Inc., and in -August of 1961, I was drafted into the Army. That was on August 5, 1961. - -Mr. JENNER. You were honorably discharged from the Army in August 1963? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. August 5; yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. What has been your father's occupation? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Well, for about 20 years he was plant superintendent for -University Loudspeakers in White Plains, N.Y. They moved to some place -out west. He quit and went back to work with Local 3 in New York City, -IBW. - -Mr. JENNER. Your father's name is Harry? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Harry Weissman; yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. Do you reside with him now at 439 South Columbus Avenue in -Mount Vernon? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. You were discharged from the Army honorably? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. You were married when, sir? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. November 7, 1958. - -Mr. JENNER. A New York girl? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yonkers, N.Y. - -Mr. JENNER. And you have some children? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. No. - -Mr. JENNER. You separated, as you have indicated. Now, would you start -from the Army? - -Before I get to that, you met Larrie Schmidt in the Army? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes; I did. - -Mr. JENNER. What other buddies did you have in the Army with whom you -again renewed your acquaintance when you were discharged from the Army -and went to Dallas? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Only one beside Larrie. That was Bill Burley. William -Burley. - -Mr. JENNER. What contact did you have with Mr. Larrie Schmidt and Mr. -Burley after you left the Army, which eventually brought you to Dallas? -State it in your own words and chronologically, please. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Well, I got out of service on the 5th, and I spent the -month of August looking for a job. During this time, I had been in -contact with Larrie. I had telephoned him once during August. Things -were pretty bad. I didn't have any money. As far as I could ascertain -he was broke himself. There wasn't any percentage in going to Dallas -and not accomplishing anything. As a matter of fact, I had lost a good -deal of confidence in Larrie in the year that he left Munich and was in -Dallas, and the letters I got from him--he seemed to have deviated from -our original plan. I wasn't too hot about going. He didn't seem to be -accomplishing anything, except where it benefited him. - -Mr. JENNER. You say he deviated from the original plan. What was the -original plan? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Well, the original plan was to stay away from various -organizations and societies that were, let's call them, radical, and -had a reputation as being such. - -Mr. JENNER. When you say radical, what do you mean? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I mean radical right. And I considered myself more of an -idealist than a politician. Larrie was more of a politician than an -idealist. He went with the wind--which is good for him, I guess, and -bad for me. - -In any case Larrie wrote me easily a dozen letters imploring me to come -down, telling me in one that he doesn't need me down there, but he -would love to have my help because he can't accomplish anything without -me, and in the next one saying, "Forget it, I don't need you," and so -forth. As the letters came, they went with the wind, depending on what -he was doing personally. And along about the end of October, I had been -in contact with Bill--he was in Baltimore, Md., selling hearing aids. -He wasn't getting anywhere. He was making a living. - -Mr. JENNER. Up to this point each of you was barely making a living? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Right. - -Mr. JENNER. And you had no capital? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. No. - -Mr. JENNER. No funds of your own? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. None at all. And I got in touch with Bill. Actually, I -forgot how it was. He wrote me a letter and I wrote him a letter. In -any case, it came about that I invited Bill up to Mount Vernon, because -he figured if there was any money to be made it would be made in New -York, because this is a salesman's paradise. I invited Bill to Mount -Vernon. He came up about the last week of August. - -I am sorry--October of 1963. And we set up about looking for work and -trying to find him work, that is--I was working for the Encyclopedia -Britannica, Great Books Division, as a district manager in Westchester -County. So I more or less supported Bill the best I could. I fed him -and gave him a room to sleep in and so forth. - -In the meantime, Larrie had up to a point--hadn't accomplished anything -in the way that we could use gainfully or to our purposes in Dallas. So -there was really no reason to go down there--up until about, I guess, -the 26th or 28th of October. - -Mr. JENNER. Excuse me. Why were you thinking of Dallas at this time? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Well, I kept getting these letters from Larrie. I tried -to forget about it, and he constantly reminded me. Once or twice a week -I would get a letter. And it was a question--I was almost obligated to -go, because I had promised I would be there. And still having somewhat -of a close relationship with Larrie, through my promises, I sort of -felt morally obligated to go down there. - -And, at the same time, it was new, different, exciting, it had a lot of -promise for the future if it worked out. - -So Adlai Stevenson was down there in the latter part of October. - -(At this point, Representative Boggs entered the hearing room.) - -Mr. WEISSMAN. And I didn't pay too much attention to this--until the -evening of Stevenson's speech at the Dallas Auditorium. And I got a -long distance telephone call from Larrie, and he explained what had -happened--that Stevenson had been struck by several individuals down -there. - -Mr. JENNER. Please call on your best recollection and tell us what he -said to you. You recall that he made that telephone call? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. You recognized his voice? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. You are clear it was Larrie Schmidt? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. That is right. - -Mr. JENNER. What did he say? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. He said that big things are happening, and he went--this -is before it hit the papers. He told me what had happened with Adlai -Stevenson. - -Mr. JENNER. What did he say? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Something like, "I think we are" he always speaks I this -and I that. "I have made it, I have done it for us," something to this -effect. In other words, this is not exactly his words. I don't recall -his exact words. But this is essentially it. And that---- - -Mr. JENNER. Did you say to him, "What do you mean you have made it for -us?" - -Mr. WEISSMAN. When he said, "I have made it for us," meaning Larrie -Schmidt--meaning me and Bill and whoever else was going to come down -here---- - -Mr. JENNER. That was---- - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Bill Burley. - -Mr. JENNER. What did you say when he made that remark? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I said "Great." - -Mr. JENNER. What did it mean to you, sir? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. What did it mean to me? - -Mr. JENNER. It is a generalization. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. That is it. In other words, I didn't really know what to -think. I had to go along with him, because I didn't know anything about -it, aside from what he told me. - -And he said, "If we are going to take advantage of the situation, or if -you are," meaning me, "you better hurry down here and take advantage -of the publicity, and at least become known among these various -rightwingers, because this is the chance we have been looking for to -infiltrate some of these organizations and become known," in other -words, go along with the philosophy we had developed in Munich. - -Mr. JENNER. Could I go back a little bit, please. You received a -telephone call from Mr. Schmidt. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. At that moment, you knew nothing about the Adlai Stevenson -incident, is that correct? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I had received a letter from him several weeks before -saying that--if you will wait just a minute, I think I might have the -letter with me. - -Mr. JENNER. All right. While you are looking, what was your rank when -you were discharged? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Pfc. - -Mr. JENNER. Did you reach any higher rank when you were in the service? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. No; this is a letter I received on October 1, 1963. - -Mr. JENNER. For purposes of identification, we will mark that as -Commission Exhibit No. 1033. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 1033 for -identification.) - -Mr. JENNER. May I approach the witness, Mr. Chief Justice? - -The CHAIRMAN. Yes; go right ahead. - -Mr. JENNER. That is marked only for identification for the moment. - -Mr. FLANNERY. The record will reflect it is a three-page letter. - -Mr. JENNER. Thank you. - -Marked Commission Exhibit No. 1033, is that not correct? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes; that is correct. Now, in Exhibit No. 1033, the -letter I received from Larrie on October 1--that was typed on October -1, 1963, and mailed on 7 October 1963. - -Mr. JENNER. You are looking at the envelope in which the letter was -enclosed when you received it? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. That is correct. And he states in the last paragraph of -his letter in a postscript, "My brother has begun working as an aide -to General Walker. He is being paid full time, et cetera. Watch your -newspaper for news of huge demonstrations here in Dallas on October -3 and 4 in connection with U.N.-day and Adlai Stevenson speech here. -Plans already made, strategy being carried out." - -This was the only advance notice I had of this. And I didn't give it -too much thought, because he had said many things like it before, just -to build something up, and nothing ever came of it. - -Mr. JENNER. Is that document signed? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. No; it is not. - -Mr. JENNER. Does it bear a typed signature? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. Did you have occasion to speak with Mr. Schmidt respecting -the contents of that letter at any time subsequent to your receiving it? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I don't recall. - -Mr. JENNER. Did you ever talk with him about having received that -particular letter, that he acknowledged having sent to you? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes; as a matter of fact, I was pretty worried about his -brother becoming involved with General Walker, and I thought it might -give us a black eye. - -Mr. JENNER. And what did you do--call Mr. Schmidt or talk with him on -that subject? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I don't recall if I spoke with him, or if I wrote it to -him in a letter. I don't recall. - -Mr. JENNER. But you had occasion to confirm the fact that the letter -now identified as Commission Exhibit No. 1033 was written by Mr. -Schmidt and mailed to you in an envelope, which we will mark as -Commission Exhibit No. 1033-A? - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 1033-A for -identification.) - -Mr. JENNER. Did you hear my question? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Repeat it, please. - -(The question, as recorded, was read by the reporter.) - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. So that when you had your telephone conversation which you -were in the course of relating, with Mr. Schmidt, you were aware when -he made the exclamation which you have described, of that to which he -was then referring--that is, the Stevenson incident? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. Was there anything else in Mr. Schmidt's letter that -disturbed you? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I received so many. - -Would it be permissible to--excuse me. - -Mr. Jenner, would it be permissible to read this letter into the record? - -Mr. JENNER. My trouble is, Mr. Weissman, and Mr. Flannery--I haven't -seen the letter. - -Mr. Chief Justice---- - -The CHAIRMAN. I suppose Mr. Jenner could see the letter for a moment, -couldn't he? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Definitely; yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. Mr. Flannery, would you be good enough to pass it up? - -(At this point, Representative Ford withdrew from the hearing room.) - -Mr. WEISSMAN. You see, up to the point of that letter--excuse me. - -Mr. JENNER. Mr. Chief Justice, it is quite apparent to me, from -glancing through the letter, that this is a letter that we--in -connection with Mr. Weissman's testimony, that we would like to offer -in evidence in due course. - -And, with that in mind, Mr. Weissman, it will not be necessary for -you to read paragraphs from the letter, unless in the course of your -testimony you feel it will round out your testimony and serve to -refresh your recollection as to events you might wish to relate. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I would like to take a look at it now. - -(At this point, Representative Ford reentered the hearing room.) - -Mr. JENNER. Ready? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. Mr. Reporter, would you be good enough to read, let us say, -the last question and answer of the witness? - -(The question and answer, as recorded, was read by the reporter.) - -Mr. JENNER. The point I was making, Mr. Weissman, was that when you -received the telephone call about which you were testifying, in which -Mr. Schmidt exclaimed, "I have made it for us," or words to that -effect, you were then aware of that to which he was referring, at least -in general? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. So that was the reason why you didn't ask him to elaborate -upon what he meant by, "I have made it for us"? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Right. That is right. - -Mr. JENNER. And that was the fact that he, as you understood it, am I -correct in saying, had had something to do with the organization of the -picketing or other demonstrations at the time that Mr. Stevenson made -his visit to Dallas? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Well, at the time I was almost--Larrie led me to believe -that he had organized the whole thing. And it transpired when I got to -Dallas that I found that he had led a group of 11 University of Dallas -students in quiet picketing near the entrance to the auditorium, and -didn't engage in any physical violence of any sort. - -Mr. JENNER. But up to the time that you arrived in Dallas, you were -under the impression that he had had a more extensive part? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. This is what he led me to believe. In other words, he -was trying to--he wanted to get me to Dallas in the worst way. And he -wanted it to look like he was on the hot seat and he would be there -unless I came down to help him. In other words, he is throwing my -obligation at me. And trying to convince me in various ways, as I -mentioned, to come down there, so we can get moving on what we had -planned in Munich. - -Mr. JENNER. Did you receive a letter from him dated October 29, 1963, -a copy of which I have marked as Commission Exhibit No. 1032, and I -tender to you. You may have the original among your papers. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 1032 for -identification.) - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes; I did receive this letter, Exhibit No. 1032, from -Larrie, about the 29th of October. - -Mr. JENNER. And, gentlemen of the Commission, this is a letter dated, -as the witness has stated--it is addressed to, "Dear Bernie and Bill," -and I assume Bill is---- - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Bill Burley. - -Mr. JENNER. He was then staying with you in New York? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Right. - -Mr. JENNER. And it is signed Larrie. By the way, do you have the -original of this letter with you? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I don't think so. Let me see. No; as a matter of fact, -I believe the situation was when I gave the letter to the FBI, they -asked me if I needed it back right away, and I said no--I didn't see -any value in it, frankly. And then I spoke with Mr. Reedy, the agent -who had conducted the investigation at the FBI headquarters in New -York, and he said, "Do you want the letter?" And I said, "I don't -particularly need it," and I don't recall if I ever got it back. - -Mr. JENNER. All right. But the document which has been marked with an -exhibit number is a true and correct copy of the letter you received -from Larrie Schmidt? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. It seems to be; yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. Now, in that letter, there is a reference to CUSA in -capital letters. What is CUSA, what was CUSA? What was its genesis? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Well, CUSA, the letters stand for Conservatism USA, for -lack of a better name. Larrie had originally founded this himself--as -far as I know he had originally founded this himself in Munich some -time in 1961. - -Mr. JENNER. You mean it was a concept of his? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I don't know if it was his. But I was led to believe the -concept was his; and when I became associated with him, almost a year -after he had started to develop this organization---- - -Mr. JENNER. And while you were still in the Army? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. While I was still in the Army; right. - -Representative BOGGS. What was your rank in the Army? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Private, first class. - -Representative BOGGS. That is when you completed your service? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes; at the time I was pfc, also. - -Representative BOGGS. How long were you in the Army? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Two years. - -Representative BOGGS. When you were separated you were private, first -class? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. That is right. Here is how it came about. I had been in -the field on an Army training test. And I had been discussing just -political views, foreign policy especially. - -Mr. DULLES. Is this Germany, now? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes; this is Germany. - -Mr. JENNER. Who was the overall commander in Germany at that time? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. The overall commander? - -Mr. JENNER. Was General Walker one of the commanders at that time? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. No; he had been removed at that time. In any case, he -would have been about 60 or 70 miles--he was based in Landshut, Germany. - -In any case, I was on this army training test with my company, MP -Company, and I was talking to the company clerk--he had a book. We just -got onto a discussion of politics, just generally. And I expounded some -views on foreign policy, and where I agreed or disagreed. And I went -into some great detail. And he said, "Gee, if I didn't know better I -would say it is Larrie speaking." - -And I said, "What do you mean?" - -And he went into this CUSA organization. He was at that time a partner -in CUSA. It was set up as a business. - -Representative BOGGS. What does CUSA mean? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Conservatism USA. - -Representative BOGGS. What was Mr. Schmidt's rank? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. He was specialist fourth class, SP-4, and he was in -charge of public relations for Armed Forces Recreation Centers. - -Mr. JENNER. How old a man is he? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Larrie is 26 or 27. - -Mr. JENNER. About the same age as yours? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. And Mr. Burley? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Twenty-nine now, I believe. - -Mr. JENNER. A little older--about 2 years older than you and Mr. -Schmidt. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. In there. A year and a half, 2 years, yes. - -Mr. JENNER. Excuse me. What was his rank? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Corporal. At the time that I met Bill he was a pfc. In -fact, Bill Burley didn't become really involved in this until, I would -say, 2 or 3 months before we left Germany. We left there about the -same time, we were discharged about the same time; and, anyway, I was -talking to the company clerk, Norman Baker, who was a partner in CUSA. -I didn't know this at the time; but he just said he wanted to introduce -me to somebody. - -Mr. JENNER. What was the rank of the company clerk? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. At that time--I think he was the only corporal company -clerk in the army. And he introduced me to Larrie several weeks later -after we had returned from the field. - -They tried to pull a big snow job, saying public relations and so on -and so forth, just to sort of impress me, and they did. They worked -very well together; and, in any case, I became involved in it. - -I don't recollect the step-by-step involvement--just that I jumped in -with both feet, because I liked the idea. - -Mr. JENNER. This was Conservatism USA, and it consisted of an idea at -this particular time? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Right. - -Mr. JENNER. And associated with that idea were these people, Larrie -Schmidt, yourself, was Burley---- - -Mr. WEISSMAN. At that time, I don't think so. - -Mr. JENNER. But he did become? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Later. - -Mr. JENNER. And the company clerk--what was his name? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Norman Baker. - -Mr. JENNER. And yourself--what was that--five? Were there any others? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. There were others, but it was the sort of thing where -they were involved but not involved. They were just sort of going along -for the ride, because it was interesting, and you might say a little -diverse from the humdrum army life. - -Mr. JENNER. Was CUSA ever organized formally in the sense of corporate -organization or drafting of partnership papers and registration under -the Assumed Name Act in Texas? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. In Texas; no. - -Mr. JENNER. I take it it was organized? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes; it was. - -Mr. JENNER. As a corporation or partnership? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. As a partnership. - -Mr. JENNER. In what state? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. In Munich, Germany. - -Mr. JENNER. I see. And that was a sort of declaration among you? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. It was a written declaration; yes. - -Mr. JENNER. Who drafted that? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. We did--that is, we called ourselves--the hangers-on were -identified as the outer circle, and the partners were the inner circle. -This was just for ease of identification. This, I think, would be the -easiest way to really express it. - -And the partners, the five partners, were the inner circle, the leaders -of this organization; and---- - -The CHAIRMAN. Gentlemen, may I interrupt for just a minute? I have an -appointment I must keep at the court. - -Congressman Ford, will you preside, please? - -Representative FORD. Surely. - -(At this point, Chief Justice Warren withdrew from the hearing room.) - -Representative FORD. Will you proceed, please, Mr. Jenner. - -Mr. JENNER. Thank you. In short compass, tell us the objectives of CUSA. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Well, the objectives of CUSA were substantially to set -up a political business organization. We used a rough comparison with -Ford and the Ford Foundation as an example. The Ford Foundation would -be CUSA, Conservatism USA, and the Ford would be AMBUS, or American -business. - -Mr. JENNER. What was AMBUS? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. American business. This was the business half of the -political organization. - -Mr. JENNER. This was to be a combination of business and politics? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Right. We were going to use the business end---- - -Mr. JENNER. Which you called AMBUS? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. That is right. - -Mr. JENNER. That would be---- - -Mr. WEISSMAN. American business, or American businesses. - -Mr. JENNER. I don't get the initials. A-B-U-S? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. A-M-B-U-S--American business. - -Mr. JENNER. All right. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. And we were trying to develop, in our own minds, without -actually doing it at the time, ways to build up various businesses that -would support us and at the same time support our political activities. - -Mr. JENNER. All right. Could I characterize it this way--that a -material objective of this group or partnership was ultimately a -self-interest in business? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. No. - -Mr. JENNER. Coupled with a political arm which was to aid or assist in -the business, and each was to feed the other? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. The business arm was to be developed mainly to feed the -political arm. - -(At this point, Representative Ford withdrew from the hearing room.) - -Mr. WEISSMAN. We were mainly interested in the political end. At least -this is my feeling on it. Mainly interested in the political end. And -the business end, while, of course, we hoped it would succeed, in my -mind was merely to support us politically. - -(At this point, Representative Ford reentered the hearing room.) - -Mr. JENNER. All right. Now, as of this moment, Mr. Weissman, there -were the five of you only. There were no others who were part of the -combination business-political group? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. We left out one man, one of the original men. His name -was James Moseley. - -Mr. JENNER. Was he a GI with you? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. No; he was an American civilian. His father was a -major--is a major in the Army. - -Mr. JENNER. And was he an acquaintance of yours? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. Prior to this time? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Not prior to this. I met him when I went into the -organization. - -Mr. JENNER. I see. Was he an acquaintance of Mr. Schmidt's? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. How did he get in, is what I am getting at? How did he get -into this little group here? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. They all hung around the same bar. - -Mr. JENNER. What bar? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. The Gastatte Lukullus. - -Representative BOGGS. How far was that from the bar where Hitler used -to gather? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. A couple of miles, I think. - -Mr. JENNER. It is a bar in Munich? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes. It is a GI guest house. - -Mr. JENNER. This man you have now mentioned, Moseley, was a civilian in -Germany? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. He was a civilian; yes. - -Mr. JENNER. How did he come to be in Munich? Was his father stationed -there? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. His father was stationed there. But he was also employed -by Rambler--he was selling Ramblers. - -Mr. JENNER. What is Mr. Moseley's hometown? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. What is Mr. Mosley's hometown? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I believe it is New York. I am not sure. - -Mr. JENNER. How old a man is he? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. He is a pretty young fellow. He is about 21. - -Mr. JENNER. Now, have you named all of you who were the nucleus of this -group? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. To my recollection, yes. - -Mr. JENNER. Had you finished your statement as to the general--the -general statement as to the purpose of this organization which -consisted of the two arms? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Not completely. I think what might bear directly is we -had planned while in Munich that in order to accomplish our goals, to -try to do it from scratch would be almost impossible, because it would -be years before we could even get the funds to develop a powerful -organization. So we had planned to infiltrate various rightwing -organizations and by our own efforts become involved in the hierarchy -of these various organizations and eventually get ourselves elected -or appointed to various higher offices in these organizations, and by -doing this bring in some of our own people, and eventually take over -the leadership of these organizations, and at that time having our -people in these various organizations, we would then, you might say, -call a conference and have them unite, and while no one knew of the -existence of CUSA aside from us, we would then bring them all together, -unite them, and arrange to have it called CUSA. - -Mr. JENNER. You never accomplished this, did you? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Almost. Here is how far we did get. - -Larrie had--and this was according to plan--the first organization we -planned to infiltrate was the NIC, National Indignation Convention, -headed by Frank McGee in Dallas. About a week or so after Larrie got to -Dallas he got himself a job with the NIC, as one of the very few paid -men. - -This didn't last too long, because a few weeks after that the NIC went -under. And we had also--in other words, we had planned to use these -organizations as vehicles to accomplish---- - -Mr. JENNER. Keep going on those details of your infiltration. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. All right. We had planned to infiltrate these various -rightwing organizations. - -Mr. JENNER. You mentioned one. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. The NIC. The Young Americans for Freedom. We succeeded -there. - -Mr JENNER. What organization is that? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. The Young Americans for Freedom? This was an organization -essentially of conservative youths, college students, and if I recall -I think the most they ever accomplished was running around burning -baskets from Yugoslavia. - -Mr. JENNER. Where was it based? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. This is southwest. Regional headquarters was in Dallas, -Tex., Box 2364. - -Mr. JENNER. And the earlier organization, the organization you -mentioned a moment ago, NIC--where was that based? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Dallas. - -Mr. JENNER. All right. What is the next one? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. We had also discussed getting some people in with General -Walker, getting some people into the John Birch Society. - -Mr. JENNER. Stick with General Walker for a moment. To what extent were -you able to infiltrate, as you call it, General Walker's group? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Well, this was rather a fiasco. Larrie's brother, as I -mentioned in the letter--Larrie's brother went to work for General -Walker. - -Mr. JENNER. What was his name? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I don't know his first name. But Larrie led me to believe -his brother was some guy. His brother is about 29. And the only -thing I ever heard from Larrie about his brother was good; and when -he mentioned that his brother had joined the Walker organization, I -figured this is another step in the right direction. In other words, he -was solidifying his argument as to why I should come to Dallas. - -Mr. JENNER. And this is what he told you? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Right. So when I got to Dallas, I found that Larrie's -brother drank too much, and he had--well, I considered him a moron. He -didn't have any sense at all. He was very happy with $35 a week and -room and board that General Walker was giving him as his chauffeur and -general aide. And so I tossed that out the window that we would never -get into the Walker organization this way. - -Mr. JENNER. This man's name, by any chance, was not Volkmar? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. This name is entirely unfamiliar to me. Never heard it -before. - -Senator COOPER. Could you identify the Walker organization? You keep -speaking of the Walker organization. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. General Edwin Walker. - -Mr. JENNER. General Edwin A. Walker? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. Did you ever meet him? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. No; I never have. - -Representative FORD. How did you infiltrate the Young Americans for -Freedom, and what led you to believe you had been successful? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Well, Larrie had been named executive secretary of -the Dallas chapter of the Young Americans for Freedom. And another -man--his name is in one of these letters somewhere--I don't recall it -offhand--who was brought into CUSA by Larrie, was named chairman or -vice chairman--vice chairman. And the only other move that we had to -make in order to take control of Dallas Young Americans for Freedom -would have been to get rid of the chairman, who was anti-Larrie -Schmidt. He was absolutely no help to us. And this was on its way to -accomplishment. But for some reason or another, there was some sort of -an argument. I am still not clear on what happened. I wasn't there. I -just can take it secondhand from Larrie. - -A friend of Larrie's had come to Dallas--this was Larry Jones, another -partner in---- - -Mr. JENNER. He is mentioned in some of these interviews. Did you meet -Larry Jones? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I didn't meet him in Dallas; no. He was gone before I -got there. But Larry had come to Dallas, he had stayed a few weeks, -had made friends with these people, and I had advocated many and many -a time--I saw through Larry the first time I met him--is to get rid of -this guy, because he was not going to do us any good. - -Mr. JENNER. You did meet Jones? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. In the Army; yes. - -Mr. JENNER. You met Larry Jones in the Army? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes. We were all on the same post. - -Mr. JENNER. Mr. Chairman, if you will permit, I would like to go back -to that at this moment. - -Representative FORD. Surely. - -Mr. JENNER. This was another man. You hadn't mentioned him before. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I didn't? I thought I did. - -Mr. JENNER. What rank was he? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. SP-4, Specialist-4. - -Mr. JENNER. That wasn't the company clerk? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. No. Larry worked for headquarters. He was in -communications--the scramblers and so forth. - -Mr. JENNER. Seeking to scramble broadcasts? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. No. In other words, they would send out the secret -messages and so forth from commander to commander and so on. - -Mr. DULLES. These were military messages? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. How old a man was Larry Jones? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Larry--he looked 30. I think he is 21. - -Mr. JENNER. Do you have the charter or partnership agreement of CUSA -with you? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes; I do. - -Mr. JENNER. I wonder if I could see that. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Sure. - -Mr. JENNER. Mr. Chairman; the document consists of two pages -which have been identified as Commission Exhibit No. 1034. It is -entitled "Corporate Structure of American Business, Inc.," naming as -incorporators or partners, Larrie H. Schmidt, Larry C. Jones, Bernie -Weissman, James L. Moseley, Norman F. Baker. It purports to be signed -in those names as well on the second page. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 1034 for -identification.) - -Mr. JENNER. I notice on the first page that after each of those names -there appear to be some initials. Are those the initials of those -respective men? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. That is right. - -Mr. JENNER. And were those initials placed on there in your presence? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes; they were. - -Mr. JENNER. The signatures that appear under each of those names or -above each of those names on the second page, those are the signatures -of those men, including your own? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. That is right. - -Mr. JENNER. Were they placed on there in your presence? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes, they were. - -Representative FORD. Do you want that admitted at this time, Mr. Jenner? - -Mr. JENNER. I was going to offer these documents in sequence, if it -suits the convenience of the Chairman. If we may return now, Mr. -Weissman, please, to your efforts to infiltrate various conservative -groups---- - -Senator COOPER. May I ask a question there? I may have to leave in a -few minutes. Was there any time when your organization drew up a list -of organizations, of other organizations, that it wanted to infiltrate? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. Do you have that list with you? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I don't know. I have lost an awful lot of it. I might. - -Mr. JENNER. Would you look, please? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. No; I don't have it. - -Senator COOPER. May I ask, then--can he name from memory the -organizations? - -Mr. JENNER. Using your recollection, sir, and it appears to be very -good, if I may compliment you---- - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Thank you. - -Mr. JENNER. Would you do your best to respond to Senator Cooper's -question by naming those various groups? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes. One was the NIC. - -Mr. JENNER. When you use initials, will you spell out what the initials -mean? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. National Indignation Convention, headed by Frank McGee, -in Dallas, Tex. - -Young Americans for Freedom, which encompassed the southwest. The -initials are YAF. - -Mr. JENNER. Located in Dallas? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Regional headquarters in Dallas. John Birch Society. - -Mr. JENNER. Where was the John Birch--was there a chapter or -headquarters in Dallas? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. There are several chapters in Dallas; yes. And as far as -I can recollect, that is as far as we went. - -Representative BOGGS. What did you hope to accomplish by this -infiltration, as you call it? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Well, I will be very blunt. - -Representative BOGGS. That is what I would like for you to be. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. We were, you might say--at least I personally--this is -my reason--I was sick and tired of seeing America as a weak sister -all the time. And this is especially in the field of foreign affairs, -where it seemed that our administration, whether it is the Eisenhower -or the Kennedy administration, both of them, had no set, stable foreign -policy. We were constantly losing ground all over the world. We were -going to conference tables with everything to lose and nothing to gain, -and coming away by losing. - -And we hoped by developing a powerful political organization we could -exert some influence on the government and eventually even put, you -might say, our man in the White House, let's say, in order to obtain a -stable policy--because we felt that the Communists were gaining ground -all over the place, we were doing nothing but losing. - -Representative BOGGS. Did you have a candidate for the Presidency? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Excuse me? - -Representative BOGGS. Did you have a candidate--you said your man. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I wouldn't say we had a candidate. We had looked to -Barry Goldwater as personifying Mr. Conservative. And we had stated in -writing, though, that we would support him for the Presidency, but we -were not obligated to support him or any other individual. - -Representative BOGGS. Are you still in this business? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. No. - -Representative BOGGS. What are you doing now? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I am a salesman, I sell carpets. - -Representative BOGGS. You have given up this goal? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Well, if I had money I didn't know what to do with, I -would get back into it--only I would do it myself, because I found that -in order to accomplish these aims--I mentioned before I considered -myself an idealist. I found in order to accomplish these goals I had to -against my will prostitute my ideals in order to further the general -cause of the organization. - -Representative BOGGS. What ideals did you find you had to prostitute? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I personally didn't want to associate with the John Birch -Society. - -Representative BOGGS. You did not want to? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. No; I did not. - -Representative BOGGS. Why didn't you? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Well; they are rather extreme, I thought. I didn't like -some of the things they were doing. For example, I didn't want to spend -my days and nights sneaking into bathrooms around the country, pasting -up "Impeach Earl Warren" stickers. - -Representative BOGGS. Is that what they do? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. This is part of their program. And I can't see any use in -it, frankly. In other words, it is just little things like this. Plus -the fact that after I got to Dallas, I found that most of the people -who are professing anti-communism, they were, they were definitely -anti-Communists. But, at the same time, it seemed to me to be nothing -but a conglomeration of racists, and bigots and so forth. - -Representative BOGGS. What do you mean by that--bigots? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. They are anti-everything, it seems. - -Representative BOGGS. Are you Jewish? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes; I am. - -Representative BOGGS. Were they anti-Jewish? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Too many of them, yes. It was requested at one time that -I change my name. - -Representative BOGGS. Is that right? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. That is right. - -Representative BOGGS. What did you tell them? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Excuse me? - -Representative BOGGS. What did you tell them? Did you change your name? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. No, sir. - -Representative BOGGS. Well, did you find this request unusual? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes; I did, as a matter of fact, I got pretty mad. - -Representative BOGGS. When you were in Germany, did you find sometimes, -particularly in Munich, as long as you opened this line of replies, -that some of the Nazi-alleged anticommunism was also associated with -their racist policies? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. In what vein are you using Nazi? - -Representative BOGGS. Well, of course, you know they exterminated quite -a few members of your religion in Germany. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes. - -Representative BOGGS. That is a fact; is it not? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes; it is. - -Representative BOGGS. I am using Nazi in the normal term of state -dictatorship, with all that it implies. I am sure you have worked on -foreign policy, you understand what I mean. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I think you are giving me a little too much credit. But I -think I can answer your question. - -Representative BOGGS. I would like for you to. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. At no time did I, and to my knowledge, in Germany, did we -consider ourselves fascists or Nazis. As a matter of fact, in my every -conversation, and everything I had written---- - -Representative BOGGS. I didn't ask you whether you had considered -yourself as a fascist---- - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Or any of my associates, sir. - -Representative BOGGS. Or any of your associates. I asked you if in -your study of events in Germany, having been stationed there, that you -didn't soon associate, or that you didn't see some association in your -mind of the alleged so-called extreme right with naziism. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. No. In fact, I never thought--I thought of the extremists -as superpatriots. I had never really defined the term fascist or Nazi -in my own mind---- - -Representative BOGGS. Of course, you realize that members of your -religion in Germany were described as traitors, treasonable, and -Communists. And I presume that on the other side of the coin those -making the accusation classified themselves as superpatriots. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. This is quite true. But you are getting into a field -right now that at the time---- - -Representative BOGGS. Were you surprised when you discovered this -anti-Jewish feeling? You must have been somewhat, shall I say, -disappointed when one of your associates asked you to change your name. -I would think that was right insulting. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. It was downright insulting, as a matter of fact. No, I -wasn't surprised. Now---- - -Mr. DULLES. Did you have something on this in your letter? I noticed -you looking through that letter a minute ago. I thought maybe you had -something on this very point in your letter. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes. I received a letter from Larrie, while I was in -Germany. - -Mr. JENNER. Is this another document to which no reference has been -made? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I am not sure whether this is the one I want to read -from. But this letter is an answer that I wrote Larrie. - -Mr. JENNER. Excuse me, sir. I want to put an exhibit number on that. - -This will be exhibit--Commission Exhibit No. 1035. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 1035 for -identification.) - -Representative BOGGS. I would like for a moment to pursue this a -bit. This gentleman is telling us something that I think is very -significant. You have a letter there about changing your name? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. This is my answer. I would like to read just this one -paragraph. - -Representative BOGGS. Who was this addressed to? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. This was addressed to Larrie Schmidt. - -Representative BOGGS. Did he ask you to change your name? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes. - -Representative BOGGS. He was your associate? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. He didn't ask me directly. He had written a letter to -Larry Jones, and Larry Jones gave me the letter. - -Mr. JENNER. Where was Larry Jones at this time? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. In Germany. - -Mr. JENNER. You are now reading from Commission Exhibit No.---- - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Exhibit No. 1035. This is dated Munich, Germany, January -7, 1963. - -(At this point, Senator Cooper withdrew from the hearing room.) - -Mr. JENNER. It is addressed to whom? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Larrie Schmidt. - -Mr. JENNER. And I take it it is your letter to Larrie Schmidt. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. Did you dispatch the letter? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes; I did. - -Mr. JENNER. And is that a true and correct copy of the original that -you did dispatch to Larrie Schmidt? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Erasures and all; yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. And did you become aware of the fact subsequently to your -mailing that letter that he received it? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. You had occasion to discuss it with him? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. He sent me a letter. - -Mr. JENNER. He responded? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes; he did. - -Mr. JENNER. All right. Do you have his response? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I don't know. I have his response. I don't know if it is -with me. - -Representative BOGGS. Let's first have what he said. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Paragraph 2 on the second page, "Larrie, as relates to -the political goals of CUSA and the methods of achieving them, I (not -alone)"--meaning Bill Burley--"do not wholly support your ideas as -concerning the NIC and related or affiliated organizations. It seems to -us that this type of organization smacks of hypocrisy. I feel that any -type of organization that we choose to support or begin to take support -from should be free from the racism and prejudice in general that -is rampant among the high officers of the NIC. It should be obvious -to you that once we associate ourselves with these people, we may -acquire a personal reputation that can never be lived down. I am sure -you have considered this yourself, because I remember we had talked -of it several times. Larrie, let me remind you that my zeal has not -slackened, but that I did not want to compromise myself or my ideals -for the sake of accomplishing our goals a year ahead of time. I know -and you know that we can do a fantastic job once we get together again -with or without these organizations." - -Representative BOGGS. What do you say about your name, though? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. About my name? - -Representative BOGGS. Yes. Changing your name. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I didn't refer to it directly. In other words, in the -letter I received from Larrie, he said--he mentioned that the NIC, the -leadership, Frank McGee, was anti-Jewish, and it might be best if I -changed my name in order to bring myself down to where I can associate -with these people. - -(At this point, Senator Cooper reentered the hearing room.) - -Representative BOGGS. Do you have a copy of that letter? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Let me take a look here. With your permission, I would -like to read into the record a paragraph---- - -Mr. JENNER. To what are you referring now, sir? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. This is a letter sent by Larrie Schmidt to Larry Jones. - -Mr. JENNER. And it is in longhand, is it? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes; it is. - -Mr. JENNER. And do you recognize the handwriting? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. It is Larrie's. - -Mr. JENNER. It consists of seven pages, which we will mark Commission -Exhibit No. 1036. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 1036 for -identification.) - -Mr. JENNER. Before you read from the letter, how did you come into -possession of the letter? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Larry Jones gave it to me. - -Mr. JENNER. Over in Germany? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Over in Germany; yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. And the envelope which I now have in my hand, from which -you extracted the letter, is postmarked Dallas, Tex., November 5. - -Representative BOGGS. What year? - -Mr. JENNER. 1962. Is that the envelope in which the letter, Commission -Exhibit No. 1036, was received by Mr. Jones? I notice the letter is -addressed to Mr. Jones, SP-4 Larry Jones. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. We will mark that as Commission Exhibit No. 1036-A--that -is, the envelope. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 1036-A for -identification.) - -Mr. WEISSMAN. On the third page, last paragraph, he has marked "One -bad thing, though. Frank gives me the impression of being rather -anti-Semetic. He is Catholic. Suggest Bernie convert to Christianity, -and I mean it." - -"We must all return to church. These people here are religious bugs. -Also no liberal talk whatsoever--none." Larrie had a flare for the -dramatic. - -Mr. DULLES. When he mentions "these people" who does he mean? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. The NIC. And at this point I was ready to drop out of -the organization completely, but thought better of it, because I am a -perennial optimist. I felt once I got down there--it is like changing -your wife after you marry her. You figure everything will work out. - -Representative FORD. This CUSA organization in Munich--did it have any -local Munich affiliation at all? I mean German affiliation? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. No; none whatsoever. Strictly an American proposition. - -Representative FORD. All among GI's, with the one exception of---- - -Mr. WEISSMAN. GI's or, one or two hangers-on, American civilians over -there. - -Senator COOPER. May I ask a question, Mr. Chairman? - -You stated at one point in your testimony that you did not care to -become associated with some of the organizations you had discussed. You -named the John Birch--you thought it was too extreme. Yet you stated -earlier that it was your intention to infiltrate these organizations. -How do you explain this inconsistency? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. It is difficult to explain. The situation being as fluid -as it was--you find that without anything solid to go on, you have got -to change your stand a little bit in order to just get started. - -Senator COOPER. Let me ask you something else. You said that you all -had thought that to be able to fully pursue your political objectives, -you needed to have a certain financial independence, is that correct? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes. - -Senator COOPER. Did you intend to get some financial support from these -organizations, in addition to political support? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. No; not directly. We felt that after we had accomplished -our goal--this is assuming we would accomplish our goal--any treasury -that they had through membership dues or what-have-you would then be a -common treasury, a CUSA treasury. - -Senator COOPER. You had the idea that you could infiltrate and get -control of these organizations, then you would have a source of revenue -through their treasury, or through whatever treasury you were able to -build up? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes. - -Senator COOPER. Did you think, also, in terms of contributions to these -organizations from individuals? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. It had been discussed--never very completely. It had just -been brought up. But we didn't know exactly what we were going to do, -really. - -Senator COOPER. Was there any discussion about the support of these -organizations--about the financial support of these organizations, -that they might be a source of funds? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. You mean from individuals who would contribute? - -Senator COOPER. Yes. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes. - -Senator COOPER. Was there any discussions as to what individuals were -supporting these organizations? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Just those that we had occasionally read about in Life or -Look or Time--people like Hunt, H. L. Hunt. - -Mr. JENNER. Of Dallas, Tex.? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Of Dallas, Tex.--the oilman. In other words, people -who are known to be conservative, sympathized with the conservative -philosophy. And we didn't know at the time--in fact, I still don't know -personally whether or not they do contribute. I just know it is said -they do. But whether they do or not, I have no idea. - -Representative BOGGS. It has been established, I presume, who paid for -this newspaper advertisement. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Well, this is something else. I am still not sure of who -paid for it. - -Mr. JENNER. The newspaper advertisement is Commission Exhibit No. 1031. - -Representative BOGGS. Did you bring the money in to pay for it? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes; I did. - -Representative BOGGS. Do you know where you got it? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I know where I got it. But I don't know where he got it -from. I got it from Joe Grinnan. - -Mr. JENNER. Joseph P. Grinnan, Room 811, Wilson Building, Dallas, Tex., -independent oil operator in Dallas. - -Representative BOGGS. How did you happen to get it from him? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Well, Joe was the volunteer coordinator for the John -Birch Society. - -Representative BOGGS. And how did he hand it to you--in a check or cash? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. In cash. - -Representative BOGGS. How much was it? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. It was a total of $1,462, I believe. We had 10 $100 bills -one day, and the balance the following day. Now, as far as I know, Joe -didn't put any of this money up personally, because I know it took him -2 days to collect it. - -Representative BOGGS. Do you think you know where he got it from? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I don't know. I really don't know. - -Representative BOGGS. He didn't tell you where he got it from? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. No; he didn't. - -Representative BOGGS. But you are convinced in your own mind that it -wasn't his money? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes; because he seemed to be--he didn't seem to be too -solvent. - -Representative BOGGS. Did you solicit him for this money? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. No; I didn't. - -Representative BOGGS. Who did? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I believe--well, I believe Larrie did. I think the idea -for the ad originated with Larrie and Joe. - -Representative BOGGS. And Larrie solicited the money? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. No; I don't think so. I think it was Joe who originally -broached the subject. - -Representative BOGGS. How did you happen to end up with the money? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. This was an expression of confidence, you might say, that -Joe Grinnan had in me. - -Representative BOGGS. Did you write the copy? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I helped. - -Representative BOGGS. Who else? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Larrie. - -Representative BOGGS. So Joe Grinnan gave you the money, and you and -Larrie wrote the copy? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. We wrote the copy before that. - -Representative BOGGS. And then you paid for it. What was this -committee? Are you the chairman of that committee? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Well, this is an ad hoc committee. I think we finally -thought of the name--as a matter of fact, we decided on it the same -morning I went down to place the original proof of the ad. - -Representative BOGGS. What do you mean an ad hoc committee? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. It was formed strictly for the purpose of having a name -to put in the paper. - -Representative BOGGS. Did you have many of these ad hoc committees? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. This is the only one that I was involved in; that I know -of. - -Representative BOGGS. Were there others? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Not that I know of. - -Representative BOGGS. Did you ever ask Joe where this money came from? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. No; Joe was pretty secretive. I frankly didn't want to -know. I was interested, but not that interested. And it didn't--it -would have been a breach of etiquette to start questioning him, it -seemed. - -Representative BOGGS. Have you ever heard of H. R. Bright, independent -oil operator? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. No. - -Representative BOGGS. Did you ever hear of Edgar Crissey? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. No. - -Representative BOGGS. Did you ever hear of Nelson Bunker Hunt? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes; that is H. L. Hunt's son. I knew that he had gotten -it from three or four different people, because he told me he had to -get $300 here and $400 there, but he did not say where. - -Mr. JENNER. The "he" is Mr. Grinnan? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Grinnan; right. - -Representative BOGGS. That is all, Mr. Chairman. - -Mr. DULLES. Did you suggest that this advertisement had been drafted -before he collected the money? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes. - -Mr. DULLES. And you used this advertisement as the basis for the -collection of the money, or was it used for this purpose, as far as you -know? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. As far as I know; yes. - -(At this point, Representative Boggs withdrew from the hearing room.) - -Mr. WEISSMAN. May I see the ad for a moment? There are a few things I -would like to point out in this. - -Mr. JENNER. Give the exhibit number, please. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. It is Exhibit No. 1031. - -Mr. JENNER. Tell us the genesis of the advertisement, the black border, -the context, the text, the part which Mr. Grinnan played, you played, -and Mr. Schmidt played in drafting it, how it came about, what you did, -in your own words. How the idea arose in the first place--and then just -go forward. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Well, after the Stevenson incident, it was felt that -a demonstration would be entirely out of order, because we didn't -want anything to happen in the way of physical violence to President -Kennedy when he came to Dallas. But we thought that the conservatives -in Dallas--I was told--were a pretty downtrodden lot after that, -because they were being oppressed by the local liberals, because of -the Stevenson incident. We felt we had to do something to build up the -morale of the conservative element, in Dallas. So we hit upon the idea -of the ad. - -Mr. JENNER. Would you please tell us who you mean? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Me and Larrie, Larrie and Joe, and then all of us -together. - -Mr. JENNER. All right. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. And I originally--well, I took the copy of the ad to the -Dallas Morning News. - -Mr. JENNER. Please, sir--we wanted the genesis from the beginning. How -it came about, who participated in drafting it. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. About a week or so before placing the ad, Larrie and I -got together at his house. - -Mr. JENNER. The ad was placed when? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. The first payment was made on the 19th or 20th of -November. - -Representative FORD. Was this after the announcement of the President's -visit? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes. - -Representative FORD. You knew that President Kennedy was to be in -Dallas on November 22? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. A week before that? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Right; we had started working on the ad. Larrie and I -got together. And I said, "What are we going to put in it?"; because -I didn't have the vaguest idea. And Larrie brought out a list of -questions, 50 questions, that were made up for some conservative--I -think it might possibly have been one of Goldwater's aides had just -listed 50 questions of chinks in our foreign policy, you might say, -weak points. And we just picked some that we thought might apply to -President Kennedy and his foreign policy. Because the 50 questions went -back quite aways. And all of the questions except for two I had a part -in saying okay to. The two that I had no part in was---- - -Mr. JENNER. Read them, please. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Was the 11th question---- - -Mr. JENNER. Are those questions numbered? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. No; but I will read it to you. It says "Why has the -foreign policy of the United States degenerated to the point that the -CIA is arranging coups and having stanch anti-Communist allies of the -U.S. bloodily exterminated?" - -This was handed in at the last minute by one of the contributors. He -would not contribute. - -Mr. JENNER. By whom? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I have no idea. But he would not contribute the money. - -Mr. JENNER. Was this one of the men who gave money to Mr. Grinnan? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes; this is my understanding. - -Mr. JENNER. And did Mr. Grinnan tell you this? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes; he said "This has to go in." - -Mr. JENNER. He said that to you in the presence of whom? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I believe Bill Burley was there, and Larrie Schmidt. - -Mr. JENNER. Where was this? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. In Joe Grinnan's office. - -Mr. JENNER. In Dallas? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. In Dallas; yes. - -Mr. JENNER. That is room 811 of the Wilson Building? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes; and I was against this particular question, because -I frankly agreed with the coup. But it is a question of having all or -nothing. - -Another question that was put in here--I forget exactly when--which I -wasn't in favor of, which we put in after the proof was submitted to -Joe Grinnan for his approval, is "Why have you ordered or permitted -your brother Bobby, the Attorney General, to go soft on Communists, -fellow travelers, and ultra-leftists in America, while permitting him -to criticize loyal Americans, who criticize you, your administration, -and your leadership?" - -Now, this struck me as being a States rights plea, and as far as our -domestic policy goes, I am a pretty liberal guy. So I didn't agree with -that. - -Mr. JENNER. Who suggested that question? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I don't remember. I just remember that it came up--I -didn't like it. But the fact was that it had to be in there. - -Mr. JENNER. I would like to keep you on that for a moment. Was it a -suggestion that had come from a contributor, or did it originate in -your group? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I really don't recall. - -Mr. JENNER. Or Mr. Grinnan? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I don't recall if it originated with Larrie or Mr. -Grinnan or with someone else. I really don't know. - -Mr. JENNER. How old a man is Mr. Grinnan? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I would say in his very early thirties. - -Representative FORD. That suggestion, the last one, didn't come from -you, however? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Which? - -Representative FORD. The one you just read. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Oh, no. - -Representative FORD. Because of your own liberal domestic philosophy? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Right. The only question in here that is entirely my own -is the last one, and this is because I was pretty steamed up over the -fiasco in Cuba and the lack of followup by the administration. - -"Why have you scrapped the Monroe Doctrine in favor of the spirit of -Moscow?" I will still stand by that question. - -As far as the copy at the top of the letter, appearing before the -questions, as far as I know, this was written by Larrie Schmidt. He -showed it to me. I said, "It is a little rough, but if we are going to -get our money's worth out of the ad, I guess it has to be." - -Mr. JENNER. Mr. Chairman, may I stand over near the witness? - -Representative FORD. Surely. - -Mr. JENNER. Thank you. - -When you say the copy at the top of the ad, does that include the -banner, "Welcome, Mr. Kennedy, to Dallas."? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. And you are referring to all that portion of the ad which -is Commission Exhibit No. 1031, down to the first question? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes. The idea of the black border was mine. - -Mr. JENNER. Yes. I was going to ask you that. Why did you suggest the -black border? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Well, I saw a proof of the ad--drew a mockup, the -advertising man at the newspaper office drew a mockup, and it was the -sort of thing that you just turned the page and pass it by, unless you -had something to bring it out. And I suggested a black border. He put a -one-eighth inch black border around. I said try a little heavier one. -He went to a quarter inch black border and I said, "That looks okay," -and we had the black border. - -Mr. JENNER. I take it from your present statement that you worked with -a copywriter or advertising composer at the Dallas Morning News. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes. His name was Dick Houston. - -Mr. JENNER. How many editions did this ad run for the $1,463? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. One edition. It came out on the evening edition, on the -21st, and the morning of the 22d. - -Mr. JENNER. Just one paper? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. One edition, one paper. - -Mr. JENNER. That is only the Dallas Morning News? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. That is right. - -Mr. JENNER. It was not in the other Dallas papers? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. No. - -Mr. JENNER. The Times Herald? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. No. We felt--we didn't even go to the Times Herald. We -felt they would not even print it, because they are a very liberal -paper, and we felt it would be a waste of time. We were convinced that -the Morning News was conservative enough to print it. And they did. - -Mr. JENNER. So the Dallas Morning News people were quite aware of the -composition of the ad, and worked with you in putting it in final shape? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes; as a matter of fact, I had asked to show it to a -Mr. Gray, who was the head of the advertising department, and they -said no, that wouldn't be necessary, they just have to submit it to a -judge something or other, a retired judge who was their legal advisor, -and who would look at the ad to see if there was anything libelous in -it, so to speak, or anything that the Morning News could be sued for. -And I assume they did this, because they didn't let me know right away -whether or not they could print it. - -When I came back that afternoon, or the following morning--I don't -recall which--and they said everything was okay, that it would go. - -Mr. DULLES. When you spoke of the head of the advertising department, -that is the advertising department of the News? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Of the Dallas Morning News; yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. Mr. Weissman, you have read two questions with which you -disagreed. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. You have read a question, which is the last in the -advertisement. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. Of which you are the author, and you said you would still -stand by that particular one. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. A hundred percent; yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. Now, are there any others with which you had a measure of -disagreement, or any other which you now would not wish to support or, -as you put it, stand back of? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. There was one other that I thought was being a little -rough on the President, but which I didn't particularly agree with a -hundred percent. - -Mr. JENNER. Identify it, please. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. It was in the question that read, "Why has Gus Hall, head -of the U.S. Communist Party, praised almost every one of your policies -and announced that the party will endorse and support your reelection -in 1964? - -I personally thought that the selection of this particular question -tended to put President Kennedy in a light where he is voluntarily -accepting this support--in other words, sort of calling him a -Communist, which I felt he was not. And, at the same time, though, I -had a reservation about making a big furor over it, because of the -fact, if nothing else, if the President did read it, he might realize -something, and he just might do something about it, in foresaking the -support. So I let it go at that. - -Mr. DULLES. When you spoke, then, of selection from a list--was that -the list to which you referred before, which I believe you said came -from the Birch Society? - -Mr. JENNER. A list of 50 questions. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. No; as far as I know it didn't come from the Birch -Society. It was just some political material that Larrie had collected -rafts of--he had books and folders. It was something he pulled out and -said, "Maybe we can use this." And we went through the 50 questions. We -were in a hurry, and this seemed to be the easiest way out, as far as -getting some text, some composition for the ad. - -Representative FORD. So the final selection rested with Larrie, Mr. -Grinnan, and yourself, with the exception of this one contributor who -insisted on one? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Well, let's put it like this. I signed my name to the ad. -But you might say the final selection rested with the contributors. I -had to go along with them, because if I said I won't go along with it, -or I won't sign my name, there would have been an ad anyway--the ad -would have been printed anyway. Larrie would have put his name to it. - -Now, let me tell you this. It will be a very short story. - -Bill and I had decided about a week after we got to Dallas that Larrie -was full of hooey, that we could not go along with this guy. - -Representative FORD. What do you mean by that? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Well, everything he is doing he is doing for himself, and -if we happen to fit in, it was fine. And he was getting an awful lot -of recognition and publicity. We felt if this guy got any stronger, -he would be able to move us out, or control us. So when the idea for -the ad came up I said, "Okay, I will put my name to it," because I -felt any recognition that came would then be in my favor, and if we -took advantage of this, and because these organizations would have to -back me personally as representing them, I could then denounce the -anti-Semitism, the anti-Catholic, anti-Negro, and they would have -to back me up, or else I would just tell the whole story about this -thing. And I felt that this was going to be my move to get back to the -original philosophy of a completely democratic type of organization. - -And I had discussed--Bill and I, I might say, were a partnership unto -ourselves. We had decided one way or the other we were either going to -get out of Dallas or run the thing ourselves, because we didn't like -the way it was going. - -Mr. DULLES. Did Larrie object to your being the one to sign the -advertisement? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. No; in fact, Larrie was sort of afraid to sign it, -because when he came out and said he was part of the Stevenson -demonstration, his life had been threatened, and he had all sorts of -harrassing phone calls and so on. And he wanted to avoid this. But if -it was a question of printing an ad or not printing it, he would have -signed it. - -Representative FORD. But as far as any organization of any kind being -responsible for this ad, it was not true. There was no organization -that backed this ad? There were four or five of you that really -promoted it and finally raised the money for it and put it in the -newspaper? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. That is not quite accurate. You might say when you get -right down to it, in the final tale, the John Birch Society printed -that ad, not CUSA. - -Mr. JENNER. Tell us why, now. Please expand on that. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Well, in order to get anywhere in Dallas, at least in -the area of conservative politics that we were in, you had to, you -might say, cotton to the John Birch Society, because they were a pretty -strong group, and still are, down there. And---- - -Mr. JENNER. Who is the head of that now? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. The Birch Society? - -Mr. JENNER. Yes. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I never met the fellow. They had a paid coordinator. I -don't recall his name offhand. But, anyway---- - -Mr. JENNER. Were you in his offices? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. No; Joe Grinnan, as a matter of fact, is the only man in -the hierarchy of the Birch Society in Dallas that I met. - -Larrie was a member of the JBS, and Bill and I didn't like it, but we -saw that he was out for himself as much as anything, and this was a way -to help himself along anyway, both politically and financially. And he -convinced us of the method to his madness. But as I said we wanted to -move Larrie out when we found he was more JBS than he was CUSA, and he -was willing to go along with them completely, and forget about the CUSA -goals. - -Representative FORD. Your allegiance was to CUSA? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Right. In other words, I would have used the John Birch -Society as a vehicle, as planned. But I would never have gone up on a -soapbox to support them. - -Mr. DULLES. Who were the members of the American Fact-Finding -Committee, if any? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Well, the members would be myself, Bill Burley, Larrie -Schmidt, Joe Grinnan--just the people immediately involved. - -Mr. JENNER. That was a name and solely a name? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Solely a name. - -Mr. JENNER. There was no such organization? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. None whatsoever. - -Mr. JENNER. And you used it for convenience on this advertisement? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. That is right. As a matter of fact, when I went to place -the ad, I could not remember the name. I had it written down on a piece -of paper. I had to refer to a piece of paper for the name. - -Mr. JENNER. Had you ever used that name before? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Never. - -Mr. JENNER. Did your group ever use it thereafter? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Not as far as I know. - -Mr. JENNER. Have you now named all of the people who played any part -in, to the best of your recollection--in the idea for the publication -of, the actual drafting of the ad, and its ultimate running in that -edition of the Dallas Morning News? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. There is only one other individual that I could name. He -was there at the reading of the final proof, before the ad was printed. -That was Joe Grinnan's brother, Robert P. Grinnan. - -Mr. JENNER. Is he an older or younger brother? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I believe he is an older brother. - -Mr. JENNER. What business is he engaged in? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Oil and real estate. - -Mr. DULLES. Who took out the post office box 1792, Dallas 21, Tex., -that appears under your name here on this advertisement? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Bill, Larrie, and I went to the post office together. I -signed for the box. - -Representative FORD. Do you recall the date? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. It was the same--the morning--the same morning I -originally went to get the ad laid out at the Morning News. - -Representative FORD. Has it been discontinued? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. The box? Yes; I received a communication from Larrie. He -said the box time had run out. They had extended it for 3 months after -that, and then it was--as far as I know, it is nonexistent now. - -Senator COOPER. May I ask this question: Would you state now to this -Commission the idea of printing this ad was conceived by you and Larry -Jones--what is the other's name? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Larrie Schmidt. - -Senator COOPER. Alone, and there was no stimulation from any outside -group or organization. Do you state that under oath? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. There was stimulation. - -Senator COOPER. From whom? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I assume from the Birch Society. In other words, I -think the idea for the ad, for the something to do on the occasion of -President Kennedy's visit--I think the idea for the something to do -came from the Birch Society--whether Mr. Joe Grinnan or someone else, I -don't know. - -Senator COOPER. Was it communicated as an idea to you? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Larrie communicated the idea to me, said what do you -think. I said, why not? - -Senator COOPER. Which one of this group did the idea come to? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I don't know. - -Senator COOPER. It didn't come to you? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. No; it didn't come to me personally originally, no. - -Mr. DULLES. What is the basis of your evidence of saying this was the -Birch Society? How did you know that? Where did you get that? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Well, it came to a point where everything we were doing -we had to go talk to Joe--big brother. And that is just the way it -worked out. - -Mr. JENNER. This is Joe Grinnan? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes. They were getting a grip on us, and Bill and I felt -that we had to bust this grip somehow. - -Mr. DULLES. Was he prominent in the Birch Society? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes; he was known. - -Mr. DULLES. Joe Grinnan? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes; he was known as a coordinator. - -Representative FORD. This one question that was inserted at the -insistence of one of the contributors, which reads as follows: "Why has -the foreign policy of the United States degenerated to the point the -C.I.A. is arranging coups and having staunch anti-Communist allies of -the U.S. bloodily exterminated"--to what does that refer? Do you have -any specific information? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I know it specifically refers to the Vietnam thing, with -the overthrow of Diem, and the subsequent murder of the Diem people. - -Representative FORD. Was that said to you at the time? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. This was not said to me at the time. But I had -mentioned it various times, and this was definitely, as far as I am -concerned--this was definitely the reason for placing that. As a matter -of fact, this had occurred not too long after that, I believe. - -Mr. DULLES. Who was it that insisted on the insertion of that? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Well, Joe Grinnan handed me this piece of paper. It was -written on a piece of scrap paper. I could hardly decipher it, myself. -And he said, "This has to be in. Go back and have them change the ad." - -So I had to run back to the Morning News, with this other insertion. -This is just the way it happened. - -(At this point, Senator Cooper withdrew from the hearing room.) - -Representative FORD. I understand that you made a downpayment on the ad. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. That is right. - -Representative FORD. And then went back and paid the rest in full? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. A thousand dollars the first day, and $400-odd on the -second day. - -Mr. DULLES. Were both payments made before publication? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. Mr. Dulles called attention to the post office box number. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. That stimulates me to ask you this: Did you receive any -responses to the advertisement? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Oh, did I? Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. Now, tell us about that and also, before you start, do you -have any of those responses? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Not with me. All that I received I have at home. - -Mr. JENNER. And indicate to us the volume that you have at home. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I have approximately 50 or 60 letters; about one-third -of which were favorable, and the rest, two-thirds, unfavorable. The -favorable responses, all but one came before--they were postmarked, the -envelopes were postmarked before the President was assassinated. And -the threatening letters and the nasty letters came afterward. - -Mr. JENNER. Did you receive any contributions? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I still have a check to the American Fact-Finding -Committee in the amount of $20. Since we never opened a bank account, -I just sort of kept the check as a souvenir. There was one $2 -contribution---- - -Mr. JENNER. Cash? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Right--from a retired train engineer, or something. - -Mr. JENNER. And that is---- - -Mr. WEISSMAN. For the Wabash Railroad. - -Mr. JENNER. Were those the only contributions? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. To my knowledge; yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. At least that you know anything about? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. That is right. In all the letters I received the first -time we went to the box. I only went to the box once, that was, I -believe, the Sunday morning following the assassination. - -Mr. JENNER. The 25th of November? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. About; yes, sir. - -Mr. DULLES. Did anybody have the key to the box in addition to yourself? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Up to that point, only I had the key. After that, I left -Dallas on Wednesday, I believe---- - -Mr. JENNER. I misspoke--it was the 24th of November rather than the -25th. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I left Dallas on the following Wednesday. And at that -time I didn't see Larrie personally--he couldn't get to the apartment -that Bill and I were staying at for some reason or another. And I left -all the dishes and things he had given us to use while we were there, -and in one of these dishes I left the key to the box. - -Since that time, communications I received from Larrie, he says -the tenor of the letters had changed, they are more favorable than -unfavorable in the ensuing weeks and months. Of these letters--he -sent me one that called me all sorts of names, a lot of anti-Semitic -remarks, and he sent another, and he gave excerpts in one of his -personal letters, of letters that he received in support of the -position of the ad. - -Mr. DULLES. Do I understand that you got all the letters that came in -up to Wednesday after the assassination, and that your associates have -the rest, or Larrie, I presume, has the rest? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I don't know who has the rest. I don't know if it is -Larrie or Joe. - -Mr. DULLES. Larrie had the key. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes. I left him the key--I left him access to the -key. I received the letters written during the 2 days following -the assassination--the Friday afternoon and Saturday following the -assassination--because I picked the mail up the following Sunday -morning. - -Mr. JENNER. Having in mind all your testimony up to the moment, I would -like to take you back to the telephone conversation that you had with -Larrie Schmidt, in which he made the reference to Stevenson, following -which, that is following this conversation, you eventually came to -Dallas. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. And this conversation, as I recall it, the telephone call, -was in the month of October 1963? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes. It was the evening of the Stevenson demonstration. -According to the letter I think it was the 24th of October. - -(At this point, Mr. Dulles withdrew from the hearing room.) - -Mr. JENNER. Now, one of the members of the Commission is interested -in having you repeat that conversation in full, to the best of your -recollection. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Since it is recollection, it is going to change somewhat -in words, but in tenor it will be the same. - -Mr. JENNER. You do your best. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Larrie called me on the telephone and he was very -excited, and he had described what had transpired in Dallas---- - -Mr. JENNER. Tell us what he said, please. That is what we are -interested in. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. He just said---- - -Mr. JENNER. And his part in it, if any. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. He said that he had helped organize this demonstration -and it went off beautifully, there is going to be national publicity, -the newspapers were all over the place, he had given statements to the -news media, to the television. He said he was on TV and radio, and had -given out statements, and that he was--it seemed that he was going to -be heading for, not trouble, but a good deal of difficulty because it -seems that he was the only one that came out as one of the organizers -of the demonstration, who openly came out and said so. - -Mr. JENNER. And identified himself with the demonstration? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes, sir. He said he had--what did he say--something to -the effect that he had a bunch of his people down there, the University -of Dallas students. - -Mr. JENNER. Did he identify them as students? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I don't recall. I met the students several weeks later -when I got to Dallas. - -Mr. JENNER. The students he had employed? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. That had participated in the demonstration; yes. - -Mr. JENNER. Did he describe what the demonstration was insofar as his -part and his group's part in it was? - -(At this point, Mr. Dulles reentered the hearing room.) - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Well, just to the effect they had picketed and carried -signs and made some noises inside the auditorium. Not he and his -group, but that the picketers had raised quite a hullabaloo inside the -auditorium. - -Mr. JENNER. Were they his picketers? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I don't know. This he didn't specify. I had assumed---- - -Mr. JENNER. What impression did you get in that respect? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I had assumed his picketers were part of it. - -(At this point, Representative Ford withdrew from the hearing room.) - -Mr. JENNER. You were repeating to the best of your recollection that -telephone conversation. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. The gist of the conversation; yes. - -Mr. JENNER. As best you are able to recall. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. That is right. I really cannot swear to its 100 percent -accuracy, but I would say it is 75 percent accurate anyway. - -Mr. JENNER. Have you now exhausted your recollection as to all that was -said, in substance? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. In substance; yes. - -Mr. JENNER. In the course of that conversation. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. I take it he urged you to come to Dallas? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. He did. - -Mr. JENNER. That this Stevenson incident had stimulated things to -the point that CUSA--you members of CUSA should come to Dallas, and -everything was ripe? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. He said we can pick up the ball and start running. - -Mr. JENNER. Now, you and Mr. Burley then went to Dallas, did you? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. That is right. We left on the 2d of November. - -Mr. JENNER. And that would have been following the receipt of the -letter of October 29, which we have identified as---- - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Commission Exhibit No. 1032. - -Mr. JENNER. How did you get there? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I drove in my car. - -Mr. JENNER. Did Mr. Burley accompany you? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. Did you stop off anywhere on the way? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. We stopped at his mother's house in South Carolina for -about 4 or 5 hours. - -Mr. JENNER. And when you reached Dallas, did you find a room, or what -did you do? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. That night we stayed at Larrie's house. We got there -about 5 o'clock in the afternoon. - -Mr. JENNER. Where does he live? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. At that time he was living at the Eden Roc Apartments, in -Dallas. - -Mr. JENNER. Is he a married man? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. He was. - -Mr. JENNER. I take it he was separated from his wife at that time? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. No, no. He has been divorced since. - -Mr. JENNER. But he was living with his wife at that time? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. By the way, is Mr. Burley a married man, also? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I spoke with him just the other day. His divorce will be -final in about 6 weeks, he thinks. - -Mr. JENNER. He was married at that time? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes; separated. - -Mr. JENNER. Where was his wife living? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. In West Virginia, I believe. - -Mr. JENNER. He had a family, did he not, several children? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Four or five children. - -Mr. JENNER. You stayed with him at the Eden Roc Apartments? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. That is right. - -Mr. JENNER. That is, with Mr. Schmidt? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. And then you and Mr. Burley arranged a room somewhere, did -you? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. We rented an apartment. I think we stayed with Larrie for -2 days, 2 or 3 days. Then we rented an apartment in Dallas. - -Mr. JENNER. Where was that? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I don't recall the address offhand. - -Mr. JENNER. All right. Now, approximately where are we now, as a matter -of time in this period? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. This is---- - -Mr. JENNER. That you rented the apartment. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. About the middle of the first week after we arrived in -Dallas. - -Mr. JENNER. Which should be approximately what date? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. About the 7th or so of November. - -Mr. JENNER. What did you do thereafter in the way of furthering the -business of CUSA? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Well, we were thinking of buying a fourplex, a -four-family apartment house. - -Mr. JENNER. Where were you going to get the money? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. We could have gotten a loan, we hoped, with no -downpayment, because of the fact we are GI's, through the FHA, or VA, -and we were counting on that. So we were looking around. We had also -planned to take over a private club, manage a private club, with an -option to buy it. - -Mr. JENNER. What club was that? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. That was the Ducharme Club. - -Mr. JENNER. That was in Dallas? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. In Dallas; yes. - -Mr. JENNER. Where did you become acquainted with that possible business -opportunity? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Well, this had been broached by Larrie. This was one of -the big disappointments. We had been promised by Larrie we wouldn't -have any trouble making a living, that he had jobs and everything set -up for us. That is one of the reasons I chucked my job in New York. I -figured we would be able to survive down there. - -We got to the Ducharme Club, after a day or two, and it was a miserable -hole in the wall that you could not really do anything with. But we -were still dickering with the owner on the potentials. - -Mr. DULLES. What did this club purport to do? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. It was a private club. They sold liquor and beer over the -bar to members. - -Mr. DULLES. Entertainment? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. They had a dance floor and jukebox. - -Mr. JENNER. Who--do you recall the names of any of the people -interested in the Ducharme Club? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. The owners? - -Mr. JENNER. Yes. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. The only one I know of is Leon Ducharme, the owner. - -Mr. JENNER. Did Jack Ruby or Jack Rubenstein have any interest in this -club? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. No; not as far as I know. - -Mr. JENNER. Did you ever meet Jack Ruby or Jack Rubenstein? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Never. - -Mr. JENNER. Did you become acquainted with the Carousel Club when you -were in Dallas? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I was never in it, and I still don't know where it is. - -Mr. JENNER. You were never in it; you don't know where it is. Did you -hear of it when you were there? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Never. As a matter of fact, in the entire 3-1/2 weeks or -so that Bill and I were in Dallas, we didn't go to the movies at all. -The only two clubs that I can recall that we went into was the Lavender -Lounge---- - -Mr. JENNER. Where is that located? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. That is in Dallas. - -Mr. JENNER. Where? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I don't recall the street. - -Mr. JENNER. It is downtown, is it? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. No; it is not downtown. This is--it was about two blocks -from our apartment. And it is about, I guess, a good 30-minute walk to -downtown from there. And the only other club would be the Ducharme Club. - -Mr. JENNER. Where was that located? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. That was on Haskell Avenue, in Dallas. - -Mr. JENNER. How far from the downtown area, if at all? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Well, to make it conveniently, you should take a bus. -Otherwise, about a 20-minute walk. - -Mr. JENNER. From the Ducharme Club to the downtown area of Dallas? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes, sir; and the reason we went to the Ducharme Club -after the fact we decided we were not going to take it, was that that -was a place we could get credit for beer. Larrie had a charge account -there. And that was the extent of our association with that place. - -Mr. JENNER. Now---- - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Now, in the Lavender Lounge, the reason we went there, is -we were dickering with the owners of the Lavender Lounge---- - -Mr. JENNER. Name him. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. L. S. Brotherton. We wanted to lease a club that he had -that was closed down, called the Beachcomber, in a suburb of Dallas. -And we had been in there several times and had talked to him about -leasing this. In other words, we were looking for something that would -give us an income so we could operate a little bit. And that never -worked out. He wanted too much money, and we didn't have it. - -Mr. JENNER. In any of these negotiations that were carried on by you or -your associates, was the name Jack Ruby ever mentioned as having any -possible interest whatsoever in any of those groups? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Never. - -Mr. JENNER. Did you hear of the name Jack Ruby or Jack Rubenstein up -to--at anytime prior to November 24, 1963? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. No; never. - -Mr. JENNER. And do you have any information or any knowledge or any -notion or feeling that Larrie Schmidt or any of your associates knew -of or had any association with Jack Ruby or otherwise known as Jack -Rubenstein? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I think I can state pretty emphatically no. - -Mr. JENNER. Were there any communications of any kind or character, -written notes, telephone calls, or otherwise, that you know about or -knew about then to or from Jack Ruby? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Never. - -Mr. JENNER. When did you first hear of the name Jack Ruby? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I think he shot Oswald some time in the afternoon -or the morning--since Bill and I had neither a radio or TV in the -apartment--we were in the apartment all day. - -Mr. JENNER. All day that Sunday? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes; we had heard about it that night. - -Mr. JENNER. That is the 24th of November 1963? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. If that is when Oswald was shot. - -Mr. JENNER. And you first became aware of Oswald being shot the night -or evening of the 24th? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. That Sunday? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes. I don't recall exactly how. I think Larrie -telephoned us, and told us that. - -Mr. JENNER. This is the first time we have mentioned the name Oswald. -Had you ever heard the name Lee Harvey Oswald prior to your going to -Dallas? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. No. - -Mr. JENNER. Did you hear of the name Lee Harvey Oswald at any time -prior to November 22, 1963? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. No. - -Mr. JENNER. Was the name ever mentioned in your presence? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. No. - -Mr. JENNER. I take it from what you have said that you did not know a -man by the name of Lee Harvey Oswald. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. No. - -Mr. JENNER. When did you first hear the name Lee Harvey Oswald? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. We were sitting in a bar, right after President Kennedy's -assassination. - -Mr. JENNER. This was the 22d of November 1963? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes; it was Bill Burley, myself, and Larrie. We had -made--we were to meet Larrie and Joe Grinnan at the Ducharme Club. - -Mr. JENNER. For what meal? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. For luncheon. We were supposed to meet him at 12:30 or -1 o'clock, I forget which--about 1 o'clock. And I had a 12:30 on the -button, as a matter of fact--I had an appointment to sell a carpet out -in the Garland section of Texas--it was a 2:30 appointment. And I was -in a hurry to get to meet Larrie and finish the lunch, and whatever -business they wanted to talk about I didn't know. So I looked at my -watch. I remember specifically it was 12:30, because at that time -Bill had been driving my car. He had quit the carpet company and was -looking for another job. He had looked at a franchise arrangement for -insecticides. He picked me up. He was waiting for me from 10 after 12 -to 12:30. We got into the car. I am a great news bug. So I turned the -radio on, looking for a news station. And they had--at that time, as I -turned the radio on, the announcer said, "There has been a rumor that -President Kennedy has been shot." So we didn't believe it. It was just -a little too far out to believe. - -And after several minutes, it began to take on some substance about -the President's sedan speeding away, somebody hearing shots and -people laying on the ground. In other words, the way the reporters -were covering it. I don't recall exactly what they said. And, at this -time--we were going to go to the Ducharme Club through downtown Dallas. -We were heading for the area about two blocks adjacent to the Houston -Street viaduct. And then we heard about the police pulling all sorts of -people--somebody said they saw somebody and gave a description. And the -police were pulling people off the street and so forth. So Bill and I -didn't want to get involved in this. So we took a roundabout route. We -got lost for a while. Anyway, we finally wound up at the other side of -Dallas, and we were at the Ducharme Club. - -Mr. JENNER. When you arrived there, was Mr. Schmidt there? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. He was waiting for me. But Joe Grinnan wasn't there. -He had heard this thing and took off. I guess he wanted to hide or -something. - -Mr. JENNER. Why? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Well, because the way it was right away, the announcers, -even before it was ascertained that President Kennedy was dead, or that -he had really been shot, that it was a rightwing plot and so forth. And -he had every reason to be frightened. - -Mr. JENNER. Why did he have every reason to be frightened? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Because, let's face it, the public feeling would suddenly -be very antirightwing, and no telling what would happen if a mob got -together and discovered him. They would tear him apart. - -Bill and I were frightened to the point because I knew about the -ad. And I knew exactly what--at least I felt in my own mind I knew -what people would believe. They would read the ad and so forth, and -associate you with this thing, somehow, one way or another. So we went -to another bar--I don't remember the name of it--the Ducharme Club was -closed, by the way, that afternoon. - -Mr. JENNER. When you reached the Ducharme Club, it was closed, but you -found Mr. Schmidt there? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Larrie was waiting on the corner. He got in the car. We -sat and talked for a few minutes. We went to another bar a few blocks -away. We drank beer and watched television. And we had been in the bar, -I guess, about an hour when it come over that this patrolman Tippit had -been shot, and they trapped some guy in a movie theater. And maybe half -an hour, an hour later, it came out this fellow's name was Lee Harvey -Oswald. This is the first time I ever heard the name. - -Mr. JENNER. What was said at that time? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. By us? - -Mr. JENNER. Yes. When it was announced it was Lee Harvey Oswald. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. We were relieved. - -Mr. JENNER. Anything said about it? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I don't recall. First, what was said, like, I hope he is -not a member of the Walker group--something like that--I hope he is -not one of Walker's boys. Because it is like a clique, and it is guilt -by association from thereafter. So it came over later this guy was a -Marxist. This was the same afternoon, I believe. It was found out this -fellow was a Marxist. And then the announcers--they left the rightwing -for a little while, and started going to the left, and I breathed a -sigh of relief. After 4 hours in the bar, Bill and I went back to the -apartment, and Larrie went to the Ducharme Club. He was afraid to go -home. - -Mr. JENNER. I thought the Ducharme Club was closed. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. It was open at that time. We drove by. It was open. -Larrie went in. We dropped him off there. And Bill and I went back to -our apartment. We just waited. We knew we were going to get involved in -this thing because of the ad. And we figured that if anybody at all in -Dallas was on the ball, they know who we were and where we were. So we -waited. Nothing happened. We waited there until we left. We barely left -that house. As a matter of fact---- - -Mr. JENNER. You remained in the house all that evening, did you--the -apartment? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I think the--yes; late that evening Larrie came home. - -Mr. DULLES. That is Friday evening, November 22? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes; I think Larrie went home late that evening, and Bill -and I met him there. - -Mr. JENNER. You went to Larrie's home? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. To Larrie's apartment; yes. And I said what are we going -to do? And Larrie said, "Well"--he had talked to Joe Grinnan, and Joe -said don't say anything, don't do anything, don't get any more involved -than you have to, lay low, keep out of it, it is going to be pretty -bad. And it was. Thereafter, a day or so later-- - -Mr. JENNER. What did you mean by that--it is going to be pretty bad? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. In other words--this is just exactly the way it worked -out. For example---- - -Mr. JENNER. You are now explaining what you mean by "and it was"? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Right. Stanley Marcus, who was a Dallas businessman, -financier---- - -Mr. JENNER. Nieman Marcus? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Of the Nieman Marcus group, yes, and he was a well-known -and rather very rabid liberal. And sure enough, even though the -following day it was then established that Oswald was a Marxist and -so forth, and there was some question as to whether or not it was a -Communist plot, pros and cons, and Marcus put his 2 cents in in the -Dallas Times Herald, and he starts blaming the rightwing for the -trouble. And I was told--I didn't see this---- - -Mr. JENNER. This was on the 23d now? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. This was on the following day; yes, sir. And, in other -words, he and friends of his, I guess, did everything they could -to solidify their position as being always in the right, and throw -the blame, even though Oswald is obviously a Marxist--they tried to -transfer the blame to the rightwing. They had us on the run and they -were going to keep it that way. - -Mr. JENNER. How did this come to your attention? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Just by reading the newspapers. - -Mr. JENNER. The Dallas Times Herald and the Dallas Morning News? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. There was very little in the Morning News about the -rightwing, that was antirightwing, and the Dallas Times Herald was full -of it. - -Mr. JENNER. Would you please delineate what you mean by "us" who were -on the run? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I mean any conservative in Dallas at that time was -keeping quiet. - -Mr. JENNER. Including yourself and the other men you mentioned? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Including myself and everybody I was associated with; -yes, sir. And a day or so after that, I think it was Sunday or Monday, -I had suggested to Larrie, and I spoke to Joe Grinnan on the phone, -that maybe I should call the FBI and give them the story on this ad. - -And he said, "Now, look, if they want you, they will find you. They -know where you are, probably. So if they want you, they will find you." -So I waited. And several times I was going to make that phone call, and -I did not. Then finally we just ran out of money. - -Mr. JENNER. You are probably a few days beyond the 23d now? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Right; I am. I am going now--everything was rather -stable, static up until the Wednesday, the following Wednesday, when I -left Dallas. - -Mr. JENNER. I want to complete your whole day of the 23d before you -move beyond that. Did you or Bill leave your apartment on the 23d? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes; we were over at Larrie's house. I don't remember -exactly the times. We had been to Larrie's place several times. - -Mr. JENNER. Were you in the Dallas downtown business district at -anytime on the 23d? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I don't think so--no--no, as a matter of fact. In fact, I -didn't get around to the business district until--yes. We went into the -outer edge of the downtown area to get to the post office, to pick up -the letters. - -Mr. JENNER. That is right. On the 23d you went to the post office box -and picked up the 60-odd letters that you have at home in New York. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. That is right. And then we went directly back to the -apartment, and opened these letters. - -Mr. JENNER. That is all you did in the downtown area? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes; so far as I can recollect. - -Mr. JENNER. Approximately what time of the day was that? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. That was in the morning. That was early in the -morning--about 8 or 9 o'clock, I guess, in the morning. - -Mr. JENNER. Did you receive any telephone calls at your apartment that -day? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I received--Larrie called us, I know. I don't recall what -was said. It was just like, "What is happening--everything okay?" - -On Monday I received a letter---- - -Mr. JENNER. Excuse me. Have we now accounted from the time you got up -Saturday morning until the time you went to bed that evening? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I don't recall. Bill and I might have gone out for a -hamburger a couple of blocks away. We didn't go anywhere near downtown. -We might have gone to Larrie's apartment that night. I am not sure. - -Mr. JENNER. The 22d--we picked you up in your car with Mr. Burley -around 12:30. Now, what happened that morning? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. That morning? - -Mr. JENNER. Yes--the 22d. Where were you the morning of the 22d, up to -12:30 o'clock in the afternoon? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Let's see. I left the apartment at about--I guess it was -a little after 9. We had a 10 or 10:30 sales meeting scheduled, or -9:30. Anyway, I got there on time for the sales meeting. - -Mr. JENNER. That was the carpet company by which you were employed? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Exactly. - -Mr. JENNER. Name it. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Carpet Engineers. - -Mr. JENNER. And you had obtained that job when? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. About a week after arriving in Dallas. - -Mr. JENNER. And that was located where? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. 1002 South Beckley, in the Oak Cliff section of Dallas. - -Mr. JENNER. In the Oak Cliff section? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. That is right. - -Mr. JENNER. On Beckley? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. On Beckley. - -Mr. JENNER. What was the address? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. 1002. I know what you are getting at. Oswald also had a -room on Beckley, but he was on the opposite extreme. I think he was on -North Beckley. I was on South Beckley. - -Mr. JENNER. Give us the distance approximately between the location -of the carpet company by which you were employed which is on South -Beckley, and Oswald's address on North Beckley. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. At least a few miles. I don't know. I had never been on -North Beckley. - -Mr. JENNER. At no time while you were in Dallas were you ever on North -Beckley? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Not as far as I know, unless I got lost and didn't know -where I was. But as far as I know, I have never been there. - -Mr. JENNER. And you were a salesman of carpeting? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. That is right. - -Mr. JENNER. Did you ever sell any carpeting? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Not a one. - -Mr. JENNER. Did you make any effort? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I made a lot of effort. This is where most of my money -went--for gas and things like that. - -Mr. JENNER. Your associate, Mr. Burley, was he a salesman for this -company also? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. He quit about 2 weeks--about several days before the 22d. -And he was looking--of course, one of us had to make money. We both -were blanking out with the carpets. - -Mr. JENNER. I take it, however, he had been employed by the same carpet -company? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. You made application together, did you? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. And you were both employed at approximately the same time? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. That is right. - -Mr. JENNER. But he left the carpet company before you did? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. That is right. - -Mr. JENNER. And I understand you attended a sales meeting at the carpet -company the morning of the 22d. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. That is right. - -Mr. JENNER. When did that sales meeting break up? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. 12:30 for me. It was still going when I left. I left at -12:30 because I had this afternoon appointment, and also this meeting -with Larrie. I had talked to the sales manager after that. I had---- - -Mr. JENNER. What was his name? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Frank Demaria. And I had asked him if he had been -questioned at all by the FBI. He said yes, they had been around. And I -said, "What did you tell them?" And he mentioned at that time, he says, -"We thought you had left about 12 o'clock." And I said, "What are you -trying to do?" - -And, anyway, this is the way it went. But I know I left at 12:30. They -were embroiled in a big discussion, and they were not cognizant of the -time. I was. - -Mr. JENNER. All right. Now, would you tell us what you did on the 24th? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Went to pick up the mail in the morning, went back to the -apartment. - -Mr. JENNER. You picked up mail in the morning on Sunday? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. That is right, the post office was open Sunday morning. - -Mr. JENNER. You went to the post office on the 23d, which is Saturday, -and you also returned---- - -Mr. WEISSMAN. No; I didn't go to the post office on Saturday the 23d. - -Mr. JENNER. I misunderstood you, then. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. No; I am almost positive it was Sunday morning. I know it -wasn't Saturday. I am positive--almost positive it was Sunday morning. - -Mr. DULLES. That is when you picked up the 50-odd letters you referred -to? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Right. - -Mr. JENNER. It was the day that you heard that Ruby had shot Oswald, -was it? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I am getting a little confused now. I think I might be 1 -day---- - -Mr. JENNER. See if we can orient you. The assassination of the -President occurred on the 22d of November 1963, which is a Friday. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Right. - -Mr. JENNER. Then there was Saturday. Then on Sunday the 24th occurred -the shooting of Lee Harvey Oswald by Jack Ruby. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. Now, with those events in mind, when did you go to the post -office box? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Well, now, I know it was not Monday. Now, I am back in -perspective. I am almost definitely sure it was Sunday morning. - -Mr. JENNER. You said earlier that it was Saturday. You said it was the -day after the ad appeared, that night, and you went the next day. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. No; couldn't have. - -Mr. JENNER. That was an error? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. That was an error; yes. It was Sunday. - -Mr. JENNER. All right. Now, on further reflection, your recollection is -reasonably firm now that you did go to the post office box on Sunday -rather than Saturday? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I am almost positive it was Sunday morning. - -Mr. JENNER. You are equally positive it was not Monday? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. It might either be--I remembered there was an awful lot -of traffic. And I don't know if the traffic was because everybody was -driving through downtown to go around the Houston viaduct to see the -scene of the assassination or what. And this is what is confusing me -now. That is why I am not sure if it was Sunday morning--it might have -been Monday morning. I doubt it. But it might have been. - -Mr. JENNER. But it was early? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. Around 8 o'clock? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Eight, nine o'clock; yes. - -Mr. JENNER. I was asking you to account for your comings and goings and -your whereabouts on Sunday the 24th. And in the course of doing that, -in referring to the morning, you mentioned that you had gone to the -post office box. Now, what did you do thereafter? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Went right back to the apartment. - -Mr. JENNER. Did Mr. Burley accompany you? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes; and another fellow. Ken--Kenneth Glazbrook. - -Mr. JENNER. Who is he? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. This is a fellow associated with CUSA, but never really. -He came in, as a matter of fact--yes; I had forgotten about him. -President Kennedy was assassinated on a Friday. Ken Glazbrook arrived -in town by bus on Friday night. We went down to the bus station to pick -him up. - -Mr. JENNER. You knew he was coming? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes. He---- - -Mr. JENNER. Please identify him. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Ken Glazbrook. - -Mr. JENNER. Yes; who was he? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Ken is what you might call a world traveler. This is a -guy--he is a political science--he has a masters in political science -from UCLA, I believe. And we had hoped to bring him in as our political -analyst. - -Mr. JENNER. Had you met him in the service? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. In Germany; yes. Larrie met him at one time originally. -Ken was passing through Munich, and he had stopped off at our favorite -bar, and gotten into a discussion with Larrie. And he had been through -Munich after that two or three times, at one occasion which I met him. -And he had also said, "I will meet you in Dallas." - -But he came and he went. He stayed with Bill and I for a couple of days -at our apartment, because he was on his way home to California. From -what I understand now, he is back in Europe. He could not take it here. - -Mr. JENNER. I am still accounting for Sunday. You went to the post -office box, you think. You went to the bus station to pick up---- - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I am not sure whether this was--I am pretty sure it was -Friday night we picked him up at the bus station. It might have been -Saturday night. But I am more sure in my mind--my inclination goes more -toward Friday night. - -Mr. JENNER. You saw him on Sunday? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Ken? - -Mr. JENNER. Did you see this man on Sunday? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. He was in the apartment with us. - -Mr. JENNER. He came to stay with you? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes; he brought a pitcher and a knapsack. - -Mr. JENNER. Did he go down to the post office box with you? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. And he returned to your apartment? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. What did you do then? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. We went through the letters. We were going pro and con, -and reading them. We were very pleased at first because a lot of it -was favorable, and then we got to the later postmarks, and those were -terrible. We just discussed the letters for a while. And a girl came -over. What was her name? Lynn something--I don't know her last name. -And she sat around and talked for a while. We discussed the letters -with her. Then Larrie came over that afternoon also. He was wearing a -turtle-neck sweater. And we stayed around for a few hours. Then Larrie -and Lynn took off to the Ducharme Club. And thereafter I don't know -what happened to them. I did not hear from them at all. And--that is -about it for Sunday. - -Mr. JENNER. When did you first hear about the Ruby-Oswald incident? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I think Larrie called me up. Yes, he was watching -television at the Ducharme Club, I believe. I believe this was the -occasion. I think he was with Lynn. And he telephoned me at the -apartment. And that was the story. - -Mr. JENNER. You have testified you were never in the Carousel Club. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Never. - -Mr. JENNER. What if any acquaintance did you have with Officer Tippit? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. None. - -Mr. JENNER. What if any acquaintance did any of your associates have to -your knowledge with Officer Tippit? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Absolutely none. - -Mr. JENNER. Had you ever heard of the name Officer Tippit? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Never. - -Mr. JENNER. Up to or any time during the day of November 22, 1963? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. None at all. The first I ever heard of this name was -after Oswald shot him, and it came over the TV, that a policeman had -been shot near a movie theater. That was the first I had heard that -name. - -Mr. JENNER. Do you know whether any of your associates, Schmidt or -Burley or Jones, or any persons you have mentioned, knew Officer Tippit? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. To the best of my knowledge, no. - -Mr. JENNER. Did anything occur during all the time you were in Dallas -to lead you to believe any of these people, including Mr. Grinnan, for -example, had had any connection with or association or knowledge of or -acquaintance with Tippit? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Not as far as I know. I don't know too much about Joe -Grinnan. - -Mr. JENNER. Did you at anytime while you were in Dallas ever have a -meeting with or sit in the Carousel Club with Officer Tippit? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. No. - -Mr. JENNER. Do you know or do you have any information as to whether -any of the associates you have mentioned ever had a meeting with -Officer Tippit in the Carousel Club? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. None whatsoever. - -Mr. JENNER. Or whether or not, irrespective of whether it was a formal -meeting or even an informal one, that they were with Officer Tippit at -anytime in the Carousel Club. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Absolutely not. - -Mr. JENNER. And you were never in the Carousel Club at all; and you -never were with Officer Tippit. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Right. - -Mr. JENNER. Any place. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Any place. - -Mr. JENNER. Mr. Weissman, it has been asserted that a meeting took -place on November 14, 1963, in the Carousel Club between Officer Tippit -and yourself--and I take it from your testimony that you vigorously -deny that that ever took place. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Very definitely. May I say something in relation to this? - -Mr. JENNER. Is it pertinent to this? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I believe so. I believe that this is a statement made -by Mark Lane, who claimed to be attorney for the deceased Oswald. It -was originally made at the Town Hall in New York, and later that same -evening, I do not recall the date exactly, on a radio program Contact -WINS New York, at about midnight of that same day. - -At that time I telephoned the radio station and spoke to Mark Lane. -This is the first I had heard of the allegation at all. - -Mr. JENNER. You telephoned the radio station? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Right. - -Mr. JENNER. And you asked for Mr. Lane. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. That's right. - -Mr. JENNER. Did the man for whom you asked come to the phone? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes; he did. - -Mr. JENNER. Had you known Mr. Lane prior to this time? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Never heard of him before. - -Mr. JENNER. You had never spoken to him? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Never. - -Mr. JENNER. Did you ask--when there was an answer on the phone, did you -ask who it was that was on the phone? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I said something to the effect of "Hello, Mr. Lane?" - -Mr. JENNER. What did the voice on the other end of the phone say? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. He said yes--yes something. - -Mr. JENNER. Did you identify yourself? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes; I did. - -Mr. JENNER. Did you identify yourself before or after you asked whether -the voice was that of Mr. Lane? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I identified myself--I called the radio station and it -was a telephone thing that was broadcast over the air, question and -answer--you telephone in a question and he answers. So I telephoned, -and just by luck I happened to get through on the first ring. And -somebody said, "Who is calling?" I said, "I would like to speak with -Mr. Lane. This is Bernard Weissman calling, chairman of the American -Fact-Finding Committee." And so I got him on the phone, because they -could not pass this up. And I told him, I identified him that "You are -the attorney for the assassin Oswald"--this is just what I said to him. - -Mr. JENNER. What did he say? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. And he said--he murmured in agreement. He did not say -emphatically "Yes; I am." But he said, "Um-hum," something to that -effect. And I said, "I know what you are trying to do. I think you are -hunting for headlines. But you had been talking to some liar in Dallas -who has been feeding you all this baloney about me. You are making all -these allegations at the Town Hall and now on radio. And you have never -taken the trouble to contact me. My name has been in the paper. It is -very well known where I live. I am in the phone book. You could have -at least tried to contact me." And I pinned him up against the wall -verbally. And he agreed at that time---- - -Mr. JENNER. What did he say? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. He said that he had no definite proof, that he would have -to check on it. - -Mr. JENNER. Proof of what? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Proof of the allegations. - -Mr. JENNER. Did you mention what the allegation was when you talked -with him on the telephone? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes; I did. - -Mr. JENNER. What did you say? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I said, "You are alleging that I had a meeting with -Patrolman Tippit in Jack Ruby's bar with some unidentified third person -about a week before the assassination." I said, "You are going strictly -on the story of some liar in Dallas." I said, "If you had any courage -or commonsense or really wanted to get at the facts, you would have -called and asked me, too." And he agreed, yes, he should have talked to -me. - -Mr. JENNER. Did he say yes he should have talked to you? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes; and that he would also recheck his facts in Dallas. -And that ended the essence of the conversation. - -Mr. JENNER. Have you exhausted your recollection as to that -conversation? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. As to that particular conversation; yes. - -Mr. JENNER. When you adverted to his assertion in the Town Hall -meeting, that you had been present in the Carousel Club in a meeting -with Officer Tippit, did you say that you denied that you were ever in -the Carousel Club? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I denied that; yes. - -Mr. JENNER. That was what you said. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I said, "I did not know Lee Harvey Oswald. I did not know -Jack Ruby. I have never been in the Carousel Club." - -Mr. JENNER. And you said that to him over the telephone on that -occasion---- - -Mr. WEISSMAN. That's right. - -Mr. JENNER. What was his response to that? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. This is when he came up with he would have to recheck -his facts and he would have to check into it. Subsequently, I had -talked to him later that same evening--the show went off at 1 a.m. in -the morning. And I had been given a private number to call at the radio -station. I talked to him on the telephone. - -Mr. JENNER. How did you get that number? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. The announcer gave it over the air. And he said, "If you -want to speak with Mr. Lane"--because I was getting pretty hot. - -Mr. JENNER. You mean angry? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Angry; yes. And he said, "If you want to talk to Mr. Lane -call him after the show is over, about 5 after 1." I forget the number -of the station. And I telephoned him. - -Mr. JENNER. You called the same number again. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. You asked for Mr. Lane. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes; I did. - -Mr. JENNER. And somebody responded? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Mr. Lane got on the wire. - -Mr. JENNER. Was it the same voice? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. What did he say in the way of acknowledging that it was Mr. -Lane? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I went into it again. - -Mr. JENNER. Did you say, "Mr. Lane"? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. And the voice's response was what? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I said, "Hello, Mr. Lane." And he said--I said, "Hello, -Mr. Lane." And he said, "Yes." - -"This is Bernie Weissman" or Mr. Weissman. And he said "Yes." And -then I reiterated what I had said, and that he had better check his -facts--and "I am going to get a hold of some friends in Dallas to check -on your witness and find out who he is." - -Mr. JENNER. Please identify these people. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I was saying this to Mark Lane. And Mark Lane repeated -again---- - -Mr. JENNER. Please say again what you said to Mr. Lane, and then what -his response was, because with the rapidity with which you speak, it is -difficult to sort out his words from your words. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Well---- - -Mr. JENNER. It might be well if you started over again. You called the -station. You asked for Mr. Lane and a voice responded. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. You then said, "Mark Lane"? And he responded? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. All right. Now, carry on from there. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I told him that he had better check his facts, that he is -off on a tangent, that there is absolutely no factual background. - -Mr. JENNER. For what? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. For him saying, his allegations, that I had had this -meeting with Tippit in Ruby's bar. - -Mr. JENNER. Did you repeat that again? Did you repeat again that you -had not been in the Carousel Club at anytime? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I don't know if I repeated it at that time. I just made -a point of saying that he had better check his facts and talk with me -also, and get both sides of the story here, before he got himself in -trouble. By trouble, I had assumed he knew what I meant--I meant a -lawsuit. And I would have sued him, but I could not find a lawyer to -handle the case. They said any publicity that comes out of it would be -only bad. So I dropped it. Several days later---- - -Mr. JENNER. Have you finished the conversation? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I have finished the conversation with him. Several days -later I got ahold of his office number. - -Mr. JENNER. Would you fix the time of this Town Hall meeting broadcast, -as best you can. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I am pretty sure it was on the 28th or the morning of the -29th--on the Town Hall thing? That was the afternoon of the 28th of -April, I believe. I believe it was April. It was prior to his coming -to a hearing here at the Commission. And in any case, I telephoned him -several days after our radio and telephone conversation--I telephoned -him at his office in Manhattan and got him on the line again. And I -said, "Well, what has happened?" I was very curious as to what he had -done about this. - -Mr. JENNER. Where did you reach him? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. At his office in Manhattan. I do not know the address. I -had first contacted a law firm he was associated with previously, and -they gave me his office number in lower Manhattan. And I telephoned him -at his office. The secretary answered, then he got on the line. And he -said this time--I don't recall exactly what was said before or after -this particular part of the conversation. But I said that I want to -meet this guy in Dallas, the one who told him this story and call him -a liar to his face, and that I wanted it to be a public meeting, and -Mark Lane said he would arrange for a public meeting, he would pay my -transportation to Dallas to see this guy as soon as he could arrange a -meeting. And I have not heard from him since. - -Mr. JENNER. To check that date you gave us again. Mr. Weissman--Mr. -Lane appeared before the Commission on Wednesday, March 4, 1964. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. March 4? March? I did not think it was that long ago. If -he appeared March 4, then the conversation--well, I stand corrected. I -am not positive of the month. - -Mr. JENNER. It might have been February 28? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. It might have been. If it was March 4 he appeared here, -it might have been February 28, because there seemed to be several -weeks lapse between his coming here---- - -Mr. JENNER. Are you certain, however, that your telephone conversation -with him the evening of the broadcast following the Town Hall meeting -was before he appeared before the Commission? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Unless he appeared twice, I am a 100 percent positive. - -Mr. JENNER. And from what source did your information come that he had -appeared before the Commission? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Newspapers. - -Mr. JENNER. I think we can close this. I show you Garner Exhibit No. 1. -Did you ever see the person who is shown on that photograph? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. No. - -Mr. JENNER. I show you Commission Exhibit No. 520 and direct your -attention to the man in the white tee shirt between the two policemen. -Did you ever see him before? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. No. - -Mr. JENNER. Prior to November 22, 1963, had you ever seen him? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Never. - -Mr. JENNER. And except for these photographs, and whatever newspaper -clippings or photos you have seen since November 22, or television -shows on or after November 22, have you ever seen that person in the -flesh? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Never. - -Mr. JENNER. Did you ever have any contact with him of any kind? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Never. - -Mr. JENNER. Telephone calls, letters, memoranda of any kind or -character? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Never. - -Mr. JENNER. Mr. Chairman, there is correspondence that Mr. Weissman -has, and I wonder if it would be convenient with the Commission if we -could return at 2:30. In the meantime I will be able to look at some of -the material he has to see if any of it is relevant and helpful to the -Commission. - -Mr. DULLES. I would like to adjourn at this time if we can, because I -have a luncheon appointment. - -Mr. JENNER. That is what I am suggesting, sir. - -Mr. DULLES. Good. - -We will adjourn until 2:30. - -(Whereupon, at 1:05 p.m., the President's Commission recessed.) - - - - -Afternoon Session - -TESTIMONY OF BERNARD WILLIAM WEISSMAN RESUMED - - -The President's Commission reconvened at 2:45 p.m. - -(The Chairman and Mr. Dulles being present.) - -The CHAIRMAN. The Commission will be in order. You may proceed. - -Mr. JENNER. Thank you. Mr. Chief Justice. - -Whereupon, Bernard Weissman was recalled as a witness and having been -previously duly sworn, testified further as follows: - -Mr. JENNER. Mr. Chief Justice, during the luncheon hour Mr. Weissman -has afforded us an opportunity to examine some of this correspondence, -to which he made reference this morning. I have selected a few of these -pieces of correspondence as rounding out the genesis of CUSA and its -affiliate, AMBUS, and the infiltration of the rightist organizations in -Dallas that the witness described. - -I will identify these without reading from them, as some of them are -rather lengthy. - -The CHAIRMAN. Very well. - -Mr. JENNER. First, Mr. Weissman, I have a letter on the letterhead -of National Indignation Convention, the top of which has scrawled in -ink longhand "Top Secret." It is a five-page longhand letter. At the -bottom of each is written the word "Destroy." I have marked an envelope -postmarked Dallas, Tex., on November 5, 1962 as Commission Exhibit No. -1048, the first exhibit being identified as Commission Exhibit No. 1047. - -(The documents referred to were marked respectively Commission Exhibits -Nos. 1047 and 1048 for identification.) - -Mr. JENNER. The envelope is addressed to SP-4 Larry Jones, APO Station -407, New York, N.Y. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. Do you recognize the handwriting on the envelope? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes; that is Larrie's. - -Mr. JENNER. And the Larry Jones is the man to whom you made reference -in your testimony? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. The document Commission Exhibit No. 1047, do you recognize -that handwriting? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. It appears to be Larrie's. - -Mr. JENNER. Do you recognize it? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. And was document Commission Exhibit No. 1047, enclosed in -the envelope marked Commission Exhibit No. 1048? - -Mr. DULLES. Is there any signature on those documents? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. This page should be last. - -Mr. JENNER. On the page which is marked with a circle 7, there appears -to be a signature L-a-r-r-i-e. Do you recognize that signature? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. That is Larrie Schmidt's signature. - -Mr. JENNER. How did you come into possession of the documents now -identified, one of which was addressed to Larry Jones rather than you? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Larry Jones gave it to me. - -Mr. JENNER. Where? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. In Munich, Germany. - -Mr. JENNER. And when he handed the document to you was Exhibit No. 1047 -enclosed in Exhibit No. 1048? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. Next is a three-page letter dated Dallas, Tex., January 4, -1963, typewritten, addressed to "Dear Bernie." Is that you? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. Marked as Commission Exhibit No. 1040. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 1040 for -identification.) - -Mr. JENNER. It is signed in typing "Larrie." - -A document of five pages marked Commission Exhibit No. 1041 on the -first page of which appears the signature Larrie H. Schmidt. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 1041 for -identification.) - -Mr. JENNER. Do you recognize that signature? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. Whose is it? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Larrie Schmidt's. - -Mr. JENNER. The last of this series of letter-sized papers is -a five-page document titled "A Code of Conduct for Members of -Conservatism U.S.A." which has been marked Commission Exhibit No. 1042. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 1042 for -identification.) - -Mr. JENNER. I understand that these three documents that I have -now identified were enclosed in an envelope which has been marked -Commission Exhibit No. 1043, in the upper left-hand corner, L. H. -Schmidt, 5417b Lewis Street, Dallas 6, Tex., addressed to Private First -Class Bernie Weissman. Is that you? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. That is me. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 1043 for -identification.) - -Mr. JENNER. That is postmarked Dallas, January 4, 1963. - -Did you receive the documents, now identified as Commission Exhibits -Nos. 1040, 1041, 1042, and 1043? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes, I did. - -Mr. JENNER. Were the first of those three--were the first three of -those exhibits I have named enclosed in the document identified as -Commission Exhibit No. 1043? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. I have already identified the signature. - -These documents relate to the development of and plans for CUSA, do -they not? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. They do. - -Mr. JENNER. And the conduct of CUSA? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. The next two documents, a three-page letter typed on the -top "Headquarters Conservatism U.S.A.," dated February 2, 1963, at -Dallas, Tex., 5417b Lewis Street, which I have marked as Commission -Exhibit No. 1049. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 1049 for -identification.) - -Mr. JENNER. This is addressed "To All Members." It is signed in typing -"Sincerely, Larrie." Have you seen that document before? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes; I have. - -Mr. JENNER. And was it enclosed in an envelope? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. It was. - -Mr. JENNER. Was it sent to you? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes; it was. - -Mr. JENNER. Is that document the envelope Commission Exhibit No. 1050? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. That is right. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 1050 for -identification.) - -Mr. JENNER. There is handwriting on the face of Exhibit No. 1050. Whose -handwriting is that? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. That is mine. - -Mr. JENNER. Read it. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. "Meeting with Bob Morris. Infiltration of YAF by CUSA." - -Mr. JENNER. Mr. Chief Justice and members of the Commission, the -three-page document relates to a meeting held in the home of Dr. -Morris. Is that Dr. Robert Morris? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. That is right, of Dallas, Tex. - -Mr. JENNER. Which recounts the plans for infiltration of conservative -groups in Dallas, Tex., upon which the witness has somewhat expanded -in his testimony this morning. - -Mr. DULLES. Has the witness indicated who Mr. Bob Morris was? I don't -recall that. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Bob Morris at that time was president of the Defenders of -American Liberties in Dallas, Tex., and recently was a candidate for -political office in Dallas. - -Mr. DULLES. What office? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I believe he was running in the primary for Senator. - -Mr. JENNER. U.S. Senate. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. U.S. Senator. - -Mr. JENNER. I just want to be sure I have covered this. You received -both of the documents now marked Commission Exhibits Nos. 1050 and 1049 -in due course through the U.S. mail at your station in Munich, Germany? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes, sir; I did. - -Mr. JENNER. The next series is--consists of a two-page letter which has -been marked Commission Exhibit No. 1044, addressed to "Dear Bernie" at -Dallas, Tex., on June 13, 1963, also signed in typing "Best, Larrie." -That is again Larrie Schmidt, is it? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 1044 for -identification.) - -Mr. JENNER. That document was enclosed in what? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. In this envelope here. - -Mr. JENNER. And the envelope is marked Commission Exhibit No. 1046? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. That's right. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 1046 for -identification.) - -Mr. JENNER. For the purposes of the record, Commission Exhibit No. -1046 is an envelope postmarked at Dallas, Tex., on June 14, 1963. -The envelope is imprinted with "Young Americans for Freedom. Inc., -Southwestern U.S. Regional Headquarters, P.O. Box 2364, Dallas 21, -Texas," and addressed to Pfc. Bernie Weissman. That is you? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. Was there anything else enclosed in an envelope? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I believe it was this. - -Mr. JENNER. A newspaper clipping from the Dallas Morning News which -has been marked and identified as Commission Exhibit No. 1045. Is that -right? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. That's right. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 1045 for -identification.) - -Mr. JENNER. The caption of this reads "Panel Reports Birch Society -Dedicated But Not Dangerous." - -Those three documents were received by you from Larrie Schmidt? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. That is right. - -Mr. JENNER. The third from the last of this series, a letter dated at -Dallas, Tex., June 2, 1963, addressed to "Dear Bernie," Commission -Exhibit No. 1037. Also in typing "Larrie." Who is that? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Larrie Schmidt. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 1037 for -identification.) - -Mr. JENNER. There is some handwriting at the bottom of that letter--do -you recognize it? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes; that is Larrie Schmidt's. - -Mr. JENNER. Did you receive that document? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I did. - -Mr. JENNER. And was the handwriting on the document when you received -it? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes; it was. - -Mr. JENNER. Was it enclosed in an envelope? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes; it was. - -Mr. JENNER. You received the mail, then. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. In the envelope I now show you marked Commission Exhibit -No. 1037-A? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 1037-A for -identification.) - -Mr. JENNER. Addressed to you. Was there something further enclosed with -those? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I think this piece. - -Mr. JENNER. Which is Commission Exhibit No. 1037-B. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 1037-B for -identification.) - -Mr. JENNER. This is a handbill of Young Americans For Freedom, Inc. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. That's right. - -Mr. JENNER. You received all three documents I have now identified as -Commission Exhibits Nos. 1037, 1037-A, and 1037-B in due course through -the U.S. mail. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes; I did. - -Mr. JENNER. Next to the last of this series is a letter, single page -marked Commission Exhibit No. 1038, dated June 26, 1963, at Dallas, -Tex., addressed to "Dear Bernie" signed again in typewriting as -"Larrie." Have you seen that document before? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes; I have. - -Mr. JENNER. When did you first see it? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. When I received it in the mail. - -Mr. JENNER. I show you an envelope marked Commission Exhibit No. 1038-A. - -(The document was marked Commission Exhibit No. 1038-A for -identification.) - -Mr. JENNER. Is that envelope the envelope in which Commission Exhibit -No. 1038 was enclosed? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes; and as a reference, the handwriting on the outside -of these envelopes on this and the other exhibits that refer to the -contents were put on by me about a week ago, so I could identify it. - -Mr. JENNER. Please read what you have written on the face of Commission -Exhibit No. 1038-A. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. "Ready to take over YAF. Jones in Dallas. Ducharme Club." - -Mr. JENNER. And that Ducharme Club is the club, the private club, -semi-private club in Dallas that you mentioned in your testimony this -morning. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. Lastly, a single-page exhibit, Commission Exhibit No. 1039, -dated at Munich, Germany, on July 31, 1963. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 1039 for -identification.) - -Mr. JENNER. This purports to be a copy of a letter apparently from you -to Larrie Schmidt, is that correct, sir? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. That's right. - -Mr. JENNER. And this is a carbon copy of the actual letter? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. That's right. - -Mr. JENNER. Did you mail the original of this? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I did. - -Mr. JENNER. To whom? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Larrie Schmidt. - -Mr. JENNER. On or about the date this letter bears? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. That's right. - -Mr. DULLES. What date is that? - -Mr. JENNER. July 21, 1963. - -On Commission Exhibit No. 1043, which is the envelope which enclosed -several other exhibits, there is some handwriting. It that yours? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. Would you read it. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. "Membership List 1962. Code of Conduct and Introduction -to CUSA. Ultimatum." - -Mr. JENNER. And that is a shorthand description or summary of the -contents of the envelope? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. On Commission Exhibit No. 1048, which is also an envelope, -there appears to be written on the face "NIC Infiltration." Whose -handwriting it that? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. That's mine. - -Mr. JENNER. And you put it on there under the circumstances you have -now related? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. Mr. Weissman, I will show you Commission Exhibit No. 996. -Have you ever seen a counterpart of that exhibit which is entitled -"Wanted for Treason"? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Never directly. - -Mr. JENNER. Tell us about your first acquaintance with that, with the -circumstances, if you know, of how it came into existence, and who had -anything to do with it. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Well, I can only go by hearsay on this--what I have seen -and what I have heard from other individuals. - -Mr. JENNER. Did this come to your attention before November 22, 1963, -or after? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. After. - -Mr. JENNER. Tell what you know, please. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I had heard that these handbills were distributed -somewhere in North Dallas, I believe, on the university campus I -believe it was, the University of Dallas campus. - -Mr. JENNER. From what source did you hear this? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Now, I think it was--I am not sure--I think it might have -been Larrie or his brother Bob. I am not sure. Larrie declaimed any -knowledge of this. I know he had nothing to do with this particular -handbill. - -Mr. JENNER. How do you know that? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. He would have told me. - -Mr. JENNER. That's the basis for your supposition? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes; and I saw this handbill, or something similar to -it, in the back of a station wagon used by Larrie's brother Bob in -transporting---- - -Mr. JENNER. When? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. This was several days after the assassination. There -was one crumpled up in the back. And I happened to look through the -window and see it. This was in front of the Ducharme Club, as a -matter of fact. It was one night. And I saw this. And I saw something -"Treason"--I had heard about the handbills. - -Mr. JENNER. From whom? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Excuse me? - -Mr. JENNER. From whom, sir? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I think it was Larrie. I cannot be hundred percent sure. -I did not take too much interest in it at the time. But in any case, -I did see something resembling this, only it seemed to be a larger -picture of President Kennedy. But in any case, it was in the back of -a station wagon owned by General Walker, Edwin Walker, or by what--if -incorporated, by the corporation he is with, chairman of. - -Mr. JENNER. How did you know that? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Well, I know that Bob was General Walker's chauffeur, -and by seeing this crumpled up in the back, behind the front seat on -the floor of the car, I naturally assumed that it had something to do -with General Walker. Exactly what or how, or if he had distributed it, -I have no idea. I do not have the faintest idea. I did not go into it -any further, because I felt that everything was past, and I was leaving -Dallas anyway. I had made up my mind. - -(At this point, Senator Cooper entered the hearing room.) - -Mr. JENNER. When you say you had heard about this matter, that is the -handbill, or handbill similar to it, had you heard about that before -November 22, 1963? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Not to my recollection, no. - -Mr. JENNER. Shortly after that? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. And before you left Dallas? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. Did you have anything to do with the bringing into -existence of this or similar handbills? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. None; none whatsoever. - -Mr. JENNER. Other than the possibility of Bob Schmidt having something -to do with them under the circumstances you have related, did any -others of your group have anything to do with creating this type of -literature and distribution of handbills? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. None that I know of. - -The CHAIRMAN. How about the names of those people who were in on it? - -Mr. JENNER. On the handbill? - -The CHAIRMAN. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. Did you become acquainted at any time with Robert A. Surrey? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. No. - -Mr. JENNER. With Robert G. Klause? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. No. - -Mr. JENNER. With J. T. Monk? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. No. - -Mr. JENNER. Did you become acquainted at any time with the Johnson -Printing Co.? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. No. - -Mr. JENNER. Did you have any materials printed--and when I say you, I -mean you or your group--while you were in Dallas? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Not that I know of. I personally have no knowledge of -anything being printed. - -Mr. JENNER. Did you ever hear of the Lettercraft Printing Co.? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. No; I have not. - -Mr. JENNER. Did you ever hear of Ashland Frederick Birchwell? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. No. - -Mr. JENNER. Or have any contact with him? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Not that I know of. I guess I must have met two or three -dozen people. For example, when we went up to Joe Grinnan's office at -various times, we would come down and eat in the cafeteria, and there -would be somebody sitting with him, and there would be introductions. I -never remembered their names, because it was just in passing. I never -had any personal contact, really. - -Mr. JENNER. Did you meet General Walker at any time while you were in -Dallas? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Never did. - -Mr. JENNER. Did you meet anybody or know anybody by the name of Mercer? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. No. - -Mr. JENNER. While you were in Dallas--Mrs. Clifford or Dorothy Mercer? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. No. - -Mr. JENNER. Or Mr. Clifford Mercer? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Definitely not. - -Mr. JENNER. Among the exhibits we have identified this afternoon is a -list of members. Those were the members of CUSA as of that particular -time? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. And the changes in membership you have recounted in your -testimony this morning, is that correct, sir? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes; I am sorry--I knew I had left something out of -one of those. I do not know which exhibit is. But it is the one that -says---- - -Mr. JENNER. I will hand them back to you, and you can tell me. - -You now have in your hand a sheet of paper. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. I take it that sheet of paper came from one of the -envelopes we have already marked? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. This one here. - -Mr. JENNER. The answer is yes? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes. - -Mr. JENNER. I will mark this sheet as Commission Exhibit No. 1051. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 1051 for -identification.) - -Mr. JENNER. Would you tell us in what envelope Commission Exhibit No. -1051 was enclosed? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Commission Exhibit No. 1043. - -Mr. JENNER. And what is Commission Exhibit No. 1051? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Commission Exhibit No. 1051 was a current membership list -as of about January 4, 1963. If you like, I can go over this and tell -you who was in no way really associated with it at the time or active. - -Mr. DULLES. Membership in CUSA? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. In CUSA, yes. It lists Larrie Schmidt, Larry C. Jones, -Bernie Weissman, Norman Baker, James Moseley as partners. Members as -Ken Glazbrook, Bob Weiss, who was not active after about--at about the -time this was printed--these men dropped from the active list. Herb -Starr was not active. Chuck McLain was not active. Richard Harsch was -not active. Hank Tanaro was not active. Sheila McDonald was not active. -And the rest of the list were active in one form or another--some to a -much lesser degree than the others. - -Mr. JENNER. Now, the 50-odd responses that you received to Commission -Exhibit No. 1031, when you went to the post office box on the following -Sunday, the 24th of November 1963, did you recognize the names of any -of the persons who responded? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. None--none at all. - -Mr. JENNER. Was there any response from Jack Ruby? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Not under his name. - -Mr. JENNER. And you say about a third of those responses were favorable -and two-thirds unfavorable. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. That's right. - -Mr. JENNER. Insofar as the questions asked on Exhibit--Commission -Exhibit No. 1031 are concerned? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes. - -The CHAIRMAN. When you said there was no letter in the box under the -name of Jack Ruby does that infer that there was one by any other name? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Well, to put it very exact, if I did receive a letter -from Jack Ruby, I have no knowledge of it. - -The CHAIRMAN. That is what I wanted to know. - -Mr. JENNER. And apart from--I asked you also the general question -whether you recognized any names. I would like to add to that--did -you recognize in reading over any of those letters or responses any -persons, regardless of what name was signed to the document? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. None whatsoever. - -Mr. JENNER. During the noon recess I have had the witness read through -an interview with him by the FBI on the 5th of December 1963. You have -read that? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes; I have. - -Mr. JENNER. Does that accurately reflect the interview which the FBI -had with you on that day? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. It does. The only variance you might find is that at the -time I had the interview with the FBI, I did not develop the CUSA story -with them. And they did not press the issue, and I did not go into it. - -Mr. JENNER. But it does accurately reflect what took place during the -course of that interview. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Exactly. - -Mr. JENNER. What you said--it reports it accurately. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes; very accurately. - -Mr. JENNER. Mr. Chief Justice, I was using this method in order to -shorten the balance of Mr. Weissman's testimony. There are many details -here that I wanted to spare the Commission. - -I will mark that with the next exhibit number, Commission Exhibit No. -1052. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 1052 for -identification.) - -Mr. JENNER. Mr. Chief Justice, I offer in evidence the exhibits which -have been identified--I will read the exhibit numbers. Commission -Exhibits Nos. 1031 through 1052, both inclusive, with some of the -envelopes designated with subletters A, and one of the other documents -designated with the subletter B. I ask that those exhibits be admitted -in evidence with the exhibit numbers which appear on them, each of -which has been recited in the record. - -The CHAIRMAN. They may be admitted under those numbers. - -(The documents referred to, heretofore marked for identification as -Commission Exhibits Nos. 1031 through 1052 inclusive, were received in -evidence.) - -Mr. JENNER. I have no further questions of the witness. Mr. Flannery, -do you have anything? - -The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Dulles, do you have any questions you would like to -ask? - -Mr. DULLES. Just one general question. From the questions which have -been addressed to you, Mr. Weissman, you have a general idea of what -the Commission, the area of search of the Commission is so far as you -are concerned. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes. - -Mr. DULLES. Did anything occur to you of any significance which you -could add or would like to add to the answers you have made to the -questions you have already given? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Excuse me, please. There is just one thing but it is a -question of--it is not a positive identification or anything like that. -But on the day I went to the post office to pick up the mail there was -a gentleman waiting, observing the box, the post office box in the -Dallas post office. Now, Bill Burley was waiting in my car outside, -driving around the block because the traffic was quite heavy. I went -in with Ken Glazbrook, who had just come to Dallas about a day or so -before by bus from the East Coast. He got off a freighter from Sweden. -And this individual seemed to be about--I would put him at about 60 -years old. And I thought about it since. And I said that might have -been Jack Ruby, because he was short enough to be. But my recollection -of the individual that followed me, when we subsequently lost in the -crowd, and jumped into the car and took off, was that one time not more -than 3 feet away from me--though I did not stare into his face, because -I did not know if this fellow was going to shoot me or say something. - -Mr. JENNER. You were then frightened; were you not? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes, sir. And we went across through traffic and up a -street and down a street and lost this individual and jumped into the -car and took off back to the apartment. And to this day I do not know -whether it was Ruby--because frankly my recollection of the individual -on the pictures I have seen of Ruby in the newspapers, they do not seem -to jibe--just the size. This fellow was about 5 foot 6 or so. He was -wearing tan clothing with a Stetson hat, a tan Stetson hat. - -Mr. JENNER. A typical Texas western hat, sometimes called a 10-gallon -hat? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. That's right. And this is about the only thing else I -have to add. - -Mr. JENNER. Did he follow you? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. He followed us from the box down the steps of the post -office to the traffic light. We crossed the street, he walked up the -other side of the street adjacent to the post office, directly opposite -us. And we were going halfway up and he started to cross the corner. We -quickly ran back to the corner, across which we came. At that time Bill -had come around the corner in the car, he knew nothing about it, we -jumped in, sat down low and went in a straight line, made the turn and -went back to the apartment. And I have never seen the individual since. - -Mr. DULLES. This post office box from which you were taking the mail, -was that box the one that was advertised in the paper? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes. - -Mr. DULLES. So that the number of that box was known. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes; it was. This individual was obviously waiting for -me. I did not see him. Ken pointed him out to me. We expected possibly -some sort of trouble there. And Ken was walking about 6 feet to the -right of me, on another side of the post office tables that are in the -middle of the aisle. So if I got in any difficulty he would be there to -help. And he noticed this individual and pointed him out to me. And -this fellow just followed us right out, and that was that. - -Mr. DULLES. As I recall, you fixed the time when you went to the mail -box as probably sometime Sunday morning. - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes, sir. - -Mr. DULLES. Can you be any more definite as to the time Sunday morning -when you were there? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I am almost 100 percent sure it was between 8 and 9 -o'clock. - -Mr. DULLES. In the morning? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes, sir. - -Mr. DULLES. I have no further questions. - -The CHAIRMAN. Senator Cooper, have you any questions? - -Senator COOPER. What age did the man seem to be? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. About 60. - -Senator COOPER. I have two or three other questions. - -Did your organization, CUSA, ever consider violence as a means to -reaching its objectives? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. This had been--I don't remember exactly. It had been -hashed over in skull sessions, so many things come up, and you talk -about it and throw it away. These things did come up over the year -or so that I was involved in it in Munich, and thrown out. No. In -schedules that we had made up, we figured probable political happenings -over a period of years, and we took into account there might be a war -for example in 1968 or 1970 or 1972, and what would happen before or -after, or who would probably be President at that time, and the type of -action America would take. But it had never gone any further than a lot -of supposition. - -Senator COOPER. Did you consider the advertisements in the paper there -as possibly inciting to violence under the circumstances? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Definitely not. - -Senator COOPER. Was that considered at all? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Definitely not. At least not by me. And nobody ever -mentioned it. - -Senator COOPER. This group of men that you have named, of which you -were one, who formed this CUSA with objectives, both political and -business you said? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes, sir. - -Senator COOPER. Was there any background of writings or theory of any -kind upon which you depended? Where did it come from? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Let's see. You are putting me in sort of a box but I -will answer you. We read, for example--for example, I did not know I -was a conservative until I got to Germany. I just knew how I felt. But -I never identified myself with any particular political leaning. I -thought I was a Democrat, an independent voter and independent thinker. -For example, I voted for Kennedy in 1960 and I would have voted against -him in 1964. But this is neither here nor there. - -We were asked--not asked--we had a list of required reading. In -other words, if you are going to expound the conservative philosophy -we figured you should know something about it, a little bit of the -background, aside from your own personal feelings. So we read, for -example--I didn't--I never did find the time to do it--some of the -fellows read "Conscience of a Conservative" by Barry Goldwater, one or -two books that Barry Goldwater had written, and "Atlas Shrugged" by Ayn -Rand, which I did not read. - -Mr. JENNER. Did the others read them? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I guess Larrie read them, because he suggested these. -There were many times when I said yes--I yessed him to death, and did -as I pleased. And this is one of the cases. - -Senator COOPER. That was about the extent of your reading background? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Not completely. In other words, I cannot point to any -specific volumes that I read for the specific purpose of giving me a -certain background. In other words, I am motivated personally by my own -feelings in the situation, and the particular dogma that you might read -in a book does not interest me too much. - -Senator COOPER. As one of your aims, did you have the purpose of making -some money out of this movement? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Out of the movement itself, no. Out of the business, yes. -Because I think it would be foolish to go on the premise that if we -would devote ourselves a hundred percent to politics that we could make -money at it, because there are laws against it, and in order to survive -while you are in politics, you have to have a business interest, -managed by yourself part time or by others full time, that can support -you while you devote yourself to politics. - -Senator COOPER. Was this business interest to be these organizations -which you were going to infiltrate and whose treasuries you might -capture? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. No. - -Senator COOPER. Or was it to be--you hoped to develop businesses -because of your political influence; is that it? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes; to put it straight on the record, we had discussed -this, and what we would do if we came into any of the treasuries -of these organizations. We felt that you can incur a lot of legal -problems if you are caught taking funds, tax-free funds, and using it -for personal gain and so forth. I am sure there are laws against it. -Exactly which ones, I do not know. I am sure there are laws against it. - -And so we felt there is nothing wrong, and it is done occasionally in -government, where occasionally you would use--you would meet someone -politically--because generally these are more affluent individuals, -people in politics. By dint of their drive they have acquired property -or moneys, et cetera. And these individuals might be willing to invest -some of their capital in some up-and-coming young businessmen, young -politicians. And we had hoped to get some money this way. Plus the -fact, by using our heads, by setting up businesses on our own that -would support us in the political goal. - -Senator COOPER. Did you study methods of propaganda? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Study methods of propaganda? No; we had discussed ways -of bringing about recruitment and so forth, in the way of pamphlets, -or things of that nature, but this never got out of the talking stage -itself. As a matter of fact---- - -Senator COOPER. You felt the way to move into political life quickly -was to get into these extreme organizations which do use a great deal -of propaganda, and are against things? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. Yes; in general, we thought these organizations because -they grew so quickly, would be relatively unorganized and easy to -infiltrate, and this proves to be quite true. They were more or less -autonomous within their own regions, and they did not have a national -director keeping tabs on everything they did. - -I have something here that was made up. It is just a list. I just -happened to remember. Publicity tactics, for example--rallies, -hangings--these are effigies, I would imagine--demonstrations, -picketing, sit-downs, stickers, billboards, boycotts, lectures, -songfests, talkathons, telephone campaigns, door-to-door campaigns. -Publicity--letters, brochures, pamphlets, booklets, stationery, flags, -songs, emblems on blazers, stickers, match covers, billboards, radio, -TV, newspapers, magazines, streetcars, taxicabs. Fund-raising would be -personal solicitation, get firms to do things free for us, parties, -teas, bridges, lectures, assessments, dues, sale of books, pins, -buttons, stationery, flags, emblems, match covers, brochures, and -pamphlets. That is it. - -Mr. JENNER. That was your program? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. This was our advertising program; yes, sir. - -Senator COOPER. Some of these activities are certainly activities -carried on by political parties. But did it ever occur to you that some -of the activities which you planned, in fact which you undertook, such -as infiltration into an organization, to try to seize control of it, -and these methods that you used--do you consider that as in the regular -spirit of our system of government? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I would say this, sir. - -Senator COOPER. Democratic system you spoke of? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. It was a question of doing something like that, or -absolutely nothing at all, never getting off the ground. And while my -belief would say no, of course not, this is not the way you do it, this -is not the way it should be done, but it was expedient at the time -to do this. And plus the fact that you certainly could not make these -organizations any worse than they were. And as far as I felt, if we -could bring them around to our way of thinking or my way of thinking, -we could have brought them around to where they were more beneficial to -the country rather than detrimental. - -Senator COOPER. That is all I want to ask. - -The CHAIRMAN. I noticed on the list that you had there of techniques -was hangings. Now, you said--you added to that, I think, that that -meant hanging in effigy, you assumed. Is that right? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. I am 100 percent sure, Your Honor, that that is what it -meant. In other words, this was just ways to attract attention, and the -college students are doing it all the time. It was just sort of tossing -it all in a pot and then putting it down on paper. - -The CHAIRMAN. Is that not provocative to violence? - -Mr. WEISSMAN. No; I think in the context that we meant it, that it was -just another way of getting possibly some publicity--like if students -in a university do not like their professor, for example, or if they -win a football game, they will hang the opposing team in effigy, or -the captain, or what have you. And it attracts a certain amount of -publicity and talk. - -We had to gain recognition in order to accomplish some of the goals -that I had stated previously. And this is just another way. In this -case, you have to consider us as young men, and effigy hanging, you -know, is just part of a young idea. - -The CHAIRMAN. I think that is all. Thank you very much, Mr. Weissman. -You may be excused. And Mr. Flannery, thank you very much for your -cooperation. - -If there are any questions you would like to ask, you may feel free to -do so now. - -Mr. FLANNERY. I have nothing. - -The CHAIRMAN. Very well. - -(At this point in the hearing, Chairman Warren left the hearing room -and the witness Robert G. Klause entered.) - - -TESTIMONY OF ROBERT G. KLAUSE - -Mr. DULLES. Would you kindly raise your right hand? - -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. KLAUSE. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. You are Robert G. Klause? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. And you appear here voluntarily today? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. I may say, Mr. Chairman, I reached Mr. Klause in Dallas -yesterday afternoon. He had just returned from a 2-week vacation. -He volunteered to come. The Secret Service got him on a plane with -but minutes to spare, and no baggage. This he did to accommodate the -Commission. - -Mr. Klause is here to testify with respect to the genesis and -dissemination of the "Wanted For Treason" handbill, Commission Exhibit -No. 996. - -Mr. DULLES. Proceed, please. - -Mr. JENNER. Your age, please? - -Mr. KLAUSE. 32. - -Mr. JENNER. You are a married man? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. You were born and reared in this country? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. Likewise your wife? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. And your parents? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. And you reside in Texas? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. Where? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Dallas. - -Mr. JENNER. What address? - -Mr. KLAUSE. 1126 South Waverly. - -Mr. JENNER. And what is the name of your mother? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Dorothy Anna Mercer. - -Mr. JENNER. And is she engaged in a printing business in Dallas? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. She and her husband? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. What is her husband's first name? Clifford? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Clifford; yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. Are you employed in their business? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. Is that the Lettercraft Printing Co.? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. And that is located where? - -Mr. KLAUSE. 2615 Oak Lawn, Dallas. - -Mr. JENNER. And how long have you been employed in the Lettercraft -Printing Co.? - -Mr. KLAUSE. I would say approximately about a year and a half. I think -we have been open about a year and a half, it might be going on 2 years. - -Mr. JENNER. And tell us what the nature of that printing company is. - -Mr. KLAUSE. Offset lithography, letterheads, statements, envelopes, -things like that. - -Mr. JENNER. Is it a small house? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. Were you employed theretofore by a different printing -company? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Sir? - -Mr. JENNER. Were you formerly employed by another printing company in -Dallas? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. And that was Johnson Printing Co.? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Johnson Printing Co.; yes, sir. With several other -companies in town. - -Mr. JENNER. I see. And where is Johnson Printing Co. located? - -Mr. KLAUSE. I think it is the 2700 block of Haskell in Dallas. - -Mr. JENNER. Did you become acquainted with Robert A. Surrey while you -were employed at Johnson Printing Co.? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. Had you known him before that? - -Mr. KLAUSE. No, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. I show you a document which has been identified and -admitted in evidence as Commission Exhibit No. 996. The particular -document I show you is a Xerox reproduction of the original exhibit. - -Did you play some part in producing the original, the original copy and -materials from which the Exhibit No. 996 I show you was prepared? - -Mr. KLAUSE. I am not too sure what you mean but as far as -laying--laying the job out, no, sir. Now, like I said, I ran the job. I -shot the negatives. - -Mr. JENNER. Perhaps we can get at it this way, sir. When first did you -have any connection with this matter? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Approximately, I would say, a month before President -Kennedy came to town. - -Mr. JENNER. How did that arise? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Mr. Surrey called on me and asked me if I would run a job. - -Mr. JENNER. You say he called on you. Where were you when he called on -you? - -Mr. KLAUSE. I believe I was at the shop. In fact, I know I was at the -shop. He must have called me at the shop. - -Mr. JENNER. When you say shop, you mean the Lettercraft Printing Co.? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. He came to Lettercraft Printing Co.? - -Mr. KLAUSE. No, sir; he called. - -Mr. JENNER. What did he say? - -Mr. KLAUSE. He said that he had a little job he would like to have run, -and would I run it myself? - -Mr. JENNER. And you responded? - -Mr. KLAUSE. I said yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. Did he come over to your shop? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Mr. Jenner, to be honest with you, really I do not remember -now. I might have gone out, or he might have come over. To be perfectly -honest, right at the present time I do not remember. - -Mr. JENNER. Did I understand you to say that you said to him you would -run it yourself? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. You mean by that something distinct from or having -Lettercraft Printing Co. run it? - -Mr. KLAUSE. He asked me if I was interested in doing a little job on -the side, and I said yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. By "on the side," does that mean that you were going to -do some reproduction printing for him, other than as a job for the -Lettercraft Printing Co.? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Yes, sir. You see, I have my own shop. - -Mr. JENNER. You do? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. Where is that located? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Actually, I operate out of my house. But I have always had -my own shop. I mean I have two or three little insert accounts that -I do, and a couple of beauty suppliers. They will come in and want -500 letterheads. For a long time, when I was out of work, I went out -and solicited work door to door. Then I would job them out to other -printers. And then when I could get my hands on a press, I would run -them myself. - -Mr. JENNER. Was Mr. Surrey aware of this practice? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Yes, sir; I am sure he was. - -Mr. JENNER. And he proposed to you at the outset that you do it "on the -side"? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. Now, you met with Mr. Surrey after this telephone call? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. Do you recall whether it was at your home or whether it was -at the Lettercraft Co. or some other place? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Actually, like I say, Mr. Jenner, I am not real sure. I -do not know whether it was out at--I am pretty sure it was not at the -shop. And Mr. Surrey has never been to my house. And so it must have -been out. - -Mr. JENNER. Now, there are two reproductions of President Kennedy, a -profile and a front view. Did you prepare the plates from which those -profiles were made? - -Mr. KLAUSE. By preparing the plates--the only thing that I actually did -is--either it was two newspaper clippings or magazine clippings. - -Mr. JENNER. From whom did you receive the magazine clippings? - -Mr. KLAUSE. From Mr. Surrey. - -Mr. JENNER. They were slick paper magazine clippings? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Something on a slick paper basis; yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. That contained the front and profile of President Kennedy, -which is reproduced on Commission Exhibit No. 996? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. Now, what did you do with those two slick magazine -reproductions of President Kennedy's head? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Well, I tried to shoot them, and I could not shoot them. We -have our own camera. We take a picture of it--reproduce it. - -Mr. JENNER. You must assume that none of us is experienced in the -printing business. And when you say "shoot"---- - -Mr. KLAUSE. I will explain myself more carefully. When they were -brought to me---- - -Mr. JENNER. By Mr. Surrey? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Yes, sir. Then I tried to make negatives of them---- - -Mr. JENNER. Negatives on film? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Yes, sir; on film. - -Mr. JENNER. Yes. - -Mr. KLAUSE. I could not do it. When I take a picture of copy, on most -of your offset or lithography work, you have dot patterns. And when -I would try to use my camera, the dot patterns would kind of blur, -and you could not see what it was. It was just a big blur. So I sent -the negatives of the two pictures downtown, down to Monk Brothers -Lithography Service downtown, which shoots nothing but negatives. - -Mr. JENNER. That is J. T. Monk? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Tommy Monk, of Monk Bros. - -Mr. JENNER. J. T. Monk is the father, and Tommy Monk, or J. T. Monk, -Jr., is the son. - -Mr. KLAUSE. The only person I know down there is Tommy. - -Mr. JENNER. He is a young man? - -Mr. KLAUSE. No, sir; Tommy I have known 12 or 13 years. He is somewhere -around 50, 55, probably. - -Mr. JENNER. Is he the apparent owner or manager at least of this---- - -Mr. KLAUSE. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. Is it a lithography company? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Well, it is a negative service. In other words, what -they do is supply the printers with blanks, and ink, and ink knives, -different fountain solutions, things like that, for the press, and also -they have their own cameras. They have probably two $15,000 or $20,000 -cameras there. And, of course, they can produce work from their cameras -I cannot touch on my little camera, or our camera at the shop. - -Mr. JENNER. So you took the two magazine pictures of President Kennedy -to Monk Bros.? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. For the purpose of having Monk Bros. make negatives, film -negatives of them? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. Which in turn were to be employed to do what? - -Mr. KLAUSE. To be employed to be run on this job. I mean it was part of -this piece right here. - -Mr. JENNER. And do you recall what the charge was by Monk Bros. for -that service? - -Mr. KLAUSE. No, sir; I think it was around three and a half, four and a -half, something like that. - -Mr. JENNER. Did you pay in cash? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. And you paid in cash because you did not want it charged to -Lettercraft Printing Co.? - -Mr. KLAUSE. No, sir; I originally had a charge account at Monk Bros. -But I still owe a little on my bill down there; and at the time I just -rather had paid for it. Not knowing what the job was then anyway--I -mean when I go down there and buy supplies for myself, since--I owe the -man money, I try whatever I can to pay for, because I have got a pretty -nice little bill down there now, and I do not want to run it up any -higher. - -Mr. JENNER. When you received the negatives, then what did you do with -the negatives? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Well, the bottom part was shot, or picture was made with -the camera at our shop; and then I stripped the negative in. In other -words, I put the two top pieces, the picture and the bottom part -together. And then made a plate on it. - -Mr. JENNER. Made a plate from those negatives? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. In turn to be employed in printing the handbill? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. When you received those negatives, did you again -communicate with Mr. Surrey? - -Mr. KLAUSE. I do not believe I understand what you mean, Mr. Jenner. - -Mr. JENNER. After you obtained usable negatives from Monk Bros., did -you advise Mr. Surrey that you now had obtained those usable negatives -and would be able to proceed with the job? - -Mr. KLAUSE. No, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. Had Mr. Surrey advised you as to how many he wished of -these handbills? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Approximately--he said approximately 6,000, 7,000. - -Mr. JENNER. You made a plate from which the front and profile of -President Kennedy as appears on Exhibit No. 996 was made? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. Now, there is copy below the profile and front view, as you -will notice on the exhibit before you. From what source did you receive -that copy? - -Mr. KLAUSE. That copy came, sir; as was--just approximately about the -way it is here. I do not know whether it was typed on--I do not know -that much about a Varitypewriter. Or it might have been letterpress. -Somebody might have set it up letterpress or Linotype, and ran a press -proof; I do not know. - -Mr. JENNER. From whom did you receive that press-proof copy? - -Mr. KLAUSE. I received all the copy from Mr. Surrey. - -Mr. JENNER. And the copy, then, as you received it from Mr. Surrey, -which is in turn reflected on Commission Exhibit No. 996, was in the -form at that time, when you received it from Mr. Surrey, that it now -appears in on Commission Exhibit No. 996? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. How did you reproduce it onto the handbill? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Well, this was run offset, like I said, all of it was put -on film. Then it was burnt into what we call a metal plate, which we -expose to light. It is a light-sensitive plate, and any time light hits -it, where you have clear spots on your film, that image of the light -will burn into your plate. When you process the plate out, you come up -with a developer, which brings the image out. Then once you put that -plate on the press, that image will pick up type. - -Mr. JENNER. When did Mr. Surrey bring you that copy with respect to the -time when he brought the two slick magazine reproductions of President -Kennedy's profile and front views? - -Mr. KLAUSE. I believe it was all at the same time. This was--the -pictures were the only thing I even took out of the envelope at one -time. The rest of it I did not even bother to look at. - -Mr. JENNER. Who, if anybody, assisted you in printing up the handbills? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Nobody. - -Mr. JENNER. Mrs. Klause did not help you? - -Mr. KLAUSE. She was in front of the shop. In fact, I do not even think -she ever came back. - -Mr. JENNER. When you say shop are you talking now of your own shop in -your home or the shop at Lettercraft? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Lettercraft. - -Mr. JENNER. So the handbills were actually printed by you in the -Lettercraft Printing Co. shop? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Yes, sir; after hours. - -Mr. JENNER. After you had--how many did you print, if you recall? - -Mr. KLAUSE. I would say, Mr. Jenner, approximately 5,000--5,200, 5,300. - -Mr. JENNER. What did you do with them after you printed them? - -Mr. KLAUSE. I put them in a box. In fact, I did not even wrap them. I -just stuck them in a box. And I contacted Mr. Surrey the next day. - -Mr. JENNER. And now, give us your recollection as to when you made -contact with Mr. Surrey--with particular reference to November 22, 1963. - -Mr. KLAUSE. I would say, sir; it was approximately 2 or 2-1/2 weeks -before Mr. Kennedy was in Dallas. - -Mr. JENNER. That would be the early part of November 1963? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Yes, sir; as close as I can remember right now. - -Mr. JENNER. Did you deliver the 5,000 plus handbills personally to Mr. -Surrey? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. And where did that delivery take place? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Now, that I do remember. That was about 5 blocks -approximately from the shop. It was--from Lettercraft. It was a little -cafe there which we call the Waffle Shop. It is the Pal's Waffle Shop. - -Mr. JENNER. Did you make--I take it then you made arrangements with Mr. -Surrey to meet him at Pal's Waffle Shop, rather than he come to the -Lettercraft Printing Co. - -Mr. KLAUSE. I called him and told him that they were ready, and he -said, "Where can I meet you?" and I was getting ready to go to lunch at -the time anyway. I believe it was lunch or coffee. I said, "I'm getting -ready to go out for coffee. I am going to go up about 5 blocks up the -street to the Waffle Shop." He said, "I'll meet you there, then." - -Mr. JENNER. Did Mrs. Klause accompany you? - -Mr. KLAUSE. No, sir; she was at work. - -Mr. JENNER. Anybody accompany you? - -Mr. KLAUSE. No, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. You met Mr. Surrey at the Pal's Waffle Shop? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. You delivered him all of the handbills you had printed up? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. What color were those? - -Mr. KLAUSE. The handbills were run on what we call assorted dodger -stock--green and orange and blue and yellow. It is a cheap colored -newspaper print is what it is. - -Mr. JENNER. From where did you obtain the assorted dodger stock? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Olmstead Kirk Paper Co. - -Mr. JENNER. Did you make it as an individual purchase or was that a -purchase on behalf of the Lettercraft Printing Co.? - -Mr. KLAUSE. No; that was my own purchase. - -Mr. JENNER. You purchased that and paid for it in cash? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. Now, were you paid for this work you did for Mr. Surrey? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. And what did he pay you? - -Mr. KLAUSE. I think it was $40, Mr. Jenner. In fact, I am almost -positive. - -Mr. JENNER. Was it in cash? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. When next did you see Mr. Surrey after you had delivered -the handbills to him? - -Mr. KLAUSE. I would say approximately 2 or 3 weeks after Mr. Kennedy -was assassinated in Dallas. - -Mr. JENNER. So I take it then you had no contact with Mr. Surrey of any -kind or character from the day you delivered the 5,000 plus handbills -to him in Pal's Waffle Shop until some 2 weeks after President -Kennedy's assassination on November 22, 1963. - -Mr. KLAUSE. Yes, sir; that is correct. - -Mr. JENNER. That whole time span was a month to 5 weeks? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Yes, sir; and then at that time I called Mr. Surrey myself -personally. - -Mr. JENNER. Why? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Like I said, I have two or three accounts, and I had one -job that I could not run, it was a big job. A lot of printers will work -with other printers in jobbing out work. I took this job and jobbed it -out--Mr. Surrey jobbed it out to Johnson, and let Johnson run it. And I -in turn paid Bob for the job, when the people paid me, and I delivered -the job, and I made a commission off of it. - -Mr. JENNER. On that occasion when you saw Mr. Surrey, did you have a -conversation--did you have any conversation with him with respect to -the dodger or handbill, Commission Exhibit No. 996? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Yes, sir; I imagine there was. I cannot exactly say what -it is now. But I imagine there was something said--because I was quite -upset about it at the time. - -Mr. JENNER. The FBI interviewed you about this incident, did they not? - -Mr. KLAUSE. The Secret Service did; yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. And when you were first interviewed, you did not disclose -to the Secret Service the facts with respect to Mr. Surrey delivering -this material to you and your having printed it for him, delivered it -to him, and he paying you? - -Mr. KLAUSE. No, sir; nothing at all. - -Mr. JENNER. What led you to do that, Mr. Klause? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Well, I started thinking about it, and then the folks were -getting real upset about it, because I had put them in a jam, which it -was my own fault. - -Mr. JENNER. When you say folks, you mean your mother and stepfather? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Yes, sir; and I mean I like to help friends as much as I -can, and be good to people as much as I can. But people in my family -are going to come closer than my friends are. - -Mr. JENNER. You finally decided to reveal the full facts respecting -this handbill? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. And you did so to the Secret Service? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. Did Mr. Surrey approach you at any time to suggest to you -that you should not reveal the source of this handbill? - -Mr. KLAUSE. No, sir; I talked to him--I believe it was probably a -couple of days after the Secret Service was out. And I told him those -people were wanting to know things--I mean doing their job, that they -wanted to find something out. - -I said this is strictly out of my territory--I did not know what I was -supposed to do. And he said, well, I could either get myself a lawyer -or just not say anything at all. - -Mr. JENNER. Did you ever tell him you made up your mind you were going -to tell the full facts about this matter? - -Mr. KLAUSE. No, sir; not really. I think in so many words he might have -understood that I was. - -Mr. JENNER. Did he ever make a remark to you, "Well, that is the way -the ball bounces." - -Mr. KLAUSE. It sounds like--it seems to ring a bell, but I cannot place -it. - -Mr. JENNER. Was that not in fact said by him in connection with your -telling him that you had reached the conclusion that you had to tell -the full facts about this matter? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Yes, sir; I believe so. - -Mr. JENNER. Does that refresh your recollection? - -Mr. KLAUSE. The ball bounces--yes, sir--that rings a bell now. - -Mr. JENNER. Up to November 22, 1963, had you ever heard the name Lee -Harvey Oswald? - -Mr. KLAUSE. No, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. Had you ever seen anybody up to that day who purported to -be or whom you were advised was Lee Harvey Oswald? - -Mr. KLAUSE. No, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. I show you Garner Exhibit No. 1. Did you ever see that man -prior to November 22, 1963? - -Mr. KLAUSE. No, sir. The only time I seen this man was on television -and in the paper. - -Mr. JENNER. You mean on or after November 22, 1963? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. I hand you Commission Exhibit No. 520, and direct your -attention to the center figure appearing on that photograph. Did you -ever see that man prior to November 22, 1963? - -Mr. KLAUSE. No, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. Did you have a conversation with Mr. Surrey as to the -purpose for which the handbill was to be put? - -Mr. KLAUSE. No, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. When you read this copy, did that not alarm you or upset -you? It is rather provocative, is it not, and it has a title "Wanted -for Treason." - -Mr. KLAUSE. Actually, Mr. Jenner, I did not even pay any attention to -the copy at all. It was late at night at the time I ran it. I did not -pay any attention to it at all--which I should have done, I admit now. -But I did not. - -Mr. JENNER. You were running it at night because you were doing this on -the side? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. You do have some printing equipment in your own apartment -or home? - -Mr. KLAUSE. No, sir. Not at my house; no, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. You used the equipment of the Lettercraft Printing Co., did -you? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. And you did this at night because you were doing it on the -side with the Lettercraft Printing Co. equipment? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. Did you advise your mother or your stepfather you were -doing this? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Now, let me explain this to you. When they opened the -shop up I started to work for approximately $35 a week, and what few -accounts I had, I turned over to the shop, and there was a couple of -little accounts, like friends of mine that I ran around with, rode -motorcycles with and things like that, that I kept for myself. And I -mean that was my spending money. And they made the understanding--we -made the understanding, when the shop was opened, that whatever little -jobs like that that I had, I could do on the side at night--as long as -it did not interfere with work during the day. - -Mr. JENNER. Did you tell your mother or stepfather that you had done -this work? - -Mr. KLAUSE. No, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. Did you tell them eventually? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. They found out about it eventually? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. You kept the money, did you? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. Do you know General Edwin A. Walker, resigned? - -Mr. KLAUSE. No, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. Have you ever heard of him? - -Mr. KLAUSE. I have heard of him. - -Mr. JENNER. Did you ever have any contact with him? - -Mr. KLAUSE. No, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. Were you aware that Robert A. Surrey was associated with -General Edwin A. Walker at the time you made up these handbills? - -Mr. KLAUSE. No, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. Did you have any acquaintance with Robert A. Surrey other -than as a fellow employee at Johnson Printing Co.? - -Mr. KLAUSE. No, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. And this incident about which you have testified? - -Mr. KLAUSE. No, sir. - -Senator COOPER. May I ask a question there? Did Surrey ever tell you -what he intended to do with these throwaways, or posters, or make any -remarks about them at all? - -Mr. KLAUSE. No, sir. He just asked me to do the job--said he had a -customer that wanted it done. And that is all that was ever said about -it. - -Senator COOPER. He did not tell you what the customer wanted to do with -them? - -Mr. KLAUSE. No, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. But at the very outset he asked you to do this on the side? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Yes, sir. - -Senator COOPER. Mr. Chairman, I think I am going to have to leave now. -I have no further questions. - -(At this point, Senator Cooper left the hearing room.) - -Mr. JENNER. Have you ever heard of the American Eagle Publishing Co.? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Yes, sir. It takes a minute to ring a bell, but it rings a -bell. - -Mr. JENNER. Did you ever do any work for the American Eagle Publishing -Co.? - -Mr. KLAUSE. No, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. That is a company with which Mr. Surrey is associated? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Yes, sir; I believe so. That is why I heard that mentioned. - -Mr. JENNER. How did you become acquainted with that fact? And when? - -Mr. KLAUSE. I believe there was a discussion one day that sometimes on -jobs--I think this was done, we talked about this at Johnson at the -time. - -Mr. JENNER. At the time you were employed at Johnson? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Yes, sir. That jobs would come in that he would send -through--might not be too much commission in it or something, or might -not be a big job, where he would job through this place, which in turn -then would job back through Johnson. Then he would get probably a -markup plus a commission. How it is worked, I do not know, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. You were aware of the fact that Mr. Surrey and General -Walker were the two partners in American Eagle Publishing Co.? - -Mr. KLAUSE. No, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. But you knew he had some connection with the company--Mr. -Surrey? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Yes, sir. Like I said, he had mentioned it. - -Mr. JENNER. Mr. Surrey had mentioned it to you. Did he tell you he was -an officer of that company? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Well, as far as I knew, he was sole owner. - -Mr. JENNER. I see. - -Mr. KLAUSE. It is what I thought was an assumed name, like myself. I -do not know how the laws are here, but in Texas when you open up in -business, you have got to file an assumed name certificate--if it is -under an assumed name or your name or whatever the name is, you have to -file that business. - -Mr. JENNER. Do you have an assumed name certificate for your private -business? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. What is it? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Klause Printing. - -Mr. JENNER. Were you not aware of the fact that Mr. Surrey had some -connection with General Edwin A. Walker? - -Mr. KLAUSE. No, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. At no time? - -Mr. KLAUSE. No, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. Did you ever see that tall yellow covered book published -almost like a pamphlet, published by the American Eagle Publishing Co., -which contained reprints of various news stories of the assassination? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Yes, sir; this might be hard to believe. I saw the book. In -fact, I think I have a copy of it. But to this day, I have yet to crack -the cover on it. I have never even opened it. - -Mr. JENNER. What I want to question you about--did you look at the back -of the book, the back cover of the book? - -Mr. KLAUSE. No, sir; I noticed the front, and put it in the car. I -carried it in the car for about a week, with a bunch of my scratch pads -I hand out to my customers. And one night I went home to unload the -car, and I unloaded everything out of the car and put it in the house. -And since then I never looked at it. - -Mr. JENNER. You never noticed that Surrey appears on the backside of -the back cover as the president of the American Eagle Publishing Co. - -Mr. KLAUSE. No, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. Have you ever heard of the Carousel Club in Dallas? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Yes, sir; I have heard of it. - -Mr. JENNER. Do you know where it is located? - -Mr. KLAUSE. All I can tell you, sir, it is downtown. I have never been -there. - -Mr. JENNER. You have never been there? - -Mr. KLAUSE. No, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. Did you ever meet Jack Ruby? - -Mr. KLAUSE. No, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. Did you ever see Jack Ruby prior to the 24th of November -1963? - -Mr. KLAUSE. No, sir; I have never seen him and have never met him. - -Mr. JENNER. You've never seen him before or since or on that day? - -Mr. KLAUSE. No, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. Did you ever have any business with him of any kind or -character? - -Mr. KLAUSE. No, sir; as soon as he was put in jail, from what I -understand, the biggest part of his property went up for sale, and the -people--some people that bought some of his property, or bought his -business, called on us to do a job. - -Mr. JENNER. This was after the assassination? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Yes, sir; this was after--in fact, I imagine sometime -after his trial. And I called on those people. We printed I think -500 letterheads and 500 envelopes, something like that, plus 2,000 -circulars about open from 7 until 2 in the morning, and then the dance -band who was there. In fact, they still owe the bill at the shop. In -fact from what I understand, that place is closed up again now. - -Mr. JENNER. Did Lettercraft Printing Co. ever do any work for Jack -Ruby, to your knowledge? - -Mr. KLAUSE. No, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. Did Johnson Printing Co. ever do any work for Jack Ruby, to -your knowledge? - -Mr. KLAUSE. No, sir; not to my knowledge. And I can assure you that -Lettercraft didn't, because if it had, it would have crossed my desk. - -Mr. JENNER. Were you generally aware of the jobs that went through -Johnson Printing? - -Mr. KLAUSE. That came to my press, yes sir. Now, Johnson--I don't know -whether you know it--it is a pretty good sized shop. It is one of the -biggest in Dallas. In fact, you could put my whole shop in just one -room over there. - -Mr. JENNER. When you talk about your shop you are talking about -Lettercraft? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Yes, sir; now, on the press that I was working on, nothing -ever came in; no, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. I think that will be all. May I look at my notes, Mr. -Chairman. - -Mr. DULLES. Have you told us in detail all your conversations with Mr. -Surrey, from the time that this particular job started until it was -concluded? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Yes, sir. - -Mr. DULLES. Did he tell you at all what his purpose was? - -Mr. KLAUSE. No, sir; the only thing I mentioned--he said he had a -customer that wanted it. - -Mr. JENNER. He did not identify the customer? - -Mr. KLAUSE. No, sir. - -Mr. DULLES. But he indicated he was doing this for a customer? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Yes, sir. - -Mr. DULLES. Do you recall whether at the time Mr. Surrey first spoke -with you about this job, it was publicly known that President Kennedy -was to visit Dallas? - -Mr. KLAUSE. It might have been; but not to my knowledge, sir. - -Mr. DULLES. You did not know at that time that President Kennedy was -going to visit Dallas? - -Mr. KLAUSE. No, sir. - -Mr. DULLES. And I think you have testified that your first contact with -Mr. Surrey about this was some 3 weeks before the visit? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Yes, sir. - -Mr. DULLES. Around the first of November that would be? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Yes, sir; now, it might have came out in the paper that -Mr. Kennedy was coming to Dallas, but we don't take the paper. And -usually by the time we get home and feed the kids, we don't have time -to read the paper anyway. We might watch the late movie on television. -We don't keep up with the news, which we should, but we don't. And -that is probably the way it got in without me knowing it. But I had no -knowledge at all. - -Mr. JENNER. Mrs. Klause works, does she? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. And you both get home about the same time do you? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Yes, sir--the biggest part of the time we do. - -Mr. JENNER. How many children do you have? - -Mr. KLAUSE. We have three. - -Mr. JENNER. I exhibit to you another handbill which we will mark as -Commission Exhibit No. 1053. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 1053 for -identification.) - -Mr. JENNER. For the purpose of the record, this is entitled "Wanted for -Murder," and it had a front view and profile of Mr. Khrushchev. It is -signed "Minutemen" in printing, with quotations. - -Have you ever seen that document before or one like it? - -Mr. KLAUSE. No, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. Do you see any form of type there that is the kind of type -that is reproduced in Lettercraft Printing? - -Mr. KLAUSE. No, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. Does that appear to be any type font or printing with which -you became familiar at Johnson Printing Co.? - -Mr. KLAUSE. No, sir; actually from a printer's viewpoint--just looking -at it from this angle here--that could be done off of a typewriter. -That looks more like a typewriter than it does off a Linotype machine. - -Mr. JENNER. And after its having been typed, then reproduced in the -fashion in which Commission Exhibit No. 996 was reproduced? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. The mechanical processes you have described. You called it -a blanket? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Plate. - -Mr. JENNER. Make up a plate of the whole sheet--you photograph the -sheet, then make a plate, and reproduce from the plate? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Yes, sir. - -Now why I say it doesn't look like Linotype--in Linotype most of your -columns or your paragraphs are butted up straight. In other words, you -got straight edges on both sides. Whereas on a typewriter you cannot -flush. It takes somebody exceptionally skilled with a typewriter to -flush the corners. These edges here are not flush. - -Mr. JENNER. You are talking about the right-hand margin? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Yes, sir; you see your left hand is flush. Now on a -Linotype those on the right can be flushed. - -Mr. JENNER. Now, directing your attention to Commission Exhibit No. -996, are the right-hand margins of that material flushed as you call it? - -Mr. KLAUSE. These I would say were pretty close to being flush. It -would be more of a Linotype than this Exhibit No. 1053 here. - -Mr. JENNER. That would lead you to believe, then, that the copy on -Commission Exhibit No. 996 was produced in the first instance on a -Linotype machine? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Linotype or---- - -Mr. JENNER. A Ludlow? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Possibly. I was getting ready to Varitype. Varitype would -come up close to flushing it. - -Mr. JENNER. But Commission Exhibit No. 1053 does not stimulate your -recollection in any respect whatsoever? - -Mr. KLAUSE. No, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. You never heard about that handbill? - -Mr. KLAUSE. No, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. Wholly apart from never having seen it? - -Mr. KLAUSE. No, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. My handing it to you a moment ago was the first time you -ever knew of the existence of a handbill of that type? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Yes, Sir. - -Mr. JENNER. You never heard any discussion of it heretofore? - -Mr. KLAUSE. No, Sir. - -Mr. JENNER. Mr. Chairman, I have covered all of the details with Mr. -Klause. I have no further questions of him. - -Mr. DULLES. I have no more questions. We thank you very much, Mr. -Klause, for coming. We appreciate your testimony. - -Mr. KLAUSE. I am glad I can do what I can do. I would like to get this -straightened out. I feel real guilty about it. - -Mr. JENNER. Is there anything you would like to add, Mr. Klause? - -Mr. KLAUSE. No, sir; except that it is a mess, and that I am just a -poor country boy, I guess you would say, that got caught up in the -mess, and I strictly learned my lesson on this. - -I have hurt a bunch of people, especially my folks, and I have caused -a lot of trouble. I just feel real bad about it. That is all. If I had -taken time to have read the thing actually I don't think I would ever -have done it. - -But like I said, it was late at night, and I was in a hurry, and I -wanted to get it on and off. - -Mr. JENNER. And you needed the money. - -Mr. KLAUSE. And I needed the money; yes, sir. - -Mr. DULLES. What did you net on this? - -Mr. KLAUSE. $40. Actually, I think the stock was somewhere around $20. -I paid for the stock, and he in turn paid for the stock. - -Mr. DULLES. $40 was your profit on this? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Yes, sir. - -Mr. JENNER. $40 was the full profit to you? - -Mr. KLAUSE. Yes, sir. - -Mr. DULLES. Have you anything further, Mr. Jenner? - -Mr. JENNER. No; I have not. - -Mr. DULLES. The Commission will stand adjourned. - -(Whereupon, at 4:15 p.m., the President's Commission recessed.) - - - - -_Thursday, July 2, 1964_ - -TESTIMONY OF MARK LANE RESUMED - -The President's Commission met at 2 p.m., on July 2, 1964, at 200 -Maryland Avenue NE., Washington, D.C. - -Present were: Chief Justice Earl Warren, Chairman; and Representative -Gerald R. Ford, member. - -Also present were J. Lee Rankin, general counsel; and Norman Redlich, -assistant counsel. - - -The CHAIRMAN. The Commission will be in order. - -Mr. Lane, the last time you were here, we excused you as a witness. You -should be sworn again as a witness. - -Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you shall give before this -Commission will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the -truth, so help you God? - -Mr. LANE. I do. - -The CHAIRMAN. You may be seated, please. Mr. Rankin will ask you some -questions that were not entirely cleared up when you were here last -time. Would you proceed? - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Lane, you testified before the Commission the last time -on March 4, did you? - -Mr. LANE. Yes; I did. - -Mr. RANKIN. And you recall your testimony at that time? - -Mr. LANE. Well, it was rather long testimony. I recall portions of it; -yes, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. Yes. Do you recall that you were asked about an interview -with Helen Markham? - -Mr. LANE. I recall testifying to that; yes. I don't know if I was asked -about it specifically, but I do recall testifying in reference to that -interview. - -Mr. RANKIN. If you would care to refer to your testimony at any time, -you are free to do so. - -Mr. LANE. Thank you. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you have any writing from Mrs. Markham in connection -with the interview that you referred to in your testimony? - -Mr. LANE. Any document which Mrs. Markham wrote? Is that the question? - -Mr. RANKIN. Either that or anything that she signed which purports to -be her statement or affidavit or other recording. - -Mr. LANE. I have nothing that she signed or that she wrote. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you have anything that you made up yourself from any -interview with her? - -Mr. LANE. Yes; I do. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you have that with you? - -Mr. LANE. No; I do not. - -Mr. RANKIN. Will you describe that document? Is it a paper or a tape -recording, or what form does it have? - -Mr. LANE. It is a tape recording and a transcript of the tape recording -in writing. - -Mr. RANKIN. Was the tape recording made by you? - -Mr. LANE. I think we are now moving into an area where I would prefer -not to answer questions, quite frankly. I have given to the Commission -the results of my investigation, and I think that the Commission are -aware of the fact that I have an attorney-client relationship existing. -The Commission is now asking for working papers of an attorney. The -Supreme Court has been quite plain, I think, on the question of the -sanctity of working documents of attorneys. And I think, therefore, -that the questions are no longer in a proper area. - -I might also indicate to the Commission that when I was retained by -Marguerite Oswald to represent the interests of her son before this -Commission, and the Commission declined to permit me to so represent -Lee Oswald, it made it impossible for me to conduct the kind of -cross-examination before this Commission of witnesses that I would have -ordinarily conducted, and that entire conversation would have been in -the presence of the Commission, obviously, had I been permitted to -function as counsel for my client. - -Mr. RANKIN. Will you describe to the Commission the attorney and client -relationship that you claim to exist? - -Mr. LANE. Yes. I should think the Commission would be well aware -of that since I wrote to the Commission on the very day that I was -retained and sent, as I recall, an affidavit from my client, detailing -the purpose, the purpose of my being retained. I think that was during -the very early days of this year. - -Mr. RANKIN. Who was the client? - -Mr. LANE. Marguerite Oswald retained me to conduct an investigation in -reference to the charges that were made against her son, then deceased, -and to represent his interests before this Commission. - -Mr. RANKIN. And do you claim that that attorney-client relationship is -one that exists now? - -Mr. LANE. It does exist at the present time in relationship to a matter -peripheral to this investigation. It certainly did exist at the time of -my discussion with Mrs. Markham, and my discussion with Mrs. Markham -took place solely because of the existence of that relationship and to -further that relationship. - -Mr. RANKIN. Will you state what the peripheral matter is that you -referred to? - -Mr. LANE. It is the matter that Mrs. Oswald called you and spoke with -you on the telephone about yesterday, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. What is that? - -Mr. LANE. It is in reference to a matter regarding the son of Mrs. -Markham. - -Mr. RANKIN. Will you tell whatever else there is in regard to that? - -Mr. LANE. Mrs. Oswald has specifically requested that--in fact, has -specifically directed me not to discuss that matter publicly--inasmuch -as you have that information--because she talked with me only after she -spoke with you, Mr. Rankin. And when she did speak with me, she told -me what she had told you precisely early in the day she had told me. I -think that the Commission does have that information. - -Mr. RANKIN. Are you refusing to disclose it, then? - -Mr. LANE. I have a specific direction from Mrs. Oswald, who retained me -in this peripheral matter just yesterday, not to discuss this matter -publicly, sir. She is presently herself involved in investigating this -matter, and told me specifically that any publicity in reference to -this matter would be harmful to her investigation. I would otherwise -be very happy to discuss the matter with you, as I have discussed -everything else quite publicly. - -Mr. RANKIN. And that is your reason for not disclosing it at this time? - -Mr. LANE. Yes; coupled with the fact that the Commission has this -information, because I assume that Mrs. Oswald did speak with you -yesterday. She told me that she did, and she gave you all the -information she had in this regard. I believe she gave you more -information than she gave to me, as a matter of fact, judging from what -she said to me. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you claim to be acting for Mrs. Oswald on any other -matter than that in connection with her son? That is Helen Markham's -son? - -Mr. LANE. At the present time? - -Mr. RANKIN. At the present time. - -Mr. LANE. No; I am not. - -Mr. RANKIN. When did that relationship terminate? - -Mr. LANE. I don't recall the exact date, but it was sometime after my -testimony here, which was, I believe, on the 4th of March of this year. - -Mr. RANKIN. Can you fix it more precisely? - -Mr. LANE. I believe it was within 2 weeks after that date. I did -not bring with me the letter that I wrote to Mrs. Oswald explaining -that I could not function before the Commission as counsel because -the Commission would not permit me to function as counsel, and that -I agreed to serve on a citizen's committee which would conduct an -independent inquiry. And, therefore, since it seemed that there -was nothing further I could do on behalf of the original purpose -of our retainer, that we should probably conclude our professional -relationship as of that time had ended. I believe that is the substance -of the letter that I sent to Mrs. Oswald. And that is within 2 weeks of -March 4. - -Representative FORD. Mr. Rankin, may I raise a question about the -language which Mr. Lane uses to the effect that the Commission declined -to permit Mr. Lane to represent Mrs. Oswald? - -I think the record before the Commission on this matter will speak for -itself. I think to have the record clear, we ought to have that part of -the Commission proceedings inserted in the record at this point. - -Mr. LANE. I would like to correct a mistake that you made, Congressman. -I did not say that I was not permitted to serve as counsel for Mrs. -Oswald before the Commission. I said, I thought quite precisely, that -I had not been permitted by the Commission to serve as counsel to -represent the interests of Lee Harvey Oswald at the request of his -mother, Marguerite Oswald. - -Representative FORD. I think we should let the record speak for itself -at the time that this matter was raised before the Commission. - -The CHAIRMAN. That portion of the record may be incorporated in this -record at this particular time. - - Mr. LANE. I would just like to conclude on this note. - - I hope the Commission will give consideration to my request, which - the Commission has answered, but which again I would like at this - time to renew. That is, that I be permitted, at the request of Mrs. - Oswald, the mother of the accused, defendant, really, before this - Commission's hearing, to represent his interests here, to have - access to the material which you have access to, and the right to - present witnesses. - - It is not usual for an attorney representing a party to be given - an opportunity to testify, which is quite unusual--but rather to - be given the opportunity to present witnesses and to cross-examine - them. It has generally been my role in criminal cases. Never before - have I testified in behalf of a client. - - If it is the Commissioners' position that this is not a trial in - any respect, and therefore Oswald is not entitled to counsel, that - is the position with which I would like to respectfully offer a - dissent. - - The fact that Oswald is not going to have a real trial flows only - from his death, and he is not responsible with that having taken - place. Every right belonging to an American citizen charged with a - crime was taken from him up to and including his life. - - I think now that that episode is completed, hopefully never to - reappear ever again in our history, or anything close to it--I - think it would be proper to permit him to have counsel before the - Commission, counsel who can function on his behalf in terms of - cross-examining evidence and presenting witnesses. If it is the - Commission's position now that he is entitled to counsel, and the - Commission will appoint counsel, then I ask the Commission to - consider that the constitutional right to counsel involves the - right to counsel of one's choice, or in the event of the death of - a party, to counsel of the choice of the surviving members of the - family. - - If Marina Oswald, the widow, sought to have counsel represent - her husband I would think--here--I would think that would cause - a conflict and a problem, if the widow and also the mother made - the same request. But as I understand it no request has been made - by the widow, who has indicated to the press that she believes - her husband is guilty, and through her former business agent, Mr. - Martin, who I am told was secured for her by the Secret Service - as a business agent, she indicated that even a trial which might - prove he was innocent, she would still be sure he was guilty, and - has indicated since that time no desire to my knowledge to secure - counsel for her husband, her late husband, before the Commission. - - I think, then, the mother would, in almost any jurisdiction, be the - next person to make a decision in this area, and the mother has - made a decision, as you know. She has retained me to represent the - rights and interests of her son. - - I think under those circumstances it would be proper for the - Commission to permit me to participate. - - This, of course, is not a jury trial. With all due respect to the - integrity and background of each of the members of the Commission, - I suggest that it is not the function of the trying body to appoint - counsel, or the jury to appoint counsel, but in our society it - is just the reverse; it is the function of defense counsel to - participate in determining who the jury should be. - - Many criminal lawyers, very noted counsel, would probably seek to - excuse certain--and again no disrespect at all is meant to the - background of members of this Commission--but defense counsel - generally seeks to excuse as jurors those who are in any way - associated with the Government in a criminal case. And here we - have the Government appointing the jury, and then the jury picking - counsel, who also is Government connected at this time. I in no - way wish to raise the question of the integrity of any of the - members of the Commission or counsel or anyone else, or their - ability. But that truism about equality has some meaning in terms - of impartiality--everyone is impartial to some people, and more - impartial to other people. And counsel, in order to function, I - believe, must be totally independent and totally committed to the - responsibility of representing his client. - - But above all, he must be secured by someone who has the ability to - speak for the deceased, in this case his mother and his wife. And - under those circumstances, I renew my request that I be permitted - to, at the request of Lee Oswald's mother, who survives him--to - function before this Commission as counsel on his behalf. - - The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Lane, I must advise you that the Commission, as - you already know, has considered your request and has denied it. It - does not consider you as the attorney for Lee Oswald. Now, this is - not for any discussion. We are not going to argue it. You have had - your say, and I will just answer. - - Lee Oswald left a widow. She is his legal representative. She is - represented by counsel. This Commission is cooperating with her - in any way she may request. If anyone else wants to present any - evidence to the Commission, they may do so. But it is the view and - the wish--the will of the Commission--that no one else shall be - entitled to participate in the work and the deliberations of the - Commission. - - We asked you to come here today because we understood that you - did have evidence. We are happy to receive it. We want every bit - of evidence that you have. You may present anything that you wish - to us. But you are not to be a participant in the work of the - Commission. I assume you have some questions you would like to ask - Mr. Lane, Mr. Rankin? - -Mr. LANE. Well, then I ask also, Mr. Chief Justice, at this point the -letters, exchange of letters between Mr. Rankin and myself, where I -made the request to appear as counsel for the interests of Lee Harvey -Oswald, and where counsel for this Commission said that, Oswald was not -entitled to counsel, or that I could not represent him---- - -The CHAIRMAN. Let the record speak for itself in that respect, too. The -exchange of letters will be in the record. [See Commission Exhibit No. -1053.] - -Mr. LANE. Thank you, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. Now, Mr. Lane, regarding this tape recording of Helen -Markham, and your interview with her, will you tell the Commission when -you made this? - -Mr. LANE. I had a conversation with Mrs. Markham on the 2d day of March -of this year. - -Mr. RANKIN. Where was that? - -Mr. LANE. I have given the Commission the results of that investigation -to the best of my ability. I think that, again, Mr. Rankin, your -question delves into the functioning of an attorney on behalf of a -client, and, therefore, is not proper, and, therefore, I decline to -answer it. - -Mr. RANKIN. Will you tell the Commission when you made the tape -recording that you referred to? - -Mr. LANE. I just answered that question, Mr. Rankin. - -Mr. RANKIN. And do you refuse to tell, then, anything about that -interview with Helen Markham, how you recorded it? - -Mr. LANE. I beg your pardon? - -Mr. RANKIN. And how you recorded it? - -Mr. LANE. I should think that since this Commission has been appointed -by the President of the United States to secure all of the information -regarding the assassination of President Kennedy and other matters -peripheral to that, the questions asked of me should be related to -information which can be of assistance to the Commission, and should -not be the kind of questions, Mr. Rankin, that you have put to me. - -I am happy to tell you every bit of information that I have been able -to secure as a private citizen in trying to discover what took place on -November 22 and the days that followed November 22, but I think that -the very questions that you are putting to me indicates that you are -not interested solely in securing that information, but in placing me, -Mr. Rankin, in a position which is not a good one. And I see this quite -frankly as part of many things that have happened to me since November -22--not November 22, but since I expressed some interest in this case. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Lane, could you tell us whether there was anyone else -present at this interview with Helen Markham that you recorded? - -Mr. LANE. I don't believe that I said I recorded it. I believe I said -it was recorded. - -Mr. RANKIN. Was it recorded by someone else? - -Mr. LANE. I decline to answer any questions, because the questions you -are asking clearly are not for the purpose for which this Commission -has been established. And I tell you that I am amazed, quite frankly, -Mr. Rankin, that the kind of harassment to which I have been subjected -since I became involved in this case continues here in this room--I am -amazed by that. - -As you know, and I don't know if this has been placed on the record by -the Commission--in the letter that I wrote to you on May 18, 1964, I -told you that I had been accosted by two agents of the Federal Bureau -of Investigation in front of my own house, and ordered to give to them, -by them--their names being William E. Folkner, his serial number being -5954, and John P. Dimarchi, his serial number being 4256--and ordered -to give to those gentlemen documents in my possession, relating to my -testimony before this Commission. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you do that? - -Mr. LANE. I did not give them those documents; no. - -Mr. RANKIN. Why not? - -Mr. LANE. Does your tone and your question indicate you think I should -have given those documents to agents of the FBI? - -Mr. RANKIN. I would like to have you answer the question, if you would. - -Mr. LANE. You decline to answer my question? - -Mr. RANKIN. Yes; I am examining you. - -Mr. LANE. Of course, I did not give them any documents in my -possession. When I deal with any agencies of the Government, I expect -that they will write to me, and if they wish to secure information from -me they will do that in a dignified manner. I am an attorney with an -office in New York. I don't expect to be accosted in front of my house -by agents of the police, Federal, State, or local authorities. Those -are the actions not of a democratic society, but of a police state, -and I decline to believe for one moment that we live in a society -where that behavior is going to be countenanced by any members of this -Commission or by counsel to this Commission. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you offer to furnish them copies if they would write to -you in the manner you suggested? - -Mr. LANE. I suggested to those two agents that someone in the office of -the Federal Bureau of Investigation might write to me and that I would -respond courteously, and make available whatever information I could. I -told them, also, as I told you, since I wrote a letter to you covering -this entire matter on May 18th--I told them also that I had testified -fully before this Commission. If they wanted to secure any information -I had, they might contact the Commission. They indicated they were not -interested in the Warren Commission. - -Mr. RANKIN. Now, to return to the tape recording---- - -Mr. LANE. I would like to add one more point, if I may. It is a matter -which I discussed with you on the telephone 2 days ago. - -Mr. RANKIN. Is that in regard to the tape recording? - -Mr. LANE. No; it is not. - -Mr. RANKIN. Can we confine ourselves to that for a bit, until we -complete that. Can you tell us who else was present at the time of this -tape recording of Helen Markham that you describe? - -Mr. LANE. I would like to make this quite clear to you, Mr. Rankin. - -I am not going to discuss any working papers in my possession. Those -papers came into my possession as a result of an attorney-client -relationship. The Supreme Court has written decisions regarding the -sanctity of those documents. I think it is improper of you to ask -questions which delve into relationship of that nature. And I think you -know that the questions you are asking are improper. - -Mr. RANKIN. And if other people were present at the time of any such -matters and disclosures, does that make any difference under the law, -do you think? - -Mr. LANE. Present where? - -Mr. RANKIN. At the time of the tape recording and the interview. That -is what I am asking you. - -Mr. LANE. No one else was present. - -Mr. RANKIN. And who did the tape recording? - -Mr. LANE. Again you are delving into an area which is an improper one -for you to delve into. - -Representative FORD. Did you know about the tape recording being made? - -Mr. LANE. I beg your pardon? - -Representative FORD. Did you know about the tape recording being made? - -Mr. LANE. I decline to answer that question. - -Am I a defendant before this Commission, or is the Commission trying to -find out who assassinated the President? - -Representative FORD. We are trying to find out information about a -witness before this Commission---- - -Mr. LANE. Well, then, call the witness before the Commission and ask -the witness questions. And if the Commission--if the witness has -testified contrary to what I say the witness has said, then I would -suggest you do what I invited the Commission to do when this matter -arose. Submit my testimony and Mrs. Markham's testimony to the U.S. -attorney's office, and bring an action against both of us for perjury. -And then at that trial I will present documents in my possession, and -we will see who is convicted. - -Representative FORD. Do you believe Mrs. Markham is an important -witness in this overall matter? - -Mr. LANE. I would think so. - -Representative FORD. I am sure you know what she has told you. - -Mr. LANE. I know what she has told me, that is correct. - -Representative FORD. If there is any difference between what she told -you and told this Commission, is that important? - -Mr. LANE. Of course, it is important. And if there was someone -representing the interests of Oswald before this Commission, there -could be cross-examination, you sitting as judges could then base your -decision upon the cross-examination. But you have decided instead -to sit as judges and jurors and defense attorneys and prosecuting -attorneys, and you are faced with a dilemma. I cannot solve that -dilemma for you. - -Representative FORD. In order for us to evaluate the testimony she -has given us and what you allege she has given you, we must see the -information which you have at your disposal. - -Mr. LANE. I have told you precisely under oath what Mrs. Markham has -said to me. - -Mr. RANKIN. Are you unwilling to verify that with the tape recording -that you claim to have? - -Mr. LANE. I am unable to verify that because of an existing -attorney-client relationship, and you know that it would be improper -and unethical for me to give the answers to the questions which you -are asking. And that is why I am amazed that you persist in asking -questions which you know are improper and which would be unethical for -me to answer. - -Mr. RANKIN. And where was this tape recording made? - -Mr. LANE. You have my answer to questions about that already, Mr. -Rankin. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you, yourself, have any conversation with Helen Markham -at anytime? - -Mr. LANE. Yes; I testified to that on March 4, and again today. - -Representative FORD. Is this tape recording of that conversation? - -Mr. LANE. Precisely. - -Mr. RANKIN. Can you tell us where the tape recording was made? - -Mr. LANE. I can tell you, but I will not tell you. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you have any other reasons for not disclosing this -information to the Commission except your statement about the attorney -and client relationship that you describe? - -Mr. LANE. And the sanctity of working documents of an attorney. I have -no other reason whatsoever. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Lane, the Commission has asked you a number of times to -disclose to it the name of the informant that you said told you about -having seen certain persons in the Carousel Club. Are you ready to -disclose the name of that informant now? - -Mr. LANE. I am ready, but as I told you when I gave you that -information at the outset, I gave my word of honor to that person -that I would not disclose his name unless he gave me permission to. I -have gone to Dallas on two separate occasions to try to secure that -permission. I have not been able to secure that permission. Nothing -would make me happier than giving you the name of that person; but I -have given my word of honor and, therefore, I am unable to give you -that name. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you claim any attorney and client relationship with -regard to the name of that informant? - -Mr. LANE. I think there clearly exists an attorney-client relationship, -but that is not the motivating factor in my telling you that I will not -disclose the name. - -Mr. RANKIN. Is that the basis for your refusal to disclose the name? - -Mr. LANE. Obviously if I say yes, you cannot pursue this, but I must -tell you honestly that is not the reason. - -Mr. RANKIN. Then I ask you to disclose the name of the informant. - -Mr. LANE. I cannot. I have given my word to that person that I would -not disclose his name. - -Mr. RANKIN. You know that is no legal justification, do you not? - -Mr. LANE. I know that is true. There is no legal justification. I know -that I am not here under subpena. I know that you wrote to me while I -was in Europe, although you have the power of subpena--you do not have -the power to subpena me while I was in Europe. I know the Commission -will complete its work very likely within the next 2 weeks. I could -have easily remained in Europe until the Commission had completed its -work. - -I knew you were calling me here today in reference to that specific -matter because you said so in your letter to me. So I have come here -voluntarily to cooperate with the Commission to the very best of my -ability, and not to rely upon any legal superstructure to protect my -answers. - -I told this Commission at the outset that I had given my word to this -person, and I would not reveal his name. The Commission led me to -believe at that time that it would honor that understanding, and the -record, I think, so reveals that. If the Commission is prepared---- - -Mr. RANKIN. You base that upon the record at that time? You base your -claim that the Commission indicated that it would honor any such -understanding on the record that was made on March 4, do you? - -Mr. LANE. Yes; I think there is language there which indicates this. I -was not pressed at that time. We discussed the matter at that time. If -the Commission is at this point about to reverse its position, despite -an indication that it would honor that understanding, I am myself not -ready to break my honor, my commitment to that individual. I have not -done that ever in the past, and I will not do that now. - -Mr. RANKIN. The Commission has a number of times asked you by -correspondence to disclose the name of that informant, and it now -asks you in this proceeding, while you are under oath, to make that -disclosure. - -Mr. LANE. I will not do so, Mr. Rankin. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you realize that the information you gave in closed -session could have an unfavorable effect upon your country's interests -in connection with this assassination and your failure to disclose the -name of your informant would do further injury? - -Mr. LANE. Mr. Rankin. I am astonished to hear that statement from you. -There are 180 million Americans in this country. I am perhaps the -only one who is a private citizen who has taken off the last 6 months -to devote all of his efforts to securing whatever information can be -found, and to making that known to this Commission, and publicly to -the people of this country at great personal cost in terms of the -harassment that I have suffered, in terms of the terrible financial -losses that I have suffered. And to sit here today, after 6 months of -this work, which I have given all to this Commission, voluntarily, -and again have come here again today voluntarily to give you this -information, and to hear you say that I am not cooperating with the -Commission, and I am going to do harm to the country by not making -information available to you astonishes me. - -You have hundreds of agents of the FBI running all over the Dallas -area--agents of the Secret Service, Dallas policemen. Are you telling -me that in one trip to Dallas where I spent something like 2 days, I -uncovered information which the whole police force of this Nation has -not yet in 6 months been able to secure? I cannot believe that is a -valid assessment of this situation. I cannot, Mr. Rankin. - -The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Lane, may I say to you that until you give us the -corroboration that you say you have, namely, that someone told you that -that was a fact, we have every reason to doubt the truthfulness of what -you have heretofore told us. And your refusal to answer at this time -lends further strength to that belief. If you can tell us, and if you -will tell us, who gave you that information, so that we may test their -veracity, then you have performed a service to this Commission. But -until you do, you have done nothing but handicap us. - -Mr. LANE. I have handicapped you by working for 6 months and making -all of the information which I have had available to you? I understand -very fully your position, Mr. Chief Justice. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Lane, what did you come down to tell us or inform -the Commission about? You say you came here of your own volition in -order to help us, and to give us information. Now, what information -in light of the fact that I wrote you and asked you for two specific -things--whatever information you had in any recorded form concerning -your interview with Helen Markham, and secondly, the name of the -informant, neither of which you are willing to disclose or have said -anything to help the Commission on. - -Mr. LANE. I came here at your request that I interrupt my trip in -Europe to come back and testify before you. And I have done that. - -The CHAIRMAN. By denying--by refusing to answer either question. - -Mr. LANE. I think that--well. I have given you the reasons why I cannot -answer the question. With reference to Mrs. Markham, I should tell you -this, that I am hopeful that in the very near future I will be able -to make that document available to you by securing permission from my -client. But she has informed me at the present time that she is herself -involved in securing some information relative to this whole matter, -which you are familiar with, Mr. Rankin, and that she wishes there to -be no discussion at all at this point about this matter. - -Frankly, quite frankly, matters which have been given to this -Commission in utmost confidence have appeared in the daily newspapers, -and one cannot feel with great security that giving information to this -Commission, even at secret hearings, means that the information will -not be broadcast, and this is the problem which confronts us at the -present time. - -The CHAIRMAN. You know, do you not, that you and other witnesses have -been free to discuss their testimony before the Commission with the -public, and you, yourself, have done that, and that is one of the -reasons that things that were said before the Commission have been -divulged. You, yourself, have discussed fully your testimony before the -press and the radio and the television. - -Mr. LANE. Yes; I have. - -The CHAIRMAN. Other witnesses have done the same thing. No witness is -under compulsion to keep his testimony secret. Naturally, some things -would come out. - -Mr. LANE. Well, it seems to me that when the transcript of my--the -transcript of my testimony was sent to me, dealing with the portion in -executive session, every page had been marked "Top Secret." In fact, -it bore a legend across it saying that my testimony, which consisted -almost solely at the outset of my request that the hearings be open to -the public, was in fact related to the national defense of the United -States and it was a violation of the espionage laws for me to discuss -those matters publicly. - -The CHAIRMAN. Well, Mr. Lane, you know that you came right down from -your testimony, and I think in this very room, or at least on this -floor of this same building, discussed your testimony with the press -and the radio and the television. - -Mr. LANE. Oh, I most certainly did. My testimony was open to the -public. My testimony was unlike the rest of the testimony before the -Commission. - -The CHAIRMAN. Well, now, that is your judgment. Every witness knows -that he is under no compulsion to keep his testimony secret. They have -not done it. And many of them have come down here after their testimony -upstairs and have appeared on radio and television and have discussed -matters with the press. - -Mr. LANE. Yes; I know that that may very well be so, Mr. Chief Justice. -I was only making reference to matters such as the diary which has been -marked Top Secret, which has been published, and the press conferences -in which members of the Commission reported to the press the testimony -before them. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Lane, when I wrote you, do you recall that I offered to -have the Commission pay your expenses to come back from Europe in order -to testify before the Commission at this time? - -Mr. LANE. Yes; you did. - -Mr. RANKIN. Are you asking that you be paid those expenses? - -Mr. LANE. I would expect that since you made that offer that is a -commitment you should keep. I would have remained in Europe; yes. - -Mr. RANKIN. And you did not tell me in any correspondence that you were -going to take the position that you could not make this disclosure -because of an attorney-client relationship, and that you were not going -to give us any information about the informant at this time? - -Mr. LANE. Mr. Rankin---- - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you? - -Mr. LANE. Yes; of course I told you that. I told you that on March 4, -and I have told you that in every letter which you have written to -me on these questions. I cannot understand how you can pretend to be -surprised or plead surprise at this point based upon my position before -the Commission which today, in July, is consistently the same position -I took in March, and consistently the same position I took in the -intervening months when I wrote to you, we exchanged correspondence, in -relationship to my position. - -Mr. RANKIN. And you did not in answer to my letter, when I offered -to pay your expenses, say that the only thing you could testify to -was that there was an attorney-client relationship and you would not -produce any of the records in regard to Helen Markham because of that, -or you did not say that you would not give us the name of the informant -because you had refused to disclose it, in answer to my letter, -offering to pay your expenses. You said nothing about anything of that -kind, did you? - -Mr. LANE. I never received your letter. You wrote it to my New York -address. I was in Europe traveling at the time. I received a phone call -from my office 3 days ago stating that you had asked that I return to -the United States to testify, and I immediately booked passage the -next morning, which was the first plane, in order to return, and to -be here before July 1, which was what your letter said. When I came -back, I received a phone call from you indicating that I was not needed -yesterday, but that today at 2 o'clock would be the appropriate time, -and so I came here today. And I am willing to---- - -Mr. RANKIN. Is that your answer? - -Mr. LANE. Yes; of course, it is my answer. I will give you all of the -information in my possession in reference to everything I have been -able to discover in order to assist this Commission. But what you are -asking at this point are sources. You are not asking for information. -You are asking for sources. And you know that it is improper to ask for -those sources. - -The CHAIRMAN. Even where there is no relationship of attorney and -client? - -Mr. LANE. It is not improper because there is a relationship in that -case. It is improper because I gave that testimony to you voluntarily -on March 4, explaining to the members of this Commission that I had -given my word of honor to this person not to disclose his name. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you have anything else that you wish to disclose in -addition to such disclosures as you now have made to the Commission in -regard to the assassination of President Kennedy? - -Mr. LANE. There are three additional matters which have come to my -attention, which I am not at this point able to disclose because an -investigation is still being conducted in Dallas. But by Monday, -this coming Monday, I will be in a position to make that information -available to you. In addition to that---- - -Mr. RANKIN. Will this be in written form, signed statements and -affidavits, or what will you have for this? - -Mr. LANE. I don't understand your question, Mr. Rankin. - -Mr. RANKIN. Will you have it in any kind of a written form; the -additional testimony or evidence that you refer to? - -Mr. LANE. I cannot tell you that until Monday. In addition to that, as -I told you when we spoke on the phone 2 days ago, and you suggested -that I raise this matter before the Commission, I am deeply concerned -about the fact that since I have become involved in this matter, -and since I testified before this Commission, the U.S. Department -of Immigration has placed my name in their immigration book, on the -proscribed list, and that when I returned to this country, in response -to your invitation to come here and testify before this Commission, I -was halted by the immigration authorities because my name appeared in -that proscribed list. - -Mr. RANKIN. And I told you at that time on the telephone, didn't I, -that the Commission had nothing to do with that? Is that right? - -Mr. LANE. You did tell me that, and I ask you if you would be good -enough to find out, since I did not accuse the Commission of having -my name listed there, of course--to find out if my name was listed in -relationship to the inquiry which I have conducted, and the testimony -that I have given to this Commission. - -The CHAIRMAN. Were you prevented from entering the United States? - -Mr. LANE. No; I am here now, Mr. Chief Justice, but I was stopped. - -The CHAIRMAN. How long were you detained? Were you detained? - -Mr. LANE. Oh, just for a few minutes. - -The CHAIRMAN. How many minutes? - -Mr. LANE. Oh, perhaps 5. My objection is not to the period of time. - -The CHAIRMAN. What was the question asked of you? - -Mr. LANE. Just to wait. - -Mr. RANKIN. Wasn't there something else asked of you? - -Mr. LANE. Well, perhaps I should, then, tell you what happened. - -Mr. RANKIN. All right. You better answer that question of the Chief -Justice. - -The CHAIRMAN. That is a part of my question. I asked you: What did they -say to you? - -Mr. LANE. Well, there were three different persons. The first person -was at the desk, whose name I do not recall, but as an immigration -inspector said, "Kindly wait," and he returned within 5 minutes and -gave me back my passport and said, "You can pass through now." So not -a single question was asked of me by the immigration inspector who -discovered that my name was in the proscribed book. - -I, however, asked him if he could tell me why my name was in the book, -and he said that it was confidential material which he could not reveal -to me, and I asked him if he would be good enough to tell me the name -of his superior officer so that I might discuss the matter with him. He -referred me to Mr. J. J. Daley, also an immigration inspector, and Mr. -Daley asked me if perhaps I had gone to Cuba, and I said to him I had -never been to Cuba; I had only been out of the country where a passport -was required twice in my life, both within the last 6 months. The only -time prior to then I had left the country was when I was a soldier in -the U.S. Army, and I was sent to Europe--not to Cuba at that time. - -He said, "Well, then, I can't understand it." And I asked if I could -see his superior officer. And he referred me to W. T. McArnity, who -was the officer in charge. He told me that perhaps there was just some -mistake made, but could give me no further information. He referred -me to Mr. Espardy, who is the district director, I believe, of the -Immigration Department, and Mr. Espardy said merely, "I am not going to -tell you a thing." That is where the entire matter rested, and where it -rests now. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Lane, when you asked your informant if you could -disclose the information that we have asked you about--and we have -asked you the name of the informer--did you tell him that the -Commission had indicated to you that his name would not be publicly -revealed if he would allow you to disclose it to the Commission? - -Mr. LANE. I most certainly did. - -Mr. RANKIN. And what was his response? - -Mr. LANE. He wondered whether that meant his name might not be revealed -anywhere--if not by the members of the Commission, perhaps somehow it -might be revealed. - -Mr. RANKIN. Is that what he said? - -Mr. LANE. That is precisely what he said. - -Representative FORD. When did he tell you that? - -Mr. LANE. When I spoke with him; I think it was during March or April -of this year, after I testified before the Commission. - -Representative FORD. Have you made any further inquiry in that regard? - -Mr. LANE. Have I? - -Representative FORD. Yes. - -Mr. LANE. I spoke with him one more time. - -Representative FORD. Since your return from Europe? - -Mr. LANE. No; I just arrived 2 days ago. - -Mr. RANKIN. When was the last time you spoke to him about disclosing -his name? - -Mr. LANE. I would think it was during April of this year. - -Mr. RANKIN. When in April? - -Mr. LANE. I don't recall the exact date. When I was last in Dallas. - -Mr. RANKIN. Can you give us a closer approximation than that? - -Mr. LANE. I really cannot. I believe it was in April; perhaps toward -the middle of April, but I am not certain. - -Representative FORD. Was it by telephone? - -Mr. LANE. No; I saw him in person. I went down to see him. - -Representative FORD. You saw him in Dallas? - -Mr. LANE. Yes; well, near Dallas. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you consider, Mr. Lane, that you have cooperated with -the Commission as much as you can in regard to both of these matters, -Helen Markham and this informant? - -Mr. LANE. Yes; I think there is no question but that I have. Frankly, -when I returned to the country, I had thought that it would be not -difficult for me to make available to you all the documents regarding -Mrs. Markham. I had planned to do that. - -(At this point, Representative Ford withdrew from the hearing room.) - -Mr. LANE. I felt that I would be able to be released from the -attorney-client stricture so that I could do that. It was not until -after I returned that I received a phone call from Mrs. Oswald, after -she called you, related this new development in relationship to the -Markhams, which has at this point handicapped my being able to secure -permission to release that information. I had intended to do that. - -I am hopeful that in the next few days it will be possible to give you -that information, as I said earlier. - -The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Lane, you told us what your attorney relationship -was, but, really, I did not understand it very clearly. Will you tell -us what your present attorney relationship is that causes you to rely -upon it in refusing to tell us about this recording that was made at -the time of the conversation between you and Helen Markham? - -Mr. LANE. I don't have a present attorney-client relationship in -relation to that particular matter. I, at that time, had been retained -by Marguerite Oswald to investigate the charges against her son and -peripheral matters, and, in conformity and in furtherance of that -retainer, I conducted an interview with Mrs. Markham. - -The CHAIRMAN. And---- - -Mr. LANE. And that is one of the working documents in my possession. - -The CHAIRMAN. How does that become a peripheral matter--the -conversation that you had with Mrs. Markham? What does that have to do -with Mrs. Oswald? - -Mr. LANE. I secured that information on behalf of an attorney-client -relationship when I was serving my client, Mrs. Oswald. - -The CHAIRMAN. But, Mr. Lane, you at that very time, when you claimed to -be, and when you were, the attorney for Mrs. Oswald, you did come here -and testify concerning that conversation with Mrs. Markham. - -Mr. LANE. Yes. - -The CHAIRMAN. NOW, if you testified concerning it then, why can't -you now tell us all the circumstances surrounding that? Why is your -privilege any different now than it was then? - -Mr. LANE. I explained to Mrs. Oswald that I had been called to testify -before the Commission as a witness, and that the information which I -had secured I had secured on her behalf, and discussed with her what -it is I was going to tell the Commission, and she agreed and gave me -permission to testify before the Commission as I did. - -The CHAIRMAN. And since that time she instructed you not to testify? - -Mr. LANE. Since that time, just actually 2 days ago--or perhaps it -was yesterday--she instructed me not to discuss the entire Markham -situation at all, quite specifically, and quite strongly, and -insistently, over my objection. - -Mr. RANKIN. Is it your position, then, that you have a right to -disclose part of the information about the Helen Markham matter to the -Commission and you don't have a duty to disclose all of it? - -Mr. LANE. I think that when one has a client, one has the right, if -one secures the permission of the client, to release the results -of investigation while retaining the sanctity of working documents -belonging to an attorney; yes. - -I think there is a clear distinction. - -Mr. RANKIN. It is your contention you can hold back part of it so that -the Commission then is not able to verify what you do tell, the part -you do tell? - -Mr. LANE. Well, of course---- - -Mr. RANKIN. Is that your position? - -Mr. LANE. No, and I haven't said anything, I think, even comparable to -that. I said one can testify if one has permission of the client in -terms of the result of an investigation conducted by a client. - -Mr. RANKIN. Your conclusion about the testimony? Is that what you mean? - -Mr. LANE. Not my conclusion. The result of the investigation, the -result of inquiry. But at the same time it does not mean that an -attorney's working documents are no longer sanctified documents. - -Mr. RANKIN. About the same matter; is that right? - -Mr. LANE. Of course, about the same matter. Yes. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you know of any law to support that position? - -Mr. LANE. That an attorney's working documents---- - -Mr. RANKIN. Can be withheld about a matter that he purports to give -testimony concerning? - -Mr. LANE. I have not researched the question; no. Do you have law -indicating that is inaccurate? - -Mr. RANKIN. I think it is quite inaccurate. If you come before any -body, the Commission or any court, and purport to disclose part of a -matter, I know of no law that permits you to withhold the rest. - -Mr. LANE. Well, it is not a question of disclosing part of a matter. -There is a conclusion of an investigation. For example, I assume -that this Commission will report its conclusions, but they may not -necessarily report every portion of the working documents before this -Commission, because these are two separate areas. One is a conclusion, -and one is the working documents. I have reported the conclusion, -but that does not mean, in my view, that the working documents of an -attorney, therefore, are no longer privileged. - -Mr. RANKIN. What you purported to report was what you said was her -testimony in regard to these incidents, was it not? - -Mr. LANE. It was not her testimony. It was a statement that she made to -me. - -Mr. RANKIN. Her statement she made to you? - -Mr. LANE. Yes. - -Mr. RANKIN. You purported to give that to the Commission. - -Mr. LANE. I did give it to the Commission. - -Mr. RANKIN. And then you said you had a recording of it; is that right? - -Mr. LANE. That is correct. - -Mr. RANKIN. And you are not---- - -Mr. LANE. I don't think I ever said that to the Commission. - -Mr. RANKIN. You are saying it now, are you not? - -Mr. LANE. Yes; I am saying it now. - -Mr. RANKIN. And you are not willing to have the Commission have the -recording to check the accuracy of your report about what the testimony -or statement was, is that right? - -Mr. LANE. I am not in a position to give you that document. I have said -that several times; yes, sir. I don't understand why it is not possible -to call Mrs. Markham and to call me and to have us confront each other. -I think clearly the Commission would then secure the facts. I would be -happy to participate in such a confrontation. It seems to me to be the -order---- - -The CHAIRMAN. Wouldn't you then be violating your attorney-client -privilege just the same? - -Mr. LANE. No; I don't have such a privilege--a relationship at the -present time. That relationship terminated, as I said, in March. - -The CHAIRMAN. Well, you would freely discuss, though, the things that -occurred while the attorney-client privilege did prevail, or did exist? - -Mr. LANE. No; I would merely ask Mrs. Markham a series of questions. - -The CHAIRMAN. Oh, yes; you would like to make the inquisition your own, -but you are unwilling to testify before this Commission. - -Mr. LANE. I don't think that an effort to represent a man who is -being tried in absentia, after he was killed in the custody of -police officers, is the same as asking for permission to conduct an -inquisition, with all due respect to you, Mr. Chief Justice. - -The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Lane, you have manifested a great interest in Lee -Harvey Oswald and his relationship to this entire affair. According to -you, Mrs. Markham made a statement that would bear upon the probability -of his guilt or innocence in connection with the assassination. Mrs -Markham has definitely contradicted what you have said, and do you -not believe that it is in your own interest and in the interests of -this country for you to give whatever corroboration you have to this -Commission so that we may determine whether you or she is telling the -truth? - -Mr. LANE. I have given you all the information that I am permitted to -give to you and to members of the Commission. I understand from Mr. -Rankin that Mrs. Markham denies that she ever talked with me. Is that -correct? - -The CHAIRMAN. You needn't ask Mr. Rankin any questions. You won't -answer the questions of this Commission, and he is not under -examination by you at the present time. - -Mr. LANE. I have answered questions. I spoke for about 85 pages, -without a single question being put to me, because I was anxious to -give to this Commission all the information in my possession. - -The CHAIRMAN. Yes, but you did not give us all the information. You did -not tell us that you had a recording of what Mrs. Markham said to you. -Now, we ask you for verification of that conversation, because she has -contradicted you. You say that you have a recording, but you refuse to -give it to this Commission. - -Mr. LANE. I am not in a position to give you that recording. I have -made that quite plain. Because of a matter which has arisen in the last -3 or 4 days, which I was made aware of yesterday for the first time, I -am not in a position to do that. Hopefully, I will be in a day or two. - -The CHAIRMAN. We heard that when you were here in March--hopefully you -would be able to tell us who this informant of yours was in Dallas -concerning the so-called meeting between Jack Ruby and others in his -nightclub. And we have been pursuing you ever since with letters and -entreaties to give us that information so that we might verify what -you have said, if it is a fact, or disproving it if it is not a fact. -Here we pay your expenses from Europe, bring you over here, and without -telling us at all that you won't answer that question, you come before -the Commission and refuse to testify. Do you consider that cooperation? - -Mr. LANE. Mr. Chief Justice, I believe I am the only citizen in this -country who has devoted 6 months to securing information at his own -expense. You talk about what it cost to go to Europe. I have gone to -Europe twice, and I have paid for those trips myself. I have traveled -all over this country. I have gone to Dallas five times. I have paid -for those trips myself, and I am not in a position financially to do -that, but I have done that to give you this information. - -The CHAIRMAN. Were you getting evidence over in Europe? - -Mr. LANE. No; I was discussing this case, because of the suppression -in this country of the facts. I felt it important that somehow the -American people be informed about what is taking place, and I found -that practically the only way to inform the American people is to speak -in Europe. - -The CHAIRMAN. Have you charged admission for any of your speaking? - -Mr. LANE. Have I charged admission? - -The CHAIRMAN. Yes. - -Mr. LANE. No; I have not charged admission. - -The CHAIRMAN. Do you collect any money in this country at the speeches -that you made? - -Mr. LANE. Did I, personally, collect any money? - -The CHAIRMAN. Did you have money collected? - -Mr. LANE. I collected no money. - -The CHAIRMAN. Did you have any money collected? - -Mr. LANE. I did not. - -The CHAIRMAN. Was there money collected at that meeting--at those -meetings that you had? - -Mr. LANE. I spoke at probably 40 different college campuses throughout -the United States. - -The CHAIRMAN. Was money collected at those places? - -Mr. LANE. To my knowledge, at none of those meetings was money -collected. At one or two or perhaps three other meetings, funds have -been collected for the purpose of paying the salary of the secretary of -this citizens committee of inquiry, and to pay the rent. - -The CHAIRMAN. Who got the money? - -Mr. LANE. The citizens committee of inquiry. - -The CHAIRMAN. Who is the head of that? - -Mr. LANE. I am the chairman of that. - -The CHAIRMAN. Who else belongs to it? - -Mr. LANE. Among others, Jessica Mitford, who is the author who wrote -"The American Way of Death," a best-selling book; Sterling Hayden, who -is an actor; a number of attorneys, some in California, some in New -York; and a number of others. I did not know that I was going to be -questioned about the makeup of the citizens committee. Otherwise, I -would have brought the entire membership list. - -The CHAIRMAN. I didn't intend to ask you, but we are trying to get -information about these different things that you considered vital -in the assassination of the President. And it is a matter of great -concern to the Commission that you are unwilling to tell us about those -things that you considered bear upon the guilt or innocence of Lee -Harvey Oswald. And it handicaps us greatly in what we are trying to -do, because of the things that you do say when you are away from the -Commission, and then when you refuse to testify before us as to those -very things that you discuss in public. - -Mr. LANE. I have not said anything in public, Mr. Chief Justice, that I -have not said first before this Commission, or at one time before this -Commission. - -The CHAIRMAN. But, before your audiences, do you not claim to be -telling the truth and to be verifying the things that you tell them, -and then when you come here you refuse to give us the verification? - -Mr. LANE. When I speak before an audience, I do hold myself out to be -telling the truth, just as when I have testified before this Commission -I have also told the truth. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Lane, you expressed a desire in your telegram to -examine the rifle. We have that here for you to see. Let the record -show that at this time the Commission is giving Mr. Lane an opportunity -to examine the rifle known as Commission Exhibit No. 139. - -Mr. LANE. Thank you. May I comment upon the examination? - -The CHAIRMAN. Yes; you may; if you saw anything of any significance -there, you may state it. - -Mr. LANE. Yes. I would like to call to the attention of the Commission -the affidavit signed by a police officer, Seymour Weitzman, dated the -23d day of November 1963, the original of which was at one time in the -office of the district attorney of Dallas. In that document, Officer -Weitzman states he found, along with another person--a deputy sheriff, -I believe, or a deputy of some sort--the alleged murder weapon, on the -22d day of November 1963, on the sixth floor of the Book Depository -Building. - -And in that affidavit Mr. Weitzman--Officer Weitzman--swears that the -murder weapon which he found, or the weapon which he found on that -floor, was a Mauser 7.65 millimeters. A Mauser, of course, is a German -weapon. The rifle which is before the Commission, and which is, I -assume, allegedly now the murder weapon, is, of course, not a German -Mauser 7.65 millimeters, but is an Italian carbine, 6.5 millimeters. - -Although I am personally not a rifle expert, I was able to determine -that it was an Italian carbine because printed indelibly upon it -are the words "Made Italy" and "caliber 6.5." I suggest it is very -difficult for a police officer to pick up a weapon which has printed -upon it clearly in English "Made Italy, Cal 6.5," and then the next day -draft an affidavit stating that that was in fact a German Mauser, 7.65 -millimeters. - -The CHAIRMAN. Very well. Anything further? We will take a short recess, -then. - -(Brief recess.) - -The CHAIRMAN. Gentlemen, the Commission will come to order. There is -nothing further at this time. The meeting is adjourned. - -(Whereupon, at 3:20 p.m., the President's Commission recessed.) - - - - -STATEMENT OF PRESIDENT LYNDON B. JOHNSON - - - THE WHITE HOUSE, - _Washington, July 10, 1964_. - - The Honorable EARL WARREN, - _The Chief Justice of the United States, - Washington, D.C._ - -MY DEAR MR. CHIEF JUSTICE: I have attempted, in the enclosed -statement, to set forth my recollection of the tragic events of -November 22, 1963. I am conscious of the limitations of my narrative. -I had no opportunity, in the difficult and critical days following -the assassination of President Kennedy, to record my impressions. -Recollection at this late date is necessarily incomplete. - -However, I fully realize the great importance of your task, and I have -endeavored, as best I can, to set forth the events and my impressions -as they remain in my mind at this time. Although I fear that they will -be of little specific use to you, I hope that they may be of some -interest. - -I hope that you and the members of your Commission, as well as the -devoted members of the staff who have worked so long and diligently on -this undertaking, will accept my thanks and good wishes. - - Sincerely, - - LYNDON B. JOHNSON. - -[Enclosure.] - - * * * * * - -[Statement of the President, Lyndon Baines Johnson, concerning the -events of November 22, 1963] - -Friday morning, November 22, began with a reception in the Longhorn -Room of the Hotel Texas, Fort Worth. President and Mrs. Kennedy and -Mrs. Johnson and I had spent the night in that hotel. Then, President -Kennedy and I went to a parking lot across from the hotel where a -speaker's stand had been set up and we addressed a crowd that was -gathered there. We then returned to the hotel and had breakfast. - -After that, at about 10:30 a.m., we motored to the Fort Worth airfield. -Mrs. Johnson and I then went aboard _Air Force II_ for the trip to -Dallas. - -We arrived at Love Field in Dallas, as I remember, just shortly after -11:30 a.m. - -Agents Youngblood and Johns and two other agents were with us. - -We disembarked from the plane promptly after it came to a stop at Love -Field. We were met by a committee of local officials and citizens. -After greeting them, Mrs. Johnson and I, together with the special -agents, walked over to the area where President and Mrs. Kennedy would -disembark. We were followed by the reception committee. - -President Kennedy's plane arrived about 5 or 10 minutes after _Air -Force II_. The President and Mrs. Kennedy disembarked and they greeted -us and the people in the reception committee. - -Then the President and Mrs. Kennedy walked along the fence, shaking -hands with people in the crowd that had assembled. Mrs. Johnson and I -followed along the fence, greeting people and shaking hands. This took -5 or 10 minutes, as I recall. - -Mrs. Johnson, Senator Ralph Yarborough, and I then entered the car -which had been provided for us in the motorcade. It was a Lincoln -Continental convertible. I think that our car was the fourth in the -motorcade. We were the second car behind the President's automobile. - -The driver of the car in which Mrs. Johnson and I were riding was -Hurchel Jacks, who is a member of the Texas State Highway Patrol. Agent -Youngblood was sitting next to him in the front seat. - -I was sitting behind Agent Youngblood; Mrs. Johnson was next to me; -and Senator Yarborough was on the left of the rear seat--that is, just -behind the driver. - -At first, as we left Love Field and proceeded through the -less-populated areas, the crowds were thin. I recall, however, that -Mrs. Johnson and I and Senator Yarborough commented upon the good -spirit and obvious good wishes of the crowd. As we drove closer to -town, the crowds became quite large. - -We made several stops as a result of stops by the automobiles ahead of -us. I did not get out of the car, but on occasion a few people broke -from the crowd and ran over, and I shook hands with several people on -these occasions. - -The motorcade proceeded down Main Street and then turned right on -Houston. It then turned into Elm, which is a block, I believe, beyond -the intersection of Main and Houston. The crowd on Elm Street was -smaller. - -As the motorcade proceeded down Elm Street to the point where the -assassination occurred, it was traveling at a speed which I should -estimate at 12 or 15 miles and hour. - -After we had proceeded a short way down Elm Street, I heard a sharp -report. The crowd at this point had become somewhat spotty. - -The Vice-Presidential car was then about three car lengths behind -President Kennedy's car, with the Presidential followup car intervening. - -I was startled by the sharp report or explosion, but I had no time to -speculate as to its origin because Agent Youngblood turned in a flash, -immediately after the first explosion, hitting me on the shoulder, and -shouted to all of us in the back seat to get down. I was pushed down by -Agent Youngblood. Almost in the same moment in which he hit or pushed -me, he vaulted over the back seat and sat on me. I was bent over under -the weight of Agent Youngblood's body, toward Mrs. Johnson and Senator -Yarborough. - -I remember attempting to turn my head to make sure that Mrs. Johnson -had bent down. Both she and Senator Yarborough had crouched down at -Agent Youngblood's command. - -At some time in this sequence of events, I heard other explosions. It -was impossible for me to tell the direction from which the explosions -came. - -I felt the automobile sharply accelerate, and in a moment or so Agent -Youngblood released me. I ascertained that Mrs. Johnson and Senator -Yarborough were all right. I heard Agent Youngblood speaking over his -radio transmitter. I asked him what had happened. He said that he was -not sure but that he had learned that the motorcade was going to the -hospital. - -I did not see anything that was going on in and around the President's -automobile. - -When we arrived at the hospital; Agent Youngblood told me to get out of -the car, go into the building, not to stop, and to stay close to him -and the other agents. When the car came to a stop, a cordon of agents -formed around me, and we walked rapidly into the hospital and then we -went into a room there. - -Because of the method which Agent Youngblood directed for leaving the -car and entering the hospital, I did not see the Presidential car or -any of the persons in it. - -In the hospital room to which Mrs. Johnson and I were taken, the shades -were drawn--I think by Agent Youngblood. In addition to him, two or -three other agents were there. - -As I remember, we got our first specific report from Emory Roberts, one -of the agents from the White House detail. He told us that President -Kennedy had been very badly injured and that his condition was quite -poor. He said that he thought we should make plans to get back to -Washington immediately. - -I asked about Governor Connally and was told that he, too, had been -shot, but that his wound was not serious. I was told that Mrs. Kennedy -and Mrs. Connally were uninjured and that no one else had been hurt. - -Mrs. Johnson and I asked if we could see Mrs. Kennedy and Mrs. -Connally. Agent Youngblood told me that I could not leave the room, and -I followed his direction. - -Mrs. Johnson was allowed to leave for this purpose. - -At some time during these events, Kenneth O'Donnell, Congressman Jack -Brooks, Congressman Homer Thornberry, and Cliff Carter came into the -room. - -It was Ken O'Donnell who, at about 1:20 p.m., told us that the -President had died. I think his precise words were, "He's gone." -O'Donnell said that we should return to Washington and that we should -take the President's plane for this purpose. - -I found it hard to believe that this had happened. The whole thing -seemed unreal--unbelievable. A few hours earlier, I had breakfast with -John Kennedy; he was alive, strong, vigorous. I could not believe now -that he was dead. I was shocked and sickened. - -When Mr. O'Donnell told us to get on the plane and go back to -Washington, I asked about Mrs. Kennedy. O'Donnell told me that Mrs. -Kennedy would not leave the hospital without the President's body, and -urged again that we go ahead and and take _Air Force I_ and return to -Washington. - -I did not want to go and leave Mrs. Kennedy in this situation. I said -so, but I agreed that we would board the airplane and wait until Mrs. -Kennedy and the President's body were brought aboard the plane. - -It is, of course, difficult to convey an accurate impression of the -period of time that we were in the hospital room. We were all stunned. -I suppose we were in a state of shock and there was no time for the -shock to wear off sufficiently so that the magnitude of our personal -loss of this great man and good friend could express itself in words or -in surface feelings. - -I suppose, actually, that the only outlet for the grief that shock had -submerged was our sharp, painful, and bitter concern and solicitude for -Mrs. Kennedy. - -Despite my awareness of the reasons for Mr. O'Donnell's insistence--in -which I think he was joined by one or more of the Secret Service -agents--that we board the airplane, leave Dallas, and go to Washington -without delay, I was determined that we would not return until Mrs. -Kennedy was ready, and that we would carry the President's body back -with us if she wanted. - -We left the room and were ushered by a cordon of agents to cars which -were awaiting us. At Agent Youngblood's insistence, I entered one car -and Mrs. Johnson another. Agent Youngblood and I were sitting in the -back seat and Congressman Thornberry was in the front seat. - -As we started away from the hospital, Congressman Albert Thomas came up -to the car. He saw Congressman Thornberry--I don't think he saw me--and -he asked the Congressman to wait for him. At my direction, the car -stopped and picked him up and he sat in the front seat with Congressman -Thornberry. I am sure this didn't take as much as minute. Congressman -Thornberry then climbed over and got into the back seat with us. - -When we got to the airport, we proceeded to drive to the ramp leading -into the plane, and we entered the plane. - -We were ushered into the private quarters of the President's plane. It -didn't seem right for John Kennedy not to be there. I told someone that -we preferred for Mrs. Kennedy to use these quarters. - -Shortly after we boarded the plane, I called Robert Kennedy, the -President's brother and the Attorney General. I knew how grief-stricken -he was, and I wanted to say something that would comfort him. Despite -his shock, he discussed the practical problems at hand--problems of -special urgency because we did not at that time have any information as -to the motivation of the assassination or its possible implications. -The Attorney General said that he would like to look into the matter of -whether the oath of office as President should be administered to me -immediately or after we returned to Washington, and that he would call -back. - -I thereafter talked with McGeorge Bundy and Walter Jenkins, both of -whom urged that the return to Washington should not be delayed. I told -them I was waiting for Mrs. Kennedy and for the President's body to be -placed on the plane, and would not return prior to that time. - -As I remember, our conversation was interrupted to allow the Attorney -General to come back on the line. He said that the oath should be -administered to me immediately, before taking off for Washington, -and that it should be administered by a judicial officer of the -United States. Shortly thereafter, the Deputy Attorney General, Mr. -Katzenbach, dictated the form of oath to one of the secretaries aboard -the plane. - -I thought of Sarah Hughes, an old friend who is judge of the U.S. -district court in Dallas. We telephoned Judge Hughes' office. She was -not there, but she returned the call in a few minutes and said she -would be at the airplane in 10 minutes. I asked that arrangements be -made to permit her to have access to the airplane. - -A few minutes later Mrs. Kennedy and the President's coffin arrived. -Mrs. Johnson and I spoke to her. We tried to comfort her, but our words -seemed inadequate. She went into the private quarters of the plane. I -estimate that Mrs. Kennedy and the coffin arrived about a half hour -after we entered the plane--just after 2 o'clock. - -About a half hour later, I asked someone to find out if Mrs. Kennedy -would stand with us during the administration of the oath. Mrs. Johnson -went back to be with her. Mrs. Kennedy came and stood with us during -the moments that the oath was being administered. - -I shall never forget her bravery, nobility, and dignity. - -I'm told that the oath was administered at 2:40 p.m. Mrs. Johnson and -Mrs. Kennedy were at my side as Judge Hughes administered the oath of -office. - -The plane took off promptly after the swearing-in ceremonies. I -then called President Kennedy's mother, Mrs. Rose Kennedy. She had -previously been advised of the assassination. I told her of our grief -and of our sorrow for her. I gave the telephone to Mrs. Johnson, who -also tried to bring a word of comfort to the President's mother. I -then called Nellie Connally, the Governor's wife, and told her of our -concern for her and John, and tried to give her some comfort. - -I then asked General Clifton, the military aide to the President, to -call McGeorge Bundy in Washington to instruct him to ask the Cabinet -members who were on their way to Japan to return immediately. - -When we landed at the Andrews Air Force Base, I made a short statement -for the press, radio, and television. In my heart, I asked for God's -help that I should not prove unworthy of the responsibility which fate -had thrust upon me. - - LYNDON B. JOHNSON. - - - - -STATEMENT OF MRS. LYNDON B. JOHNSON - - - THE WHITE HOUSE, - _Washington, July 16, 1964_. - - The Honorable EARL WARREN, - _The Chief Justice of the United States, - Washington, D.C_. - -MY DEAR MR. CHIEF JUSTICE: Mr. Lee Rankin, chief counsel to the -President's Commission on the Assassination of President Kennedy, has -advised me that the Commission would be interested to have a statement -from me concerning my recollection of the events of November 22, 1963. - -Beginning on November 30, and as I found time on the following 2 days, -I dictated my recollection of that fateful and dreadful day on a small -tape recorder which I had at The Elms, where we were then living. I -did this primarily as a form of therapy--to help me over the shock and -horror of the experience of President Kennedy's assassination. I did -not intend that the tape should be used. - -The quality of the tape recording is very poor, but upon considering -your Commission's request, I decided to ask that the tape relating to -November 22 be transcribed. I am sending the transcription to you with -only a few, minor corrections. Perhaps it will serve your purposes. I -hope so. In any event, it is a more faithful record of my recollection -and impressions than I could produce at this late date. - -Please accept, for yourself and the members of the Commission and its -staff, my thanks and best wishes for the important task which you -have undertaken and to which all of you have so generously dedicated -yourselves. - - Sincerely, - (S) Lady Bird Johnson, - Mrs. LYNDON B. JOHNSON. - -[Enclosure.] - - * * * * * - -[Transcript from Mrs. Johnson's tapes relating to November 22, 1963] - -It all began so beautifully. After a drizzle in the morning, the sun -came out bright and beautiful. We were going into Dallas. In the lead -car, President and Mrs. Kennedy, John and Nellie, and then a Secret -Service car full of men, and then our car--Lyndon and me and Senator -Yarborough. The streets were lined with people--lots and lots of -people--the children all smiling; placards, confetti; people waving -from windows. One last happy moment I had was looking up and seeing -Mary Griffith leaning out of a window waving at me. Mary for many years -had been in charge of altering the clothes which I purchased at a -Dallas store. - -Then almost at the edge of town, on our way to the Trade Mart where we -were going to have the luncheon, we were rounding a curve, going down -a hill, and suddenly there was a sharp loud report--a shot. It seemed -to me to come from the right, above my shoulder, from a building. Then -a moment and then two more shots in rapid succession. There had been -such a gala air that I thought it must be firecrackers or some sort -of celebration. Then, in the lead car, the Secret Service men were -suddenly down. I heard over the radio system, "Let's get out of here," -and our Secret Service man who was with us, Ruf Youngblood, I believe -it was, vaulted over the front seat on top of Lyndon, threw him to the -floor, and said, "Get down." - -Senator Yarborough and I ducked our heads. The car accelerated -terrifically fast--faster and faster. Then suddenly they put on the -brakes so hard that I wondered if they were going to make it as we -wheeled left and went around the corner. We pulled up to a building. I -looked up and saw it said "Hospital." Only then did I believe that this -might be what it was. Yarborough kept on saying in an excited voice, -"Have they shot the President?" I said something like, "No; it can't -be." - -As we ground to a halt--we were still the third car--Secret Service men -began to pull, lead, guide, and hustle us out. I cast one last look -over my shoulder and saw, in the President's car, a bundle of pink, -just like a drift of blossoms, lying on the back seat. I think it was -Mrs. Kennedy lying over the President's body. They led us to the right, -the left, and onward into a quiet room in the hospital--a very small -room. It was lined with white sheets, I believe. - -People came and went--Kenny O'Donnell, Congressman Thornberry, -Congressman Jack Brooks. Always there was Ruf right there, Emory -Roberts, Jerry Kivett, Lem Johns, and Woody Taylor. There was talk -about where we would go--back to Washington, to the plane, to our -house. People spoke of how widespread this may be. Through it all, -Lyndon was remarkably calm and quiet. Every face that came in, you -searched for the answers you must know. I think the face I kept seeing -it on was the face of Kenny O'Donnell, who loved him so much. - -It was Lyndon as usual who thought of it first, although I wasn't going -to leave without doing it. He said, "You had better try to see if you -can see Jackie and Nellie." We didn't know what had happened to John. -I asked the Secret Service men if I could be taken to them. They began -to lead me up one corridor, back stairs, and down another. Suddenly I -found myself face to face with Jackie in a small hall. I think it was -right outside the operating room. You always think of her--or someone -like her--as being insulated, protected; she was quite alone. I don't -think I ever saw anyone so much alone in my life. I went up to her, -put my arms around her, and said something to her. I'm sure it was -something like, "God, help us all," because my feelings for her were -too tumultuous to put into words. - -And then I went in to see Nellie. There it was different because Nellie -and I have gone through so many things together since 1938. I hugged -her tight and we both cried and I said, "Nellie, it's going to be all -right." And Nellie said, "Yes; John's going to be all right." Among her -many other fine qualities, she is also tough. - -Then I turned and went back to the small white room where Lyndon was. -Mr. Kilduff and Kenny O'Donnell were coming and going. I think it was -from Kenny's face and Kenny's voice that I first heard the words, -"The President is dead." Mr. Kilduff entered and said to Lyndon, "Mr. -President." - -It was decided that we would go immediately to the airport. Quick plans -were made about how to get to the car, who to ride in what. It was -Lyndon who said we should go to the plane in unmarked cars. Getting out -of the hospital into the cars was one of the swiftest walks I have ever -made. We got in. Lyndon said to stop the sirens. We drove along as fast -as we could. I looked up at a building and there already was a flag at -half-mast. I think that is when the enormity of what had happened first -struck me. - -When we got to the airplane, we entered airplane No. 1 for the first -time. There was a TV set on, and the commentator was saying, "Lyndon -B. Johnson, now President of the United States." They were saying they -had a suspect. They were not sure he was the assassin. The President -had been shot with a 30-30 rifle. On the plane, all the shades were -lowered. Lyndon said that we were going to wait for Mrs. Kennedy and -the coffin. There was discussion about when Lyndon should be sworn in -as President. There was a telephone call to Washington--I believe to -the Attorney General. It was decided that he should be sworn in in -Dallas as quickly as possible because of international implications, -and because we did not know how widespread this incident was as to -intended victims. Judge Sarah Hughes, a Federal judge in Dallas--and I -am glad it was she--was called to come in a hurry. - -Mrs. Kennedy had arrived by this time and the coffin, and there--in the -very narrow confines of the plane with Jackie on his left with her hair -falling in her face, but very composed, and then Lyndon, and I was on -his right, Judge Hughes with the Bible in front of her and a cluster -of Secret Service people and Congressmen we had known for a long -time--Lyndon took the oath of office. - -It's odd at a time like that the little things that come to your mind -and a moment of deep compassion you have for people who are really not -at the center of the tragedy. I heard a Secret Service man say in the -most desolate voice and I hurt for him, "We never lost a President in -the Service," and then Police Chief Curry, of Dallas, came on the plane -and said to Mrs. Kennedy, "Mrs. Kennedy, believe me, we did everything -we possibly could." - -We all sat around the plane. We had at first been ushered into the main -private Presidential cabin on the plane--but Lyndon quickly said, "No, -no" and immediately led us out of there; we felt that is where Mrs. -Kennedy should be. The casket was in the hall. I went in to see Mrs. -Kennedy and, though it was a very hard thing to do, she made it as easy -as possible. She said things like, "Oh, Lady Bird, it's good that we've -always liked you two so much." She said, "Oh, what if I had not been -there? I'm so glad I was there." I looked at her. Mrs. Kennedy's dress -was stained with blood. Her right glove was caked--that immaculate -woman--it was caked with blood, her husband's blood. She always wore -gloves like she was used to them. I never could. Somehow that was one -of the most poignant sights--exquisitely dressed and caked in blood. -I asked her if I couldn't get someone in to help her change, and she -said, "Oh, no. Perhaps later I'll ask Mary Gallagher, but not right -now." - -She said a lot of other things, like, "What if I had not been there? -Oh, I'm so glad I was there," and a lot of other things that made it -so much easier for us. "Oh, Lady Bird, we've always liked you both -so much." I tried to express something of how we felt. I said, "Oh, -Mrs. Kennedy, you know we never even wanted to be Vice President and -now, dear God, it's come to this." I would have done anything to help -her, but there was nothing I could do to help her, so rather quickly I -left and went back to the main part of the airplane where everyone was -seated. - -The ride to Washington was silent, strained--each with his own -thoughts. One of mine was something I had said about Lyndon a long time -ago--that he's a good man in a tight spot. I even remember one little -thing he said in that hospital room, "Tell the children to get a Secret -Service man with them." - -Finally, we got to Washington, with a cluster of people watching. Many -bright lights. The casket went off first; then Mrs. Kennedy. The family -had come to join them, and then we followed. Lyndon made a very simple, -very brief, and--I think--strong, talk to the folks there. Only about -four sentences, I think. We got in cars; we dropped him off at the -White House, and I came home. - - - - -_Tuesday, July 28, 1964_ - -TESTIMONY OF AMBASSADOR LLEWELLYN E. THOMPSON - -The President's Commission met at 3 p.m., on July 28, 1964, at 200 -Maryland Avenue NE., Washington, D.C. - -Present were Senator John Sherman Cooper (presiding), and Allen W. -Dulles, members. - -Also present were J. Lee Rankin, general counsel; W. David Slawson, -assistant counsel; and Richard A. Frank, attorney, Office of the Legal -Adviser, Department of State. - - -Senator COOPER. The Commission will be in order. - -Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to give before -this Commission is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the -truth, so help you God? - -Ambassador THOMPSON. I do. - -Mr. SLAWSON. Mr. Ambassador, could you please state for the record your -full name and address? - -Ambassador THOMPSON. My name is Llewellyn E. Thompson. I reside at 1913 -23d Street NW., Washington. - -Mr. SLAWSON. And could you state your present position with the U.S. -Government and the positions you have held since late 1959? - -Ambassador THOMPSON. In 1959 I was Ambassador in Moscow, and then I was -transferred to the State Department as Ambassador at Large, and have -been that since that time. In addition, I am now Acting Deputy Under -Secretary of State. - -Mr SLAWSON. Thank you. Ambassador Thompson has been asked to testify -today on any contacts he may have had with Lee Harvey Oswald while the -Ambassador was in his post with the American Embassy in Moscow and on -any knowledge he may have on pertinent Soviet practices or American -practices at that time which might relate to the treatment of Mr. -Oswald. - -Ambassador Thompson, could you state all of the times and describe them -when you heard about Lee Harvey Oswald's dealings with your Embassy at -Moscow while he was in Russia, either in late 1959 or thereafter? - -Ambassador THOMPSON. Yes; the only recollection I have is that when I -returned from a trip to the United States in November 1959, or some -time after that, the consul informed me about the case, and said this -man had asked to renounce his citizenship. I recall asking him---- - -Mr. DULLES. Was that Consul Richard E. Snyder? - -Ambassador THOMPSON. Yes; I am almost certain of that. I recall asking -him why he didn't accept the renunciation, and he explained that -in cases of this kind he normally waited to make sure the man was -serious, and also in order to normally consult the State Department. - -I believe he told me at that time that the man had not come back again. -And I believe that is the only recollection I have of the case at all -at the time I was in Moscow. - -Mr. SLAWSON. And that includes any other time thereafter, including -through 1962? - -Ambassador THOMPSON. Yes; of course I read the press and was aware of -the case when it came up in the Department. There was some discussion -of it. But no knowledge that I think would bear on the case. - -I recall, I think, being in Germany at the time I read in the press -that he was leaving the country--leaving Moscow, that is. But I don't -recall having been consulted about his application to leave. - -Mr. SLAWSON. Did you have any personal dealings or any knowledge of -your subordinates' dealings with Marina Oswald, Lee Oswald's wife, when -she applied to accompany him back to the United States in early 1961 -and frequently thereafter? - -Ambassador THOMPSON. None that I recall. - -Mr. SLAWSON. Mr. Ambassador, I wonder if you could make any comments -you would like to make on the policy which Consul Snyder and others -testifying for the Department of State have described in their -treatment of Americans who sought to renounce their citizenship when -they came to Moscow, and how these Americans were handled? - -Ambassador THOMPSON. Well, I am aware that we have had cases where -someone would say they wanted to renounce their citizenship and then -after a few days in the Soviet Union change their minds. And while I -don't recall any specific cases, I do know we have had cases of that -sort. - -Mr. SLAWSON. Was there any particular time in your career when this -sort of thing was more frequent than other times--any groups of people -where it might have occurred? - -Ambassador THOMPSON. Well, I know that prior to my arrival in Moscow -in 1941, when I was Secretary in the Embassy, that there had been a -great influx from the United States, particularly of people of Finnish -origin, who had returned to the Soviet Union. I think that some of -those people at least had not renounced their citizenship; they had -come over there under the impression that they would receive very good -treatment, and a great many of them applied subsequently to return to -the United States. But many of them were unable to get exit visas. - -Mr. SLAWSON. Were those that did not give up their American citizenship -usually able to return to the United States if they changed their mind? - -Ambassador THOMPSON. I believe so. I know of one case of a man of -Finnish origin who worked for the Embassy, and he did return to the -United States. It is the one case I know of personally. I am quite sure -there were some others who did get out. - -Mr. SLAWSON. Shifting now to the Soviet treatment of American -defectors, or would-be defectors, are there any cases in your -experience where you could comment on the Soviet treatment of such -persons, how quickly the Russian Government made up its mind whether it -wanted them for permanent residence in Russia and so on? - -Ambassador THOMPSON. I think that in recent times, at least, my -impression is that the Soviets, because of bad experience they have -had with some people who came there to reside, and renounced their -citizenship, have looked these people over and let them know that they -could not remain. I think there was a case since I left the Soviet -Union of that sort. I don't recall the exact particulars. But I do have -the impression that they now don't automatically accept people who -come and say they want to renounce their citizenship and would like to -reside there. - -Mr. SLAWSON. Can you give the Commission any estimate on the time -periods that sometimes are involved in the Soviet authorities making up -their mind? - -Ambassador THOMPSON. I think that there has been at least a case or two -during the time I was there where it was pretty obvious that the person -concerned was unstable and that the Soviets very quickly let the person -know that he could not reside. But since I did not handle these cases, -I do not--I could not cite any specific cases. - -Mr. SLAWSON. Mr. Ambassador, I have a name of an American citizen, Mr. -William Edgerton Morehouse, Jr., who, according to the records of the -Department of State, was hospitalized in a hospital in Moscow in the -fall of 1959. - -According to records furnished us by the Russian Government, and -according to the personal diary kept by Lee Harvey Oswald, he, too, -was hospitalized in the latter part of October, and commented--Oswald -commented in his diary--that in his ward with him was what he described -as an elderly American. We are trying to locate that American. We think -that possibly this Mr. Morehouse was that person. I wonder if you had -ever heard of Mr. Morehouse before, or know who he might be? - -Ambassador THOMPSON. I have no recollection of having heard of this man -before. - -Mr. SLAWSON. Do you have any recollection of any other American that -might fit this description? - -Ambassador THOMPSON. No; I do recall that there have been American -tourists who have been in the hospital in Moscow. But I don't recall at -that particular date whether there were any. - -Mr. SLAWSON. Mr. Ambassador, can you comment on how Americans were -ordinarily given medical treatment in the Botkinskaya Hospital in -Moscow, which was the hospital in which Oswald was treated, to the best -of your knowledge? - -Ambassador THOMPSON. The Botkinskaya Hospital has a section which -is reserved for the members of the diplomatic corps, and in case of -prominent Americans, particularly if the illness were serious, they -were often treated there. - -Mr. SLAWSON. You say the Americans normally were treated in a special -ward in that hospital, or a special section of it? - -Ambassador THOMPSON. Yes; it was a completely separate building, I -believe. - -Mr. SLAWSON. Was this the invariable method of treatment, or would -there be a reasonable chance that an American might have gone into a -normal Soviet ward which would have treated his type of illness? - -Ambassador THOMPSON. I would think that the ward which was reserved for -the diplomatic corps would probably only have been used for important -visitors, but it is quite a large hospital, with a large number of -separate buildings. It is quite possible for Americans to have been in -one or the other. And obviously, if there were an infectious disease, -they would be separated, and not in the regular section. - -Mr. SLAWSON. If an ordinary American tourist or businessman in Moscow -were to receive an injury in, say, an automobile accident or some other -normal method, would he normally be put into the same ward as Embassy -people were placed, or would he receive treatment right along with -normal Soviet citizens? - -Ambassador THOMPSON. I think that there is an emergency hospital type -where he probably would normally be taken, rather than Botkinskaya. I -cannot be sure of this. But we had an American doctor in the Embassy -who would normally be called in on cases of this kind, and if he felt -the case required it he would probably apply to have him taken to -Botkinskaya. - -Mr. SLAWSON. Do you recollect who this doctor was in the fall of 1959? - -Ambassador THOMPSON. I believe at that time it was an Air Force -officer. It sometimes rotated among the services. But I am almost -certain it was an Air Force officer. I could get the name, but I don't -recall it at the moment. I just don't recall the name. - -Senator COOPER. I suggest that the Secretary can supply the name for -the Commission. - -Mr. SLAWSON. Mr. Ambassador, do you think it would be usual of the -Soviet Government to permit someone in Oswald's circumstances, that is -a would-be defector from his own government, to be treated in the same -ward as other Americans, or particularly as Americans who might come -under the category of this important person or Embassy official ward -you were speaking of? - -Ambassador THOMPSON. I would think it is probably somewhat unusual. -This doctor could give you expert testimony on this, because he has -been involved in almost all cases. - -Mr. DULLES. Do you happen to know whether that doctor is in the United -States at the present time? - -Ambassador THOMPSON. He was in Texas the last I heard. I draw a blank -on his name at the moment, although I know him quite well. - -Mr. SLAWSON. I think with the lead you have given us, we shouldn't have -any difficulty in finding his name. I have no other questions. Does -anyone else present care to place a question? - -Senator COOPER. It appears from the testimony that we have heard that -Lee Oswald appeared at the Embassy on October 31, 1959, and stated he -wished to renounce his American citizenship. As I understand, at that -time you were out of the Soviet Union. - -Ambassador THOMPSON. That is correct. - -Senator COOPER. Was Edward L. Freers, Charge d'Affaire? - -Ambassador THOMPSON. Yes, sir. - -Senator COOPER. Was there a consulate in Moscow? - -Ambassador THOMPSON. There is a consular section of the Embassy, but -not a separate consulate. - -Senator COOPER. Who had charge of the consulate section of the Embassy? - -Ambassador THOMPSON. At that time I believe it was Mr. Richard Snyder. - -Senator COOPER. And was he the one who advised you on your return to -Moscow that Oswald had applied to the Embassy and stated that he wished -to renounce his citizenship? - -Ambassador THOMPSON. I believe that is correct. I think the counselor -was also present at the time. I think both of them informed me. - -Senator COOPER. We have had in evidence dispatches from the Embassy -at Moscow upon this question, and the matter was referred to the -Department of State as to what steps should be taken towards his -renunciation. Was that the normal way of the Embassy handling such -applications for renunciation of citizenship? - -Ambassador THOMPSON. Yes, sir; I believe that would be done in every -case. - -Senator COOPER. Did the State Department have any policy, other -than reference to the State Department, as to the approval of such -applications? - -Ambassador THOMPSON. I believe our practice is that whenever we are -convinced that the man is serious, and knows what he is doing, that -this is allowed to take place--the renunciation is accepted. - -Senator COOPER. Is there a policy or practice of attempting to -determine whether the person is serious, or whether the person might -change his or her mind after the original renunciation application? - -Ambassador THOMPSON. Yes; that is correct. Because, as I said earlier, -there have been cases where people have changed their minds in a very -few days. Also, there is always the possibility that someone might be -temporarily of unsound mind or some other reason, why it would need to -be ascertained that they were aware of what they were doing. - -Senator COOPER. There is also in evidence a letter, or a dispatch from -the Embassy to the Department of State, dated May 26, 1961, signed for -the Ambassador by Edward L. Freers, minister counselor. This dispatch -deals with the application of Oswald to secure a renewal of his -passport. Were you out of Moscow at that time? - -Ambassador THOMPSON. What was the date, sir? - -Senator COOPER. May 26, 1961. - -Ambassador THOMPSON. I believe I was in Moscow at that time. I took a -trip within the Soviet Union from May 10 to 14, 1961, but I believe I -was there on May 9. - -Senator COOPER. Then these dispatches, they were sent in your name, or -by someone for the Ambassador? - -Ambassador THOMPSON. Yes; but I don't recall having been shown them. - -Mr. SLAWSON. For the record, Senator Cooper, could I state that the -dispatch of May 26, 1961, you referred to is Commission Exhibit No. -936, and the memorandum you are also reading from is Commission Exhibit -No. 935. - -Mr. DULLES. How were those signed, Mr. Slawson? - -Mr. SLAWSON. Commission Exhibit No. 935 is signed for the Ambassador -by Boris H. Klosson, counselor for political affairs. And Commission -Exhibit No. 936 is signed for the Ambassador by Edward L. Freers, -minister counselor. - -Senator COOPER. I might also refer to the earlier dispatch November 2, -1959, Commission Exhibit No. 908. - -Now, were the procedures followed with respect to his request for -renewal of his passport--that is in reference to the Department of -State, for decision--was that the normal procedure followed when -persons who had attempted to renounce or had renounced, claimed or -desired to secure renewal of their passport--to refer it to the -Department of State? - -Ambassador THOMPSON. Yes, sir; I think in every case that would be done. - -Senator COOPER. Now, between the time of Oswald's entrance into the -Soviet Union and his exit, did you ever see Oswald yourself? - -Ambassador THOMPSON. No, sir; I never saw him that I knew of. - -Senator COOPER. Did you hear anything about him during his stay in the -Soviet Union? - -Ambassador THOMPSON. My only recollection is of this first briefing. I -don't recall hearing anything else about him. - -Senator COOPER. In evidence it has appeared that not too long after he -came to Moscow, he went to Minsk and secured a job there. - -From your experience as Ambassador, our Ambassador in Russia, and also -in other positions in the Embassy, would you consider that unusual, -that Oswald should be able to secure a job in a Russian factory while -he was there? - -Ambassador THOMPSON. No, sir; I think that once they had agreed to let -him stay in the Soviet Union, they would have assisted him in obtaining -employment, because they believe that everyone that is able to in the -country should work, and since he was obviously not staying just as a -tourist, I think they would normally have provided employment for him. - -Senator COOPER. Also in evidence it indicates he was provided by the -Soviet officials with a passport or document which described him as a -stateless person. - -From your experience would you be able to say whether or not that was a -normal procedure for the Soviets to follow with respect to an American -tourist? - -Ambassador THOMPSON. I think that as long as they agreed to let him -stay beyond the normal time of a tourist, that is a month or at the -most 2 months, that they would then provide him with documentation so -he could identify himself to the police. The police would not normally -be able to read an American passport. In the Soviet Union, if you -travel at all, you have to produce documentation--to stay in a hotel, -very often to obtain transportation. So I think it would be normal that -they would provide him with documentation. - -Senator COOPER. Would you say that in late 1959, or 1960 or 1961 that -the provision by the Soviet Union officials to a tourist of a document -like this, saying he is a stateless person, and allowing him to stay -beyond the usual time, for a tourist, was ordinary or usual? Would that -indicate anything unusual to you, from your experience in the Embassy -in Moscow? - -Ambassador THOMPSON. No; I think not. I think that in cases of this -kind that this would be normal. - -Senator COOPER. Would it indicate in any way that they might be -considering further his application to become a citizen of the Soviet -Union or, in another way, that they were considering whether or not he -might be used as an agent of the Soviet Union? - -Ambassador THOMPSON. Well, I think there have been a good many cases -of people who have come to the Soviet Union from abroad, and I believe -that a number of them have not formally renounced citizenship. I recall -that in 1941, when Germany attacked the Soviet Union, that there were a -number of people who turned up that we had not known were in the Soviet -Union, had never been near the Embassy, and had never, as far as we -know renounced their citizenship. But they had been living there all -this time. - -Senator COOPER. You would not have any reason to think, then, that -these circumstances might indicate that the Soviets were--could -consider using him as an agent at some future time? - -Ambassador THOMPSON. I would not have much on which to base a judgment -on that, other than that it seems to me, of course, possible, in this -or any other case in which a foreigner has come in to reside. But as I -say there have been a great many cases. - -For example, there are many people of Armenian origin who have returned -to the Soviet Union and have been encouraged to do so by the Soviet -Government. And in view of the very large numbers, I would think that -the intention to use any of them as an agent would be very rare. - -As far as I can understand, they encouraged them to come back because -they wanted their skills available. - -Senator COOPER. When he applied for a renewal of his passport, his -wife, Marina, made application for a passport. And I believe it was -said that that was a prerequisite to securing an exit visa from the -Soviet Union. - -From your experience as Ambassador and in other posts in the American -Embassy, do you consider the time in which she was able to secure an -exit visa from Russia, within so short time, as unusual? - -Ambassador THOMPSON. Well, if it was a short time--and I am not aware -of the exact time, myself--but if it were a short time, I would say it -is unusual, because we have had cases that drag out over years, and in -many cases, of course, they never get an exit visa. - -Senator COOPER. Well, perhaps without reference to time, from your -experience, have you found that--do you know whether it was difficult -for a Soviet citizen, such as Marina Oswald, even though she might be -married to an American--that it is difficult for them to secure an exit -visa from the Soviet Union? - -Ambassador THOMPSON. Yes; it is very difficult. - -Senator COOPER. Do you know the basis for that? Is it that they do not -want to permit the exit of any Soviet citizen? - -Ambassador THOMPSON. I think that except in the cases of rather elderly -people, they have not wanted any of their people to leave permanently. -They let them go on tourist trips abroad, but not for permanent -residence. As you possibly know, leaving the Soviet Union without -permission is one of the most severely punished crimes you can commit -in the Soviet Union. - -Senator COOPER. What was that? - -Ambassador THOMPSON. Leaving without permission. - -Senator COOPER. Would the fact that there was a child born to Lee -Oswald and Marina Oswald have altered this practice of the Soviet -Union, as far as any experience that you have had or any knowledge you -have had about such cases? - -Ambassador THOMPSON. I think the existence of a child born in the -Soviet Union would normally make it more difficult for a person to -secure an exit visa. - -Mr. SLAWSON. Mr. Ambassador, in the facts of the Oswald case they -applied to leave the Soviet Union, of course, well before their first -child was born, and in fact probably received Soviet permission to -leave in late December 1961, and the child, I believe, was born in -February 1962--although the Oswalds in fact did not leave until very -early June 1962. - -They nevertheless had received Soviet permission to do so before the -child was born. - -In light of that fact, could you comment further upon the perhaps -greater difficulty of leaving when you have a child? - -Ambassador THOMPSON. Well, I think probably having once processed the -case and agreed to let the husband and wife leave, that they would have -been more inclined then to let the child leave than if the case had -been considered after the child was born. - -Senator COOPER. I take it the policy of the United States would be -the reverse--that is, because Marina was the wife of Lee Oswald, and -because the baby had been born, the practice of the United States would -be to grant a passport to Marina for the child. - -Ambassador THOMPSON. I believe that is right, on compassionate grounds. - -Senator COOPER. Are you familiar with the testimony about a loan that -was made to the Oswalds in order to help them get back to the United -States? - -Ambassador THOMPSON. I have read in the press that they had received -the normal loan. - -Senator COOPER. Can you say anything about that as a practice of the -American Government? - -Ambassador THOMPSON. I only know that in general where a citizen wishes -to return to the United States and doesn't have the means to do so, -that we frequently do assist them. This goes back many years. But I -haven't been myself concerned in this for probably 25 years, or even -more. - -Senator COOPER. But is it the practice that if a determination has been -made that the individual is an American citizen, therefore entitled to -what protections are given to American citizens, if necessary, loans -will be made to assist them to return to the United States? Is that -about the basis of the policy? - -Ambassador THOMPSON. That is correct; yes, sir. - -Senator COOPER. I think that is all I have. - -Mr. DULLES. Did you have any conversations at any time while you were -Ambassador or after you returned to the United States with any Soviet -official with regard to the Oswald case? - -Ambassador THOMPSON. I discussed with the Soviet Ambassador the desire -of the Commission to receive any documentation that they might have -available, but I did not in any way discuss the case itself, nor did -the Soviet official with whom I talked. - -Mr. DULLES. And do you know of any conversations of that nature that -any other official of the Department had in connection with the Oswald -case? - -Ambassador THOMPSON. I do not myself know of any. - -Mr. DULLES. You probably would, would you not, if that had taken -place--of any importance? - -Ambassador THOMPSON. Off the record. - -(Discussion off the record.) - -Mr. DULLES. Your testimony is you have no knowledge of any other -conversations other than that of the Secretary of State, in connection -with communications to and from the Soviet Government on this case? - -Ambassador THOMPSON. That is correct. I know of no other cases where it -was discussed with Soviet officials. - -Mr. DULLES. That is all I have. - -Mr. SLAWSON. Thank you very much, Mr. Ambassador. - -(Whereupon, at 3:40 p.m., the President's Commission adjourned.) - - - - -_Wednesday, September 2, 1964_ - -TESTIMONY OF C. DOUGLAS DILLON - -The President's Commission met at 12:05 p. m., on September 2, 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 Gerald R. Ford, -Allen W. Dulles, and John J. McCloy, members. - -Also present was J. Lee Rankin, general counsel. - - -The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Secretary, would you please rise and follow me. - -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. - -Secretary DILLON. I do. - -The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Rankin will conduct the examination, Mr. Secretary. - -Secretary DILLON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Secretary, will you state your name and residence, -please? - -Secretary DILLON. C. Douglas Dillon of Far Hills, N.J., presently -residing in Washington, 2534 Belmont Road, NW. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you have an official position with the Government? - -Secretary DILLON. Yes, I do. I am the Secretary of the Treasury. - -Mr. RANKIN. In that capacity do you have responsibility for the Secret -Service of the United States? - -Secretary DILLON. Yes, the Secret Service is part of the Treasury -Department. - -Mr. RANKIN. Have you had that position responsibility for some time? - -Secretary DILLON. Since January 21, 1961. - -Mr. RANKIN. Can you tell us briefly the nature of your supervision of -the Secret Service, prior to the assassination? - -Secretary DILLON. Yes. Prior to the assassination, when I first took -office as Secretary of the Treasury, I naturally tried to find out, -in as much detail as seemed practical, how the various offices of -the Department functioned. One of the important ones was the Secret -Service. So I had a number of interviews with Chief Baughman who was -the Chief of the Secret Service at that time. - -I got the general description from him of how the Secret Service -operated, what their responsibilities were, what their problems were. -After he retired, which was early, after I had only been there for a -few months, I spoke with the President about this matter--President -Kennedy--and it was my responsibility to find a new Chief of the Secret -Service. - -He had known James Rowley very well as head of the White House detail, -and he felt that he would be an appropriate head of the Secret Service. -I talked with Chief Baughman, and he thought there were two or three -men, of whom Rowley was one, qualified to be head of the Secret -Service; so I decided to appoint Rowley and thereafter talked with him -considerably about the White House detail which he was more familiar -with than Chief Baughman. - -However, I did not in any sense conduct a day-to-day supervision, or -close following, of its day-to-day operations. The Secret Service had -been functioning for many years and the presumption from its record -was that it had been functioning successfully. I think that the events -that have developed since November have very clearly shown that some -of the procedures, many of them, need to be changed and improved. I -think this is probably largely due, to a considerable extent due, to a -very rapid change which probably took place without our fully realizing -its importance in the last 3 years, and which greatly increased the -responsibility of the Secret Service. That is the greatly changed -nature of Presidential travel. - -Mr. RANKIN. Will you describe to us how that affects the problems of -the Secret Service? - -Secretary DILLON. Yes. In earlier times, the Presidents did not travel -very often. When he did travel, he generally traveled by train, which -was a protected train. Doing that, he could not cover very many parts -of the country, and the Secret Service could move easily right along -with him on the train that he was on. - -What happened since has been, first, the advent of airplanes. -Presidents beginning with President Eisenhower began to move more -rapidly and were able to travel considerably more, and on very short -time differentials they could be in cities that were thousands of miles -apart. - -However, this only just began with President Eisenhower because, in -the first place, jets were not yet available, and in the second place, -in the last 4 years of his term, he had to take greater care of his -health, and he didn't travel around the country quite as much as his -successors have. So when President Kennedy came into office with the -availability of, the relatively recent availability, of jets and his -desire to travel, this greatly increased the burden on the Secret -Service. Formerly when they had a trip, they used to send out an -advance agent to some big town. Now the trip would be a 3-day trip, and -there might be four towns, each one 1,000 miles apart, that would have -to be covered thoroughly at the same time. I think that probably there -was not a full realization by anyone of this problem. - -Certainly the Secret Service came to me and said they needed more -personnel, and we tried to get them more personnel. Chief Rowley -testified, I thought quite convincingly, in 1962 before the various -Appropriations Committees of the Congress and met with very little -success because I think that this was not fully understood by the -public. The Appropriations Committees were a reflection of public -understanding, and probably it was not even fully understood within the -Secret Service. - -I would like---- - -Senator RUSSELL. Has there been any increase, Mr. Secretary, in the -number of agents assigned to guard the President. I thought there had -been some increase in recent years? - -Secretary DILLON. There has been some increase, and we have tried very -hard to increase the Secret Service in the last 3 or 4 years. We have -asked for more people every year, and while we never got the amount we -asked for, we did get increases. I have the figures here. In 1961, the -entire Secret Service amounted to 454 individuals, of whom 305 were -classified as agents. In 1964, that is the fiscal year just finished, -the figure was 571, of which 167 were clerks and 404 were agents. So we -had achieved an increase of about 100 agents, a little over a third. - -Mr. DULLES. That included both the counterfeiting responsibilities of -the Secret Service as well as the Presidential protection? - -Secretary DILLON. That is right. And I think it is important to note -that the counterfeiting problem was also increasing in volume very -rapidly and changing very rapidly at about the same time. Actually that -may have started a few years earlier because of the development of -photography, which enabled one to counterfeit by photography instead of -having to do it by hand engraving. - -Representative FORD. Wasn't the specific request for an increase in the -White House detail--I use this in a broad sense for both the President -and Vice President--primarily aimed at the increase of personnel for -the Vice President? - -Secretary DILLON. That was in one year. - -Representative FORD. 1962? - -Secretary DILLON. I think that was in--I think that was in 1963. In -1962 the law was passed, and we did have a deficiency appropriation -which was given to us. The following year when we came up for our -regular appropriation, we not only did not get the full amount that -we thought was necessary to cover the Vice President, but they cut -the protection we had been affording the Vice President in half, and -whereas there had been 20 persons assigned, they reduced it to 10. - -Representative FORD. But there had been no reduction in the funds for -the protection of the President? - -Secretary DILLON. For the White House detail; no. - -Representative FORD. It was a reduction for the protection of the Vice -President. - -Secretary DILLON. That is correct. But the thing that I think we are -coming to is, it is perfectly obvious that we have to do a great deal -more in this advance work, field work, in interviewing people who are -dangers to the President or could be classified as such. We need more -people in the field on account of this. That is what I say was not -probably fully realized, although Rowley specifically, when he first -went up in 1962 asking for an increase, pitched it on that basis, but -he did not have a very good reception from the Appropriations Committee -at that time because they felt that the White House detail was the -White House detail, right around the President. I don't think anyone -fully understood the connection with people in the field. I am not sure -that Secret Service made as good a case as they should, to be really -understood on this. It has become clear now. - -Representative FORD. Mr. Rowley in that presentation asked for -additional funds for and personnel for the Protective Research Service? - -Secretary DILLON. I don't think it was specifically for that. It was -for protection of the President, and he was the first person that made -this type of request. Baughman had always said that people in the field -were counterfeiting and just worked a little bit for the President, and -Rowley when he came in was the first one that made this claim that they -were needed to actually protect the President. He wanted more people in -the field to do these things, and that was the thing that did not go -over right away. I think it would be interesting here. We have---- - -Mr. RANKIN. May I interrupt a moment? We have a problem with some of -the members of the Commission that have to go to the Congress right -away for the vote. They would like to question you if they may. - -Senator COOPER. I have a question which I think you can address -yourself fully to later but considering these new factors which make -the protection of the President more difficult, I would like to ask if -it is your judgment that the Secret Service, if it is provided adequate -personnel and if it is--if a broader criteria for the ascertainment of -the persons who might be dangerous to the President is adopted, if it -is your judgment that the Secret Service could meet these new factors -and provide an effective protection for the President, taking into -consideration the factors which you mentioned? - -Secretary DILLON. Yes; I think they could. I think the answer -is clearcut. I don't think that means that under every and all -circumstances you could be absolutely a thousand percent certain that -nothing can happen. You never can be in a situation like this. But I -think they could be a great deal better, and you could feel everything -has been done. We have just completed--the thing I wanted to say--this -study we have been working on many months as to what is needed to -provide this in the Secret Service. Chief Rowley was not able to give -you this when he was here before. I have given a copy of this to Mr. -Rankin. I think it ought to go into the record at this point. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Secretary, I will hand to you the document you just -referred to, called Planning Document, U.S. Secret Service, and ask if -that is the document that you were describing. - -Secretary DILLON. Yes. That is the document; yes. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Chief Justice, I would like to ask leave at this time -to mark this document our next exhibit number which I will furnish -later to the reporter, and offer it in evidence as part of this -examination. - -The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Secretary, that is not a security matter that -couldn't go into the record, is it? - -Secretary DILLON. No. I have one thing I would like to say about that, -and I think it should go into the record. What this is is our report -as to how many personnel are needed and what has to be done and what -they should do. We have transmitted that with a covering letter to -the Bureau of the Budget. The final decision on what will be done on -many of these things is taken in the light of recommendations of the -Bureau of the Budget to the President and what he finally decides for -budgetary reasons. So ordinarily budgetary matters are not published -prior to the time the President has approved them. He hasn't approved -this. He hasn't seen it, but I think under the circumstances I see no -reason under this special circumstance, why this report should not go -into the record, and I think it is perfectly all right. - -The CHAIRMAN. The report may be admitted and take the next number. - -(Commission Exhibit No. 1053-A was marked for identification and -received in evidence.) - -Representative FORD. This would be the recommendation of the Treasury -Department to the Bureau of the Budget for the personnel and the funds -for the Secret Service in fiscal year 1966? - -Secretary DILLON. No. This is a recommendation to the Bureau of the -Budget for the personnel and equipment that would be needed to put the -Secret Service in what they consider adequate position to fully handle -this problem. They feel that it would take about 20 months to get all -the necessary people on board and trained. If this were started right -away, as we think it could be if a reapportionment on a deficiency -basis were approved, this could start in fiscal year 1965 and depending -on whether such is approved, the fiscal year 1966 final recommendation -would be affected. But this is the total picture, and it is assuming -our recommendation that they start in the next couple of months. - -Representative FORD. In other words, this is the plan that you would -like instituted immediately regardless of budget considerations. - -Secretary DILLON. That is right. - -Mr. McCLOY. Mr. Secretary, there is nothing in this exhibit that in any -way, according to your judgment, would compromise the protection of the -security of the President if it became---- - -Secretary DILLON. Oh, no; and there is also with it--it is just a -covering letter but I think it is equally important--it is a letter -which I wrote to the Director of the Budget on Monday when I forwarded -this plan to him, and I think that probably should also go in because -it has a recommendation at the end covering the matter Mr. Ford raised. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Secretary, I will ask you if this document, dated -Angust 31, 1964, is a copy of the letter that you have just referred to -now? - -Secretary DILLON. That is correct. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Chief Justice, I ask that this letter, dated August 31, -1964, directed "Dear Kermit," from the Secretary, be marked the next -number in order and offered in evidence as part of the record. - -The CHAIRMAN. It will be admitted. - -(Commission Exhibit No. 1053-B was marked for identification and -received in evidence.) - -Secretary DILLON. It is marked "limited official use," and I think that -should be declassified for this purpose. - -Mr. RANKIN. Now, Mr. Secretary, will you very briefly describe the -general plan of your planning document. We have that so we can use it -in considerable detail, but if you can just summarize briefly. - -Secretary DILLON. Well, in brief, this asks for a total of 205 -additional agents, which is about--not quite but nearly--a 50 percent -increase from the 415 agents they now have. It asks also for 50 clerks -to add to the 171 that are presently there. Those are stenographers, -typists and other clerical workers. And for five technicians. Of this -the idea is to put 17 agents and the 5 technicians in the PRS. Five -would be used to maintain 24-hour coverage in the PRS which is not -presently in force because of lack of personnel. One would add to the -Research and Countermeasures Unit to fill out three full units that -could be operating all the time. Six of them would do advance work for -PRS with local agencies and institutions. One of the new things we have -instituted is that each time they do an advance, someone from the PRS -goes out and works with the local law enforcement agencies. I think -that is obviously a very important thing. They need more people in view -of the volume of traveling. Then they also need five more employees -to expand our liaison with the other law enforcement and intelligence -agencies. We now have one man assigned really full time to that. We -found even in the period that we have been doing this that while -that is a great help, much the best way would be to have individuals -assigned to each agency that work full time with the agency, know the -people in the agency, and that is the only way we can be sure we have -adequate liaison. - -Mr. DULLES. May I ask, would that include the FBI? - -Secretary DILLON. Oh, yes. - -Mr. DULLES. And the CIA and military intelligence services? - -Secretary DILLON. Oh, yes. - -Mr. DULLES. And the State Department possibly? - -Secretary DILLON. Yes. - -Representative FORD. Could you specify those agencies. I was interested -in what agencies you were referring to. - -Secretary DILLON. Well, I would think certainly it would be the -military, the FBI, the security services of the State Department, and -the CIA. - -Now, there may be additional ones. There are additional ones within the -Treasury Department. I think we probably have one, for instance, with -the intelligence section of the Internal Revenue Service, Alcohol and -Tobacco Tax Unit, and so forth, which a good deal can come out of. - -In addition we recommend here five technical specialists, two of which -would be highly trained computer technicians, programers, and three -less well trained to work with these others. The purpose of this is to -automate the whole PRS operation. We have been thinking of that for -some time. It was something that obviously needed to be done. - -Mr. RANKIN. Excuse me, Mr. Secretary. Will you describe a little more -what you mean by automate. - -Secretary DILLON. I mean using electronic processing, punchcard -systems, so that they would be able to pull out of their files for any -locality, various different types of people that might be a danger or -might have made threats to the President or to other high officials, -so that they would be able to function rapidly and well in planning -protection as the President travels to these various cities. - -Mr. RANKIN. Does that include computer systems? - -Secretary DILLON. Yes. And what I was going to say was about 2 or -3 months before the events in Dallas, the Secret Service had asked -the IBM Co. to make a study of this problem for it. That study was -not completed until after the events in Dallas, and it did not prove -satisfactory because from our point of view it did not go into enough -detail in being able to handle criteria so you could tell when you -retrieved a name from the file whether it was truly dangerous or not. - -We needed a more complex system and after working with Rand Corp., the -Research Analysis Corp., and also talking with IBM, we all felt the -best way would be to hire some good programers, knowing our problems, -and then work out a pilot program and get consultants in. - -One of the things we recommend here is appropriation of $100,000 to get -consultants from IBM Co., Honeywell or other companies, and get pilot -machines to try to work out the details of this system. - -Mr. McCLOY. For the record, Mr. Secretary, you had no electronic system -of this character operating before the assassination? - -Secretary DILLON. No. Now, the total of that is 17 agents and 5 -specialists for the PRS. - -In addition, for a long time, Mr. Rowley has believed that it would -be preferable to improve the capacity of the White House detail if we -could establish a headquarters pool of 18 men where new individuals -who are going into the White House detail would be fully trained -first--before, they had to be trained sort of partially on the job--and -also through which you could rotate people from the field from time to -time, bringing them up to date on Presidential protection. - -So we would ask for 18 people, 18 spaces for that. - -We have asked for 25 spaces to provide adequate protection for the Vice -President in addition to the 10 that are already on board. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Secretary, excuse me. I think spaces may not be clear -to all our readers. Will you explain what that means? - -Secretary DILLON. Twenty-five job positions. I think the thing that is -very important here is to keep in mind that to keep one man on the job -around the clock covering a post, which is the way the Secret Service -works--one man that would be always with the President or the Vice -President, that would be always watching his house--to get one man -requires five job positions. In the first place, the coverage required -is for 24 hours a day. - -In the second place, there are holidays, there are weekends off. On -a full-time basis, the Secret Service works a 40-hour week, 5-day -week, as the rest of the Government does, and there are provisions for -sickness and leave, and so forth. When the number of hours that a man -can work a year full time is figured out, it requires 5 men to fill one -spot. - -So that is one reason why these protective numbers may seem rather high -to the uninitiated. - -When you are talking about the Vice President, and 10 people are -required to produce two posts, coverage of two posts, it is obviously -not adequate because you have to cover his house, whether he is there -or not, so that someone can't come in and put a destructive device in -it. - -This simply can't be done with the present numbers that are assigned. - -Then, going beyond this to complete this list, there is a request for -145 agents in the field offices who would handle the substantially -increased volume of security investigations. We are now getting about -twice as many referrals already as we did before. Instead of something -like 25,000, we are up to something over 50,000, and they expect it -will go over 60,000 next year. - -To really run these down out in the districts, they need, obviously, -more men than they have had. - -Now, one thing that they also need these fellows for, which I think is -important, is keeping track of more dangerous individuals. They have -tried to keep track of a few of them. But I think that probably a good -many more should be put on that list. It requires more people, so they -can periodically check up, and particularly before a visit, that all -of these people are looked at to see where they are and what they have -been doing recently before the President visits a particular place. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Secretary, while you are on that subject, could you -explain to the Commission how you make use of your agents in the White -House duty and those in the field so they will understand that? - -Secretary DILLON. Well, yes; the White House detail is composed of -about 60 people now. About half of these are what you might call, more -or less, permanent employees. They have been there for a long time, 10 -years, 12 years, 15 years, on the White House detail. - -The other half are shorter time employees who generally serve up to -3 years on the White House detail and then either leave because they -prefer other duty in the Secret Service or sometimes leave because the -Secret Service feels they can do other duty better. - -Mr. RANKIN. Now, for the protection of the President. Mr. Secretary, is -there any need to have the White House detail have any connection or -reciprocal arrangement with those in the field? - -Secretary DILLON. Well, I think it is a great help. Because of this -turnover that I mentioned, very many of the agents in the field have -had service in the White House detail of up to 2 or 3 years. So they -know what the problems are and they are able to fit in very easily and -very readily and very quickly with the White House detail which is with -the President when he comes out on a trip. - -Mr. DULLES. By fieldwork you mean attached to your field stations, of -which I believe there are 65 in the United States? - -Secretary DILLON. Yes; that is right. And if they had not had this -training, obviously they would be enforcement officers and they could -work with White House detail when they come out, but they wouldn't be -able to be as cognizant of its procedures, how the matter is handled, -and they wouldn't be able to be fitted right into the routine as well -as they can presently. I think it is highly valuable that we have this -pool of experienced people around the country and, of course, this is -again one reason that if we get a few more people out there, we will be -able to do better. - -One of the additional things that we are now undertaking, is, for -instance, these building surveys that are partially a result of a study -by the Research Analysis Corp. This seems to be something that we can -probably do something about. We will probably use more people when the -President travels through a city than we have in the past because you -can have some success in designating certain buildings as high risk or -higher risk than other buildings, and as I say, they are now trying -to map the whole United States, at least the major cities where the -President might travel, the routes he might follow, coming in from an -airport, going to a major stadium or something like that so they will -know ahead of time what the danger spots are. And one of the obvious -ones which has come out is a warehouse where there are not so many -people in it and where someone could more likely be alone and therefore -more dangerous. A building that is full of people is not as dangerous -because the other people would be watching. It is that sort of -criteria. The same thing about roof access. If there is easy access to -a roof and people are not usually on it, that would be more dangerous -than if there wasn't. - -Mr. RANKIN. Now, have you made quite a change in the Secret Service in -regard to the inspection of buildings along a motorcade route since the -assassination? - -Secretary DILLON. Oh yes. We have been doing this, and we have used -a great many more people as a result of this in our procedures, both -local police officers and also our own people. The figures we have -here are interesting. They are in this report. From February 11--I -don't know why that was the beginning date for these figures--but from -there through June 30, we used 9,500 hours of work by other enforcement -agencies. About 2,000 of that came from the Justice Department and the -rest of it from other Treasury agencies, the biggest one being the -Intelligence Section of the Internal Revenue, but also the Bureau of -Narcotics, Alcohol and Tobacco Tax Unit and so on. - -Mr. RANKIN. And that is in connection with this motorcade route? - -Secretary DILLON. That is largely in connection with that, both -planning it out ahead and also stationing them in buildings that they -thought might be difficult. - -Mr. RANKIN. Now, Mr. Secretary, returning to your Planning document, is -there anything else that you have not covered in that? - -Secretary DILLON. Well, this is just the number of people. It does -not include in this figure any purchases of automatic data processing -equipment. It just includes the study I mentioned. There are funds for -a new armored car, various funds for improving the intrusion detection -at the White House, and lighting at the White House. There is no -automatic system now. If anyone breaks through the fence at night, -nobody knows it unless someone should see them. They have developed -such systems and the Secret Service would like to get one installed, -so if anyone broke through, a bell rings automatically, and they know -someone is on the grounds, and they can take action accordingly. Also, -they would like emergency lighting that would be hidden behind various -trees or behind the wall so that if someone broke through at a place, -the lights would go on automatically and the person would be seen. Then -there is just miscellaneous equipment that goes with increased staff, -such as automobiles, radios, travel and transportation that goes with -more staff, and so forth. - -I mentioned some of the things briefly that they intend to do. I -mentioned the PRS program, and ADP study. These special agents in the -field I think we have covered pretty well. They have clearly in here a -number of things they have to do, which there certainly is plenty of. -In addition to that--I mentioned the pool. In addition to that we have -made arrangements with the Department of Agriculture and the General -Services Administration has put the funds in their budget, to get a -new training facility. All we have now is a pistol range out at the -Arboretum, and this new one will have classrooms, pistol range, and a -place where they can practice automotive protection on a practice road. -This will be out at Beltsville at the Agricultural Station out there. -It is very useful. There are no funds for that in the plan. - -Mr. McCLOY. May I just ask you about the armored car, Mr. Secretary. Is -that to transport the President? - -Secretary DILLON. Yes; that is right. A protected car, a second one. -One was fixed for the Government free by the Ford Motor Co., but our -guess is that it cost the Ford Motor Co. somewhere between $175,000 and -$200,000 to do this, and it didn't cost the Secret Service anything, -although there was some research work done on the glass and armor by -the Defense Department. This was combined with research work they -needed for their own use, to develop protective glass and armor to use -in helicopters in Vietnam. They split the cost. It cost about $30,000. -So I think they assigned $15,000 of it to this project. But it was paid -by the Defense Department. That is the only cost on that one. But I -think the companies think that the Government should buy the new car. - -Mr. McCLOY. We had some testimony here in connection with the -assassination where it was developed that the access within the car to -the body of the President became very important. In the car in which -the President was assassinated there was a bar behind the front seat -making it very difficult if not impossible for the Secret Service -man who was operating from the front seat to get to the body of the -President, and we were strongly of the view that cars that should be -hereafter designed should have freedom of access. Either the man should -be in the jump seat or there should be means by which you could get, -the Secret Service man could get to the body of the President in case -of a threat of an attack, and I think it is likely we will mention that -in the report. But it seemed to me this is something to bear in mind in -connection with the design of a new armored car. - -Secretary DILLON. That would apply to an open car. - -Mr. McCLOY. Yes. - -Secretary DILLON. It wouldn't apply I think to a fully---- - -Mr. McCLOY. Fully armored; no. That is right. - -Secretary DILLON. Closed car. - -Mr. McCLOY. Usually on those motorcades you like to be seen. - -Secretary DILLON. Yes. - -Mr. RANKIN. Have you covered your planning document, then, Mr. -Secretary? - -Secretary DILLON. I think that covers this. - -Mr. McCLOY. May I ask a question at this point? I have a date at the -White House at 1 o'clock, not with the President, but with Mr. Bundy, -who wants to talk with me. - -How long do you think we will be with the Secretary and will we resume -after lunch? - -Mr. RANKIN. I was hoping to get through. I presume he was hoping we -would. - -Secretary DILLON. I would like to if we could. I have to leave tomorrow -to go to Japan. - -Mr. McCLOY. Well, would it interrupt you if I ask a few questions? - -Mr. RANKIN. No; go ahead. - -The CHAIRMAN. Ask what questions you want? - -Mr. McCLOY. You testified, Mr. Secretary, you felt with these additions -that the Secret Service would be competent to cope with the added -requirements for the protection of the President which have occurred. - -In testifying to that effect, do you include--you include the -investigative services of your own which are quite apart, as I -understand it, from the information that you may gather from other -agencies? - -Secretary DILLON. That is correct; yes. - -Mr. McCLOY. We have had the thought that perhaps the Protective -Research Section or Division of your organization wasn't as well -equipped as it should have been nor as it might have been presumably -for the purely preventive investigative work. - -Do you feel that with this new plan of yours, that that would, be -adequately taken care of? - -Secretary DILLON. Yes; I do. It was not equipped, I think, adequately -in two ways. First, it did not, as is clearly shown by the events in -Dallas, receive information on enough dangerous people. At least, they -didn't receive the information on Lee Oswald. - -So that what is required is the development of criteria, better -criteria, that can be circulated to law enforcement agencies generally, -and which will insure that adequate information comes in. We are making -progress there. - -I think you have already seen a document with some criteria that were -developed, which has been circulated in Washington. A similar document -has now been circulated by the Secret Service Chief to all special -agents asking them to write a briefer but somewhat similar letter to -all chiefs of police, sheriffs, and State police in their localities -which asks them to furnish any such information to the local Secret -Service agent. That is being disseminated now throughout the country. -It will be completed within the next 6 weeks or so. - -In addition, we have established an interagency committee which has as -one of its jobs the development of better criteria that will really -result in getting the kind of information we want without swamping -us. If we are too broad in our criteria and we get a million names, -obviously nothing can work. - -This committee is holding its first formal meeting next week. It has -representatives of the President's Office of Science and Technology, -of the Department of Defense, which is the Advanced Research Projects -outfit, of the CIA, an individual who is highly competent in their -file section and who understands the setting up of complex files and -retrieval, that sort of business, and four people from PRS, the PRS -head inspector, Mr. Thacker, the head of the research and development, -Mr. Bouck, the head of the files section, Mr. Young, and Mr. Stoner, -who is now handling the liaison job. - -There will also be, although the individual has not yet been named, -a representative of the FBI, and with that I think that we will be -able to develop criteria that will both be useful to us and be an -improvement on criteria that was so far developed with the help of -outside consultants. - -Mr. McCLOY. Mr. Secretary, the impression has been gained, I think, by -the Commission that perhaps too great emphasis has been directed to -the mere investigation of the threat, of the particular individual, -the crank, or the fellow that sends the poison food or the threatening -letter, and perhaps not enough in a broader scope, recognizing, of -course, that you can't be too broad without defeating your own purpose, -but that there are perhaps groups or other areas of ferment that could -provoke an attack quite without the threat. Would you comment on that? - -Secretary DILLON. Yes; one of the criteria that is presently out is -meant to cover individuals who have threatened bodily harm to any high -Government official, with the idea that threat might be switched and -visited upon the President. - -That would have worked in this particular case in Dallas if that had -been a specific criterion on at that time, which it wasn't. We are just -talking about threats to the President. So I think that was one obvious -case. - -We hope that this committee would be able to possibly come up with -other groups that can be identified that would fit into this without -bringing in too many names. - -There is one that may or may not work out. I just cite this as an -example. People with bad conduct records in the Marine Corps for some -reason have had a very bad record thereafter and there is quite a -connection of crime with that class of individual. - -It may be that it would even be worthwhile, if it is not too large, to -cover this. Why that is so, nobody has quite figured out. I think the -eye was focused on them because of this event in Dallas, but then it -was discovered that this group has been involved in an awful lot of -other crimes of violence. - -Mr. DULLES. As you read the Oswald life story, it looks as though he -was going into the Marines as a kind of escape. - -Secretary DILLON. It could have been. - -Mr. DULLES. What you say is very interesting in that connection. - -The CHAIRMAN. Will you excuse us just a moment until we see if we can -finish up. - -Secretary DILLON. I would think you might want to put into the record -at this point a copy of the memorandum that I mentioned from Mr. Rowley -to the special agents asking them to send letters to the local law -enforcement institutions. - -Mr. RANKIN. Yes. Mr. Secretary, I ask you to examine the memorandum -dated August 26, from Chief Rowley and ask you if that, with the -attachment, is the memorandum that you just described? - -Secretary DILLON. That is. Fine. Yes. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Chief Justice, I ask leave to give this document that -the Secretary has just referred to the next number in order and offer -it in evidence as part of this examination. - -The CHAIRMAN. It may be admitted. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 1053-C, for -identification and received in evidence.) - -Secretary DILLON. There is one other item--you asked whether there -is anything else in general. We felt that the Secret Service did not -have adequate regularized scientific advice. They got some--they have -been getting it over the years from time to time from the President's -office of Science and Technology, but we tried to regularize that. -I have worked out an arrangement with Dr. Hornig and written him a -letter which embodies that arrangement so that they would have their -services constantly available to the Secret Service and would give -certain specific advice; first, keeping the Secret Service informed of -scientific developments of possible use in providing protection for the -President, etc.; advising or arranging for scientific advice to the -Secret Service in connection with specific problems of Presidential -protection as they may arise; and reviewing the technical aspects of -the protective operations of the Secret Service and its development -program, and assisting it in establishing priorities and schedules for -introducing technical and scientific improvements. I have an answer -from Dr. Hornig saying they would be glad to carry this out and saying -that he concurs in my judgment that the increasingly complex nature of -Presidential protection requires that the Secret Service have access to -the best scientific advice and that they are glad to take on this job. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Secretary, I will ask you if the exchange of letters, -dated August 31, between you and Mr. Hornig are the copies that I have -just given you? - -Secretary DILLON. That is right. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Chief Justice, I ask leave---- - -Mr. DULLES. Just for the record, I wonder if he would identify Mr. -Hornig. I think we know, but possibly---- - -Secretary DILLON. Oh, yes; Dr. Hornig is Special Assistant to the -President for Science and Technology. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Chief Justice, I ask leave to give this document -the next number in order and offer it in evidence as part of the -examination. - -The CHAIRMAN. It might be admitted. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit 1053-D for -identification, and was received in evidence.) - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Secretary, would you just briefly tell us without -getting into any classified matters or matters that are not properly to -be revealed because of the effects they might have on the protection of -the President, why the Secret Service would need a scientific adviser? - -Secretary DILLON. Well, I think this is because they do a number of -things. First, they need it in the communications field. There are all -sorts of advances there, and they have been assuring or working to -assure the security of the communications of the President. In addition -there are all sorts of new developments in the form of protective -devices that are being developed all the time, better forms of -bulletproof glass, better forms of protection of that kind, new types -of protection against access. For instance, there is under development, -I understand, a sort of a radar type of fence so that you can see if a -person comes through a certain area without there being any fence there. - -They are developing, working on the development of other protection -devices. They have had very substantial progress recently, I -understand, in the detection of weapons that someone might be carrying, -devices that are more effective. This is something people have tried -to develop, I guess, for a long time. Apparently they are having some -success. It is that sort of thing that is very necessary. - -And then in addition this field of computer technology is highly -scientific and complex, and I think that the scientific adviser is in -an excellent position to be sure that the Secret Service has the very -best advice in trying to identify their needs and develop the machines -for those needs. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Secretary, it has been suggested to the Commission -that it might be of assistance to you and other Secretaries of the -Treasury and the Secret Service to have someone acting as Special -Assistant to the Secretary of the Treasury, having supervision, under -your direction, of the Secret Service in its various activities, both -protection of the President and otherwise. Do you think that that would -be of help or would it not? - -Secretary DILLON. Well, I am not sure. You see, we have an Assistant -Secretary, and I should think he probably would be able to do it as -adequately as having another special assistant. - -We also have a Special Assistant for Law Enforcement Coordination who -coordinates the general work of all our law enforcement agencies and -works with outside agencies on overall law enforcement problems. - -Probably of interest is that the Treasury Department, I think, has -more law enforcement officials working for it than any other agency of -Government. It is a very large law enforcement organization, although -there are a number of separate organizations that work in different -fields. - -So we already have this. I think that it probably can be made tighter -and should be made tighter. - -One aspect of this matter, I think, is the advent of computers, -of course, which is very recent and has changed what can be done -effectively in this PRS. I think that should be done anyway. One -aspect of this matter that probably hasn't had as close and detailed -supervision as we may feel appropriate now is the White House detail. -It has always operated over the years in very close contact with -the President and has operated in a slightly different manner with -different Presidents, depending on their wishes. - -And it has been felt that as long as they were doing an adequate job, -that it was pretty hard to come in and tell them exactly what they -should do on a day-by-day basis because the President might not want -them to do that sort of thing. - -It is a very complex and personal assignment here that is a little -different than any other law enforcement agency, and I certainly think -it should be followed more closely--gone into in more detail--from the -top level of the Treasury Department probably than it has, but even if -it is, we are still going to have this problem that we won't be able -to tell the President exactly what he should do in each case. So there -never will be that close sort of supervision of day-to-day operations -of the White House detail--it wouldn't be effective anyway--that there -would be in another police operation. - -Mr. RANKIN. After the assassination, you did have Mr. Carswell take -over certain work in this area, did you not? - -Secretary DILLON. Yes; Mr. Carswell is my special assistant, in -my own office. He is a lawyer by profession and training. He has -had investigative experience, 3 years in Naval Intelligence on the -active side of it, and so he has some knowledge of this whole type of -operation, and I felt in view of this investigation, in view of the -work that had been done, it was important to have someone with legal -experience that was close to me, that had immediate access any minute -to me working on the matter. Then while this thing was running along, -they would get to me at any time, and I could ask questions, they would -bring matters to me, we could handle this matter of being sure that a -proper long-range plan was developed, and that the whole effort in the -Secret Service was organized as well as possible. That is why I asked -Mr. Carswell, as part of his work for me, to undertake this special -assignment, which he has done, and I think done very well. - -Mr. RANKIN. It has been suggested to the Commission that it might -be helpful if the National Security Council or some Cabinet level -committee would help to supervise in this area of Presidential -protection. Do you have any comments you care to make? - -Secretary DILLON. Yes; I think that would be helpful because in -relationship with the President, if there are questions of what is the -proper protection, I think a group of the Cabinet would have a stronger -voice, and also having a group, the President would be more sure that -this was not just one man's ideas, that it would be helpful. - -I am not quite sure about the National Security Council as such because -as I recall, the President himself is the Chairman of that, so he would -be advising himself, and I suppose this would be a group to advise the -President. - -Mr. DULLES. We thought there might be certain advantages in that -because if you prescribe things for the President to do, and he doesn't -want to do them, they don't get done in the field of protection. - -Secretary DILLON. That is right. Then if you describe it in the meeting -at which he was present, that might be well. - -The CHAIRMAN. I suppose, Mr. Secretary, also if a committee of that -kind was composed of the Secretary of the Treasury, Secretary of -Defense, Secretary of State, and the Attorney General, that you would -have on that committee the men who had all of the agencies that would -of necessity have to be coordinated in order to bring all the work into -focus. - -Secretary DILLON. Yes, and the Central Intelligence Agency. - -The CHAIRMAN. Yes. - -Secretary DILLON. One thing about the National Security Council is that -neither the Secretary of the Treasury nor the Attorney General are -members of the National Security Council by law. - -The Secretary of the Treasury has been asked by the Presidents to sit -with the National Security Council for some years, practically since -its beginning. - -The Attorney General has sat with it during the last few years, but I -don't know whether that will or will not continue into the future. So -there is a certain problem there. - -If this assignment is given by law to the National Security Council, -and some other President comes along that doesn't ask the Secretary of -the Treasury or the Attorney General to sit with it, the two people who -are probably most concerned wouldn't have any part in this. - -Mr. DULLES. It would have to provide that in all matters relating to -Presidential security, of course, they will be present. One way of -doing it, I would say. - -Secretary DILLON. Yes; there should be some such provision; otherwise I -see some advantages as you say. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Secretary, are you familiar with the method of -selection of the Secret Service personnel? - -Secretary DILLON. Only somewhat. They do get young men who meet their -qualifications. They do hire them at GS-7 and they stay there for 1 -year. If they have a year of satisfactory service, they are promoted -two grades. Then if they have 2 more years of satisfactory service, -they are promoted another double jump to GS-11. - -These individuals do not have the legal qualifications that some other -law enforcement agencies such as the FBI require, where you have to be -a lawyer or an accountant, because they do other kinds of investigative -work and that wasn't thought to be necessary in the case of the Secret -Service. - -But the Secret Service has felt, and I have inquired into this, that -they have no difficulty in getting young men of the highest type to -come and to take these jobs under the present setup. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you have a printed or written list of the various -qualifications that you seek in regard to the Secret Service? - -Secretary DILLON. I don't--I am not aware of that. There probably is -such a list; yes. - -Mr. RANKIN. If you have such a list will you please supply it to us? - -Secretary DILLON. Yes; I will be glad to. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Chief Justice, I would like to ask leave to give the -next number of exhibits to that document once supplied and make it part -of the record. - -The CHAIRMAN. It may be admitted. - -(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 1053-E for -identification and received in evidence.) - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Secretary, are you familiar in a general way with the -investigation that the Commission has been making with regard to this -matter? - -Secretary DILLON. Yes; In a general way, I have followed it through -Mr. Carswell, who has followed it more closely, and through the Secret -Service, so I am generally aware of it. - -Mr. RANKIN. And are you generally aware of the investigation in -connection with the assassination, the entire matter? - -Secretary DILLON. Oh, yes. - -Mr. RANKIN. Have you made any inquiry in the Secret Service to -determine whether or not Lee Harvey Oswald was ever an agent of that -Service? - -Secretary DILLON. Yes. I heard rumors of this type of thing very early, -and I asked the direct question of Chief Rowley and was informed that -he never had any connection with the Secret Service. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you know of any evidence in regard to Lee Harvey Oswald -being an agent of any part of the government? - -Secretary DILLON. I am not aware of any evidence myself in that way, -but I don't think I necessarily would be fully competent in that. - -Mr. RANKIN. But you have never heard of any such evidence? - -Secretary DILLON. I have never heard it. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you know of any area of the investigation of the -Commission that you would like to suggest that we do more than we have -insofar as you are familiar with it? - -Secretary DILLON. No. As far as I know, the investigation has been very -thorough. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you know of any credible evidence that would lead you -or anyone to believe that there was a conspiracy, foreign or domestic, -involved in the assassination of President Kennedy? - -Secretary DILLON. No. From all the evidence I have seen, this was the -work of one deranged individual. - -Mr. RANKIN. And who would that be? - -Secretary DILLON. Lee Harvey Oswald. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you know of any evidence in regard to any connection -between Jack Ruby and Lee Harvey Oswald? - -Secretary DILLON. No, no. - -Mr. RANKIN. Is there anything that you would like to call to the -attention of the Commission at this time that we should know or that we -should cover? - -Secretary DILLON. No; I think we have covered my area of competence -pretty thoroughly this morning. I can't think of anything else. - -The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Dulles? - -Mr. DULLES. Doug, in the field that in the Commission here we have -described as the preventive intelligence field; that is, trying to -identify beforehand the individuals or the type of individuals who -might be a danger to the President, have you ever thought of any -possible division of responsibility and of work between the Secret -Service and the FBI to define more clearly which each should do in that -field? - -Secretary DILLON. Well, my own feeling is that the agency that handles -the actual work of deciding who the individuals are that the Secret -Service should watch out for, which is the PRS, would function much -better and would strengthen the Service if it works as it does now as -part of the whole Secret Service operation, and working very closely -with the people who are on the White House detail and not having to be -involved in a liaison operation somewhere else. - -So I think our problem is to strengthen this PRS, and I think that this -long-range plan is a good beginning. - -I don't think it is necessarily an end because as soon as we develop -the automated machinery that we need, then we will know a little -better, and we may need some people to make full use of that. - -But this is enough to get it underway and all you can use, I think, -well, for that purpose at present. - -I would think that there is a liaison problem which exists whenever -you have liaison with anyone, whether it is within your department or -without, as long as it is a separate organization. And I think there -has been clearly a problem of inadequate liaison with other Government -agencies. - -It is much better now. We have already taken steps. And additional -steps of assigning specific liaison officers will help. But I think -this is something that has just got to be worked out continually at all -levels to make it work. So the problem is not unique to this situation; -it affects all intergovernmental relations. - -Mr. DULLES. Today with the Communist Party and with rightist groups and -we have more and more groups--we have always had them, but we seem to -have more than others which might breed up elements of danger--is there -any part of that you would like to turn over to anybody else or---- - -Secretary DILLON. Well, I think the identification of groups that are -likely to be dangerous as groups would probably more likely fall on -the FBI because they study the background of these groups and they are -aware of them and try to penetrate them, and so forth. - -So I think that from that point of view, they would certainly be -the purveyor, the first purveyor of the information that is needed -and the ones who would have the responsibility of signaling to the -Secret Service that this is a dangerous group and to the best of our -knowledge these are its members. Some of the members would probably be -subterranean and might not be known. And it would be important that -they pass on that information on the individuals. - -The Secret Service I think would be more concerned in dealing -with--trying to protect against the actual individuals. - -I think that probably on the basis of thinking of something that would -be sort of an international plot, Communist Party plot, or something -like that, I think you probably need all arms of the Government working -on that. - -We can't say that Secret Service can do it alone. Central Intelligence -Agency might get wind of it anywhere in the world or FBI would have to -use all its resources. Just to beat back something like that you would -need the combined resources of whatever you have got. - -I think there is sort of a greater thrust of continuing responsibility -obviously on the FBI for following these groups, as you call them. -For following individuals which may come to their notice because they -were somewhat deranged or did something bad at one time, they would -then pass that on to the Secret Service, and with adequate manpower, -I think that the Secret Service would have more or less the primary -responsibility of following those sort of individuals. - -The CHAIRMAN. I suppose you wouldn't want to take away from the Secret -Service entirely the concern that it might have for groups? - -Secretary DILLON. Oh, no. - -The CHAIRMAN. And the necessity of going into those groups to ascertain -further whether they were a threat to the President? - -Secretary DILLON. Yes; but I don't think it is their function to try, -for instance, to have undercover people to penetrate groups or do -things of that nature which the FBI generally does. - -The CHAIRMAN. Yes. - -Secretary DILLON. And it is their job to do that. That would require, -of course, a much larger organization, but I certainly think the -Service has to keep track of them, and they can't just say we have no -interest and everything must come from somewhere else. I don't mean -that at all. But that is not their primary responsibility. I thought -that is what Mr. Dulles' view of it was. - -The CHAIRMAN. Anything more? - -Mr. DULLES. Mr. Secretary, just one other question. It raises the -question of the combination of the--in the Secret Service of the two -functions of Presidential protection and of the counterfeiting and -related investigatory duties in connection with counterfeiting. Have -you got any comments on that? Is that a logical or wise combination or -would you suggest any change there? - -Secretary DILLON. Well, these are two separate functions. I do think -that there is a certain advantage to it that has developed and -which I think should be maintained. That comes from the fact that -counterfeiting is not an operation that is overly large; so it means -that people who are engaged in this can very well be trained. Many have -had tours such as earlier in the White House detail. - -Mr. DULLES. You transfer back and forth, do you, from these two -functions? - -Secretary DILLON. Oh, yes; many of the people after a little service in -the White House detail find that life too strenuous, the hours bad, or -prefer not to travel, and so forth, prefer the type of work that opens -up in the counterfeiting section. Then they move out into one of the -field offices, and there are probably a few more possibilities as heads -of these fields offices for higher level jobs than there would be in -the White House detail. So there is an interchange. - -Now, that interchange, I think, is useful because you do have these -field offices that you can then call upon to do protective work, and -I think there can be much more of that because, as what I indicated -earlier, with this development of more detailed criteria, the greater -number of people coming in to check up on, there are going to be more -investigations in the field that should be done by the Secret Service, -and it can be done by these people who have had this training and -who know what to look for and who have worked on this same sort of -assignment. - -They also are readily available and fit right into the pattern of -Presidential protection when the President goes to their area. So I -think that is another great advantage. - -So therefore I think there is substantial advantage by having this -additional assignment which is in a different area, counterfeiting. I -think it is probable happenstance; it grew that way. It could have been -in some other different area, but the size of it which is large enough -but not too large I think combines very well with the White House -detail to give us a possibility of making a very effective operation. - -Mr. DULLES. Do I correctly assume from what you have said that -initially your field offices were largely organized for the -counterfeiting side of the work but that is now changing, and more -and more the work of the field office is coming into the Presidential -protection? - -Secretary DILLON. Well, I think certainly the amount that they will be -doing on Presidential protection has greatly increased. - -The counterfeiting hasn't decreased. That has increased also. But -whereas earlier I think they were only used in Presidential protection -when they had to be, when they were pulled off their other jobs and -brought to Washington and sent to travel on a trip or something like -that, because extra people were needed, I think now if we get an -adequate staff they will be doing more of this as a regular routine -part of their job, investigating people in their areas as well as -investigating counterfeit cases in their area. - -So they will have more or less two permanent jobs to do. - -The CHAIRMAN. While you may have had a decrease in counterfeiting, I -suppose you have had a great increase in forgeries, haven't you? - -Secretary DILLON. Yes; we have had an increase I said in counterfeiting -and also in forgeries. - -The CHAIRMAN. Oh, in counterfeiting. I misunderstood you. I thought you -said you had a decrease. - -Secretary DILLON. No; a great increase in counterfeiting on account of -development of these methods of photography. - -The CHAIRMAN. Yes; I recall now. - -Secretary DILLON. That is similar to check forgery which is the same -problem on Government checks which has also increased. - -Mr. DULLES. That is all I have, Mr. Chief Justice. - -The CHAIRMAN. Very well. Thank you very much, Mr. Secretary. - -Before we adjourn, I would like to say to you, Mr. Secretary, that the -Secret Service has been most cooperative ever since this Commission was -formed. It has been very attentive to our every wish and has been very -helpful throughout. We appreciate it very much indeed. - -Secretary DILLON. Thank you, Mr. Chief Justice. - -The CHAIRMAN. Also, we appreciate the very fine work which the Internal -Revenue agents did in making a study of reconstructing income of -persons involved in the investigation and the other assistance that the -agents gave in connection with our work. - -[In connection with the testimony of Secretary Dillon the Commission -requested and received additional information on Secret Service -budget requests for the fiscal years 1960 through 1965. The document -containing the information was marked as Commission Exhibit No. 1053-F -for identification and received in evidence.] - -We will adjourn now. - -(Whereupon, at 1:25 p.m., the President's Commission adjourned.) - - - - -_Sunday, September 6, 1964_ - -TESTIMONY OF MRS. LEE HARVEY OSWALD RESUMED - -The President's Commission met at 3:20 p.m., on September 6, 1964, at -the U.S. Naval Air Station, Dallas, Tex. - -Present were Senator Richard Russell, presiding; Senator John Sherman -Cooper, and Congressman Hale Boggs, members. - -Also present were J. Lee Rankin, general counsel; Dean R. G. Storey, -special counsel to the attorney general of Texas; Leon I. Gopadze and -Peter P. Gregory, interpreters; and John Joe Howlett, Secret Service -agent. - - -[NOTE.--The witness, Mrs. Lee Harvey Oswald, having been previously -sworn in these proceedings, testified through the interpreters as shown -in this transcript as follows: *Translation is by Mr. Paul D. Gregory, -interpreter; **translation is by Mr. Leon I. Gopadze, interpreter. -Where the answer or a paragraph shown as part of an answer has no -asterisk, the answer is by the witness herself without the use of the -interpreters.] - - -Mr. RANKIN. Senator Russell, will you swear the witness? - -Senator RUSSELL. Since she is already under oath in this hearing, I -assume that oath will carry over? - -Mr. RANKIN. All right. - -Senator RUSSELL. You understand that you have been sworn?* - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Gregory, have you been sworn in connection with these -proceedings? - -Mr. GREGORY. No. - -Senator RUSSELL. Will you do it, Mr. Rankin? - -Mr. RANKIN. Will you rise and raise your right hand. - -Do you solemnly swear that the testimony that you are going to -translate of Mrs. Oswald will be truly translated? - -Mr. GREGORY. To the best of my knowledge and ability, so help me God. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Gopadze, have you been sworn as a translator in these -proceedings? - -Mr. GOPADZE. No, sir. - -Mr. RANKIN. Will you rise, please? - -Do you solemnly swear that your translation of anything of the -testimony of Mrs. Oswald will be true and correct, to the best of your -knowledge? - -Mr. GOPADZE. I do. - -Mr. RANKIN. Thank you. Mrs. Oswald, we're going to ask you rather -informally a number of questions about matters that have come up that -we would like to get your testimony about. Senator Russell will start, -then Senator Cooper will have some, and then I'll have a few I would -like to ask you about, and Representative Boggs will have some. - -Representative BOGGS. I suggest we designate Senator Russell as -chairman of this meeting. - -Mr. RANKIN. Will you record Senator Russell, Miss Reporter, as the -chairman of the meeting, please? - -The REPORTER. Yes, sir. - -Dean STOREY. This is Miss Oliver. She is the reporter to Judge Hughes, -a Federal judge here. - -Mr. RANKIN. Yes; we know her well by her reporting in other matters for -us. - -Senator RUSSELL. Mrs. Oswald, there may be some repetition in what we -say, in the testimony that was taken in Washington, because, I among -others, could not attend that hearing, so you will understand if we ask -questions that are similar to those that were asked of you when you -were in Washington on other occasions.* - -We will try to avoid any more of that than we can help. - -I have read all of your testimony. I don't mean that I recall all of -it, but I read it, as well as your memoirs that were submitted to the -Commission. - -When you first met Lee Oswald, did he ever mention anything about -politics or his political philosophy?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. No. - -Senator RUSSELL. Did you ever ask him his reason for coming to Russia?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. Not the first evening when we got acquainted. - -Senator RUSSELL. Prior to the time that you were married to him, did -you ask him his reasons for coming to Russia?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. - -Senator RUSSELL. Why did he say that he had come to Russia?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. He told me that the Soviet Union is the outstanding -Communist country and he wanted to see it with his own eyes. - -Senator RUSSELL. Well, I notice in your testimony that you said that -his memoirs insofar as he claimed that he wished to be a citizen of the -Soviet Union were erroneous?* - -In other words, I want to continue the statement so there won't be any -confusion--I'm not trying to trap her. But that he told you that he had -been offered citizenship in the Soviet Union and had declined?* ** - -**Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. - -*Yes, that's what he said to me. - -Senator RUSSELL. Did he give any reasons why he declined citizenship in -the Soviet Union?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. The reason he gave me for declining to become a Soviet -citizen was because he said that in case he did not like the way they -do things in the Soviet Union, it would be easier for him to leave the -country than if he did become a citizen. - -Senator RUSSELL. After you were married to Lee, did he complain about -the way they did things in the Soviet Union?* ** - -Mrs. OSWALD. What? - -Mr. GREGORY. Senator, excuse me, sir. I'm a little mixed up on your -question. Would you mind to repeat that question, sir? - -Senator RUSSELL. Did he ever, after their marriage, complain about -conditions as he found them in the Soviet Union, or the way they did -things in the Soviet Union? I believe that was the word you said she -used.* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. Yes; he did. - -Senator RUSSELL. What was the subject of his complaint?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. He did not like his job. He did not like the wage scale -that they paid him, not only for him but for people that were engaged -in the same line of work. - -*Then, he was unhappy about the restrictions that his movements were -subjected to, being a noncitizen of the Soviet Union. Every 3 months he -was obliged to report--every 3 months or every so often---- - -Senator RUSSELL. Periodically? - -*Mrs. OSWALD. Periodically, he had to report to a certain government -institution, where they would extend his permit of residence. - -Senator RUSSELL. Were there any other restrictions on his movements? -If he had reported duly as he was required, could he have gone down to -Kharkov or any other place that he might have wished to go? * ** - -*Mrs. OSWALD. Of course, in addition to restrictions imposed on his -movements, there were other things that he was dissatisfied with in the -Soviet Union. - -Senator RUSSELL. Do you care to give any of those?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. He was dissatisfied with high prices for everything that -he had to pay. He was dissatisfied with the quarters, living quarters -that he had. - -Senator RUSSELL. Do you know whether or not he had any friends that he -made there in Minsk while he was living there?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. - -Senator RUSSELL. Did most of them work in the same plant where he did -or did he make other friends out in the community?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. He had many acquaintances that worked in the same place, -but he had no friends. He had two friends at work, in other words, -closer than acquaintances--friends--those that I know personally. - -Senator RUSSELL. But none other than those that worked there in the -same plant?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. There was one young man who was a friend of his, which -did not work in the same plant, but was a student at the medical -college. - -Senator RUSSELL. Did Lee go to school while he was there in Minsk? Did -he do any studying in any of the institutes? - -Mrs. OSWALD. No. - -Senator RUSSELL. He did not. - -*Mrs. OSWALD. Lee wanted to attend Patrice Lumumba Institute in Moscow -but his application was turned down. He was very much put out, because -he told me that one of the main reasons he came to the Soviet Union was -to get education. He said that after his application was turned down. -He told that to me after his application was turned down. - -Senator RUSSELL. Was that before or after you were married? - -Mrs. OSWALD. After. - -Senator RUSSELL. Now, in reading your testimony, Mrs. Oswald, I noticed -that you referred to a number of foreign students who attended the -institutes in Minsk, including, I believe you said, a number of Cubans. -Do you know whether or not Lee Oswald was acquainted with any of those -Cubans?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. I have never met these Cuban friends of his, but I -do know that he and Erich; Erich is the medical student previously -referred to, they had Cuban friends. What they were talking about, -I do not know. I have never met him. Lee was interested in Cuba and -in Cuban affairs, but I don't know anything in detail, just through -conversations. - -Senator RUSSELL. Do you know whether he had any Cuban friends here in -Texas or in New Orleans after he came back from Russia? - -Mrs. OSWALD. No. [Nodding a negative response.] - -Senator RUSSELL. You don't know whether he did or not? - -Mrs. OSWALD. No; I don't think he had. - -Senator RUSSELL. You don't think he did. Now, you referred to the fact -in your testimony about his joining some gun club or rifle club in -Minsk?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. - -Senator RUSSELL. And he purchased, I believe, a rifle or he had a rifle? - -*Mrs. OSWALD. By the time we got married, he already owned a rifle and -he already was a member of a gun club in Minsk. - -Senator RUSSELL. From your testimony I gathered that he was not very -active in the gun club in carrying on with his rifle?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. No. He never went hunting except once during all the time -that we lived in Minsk. - -Senator RUSSELL. Did he ever discuss with you his desire to meet any -high official with the Soviet Government?* ** - -*Mrs. OSWALD. No. - -Senator RUSSELL. He never did?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. No. - -Senator RUSSELL. Do you know whether or not he carried on any -correspondence? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Excuse me---- - -*The only instance I recall--when we filed an application for our -returning to the United States, he visited some colonel, some Soviet -colonel, Aksenov [spelling] A-k-s-e-n-o-v, in order to expedite the -exit visas for us. I also visited this Colonel Aksenov. - -Mrs. OSWALD. I'm sorry---- - -*Correction. He never got to see Colonel Aksenov because when he went -to discuss this question in the--whatever office that was--he talked to -some junior officer, and they would not let him have an audience with -the colonel. - -Senator RUSSELL. Did you go to see the colonel likewise? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. - -Senator RUSSELL. You were both there together? - -*Mrs. OSWALD. We never got to see him. I saw Colonel Aksenov later on. - -Senator RUSSELL. Was he a colonel in the army or in the militia or in -the police or just what? Where did he get his rank?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. He was a colonel in the MVD, which is the Administer of -Internal Affairs. - -Senator RUSSELL. He had to do then with the passports. His -recommendation would have had to have been had with the passports?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. I think so. I do not know definitely, but that meeting -was in the Ministry of Internal Affairs. He was not dressed in a -military uniform. - -Senator RUSSELL. Had you known the colonel prior to that time?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. No; he introduced himself as Colonel Aksenov. - -Mr. GREGORY. When? - -*Mrs. OSWALD. When I talked to him concerning these documents for exit -visas. Even if he were in a uniform, I would not have known what the -insignia meant. - -Senator RUSSELL. If you didn't know him prior to that time, why is it -you got to see him and Lee could not visit him?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. When Lee went to see Colonel Aksenov in regard to the -exit visas and other documents, he could not see the colonel. Then, on -another later occasion, I went to see the colonel and they let me see -him, on a later occasion. - -Senator RUSSELL. But you don't know why?* - -Mrs. OSWALD (no response). - -Senator RUSSELL. Did any of your friends or relatives intercede with -the colonel in your behalf?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. My uncle works in the MVD, but I'm sure that he did not -discuss this matter of exit visas with Colonel Aksenov because I think -he would have been afraid to talk about it. When my uncle knew that -Lee and I were planning to go back to the United States, my uncle was -afraid for his own job and for his own welfare. - -Senator RUSSELL. I knew you testified before that he did not want you -to come to the United States, that your uncle did not, but he was -working in the same line of work as this colonel was?* - -Mrs. OSWALD. In the same building, but not in the same department. I -believe that Colonel Aksenov knew my uncle. - -Senator RUSSELL. Yes; but you didn't testify before, I believe, that -your uncle would have been afraid to have helped you. You did testify -that he did not want you to leave Russia? That's the way I recall it. I -could be in error about that--do you know why he was afraid? Why should -he have been afraid for you to leave Russia?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. My uncle never told me personally that he was afraid that -something might happen to him if I went to America, but his wife, my -aunt, confided in me that my uncle was afraid for his job and for his -well-being if I went to America. - -Senator RUSSELL. What rank did your uncle hold in the MVD? If this man -was a colonel, what was your uncle, was he a colonel or a major or -what?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. My uncle has a degree in forestry, but he is also a -colonel in MVD. Every employee has to be in the service, in the -military service. He has a degree in forestry, but he is also a colonel -in MVD. - -Senator RUSSELL. He also has the rank of a colonel in the MVD?* - -Mrs. OSWALD. No. He is the head of the forestry department in MVD. I -don't know what he is doing there. - -Senator RUSSELL. Did you ever have any occasion or know any other -Russian wife of a foreigner who tried to leave Russia?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. Mrs. Zeger. Mrs. Zeger and her husband lived in Argentina -for 25 years---- - -Senator RUSSELL. Well, you testified very fully about them. But I am -asking now if you know of any Russian national or citizen who was -married to a foreign national who ever was able to get a visa to leave -from Russia? - -*Mrs. OSWALD. No; I don't know--I don't know of anyone. I only heard -in the American Embassy in Moscow, where I heard of a Russian woman -married to an American, who had difficulty leaving the country. - -Senator RUSSELL. Well, that's what I had in mind. - -*Mrs. OSWALD. Therefore, to the very last moment we did not believe -that they would let us out of the Soviet Union. - -Senator RUSSELL. Did they examine you very much or ask you many -questions about why you wished to leave, other than the fact that your -husband decided to return to the United States?* - -Mrs. OSWALD. No. - -*No. We only filled out a proper questionnaire containing a statement -that this will be a permanent residence in the United States, or -leaving the Soviet Union for permanent residence in the United States. - -Senator RUSSELL. And none of the officials or police examined you at -all about your reason for wishing to leave?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. It's very surprising, but nobody did. - -Senator RUSSELL. Do you know as to whether or not Lee corresponded with -any of his friends in Russia after he came back to this country?* - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. - -*He did. - -Mrs. OSWALD. With Mr. and Mrs. Zeger. - -*With Mr. and Mrs. Zeger, and Erich; the medical student. I don't -recall the medical student, and Pavel Golovachev. - -Senator RUSSELL. Paul--he was one of your old boy friends, wasn't he? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Paul? - -Senator RUSSELL. I thought one of them was named Paul?* - -Mrs. OSWALD (no response). - -Senator RUSSELL. Did he correspond very frequently?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. Not often. - -Senator RUSSELL. Did you write very often to your family and friends in -Russia?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. I wrote several letters shortly after we came to America, -but I never received any answer. I also wrote to some of my colleagues -where I worked. - -Senator RUSSELL. In Minsk? - -Mrs. OSWALD. And shortly after that, my aunt wrote me. Then I -understood that perhaps the letters I wrote my aunt never reached her. - -Senator RUSSELL. She did not refer to your letters when she wrote to -you?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. No; the only thing that she wrote, she was glad to -get--that she learned my address. - -Senator RUSSELL. Did she say how she learned it? That was my next -question?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. The supervisory of a drugstore, an apothecary---- - -Senator RUSSELL. An apothecary? - -*Mrs. OSWALD. Or manager of a drugstore telephoned my aunt and told her -she received a letter from me. - -Senator RUSSELL. But she did not answer that letter, or if she did, you -didn't receive it? - -Mrs. OSWALD. No--she answered this letter. - -Senator RUSSELL. I understand, but the friend in the apothecary, did he -answer?* - -Mrs. OSWALD. No. - -Senator RUSSELL. Now, in some of your testimony you referred to a time -when you became somewhat piqued with Lee about something and wrote one -of your old friends there and forgot to put the stamp or didn't know -that the stamps had been increased--you recall that testimony, do you -not? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. - -Senator RUSSELL. Did you write to any of your other friends there and -put the proper stamps on them?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. No; this was the only letter I wrote. - -Senator RUSSELL. The only one you wrote? - -*Mrs. OSWALD. This was the only letter I wrote after I found out the -proper postage required for mailing letters. After that, my aunt never -wrote me. - -Senator RUSSELL. Have you corresponded with your uncle or aunt at any -time since this great tragedy?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. Yes; I did. - -Senator RUSSELL. And did you receive any reply? - -Mrs. OSWALD. No. - -Senator RUSSELL. Have you written them more than once since this great -tragedy?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. I don't remember exactly whether I did or not. - -Senator RUSSELL. But you've written them at least once without -receiving a reply? - -*Mrs. OSWALD. I remember well that I wrote at least once, maybe it was -twice or three times, but I don't remember. - -Senator RUSSELL. Has any official of the Russian Government -communicated with you since this great tragedy?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. No; no one ever communicated with me from the Soviet -Embassy or any other representative of the Soviet Government, and I -felt rather bad about it, because there I was--all alone in a strange -country and I did not receive any encouragement from anyone. They -didn't approach me even as a show of interest in my well-being. - -Senator RUSSELL. You didn't even hear from them with reference to your -application for visas to return to Russia, although you had heard from -them prior to the time Lee was killed?* ** - -*Mrs. OSWALD. Not after Lee was killed. - -Senator RUSSELL. Now, if I've understood it from reading your -testimony, Mrs. Oswald, Lee went to Mexico from New Orleans a day or -two after Mrs. Paine brought you back to Texas, is that right? - -*Mrs. OSWALD. I do not know definitely, but I believe Mrs. Paine and I -left one day before he went to Mexico. - -Senator RUSSELL. He had talked to you about going to Mexico, had he -not?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. Yes; he had told me he was going to Mexico. - -Senator RUSSELL. And he had told you that he intended to visit the -Russian Embassy and the Cuban consulate while he was there? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. - -Senator RUSSELL. And that was at a time when he was very anxious to get -to Cuba, I believe? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. - -Senator RUSSELL. When was it, Mrs. Oswald, that Lee told you he -thought it was best for you to go back to Russia, as to time? I know -you testified he told you that, but was that after the Walker case or -before the Walker case? * - -*Mrs. OSWALD. I believe it was before he made the attempt on General -Walker's life. It may be that I stated it differently in my deposition, -but I believe it was before. Lee insisted on my returning to the Soviet -Union before the attempt on Walker's life. - -Senator RUSSELL. I gather from your evidence, Mrs. Oswald, that Lee -was a very devoted husband, unusually so for an American husband, even -though you had little spats at times. Do you think that he advised -you that because he thought something was going to happen that would -involve the family in difficulties?* - -Mrs. OSWALD. No. - -Senator RUSSELL. You don't think so? - -*Mrs. OSWALD. No; he was not a good husband. I may have said so in my -deposition, but if I did, it was when I was in a state of shock. - -Senator RUSSELL. You not only said so in your deposition, Mrs. Oswald, -but you testified in your testimony before the Commission several times -that he was a very good husband and he was very devoted to you, and -that when he was at home and not employed that he did a great deal of -the housework and in looking after the children? - -*Mrs. OSWALD. Well, I also testified to the fact that he beat me on -many occasions, so some of the statements I made regarding him were -good and some were bad. - -Senator RUSSELL. In other words, some of them were not true that you -made?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. No; everything was true. - -Senator RUSSELL. Everything was true? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. - -*I made statements in the record that he was good when he did housework -and washed the floors and was good to the baby, and again, he was not -good when he beat me and was insolent. - -Senator RUSSELL. Did he beat you on many occasions?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. Rather--many. - -Senator RUSSELL. Well, you only testified to one, did you not, before -the Commission?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. I was rather embarrassed to discuss this before the -Commission, but he beat me on more than on one occasion. - -Senator RUSSELL. And you stated at that time that you bruise very -readily and that's the reason you had such a bad black eye? Did you not -testify to that?* ** - -*Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. - -Senator RUSSELL. Was that true or not true?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. It is true--it is--whatever I said. - -Senator RUSSELL. It is true that you bruise easily, but that was just -one of many occasions he had beat you?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. On one occasion; yes. - -Senator RUSSELL. But you didn't testify to the others, did you? - -*Mrs. OSWALD. I think I testified only about one particular occasion -that I was asked about, whether he beat me or not, and I replied that -he did, but he beat me on more than one occasion. - -Senator RUSSELL. Did he ever fail to provide for you and the children?* - -Mrs. OSWALD. No---- - -*While he never earned too much, but when he had the job and earned, -say, around $200 a month, we never had any particular need of anything. -However, Lee was so frugal, not only frugal, but he kept part of the -money in his own possession all the time that was not available for the -family. - -Senator RUSSELL. You always had plenty to eat and the children had -plenty to wear? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Not really. - -We were never hungry, but we didn't have much. We were never too -hungry, but we never had any plentitude. We never had too much, and I -wanted--I always wanted this and that, but that was not available. - -Senator RUSSELL. But he never made a great deal of money, did he?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. I marvel now how we managed to live on what he earned at -that time in comparison with what I have now. We spent $12 or $15 a -week at that time. - -We spent $12 or $15 a week at that time--you know, we can live--that -was for milk and so on. - -Senator RUSSELL. He didn't spent any money on himself, did he, he -wasn't extravagant in his own habits? He didn't spend his money on -clothes or whisky or women or things of that kind, did he? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Oh, no. He told--somebody told about Jack Ruby--he went to -his nightclub, he never did go to nightclub. - -Senator RUSSELL. Well, I mean just extravagance in his own habits--he -was frugal in his own eating habits, he didn't eat much when he was -away from home, did he? - -Mrs. OSWALD. No. - -Senator RUSSELL. You knew where he kept his money in your home, did you -not?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. He had a black wallet, but I never ventured into it. - -Senator RUSSELL. Did he not tell you to take some of the money out -of the wallet at one time and buy some clothes for the children and -yourself? - -Mrs. OSWALD. No. - -Mr. GOPADZE. Pardon--you don't understand the question?** - -*Mrs. OSWALD. Yes; he did. It was the morning before the tragedy. - -Senator RUSSELL. Before the assassination of the President? - -*Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. - -Senator RUSSELL. Did he ever talk to you about the result of his visit -to Mexico? - -*Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. - -Senator RUSSELL. Did he say his efforts were all a failure there, that -he got any assistance that he was seeking?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. He told me that he visited the Cuban Embassy and the -Soviet Embassy and that they have the same bureaucracy in the Cuban -Embassy that they have in the Soviet Embassy and that he obtained no -results. - -Senator RUSSELL. Did you have less money in the United States than you -had in Russia when you were married over there? - -*Mrs. OSWALD. We had more money in the United States than we did in -the Soviet Union, but here we have to pay $65 a month rent from $200 -earned, and we didn't have to do that in the Soviet Union. Here the -house rent amounted to 30 percent of total wages earned, while in the -Soviet Union we paid 10 percent of the wages earned. Then, all the -medical expenses, medical assistance--expenses are paid there. However, -Lee didn't spend much money on medical expenses here because he found -ways to get the expenses free; the services free. - -Senator RUSSELL. You have testified, I believe, that Lee didn't use his -rifle much, the one he had in the Soviet Union. Did he ever discuss -shooting anyone in the Soviet Union like he did in shooting Nixon and -Walker here in this country?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. No; not in the Soviet Union. - -Senator RUSSELL. You haven't then heard from anyone except one letter -from your aunt, since you left Russia?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. No; I received letters from my girl friend. - -Senator RUSSELL. Oh, how many letters from your girl friend? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Just from one--a Christmas card--I don't remember how -many, probably not more than four or five. - -*But only one letter from the aunt. - -*Mrs. OSWALD. We received letters from Lee's friends written to both of -us--several letters. - -Senator RUSSELL. Written to you? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Written to Lee and to me. - -Senator RUSSELL. I see, but it's strange about your family that you -didn't hear from them when you had written to them?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. It is strange and it's hurtful. - -Senator RUSSELL. Mrs. Oswald, I believe you testified that Lee didn't -ever discuss political matters with you very much? * - -*Mrs. OSWALD. He discussed politics with me very little. - -Senator RUSSELL. And that when he was discussing political matters with -Mr. Paine and Mr. De Mohrenschildt and others, that you didn't pay -any attention, that they didn't address any of it to you, that they -discussed it between themselves?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. No; I did not participate in those conversations. - -Senator RUSSELL. And that he didn't discuss a great many things about -his work and things of that kind with you?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. The only time he discussed his work with me was when he -worked for a printing company. He told me that he liked that job. - -Senator RUSSELL. Why do you suppose he told you about the fact that he -was going to shoot Mr. Nixon and had shot at General Walker?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. As regards General Walker, he came home late. He left me -a note and so that is the reason why he discussed the Walker affair -with me. - -*Now, in regard to Mr. Nixon, he got dressed up in his suit and he put -a gun in his belt. - -Senator RUSSELL. You testified in his belt--I was going to ask about -that, because that was a very unusual place to carry a gun. Usually, he -would carry it in his coat. Did you ever see him have a gun in his belt -before?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. No; I would have noticed it if he did. - -Senator RUSSELL. You wouldn't have noticed it? - -*Mrs. OSWALD. I would have noticed it if he did. - -Senator RUSSELL. I see--you would have noticed it. - -*Mrs. OSWALD. And so--I have never seen him before with the pistol. - -Senator RUSSELL. He didn't state to you that he talked to any person in -Mexico other than at the Russian Embassy and the Cuban Embassy?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. No. The only persons he mentioned were the Cuban Embassy -and the Soviet Embassy in Mexico. - -Senator RUSSELL. Now, going back to your personal relations, Mrs. -Oswald, with Lee. Do you think he wanted to send you back to Russia -just to get rid of you?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. This is the question that I am puzzled about and I am -wondering about it myself, whether he wanted to get rid of me. - -Senator RUSSELL. Do you think he was really devoted to the children or -was he just putting on a show about liking the children?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. Yes; he loved the children. - -*I believe he loved the children, but at times--one side of his life -was such that I wondered whether he did or not. Some of the things that -he did certainly were not good for his children--some of the acts he -was engaged in. - -Senator RUSSELL. He knew you would take the children back to Russia -with you, if you wanted, did he not?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. Of course I would have taken the children with me to the -Soviet Union. - -Senator RUSSELL. It seems to me that I recall once or twice in this -testimony when you had had some little domestic trouble, as all married -couples have, that he had cried, which is most unusual for a man in -this country--men don't cry very often, and do you think that he cried -despite the fact that he wasn't very devoted to you and loved you a -great deal?* ** - -*Mrs. OSWALD. The fact that he cried, and on one occasion he begged -me to come back to him--he stood on his knees and begged me to come -back to him--whether that meant that he loved me--perhaps he did. On -the other hand, the acts that he committed showed to me that he didn't -particularly care for me. - -Senator RUSSELL. You think then that his acts that he committed outside -your domestic life within the family, within the realm of the family, -was an indication that he did not love you?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. The fact that he made attempts on the lives of other -people showed to me that he did not treasure his family life and his -children, also the fact that he beat me and wanted to send me to the -Soviet Union. - -Senator RUSSELL. And you think that the fact that he promised you after -the Walker incident that he would never do anything like that again but -did, is an indication that he didn't love you?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. Logically--yes. That shows to me that he did not love -me. At times he cried, and did all sorts of helpful things around the -house. At other times he was mean. Frankly, I am lost as to what to -think about him. - -And I did not have any choice, because he was the only person that I -knew and I could count on--the only person in the United States. - -Senator RUSSELL. Did he beat you very often, Mrs. Oswald, strike you -hard blows with his fists? Did he hit you with his fists?* ** - -*Mrs. OSWALD. When he beat me, sometimes he would beat me hard and -sometimes not too hard. Sometimes he would leave a black eye and -sometimes he wouldn't, depending on which part of me he would strike -me. When we lived in New Orleans he never beat me up. - -Senator RUSSELL. Did he ever beat you in Russia before you came to this -country?* - -Mrs. OSWALD. No. - -Senator RUSSELL. Had you ever heard of any husband striking his wife in -Russia?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. It seems that beating of wives by the Russian husbands is -a rather common thing in the Soviet Union and that is why I was afraid -to marry a Russian. - -Senator RUSSELL. I see. Do they beat them with anything other than -their hands? - -There was a law in my State at one time that a man could whip his wife -as long as he didn't use a switch that was larger than his thumb. That -law has been repealed. - -But, did they ever whip their wives with anything other than their -hands in Russia?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. I do not know. I was not interested in what manner they -beat their wives. - -Senator RUSSELL. That's difficult for me to believe--that a very -charming and attractive girl who was being courted by a number of men, -I would have thought you would have been greatly interested in all the -aspects of matrimony?* ** - -*Mrs. OSWALD. How would I know? - -Senator RUSSELL. How would you know it--well, by general conversation. -Don't people talk about those things all over the world--in Russia and -everywhere else? - -Mrs. OSWALD. That's different there. - -Senator RUSSELL. People are very much the same, aren't they, all over -the world? If a man in the neighborhood gets drunk and beats and abuses -his wife and children, isn't that discussed by all the people in the -block--in that area? - -Mrs. OSWALD. **Sometimes during a life of 20 years with a husband, -everything will be all right, and then some occasion will arise or -something will happen that the wife will learn about what kind of -person he is. - -*I know of one family in the Soviet Union in Minsk, where a husband was -married to a woman 17 years, and he just went to another woman. - -For 1 year. - -*For 1 year--then he came back to the first one full of shame and -repentance and he cried and she took him back in. He lived with her for -3 days and then left her again. He was excluded from the party. - -Senator RUSSELL. Excommunicated from the party? - -Mrs. OSWALD. **Expelled from the party. - -*But he took all the possessions of their common property when he left. - -Senator RUSSELL. I'm taking too much time, and I will hurry along. Did -he ever beat you badly enough, Mrs. Oswald, for you to require the -services of a doctor, a physician?* - -Mrs. OSWALD. No. - -Senator RUSSELL. Did he ever strike you during your pregnancy, when you -were pregnant?* - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. - -Mr. GOPADZE. She said, "I think." She said, "I think." - -*Mrs. OSWALD. Yes; he did strike me. - -Senator RUSSELL. What reason did he give for striking you, usually?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. Well, the reasons were if--they were very petty--I can't -even remember what the reasons were after this quarrel was over. -Sometimes he would tell me to shut up, and I don't take that from him. - -**I'm not a very quiet woman myself. - -Senator RUSSELL. "I'm not--" what? - -**Mrs. OSWALD. I'm not a quiet woman myself and sometimes it gets on -your nerves and you'll just tell him he's an idiot and he will become -more angry with you. - -*Enraged. When I would call him an idiot, he would say, "Well, I'll -show you what kind of an idiot I am," so he would beat me up. - -Senator RUSSELL. Did you ever strike him?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. I would give him some in return. - -Senator RUSSELL. You would give him some in return. - -As I recall your testimony, when he told you about the Nixon incident, -you testified that you held him in the bathroom by physical strength -for some 4 or 5 minutes, so you should have been able to hold your own -pretty well with him if you could do that?* ** - -Mrs. OSWALD. Probably not 5 minutes, but a long time for him. - -*Sometimes one can gather all of his strength in a moment like that. I -am not a strong person, but sometimes under stress and strain perhaps I -am stronger than I ordinarily am. - -Senator RUSSELL. Did you ever strike him with anything other than your -hand?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. Well, I think at one time I told him that if he would -beat me again, I will hurl a radio, a transistor radio, and when he did -strike me, I threw the radio at him. - -Senator RUSSELL. You missed him? - -*Mrs. OSWALD. No--it broke. I missed him. - -Senator RUSSELL. Yes, she missed him. - -*Mrs. OSWALD. I tried not to hit him. - -Senator RUSSELL. Now, going back a moment or two to your uncle, whom -you lived with and to whom I understand you are quite devoted--did he -try to keep you from coming to the United States very vigorously? - -*Mrs. OSWALD. My uncle was against my going to America, but he never -imposed his will or his opinion on me. - -Senator RUSSELL. Did he or any other members of your family ever -tell you why you had such little difficulty in getting your passport -approved?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. During the pendency of receiving this exit visa, we never -discussed the question, my uncle and my aunt, but when we received it, -the exit visa and it was granted to us so quickly, they were very much -surprised. - -Mr. GOPADZE. Now, Marina, I'm sorry. I would like to make a correction -to that point. - -Mr. GREGORY. All right. - -Mr. GOPADZE. That during the time they were expecting a visa to -depart the Soviet Union, the relatives didn't express too much about -it--because they didn't [think] they would depart, and when they did -receive it, they were very much surprised---- - -Mr. GREGORY. Correct. - -Mr. GOPADZE. With the expediency of the visa. Therefore, they didn't -bother asking any questions or into their affairs concerning the -departure. The last time they visited their aunt and uncle, they say, -"Oh, of all places, you're going to the United States." - -Senator RUSSELL. Lee never did make much more than $225 a month, in -that area, did he, and he was unemployed almost as much as he was -employed?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. - -Senator RUSSELL. How did he manage to pay the State Department the -money he had borrowed from them and to pay his brother Robert under -those circumstances?* - -Mrs. OSWALD. He paid those debts out of his earnings. The first few -weeks when we came to the United States, we lived with his mother, and -that gave us the opportunity to pay the debts. - -Senator RUSSELL. Well, you only lived with Mrs. Oswald a matter of 3 or -4 weeks, didn't you?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. Yes; but he was earning money during that time. - -Senator RUSSELL. I understand, but he was not earning more than $200 a -month, was he, and he paid four or five or six--what was it, Mr. Rankin? - -Mr. RANKIN. It was over $400. - -Senator RUSSELL. Over $450 or more to the State Department and some -amount to his brother Robert. - -Mrs. OSWALD. Around $100. - -*It was $100. - -It was probably $100. - -Senator RUSSELL. That's $550, and a person that's earning $200 a month -part of the time, and having to support a family, that's a rather -remarkable feat, isn't it, of financing?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. I think that at the time we were leaving Russia, some of -the rubles were exchanged for dollars, and maybe he kept part of that -money, of which I have no knowledge, when we arrived in the United -States. The only thing I know is that we lived very, very economically -and Lee was saying all the time that the debts have to be paid as -quickly as possible. - -Senator RUSSELL. I was under the impression that there was a very -drastic limit on the number of rubles that could be exchanged, that it -was a hundred or 130 or something in that area?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. According to the law in the Soviet Union, they allow -about 90 rubles per person to be exchanged into foreign currency or -dollars--$180 in our case because Lee was including the baby, and -she---- - -Senator RUSSELL. For each of them--the exchange. - -Mrs. OSWALD. Not for Lee. - -Senator RUSSELL. No; he couldn't bring out any more than he took in -with him. Well, he wasn't a visitor, though--yes, he was a visitor -then. I know they checked my money when I went in there.** - -**Mrs. OSWALD. I don't know the reason why they didn't allow Lee to -exchange $90, but I believe that there is a Soviet law that for Soviet -citizens they allow $90 for each person. Excuse me. - -*I believe that a foreigner is also entitled to exchange rubles for -dollars, but in a very limited amount. - -Senator RUSSELL. Mrs. Oswald, do you have any plans to return to the -Soviet Union, or do you intend to live in this country?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. Of course--to remain in the United States. - -Senator RUSSELL. I have a few other questions, but I'm already taking -too much time. - -Senator COOPER. I want to say something off the record. - -(Conference between Senator Cooper and Senator Russell off the record.) - -Representative BOGGS. I have just one question. - -Senator COOPER. All right. - -Senator RUSSELL. Go right ahead. - -Representative BOGGS. Mrs. Oswald, have you been taking English lessons? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. - -Representative BOGGS. Do you speak English now?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. I can't call it speaking English. - -Representative BOGGS. But you understand English, you replied to my -question a moment ago?** - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. - -Representative BOGGS. But you have been speaking English, studying -English, and whom do you live with now? - -Mrs. OSWALD. With myself and my kids, with my neighbors. - -Representative BOGGS. Do you read English? - -Mrs. OSWALD. No. A little bit. - -*A little bit. - -Mr. GOPADZE. Naturally, she knows the English alphabet, but she doesn't -read too much. - -**Sometimes I read on my own, but on the other hand, it might be -entirely different for an American. - -Senator RUSSELL. Well, I believe you can speak it pretty well, Mrs. -Oswald. You are a very intelligent person, and I've never seen a woman -yet that didn't learn a foreign language three times as fast as a man. - -Mrs. OSWALD. Thank you. - -Senator RUSSELL. They all do, and in some places in Russia you run into -women that speak three or four languages very fluently, including in -the high schools, where they have 10 or 12 years of English, starting -in the first grade with it? - -Mrs. OSWALD. That's the way they try--to learn it in school. - -Senator RUSSELL. Is that your foreign language? I understand in Russia -each student has to study some one foreign language all the way--or at -least for 5 or 6 years? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes; but I don't like this system of education in Russia -to study some languages--well, he can speak, you know. - -Senator RUSSELL. Mrs. Oswald, your attorney--your then attorney, -according to the record, asked the Commission some questions -about your memoirs, your diary or whatever it was that you have -written--your reminiscences, and that they not be released. Have you -ever made arrangements yet to sell them? Have you gotten rid of them? -Because--the record of the Commission will be printed at a rather early -date?* ** - -*Mrs. OSWALD. I do not want these memoirs to be published by Warren -Commission. - -Senator RUSSELL. Yes; I understand that. - -*Mrs. OSWALD. I am now working on a book and I may wish to include -these memoirs in that book. I have no objection to the publication -of the material in those memoirs that have any relation to the -assassination of the President, or anything that is pertinent to this -particular inquiry. - -Senator RUSSELL. Of course, a great deal of it is very personal. It's -about your social relations when you were a young woman. Of course, -you are a young woman now, but when you were even younger than you -are now, and the friends that you had, and things of that nature, and -this report is going to be published before too long. And that's among -the evidence there, and I was trying to get some timing on your book -or whatever it is you are going to publish that would utilize this -material, in an effort to help you--that is the only purpose I had, to -try to see that you don't lose the publicity value of the memoirs.* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. I understand that and I'm certainly grateful to you for -it. - -**Would it be possible to publish in the report only parts of my life, -that pertaining to the assassination, instead of my private life? - -Senator RUSSELL. I cannot answer that, and only the entire Commission -could answer that, but when I read that in the testimony, I was hoping -that you had found some means of commercializing on it either to the -moving picture people or to the publishing world. - -Mrs. OSWALD. As yet, I have not availed myself of that opportunity, sir. - -Senator RUSSELL. When do you think you will publish this book?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. The publisher will possibly publish the book toward the -end of December, maybe in January and even perhaps---- - -Mr. GOPADZE. Not the publisher. The person who writes the story is -hoping to be able to finish it in the latter part of December. - -Senator RUSSELL. Of course, it goes into much more detail, I'm sure, -than this sketch we have, because this wouldn't be anything like a -book. It would be more of a magazine article. - -**Mrs. OSWALD. Would it be possible to delete it from the Commission's -report? - -Senator RUSSELL. I can't answer that because I'm not the whole -Commission.** - -Very frankly, I think the Commission would be disposed to publish all -the material that they have, is my own honest view about it. The reason -I am discussing it with you is to find out if you have done anything -about it. Of course, if you are writing a whole book, it won't be so -important, just this one phase of it. - -Mrs. OSWALD, during the course of your testimony, you testified that -Lee often called you twice a day while he was working away from home. - -Why do you think he called you if he was not in love with you?*** - -*Mrs. OSWALD. When he was away from me, he told me that he missed me. - -Senator RUSSELL. You don't think that's an indication that he loved -you?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. This shows--this would show that he loved me. He was a -dual personality. - -Senator RUSSELL. Split personality. - -Mrs. OSWALD. Split personality--that's it. - -Senator RUSSELL. Mrs. Oswald, I noticed that one of the witnesses, -I've forgotten which one it was, that ran the boarding house where Lee -lived, testified that he called someone every night and talked to them -at some length in a foreign language. That couldn't have been anyone -except you, could it, that he was calling?* ** - -*Mrs. OSWALD. I believe that I was the person he talked to. - -Senator RUSSELL. He did call you quite frequently, did he not when you -were in Irving and he was in Dallas, for example? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Every day. - -Senator RUSSELL. But he didn't call you to abuse you over the phone, -did he?* ** - -*Mrs. OSWALD. Of course not. - -Senator RUSSELL. It was the ordinary small talk you would have between -a man and his wife--he would ask you about how the children were--one -of them--was?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. He always talked about our daughter June. - -Senator RUSSELL. Did he ever say anything about, "I love you" or -anything like that over the phone?** - -Mrs. OSWALD. (no response). - -Mr. GOPADZE. Did he? - -*Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. - -Senator RUSSELL. He did? - -*Mrs. OSWALD. He did. - -Senator RUSSELL. Now, you've testified before, and I'm just going on -recollection, but I'm sure I'm right about this, that he told you in -New Orleans that he was going to Mexico City and that he was going by -bus and that a round trip would be much cheaper than a one-way fare. -I noticed something in the paper the other day where you had found a -one-way ticket or stub on the bus from Mexico City to Dallas, I believe -it was. How did you happen to come into possession of that stub?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. You say round trip was cheaper than one-way? - -Senator RUSSELL. Yes; that's what you testified he told you in New -Orleans when he said he was going. But here, according to the press--I -don't know--a one-way stub turns up where he came back here to Dallas. -Where did you get that stub?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. My statement apparently was misinterpreted in the record, -because Lee stated that the cost of the ticket, say, from Dallas to -Mexico is cheaper than it is from Mexico City to Dallas or from one -point to Mexico and from Mexico to that same point. - -Senator RUSSELL. Well, that very easily could have become confused in -translation, but it certainly is in there.* - -Mr. RANKIN. I think they have confused your question, Senator, I think -they have confused your question. I think they think that you were -saying that a round trip was cheaper than one way? Or--two ways? - -Senator RUSSELL. I'm sorry, Mr. Gregory. You misunderstood it. I didn't -mean that a round trip was cheaper than one way. I meant that a round -trip was cheaper than to go there and back on individual tickets--than -two ways. - -Mr. GREGORY. She understood you correctly. I misunderstood you, -Senator. I'm sorry. - -*Mrs. OSWALD. The fact remains, according to Lee, that it is cheaper -from Mexico--a one-way ticket from Mexico City, say, to Dallas costs -less than from Dallas to Mexico, Mexico City. Or vice versa. - -Senator RUSSELL. Be that as it may, how about the stub? - -*Mrs. OSWALD. I found the stub of this ticket approximately 2 weeks ago -when working with Priscilla Johnson on the book. Three weeks. - -*Three weeks ago--I found this stub of a ticket among old magazines, -Spanish magazines, and there was a television program also in Spanish -and there was the stub of this ticket. - -Mrs. OSWALD. But this was, you know, a piece of paper and I didn't know -this was a ticket. - -Senator RUSSELL. You didn't know it was a ticket? - -Mrs. OSWALD. No. - -Senator RUSSELL. Until you showed it to Miss Johnson? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes--it was in the TV book and then Mr. Liebeler called me -on telephone and asked me some questions about Mexico. - -Senator RUSSELL. Yes? - -Mrs. OSWALD. And I told him, "Just a minute, I'll go and inquire -and tell him what I have," and I told him I have some kind of piece -of paper. I don't know what it is. I don't know whether it would be -interested--the Commission, and somebody who was at my house one -time---- - -*Read what was on the stub. - -Senator RUSSELL. You could read the stub all right, could you, Mrs. -Oswald? There wasn't anything complicated there, you could read -"One-way ticket," couldn't you? You know that much English?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. It was a mixture of Spanish and English. - -Senator RUSSELL. Oh, I see--it had it both ways, and the name of the -bus company, too, perhaps. - -Mrs. OSWALD. I didn't understand this in languages--you can't say this. - -Senator RUSSELL. Where had that magazine been that had this bus ticket -in it, was anything else in it, any tickets to bull fights or anywhere -else?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. I turned all of this material over to the FBI, thinking -that they might find something of interest in it. I did not try to -determine for myself what it was. - -Senator RUSSELL. Was it in the possessions that were removed from Mrs. -Paine's room, or was it in some of Lee's material that was moved from -his boardinghouse?* - -Mrs. OSWALD. It was with Mrs. Paine. - -Senator RUSSELL. Didn't you testify, Mrs. Oswald, that Lee couldn't -read Spanish, when you were testifying before? What was he doing with a -Spanish magazine? - -Mrs. OSWALD. It wasn't a Spanish magazine, it was a TV program. - -Senator RUSSELL. Pardon? - -Mrs. OSWALD. It was a TV program. - -*It was not a Spanish magazine, it was a TV program. - -Senator RUSSELL. Oh, it was not a magazine, it was a TV program. I -understood you to say it was a Spanish magazine? I'm sorry. - -*Mrs. OSWALD. I found all this among my old magazines and newspapers, -that I was collecting after the assassination of the President, and -there also were English books which could have been in that small -suitcase in which I put everything. - -Senator RUSSELL. How did the FBI happen to overlook that when they -made the raid out there at Mrs. Paine's? I thought they carried off -everything you had out there, practically?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. The reason they overlooked this particular suitcase is -because I took it with me to---- - -**To the hotel--the first night they moved us. - -*When we stayed in the hotel. - -It was in Dallas. - -Senator RUSSELL. It was in Dallas. That's when they were at the big -hotel--where you spent one night there? - -*Mrs. OSWALD. It was in Dallas and I took it with me because there were -children's books. - -Senator RUSSELL. I thought the FBI had already removed your passports -and your diploma and everything before that time? - -*Mrs. OSWALD. The first day when Lee was arrested, the FBI made a -search. - -Mr. GOPADZE. The FBI or police. - -Mr. GREGORY. The FBI or police. - -Senator RUSSELL. I believe it was the police then. - -*Mrs. OSWALD. The police made the search in the Paine's house. - -Senator RUSSELL. Yes. - -*Mrs. OSWALD. And everything was there. I did not take anything with me -that first day when I was arrested. - -Senator RUSSELL. When you returned to Mrs. Paine's you found they had -left this particular program there with this bus stub? You testified -they had removed your passport and your diploma and Lee's union cards -and Social Security card and everything else--I was just wondering how -they happened to leave this particular article with the bus stub in it?* - -Mrs. OSWALD. **I never retained that for any special reason. - -Senator RUSSELL. I'm quite sure of that. I wasn't asking that at all.** - -Mrs. OSWALD. **I don't know the reason. - -Senator RUSSELL. They just overlooked that? - -Mrs. OSWALD. **It was just overlooked--the same way they overlooked -that other. - -Senator RUSSELL. Mrs. Oswald, what are your relations now with the -friends that you made in the Russian community here in Dallas? I -don't remember all of the names--one of them was named Elena Hall, -is that right, and Katya Ford, Anna Meller, De Mohrenschildt, De -Mohrenschildt's wife and children--are you still on friendly terms with -them, do you see them occasionally?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. As far as I'm concerned, I consider all of them as my -friends, but George Bouhe, and Katya Ford are the only two people that -come to visit me. Others perhaps feel that it is not healthy for them -to come to see me. - -Senator RUSSELL. I wondered if they had expressed their opinion or -whether they were afraid of you on account of publicity contamination?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. No, they never said that to me personally that they are -afraid to come to see me. When we meet in the church, they are all very -pleasant to me, but they never invite me. - -Mr. GOPADZE. No. - -**Mrs. OSWALD. Sometimes they invite Katya Ford, but they never invite -me. Nataska Krassovska is very nice to me. - -Senator RUSSELL. When was the first time you ever heard of Jack Ruby or -Jack Rubenstein?* - -Mrs. OSWALD. When he killed him. - -Senator RUSSELL. You had never heard of him until that time? - -Mrs. OSWALD. (Nodding a negative response.) - -Senator RUSSELL. That's all. - -Senator COOPER. What is your address now, Mrs. Oswald, and with whom do -you live? - -Mrs. OSWALD. 629 Belt Line Road, Richardson, Tex. - -Senator COOPER. Does someone live with you or do you live with someone? - -Mrs. OSWALD. No; I live by myself with my children. - -Senator COOPER. After the death of your husband, you had a lawyer, Mr. -Thorne, and a business agent, Mr. Martin, and they were discharged. Was -there any particular reason for discharging them?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. I got rid of them because the contract that they prepared -was unfair to me, and it was prepared at a time when I did not -understand it and when it was not translated to me. - -Senator COOPER. Now, you later employed Mr. McKenzie as your attorney -and you have since discharged him, haven't you?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. I employed Mr. McKenzie to wind up the affair with Mr. -Martin and Mr. Thorne, and he was not employed on any other basis--just -for that particular thing. - -**Not permanently. - -*Not permanently--just for that particular thing, despite the fact -that he did give advice on other business of mine. Of course, I needed -an attorney in my dealings with the Commission that's what he told -me--that I needed an attorney to deal with the Commission. - -Mr. GOPADZE. She said---- - -Mr. RANKIN. She said more than that. - -*Mrs. OSWALD. Now, as I feel now, I don't need any lawyer before the -Commission. - -Senator COOPER. If you'll just answer my question now: Do you have a -lawyer to represent you now?* - -Mrs. OSWALD. No. - -Senator COOPER. Who is your business agent? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Mrs. Katya Ford. - -Senator COOPER. Can you tell the Commission about how much money has -been donated to you or how much you have earned through contracts?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. I do not know at this time how much money I have. - -Senator COOPER. Approximately?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. Donations were $57,000, from which twelve and one-half -thousand plus expenses were paid to Martin and Thorne, and $15,000 to -Mr. McKenzie. - -Senator COOPER. Do you have any contracts, have you made any contracts -for the sale of your writings which may be payable in the future?* ** - -Mrs. OSWALD. The publishing company contract with me is all. - -*I have not signed any contracts with the publishing company, except I -have already signed several contracts with Life Magazine. - -After the diary was published. - -**After the diary was published. - -Senator COOPER. That's for $20,000? - -Mrs. OSWALD. $20,000 plus $1,000 for Parade Magazine, and one -girl--Helen--I don't know her last name, I know we did---- - -*Also, I signed--I agreed with a girl by the name of Helen--I cannot -remember her last name, for possible future stories Helen might write. - -We have interview. - -Senator COOPER. You testified that your uncle is an official and a -Colonel in the MVD?* ** And, a member of the Communist Party, is that -correct? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. - -Senator COOPER. Do you know that any other members of your family are -members of the Communist Party?* ** - -*Mrs. OSWALD. The husband of another aunt. - -Senator COOPER. Is that the aunt you visited from time to time?* ** - -**Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. - -Senator COOPER. At Kharkov? - -Mrs. OSWALD. At Minsk. - -Senator COOPER. With whom did you file your declaration for an exit -visa?** * - -*Mrs. OSWALD. There is a special institution in Minsk where prospective -departees filed application for exit visa. They leave the application -in that institution, and that institution transmits it to Moscow where -the decision is made whether to grant or to deny the exit permit. The -reply then comes to the MVD in Minsk. - -*I want to assure the Commission that I was never given any assignment -by the Soviet Government or the American Government, and that I was so -surprised myself that I got the exit visa. - -Senator COOPER. When you talked to Colonel Aksenov, what did he tell -you when you asked him about the exit visa?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. When I went to see Colonel Aksenov, I went to ask him -about the state in which my application is for exit visa, and he -replied---- - -Mr. GOPADZE. No. "Was it favorable or not," and he said it was -favorable. - -Mr. GREGORY. Yes, and he said---- - -Mr. GOPADZE. That it takes official process of getting the answer. - -*Mrs. OSWALD. He said, "You are not the only one who is seeking exit -permit, and so you have to wait your turn." - -Senator COOPER. Did he attempt to discourage you from seeking the exit -visa? - -Mrs. OSWALD. No. - -Senator COOPER. Did Lee Oswald ever express any opinion to you as to -why he thought an exit visa might be granted to you and your daughter? - -*Mrs. OSWALD. He encouraged me and he thought that I would consider -that he exerted every effort on his part for me to get this exit. Maybe -he just was saying that that way, but never hoped that actually I would -get the exit permit. - -Senator COOPER. During that time or at any other time, did Lee ever -say to you that he might do some work for the Soviet Union if you did -return to the United States?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. He did not. - -Senator COOPER. I would like to turn to your testimony about your -knowledge of the rifle that Lee possessed. Now, as I remember your -testimony, you stated that you first learned that he had the rifle -early in 1963.* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. In the year that he bought it, I learned it. - -Senator COOPER. You had seen him clean it, you had watched him sight -the rifle in New Orleans and work the bolt?* ** - -Mr. GREGORY. In New Orleans? - -Senator COOPER. Yes; in your testimony, you said you saw him sitting on -the little back porch---- - -Mrs. OSWALD. On the little back porch--yes. - -Senator COOPER. And sight the rifle? - -*Mrs. OSWALD. I'm sorry, I might be mixed up. - -Senator COOPER. When you testified that you believed he did some target -practice at least a few times? - -*Mrs. OSWALD. In Dallas or New Orleans?* ** - -*Yes; when we lived on Neely Street. - -Senator COOPER. He told you that he had used this rifle to fire at -General Walker?* - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. - -Senator COOPER. He told you he had threatened Vice President Nixon, you -had said?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. He did not say "Vice President Nixon," he just said -"Nixon." - -Senator COOPER. Now, was it your opinion throughout these months that -he was keeping this rifle for his purpose of using it again, firing at -some individual, perhaps an official of the United States Government?* -** - -Mrs. OSWALD. **He never expressed himself. - -*When the assassination of President Kennedy took place, I was asking -people whether--people in general--whether General Walker was with -President Kennedy. It perhaps was a silly question, but I thought that -he---- - -Senator COOPER. Listen to my question: During this time, didn't you -have the opinion that he was keeping possession of this rifle and -practicing with it for the purpose of using it to shoot at some -individual, and perhaps an official of the United States Government?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. I never thought--I was afraid to think that he would do -anything like that until the shooting of General Walker occurred. - -Senator COOPER. But now my question. After that--the continued -possession----* ** - -**Mrs. OSWALD. After the attempting of the killing of General Walker, -I thought he might do it, but I didn't visualize that he could do -anything like that. - -Senator COOPER. When you testified before the Commission, you -said--generally--you didn't think Lee would repeat anything like -that--"Generally, I knew that the rifle was very tempting for him". - -"Very tempting for him"--what did you mean by that, about the rifle -being very tempting for him? Did you believe he might be tempted to -shoot at someone else?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. Yes; I was afraid that he did have temptation to kill -someone else. - -Senator COOPER. Mrs. Oswald, you testified that when you talked to Lee -after he had shot at General Walker, or told you he had shot at General -Walker, he said that it would have been well if someone had killed -Hitler because many lives would be saved, is that correct? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. - -Senator COOPER. After that, you testified that many times or a number -of times he read you articles about President Kennedy? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. - -Senator COOPER. And said at one time, discussing President Kennedy's -father, that he had made his money through wine and he had a great deal -of money, and that enabled him to educate his sons and to give them a -start. - -I want you to remember and tell the Commission if he did ever express -any hatred or dislike for President Kennedy. You have several -times--not changed--but you have told the Commission things you did not -tell them when first asked. - -Now, if he did speak to you about President Kennedy, we think you -should tell the Commission?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. I don't think he ever expressed hatred toward President -Kennedy, but perhaps he expressed jealousy, not only jealousy, but -envy, but perhaps he envied, because he said, "Whoever has money has it -easy." That was his general attitude. It was not a direct quotation. - -Representative BOGGS. Pursuing this--I asked you that very question -in Washington back in February, and the answer was "No." I asked you -whether or not your husband ever expressed hostility toward President -Kennedy--is your answer still "No"?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. My answer is "No." - -**He never expressed himself anything against President Kennedy, -anything detrimental toward him. What I told them generally before, I -am repeating now too. - -Representative BOGGS. Did he ever indicate to you, except in the Walker -situation where he said he'd shot at General Walker, that he would kill -anyone?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. No. - -Representative BOGGS. What about Nixon?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. He did tell me he was about ready to commit that -particular act, with respect to Nixon. That's when I kept him in the -bathroom, but he never said, "Well, today it's Walker and then I'm -going to kill someone else." He never said that. He never related to me -any of his plans about killing anybody. - -*In other words, he never said to me, "Now, I'll kill Walker and then -I'll kill this fellow" and so on--he never did. - -Senator COOPER. You testified that your husband said that he did -not like the United States for several reasons; one, because of -certain Fascist organizations; two, because of difficulty of securing -employment; and another reason--because of the high cost of medical -care. Did he ever say that those things that he did not like could be -remedied or changed if an official of the Government were done away -with?* ** - -*Mrs. OSWALD. No; he never told me. - -**No; he never told me--he never told me. - -Senator COOPER. Did any official of the Soviet Union, or any person -who was a Soviet citizen, ever talk to you or ever talk to Lee to your -knowledge, during the time that you were in the United States? - -Mr. GREGORY. At any time before or after? - -Senator COOPER. Yes? - -Senator RUSSELL. You said--in the United States, didn't you? - -Senator COOPER. Yes; in the United States.* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. No; no one ever did. The only time Lee talked with a -representative of the Soviet Union was in Mexico, but not me and Lee, -we were never approached by the Soviet representatives. - -Senator COOPER. When was the first time you ever heard of Police -Officer Tippit?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. When there was a broadcast over the radio that Officer -Tippit was killed. - -Senator COOPER. Have you seen Mrs. Paine since the time you left her -home after the assassination?* - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. - -I saw her twice since I left Irving, since I lived with her in Irving. - -Senator COOPER. When was that?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. Once, when I lived with Katya Ford in February of this -year, and the next time I do not recall--maybe 1 month later. - -In my house. - -Senator COOPER. You had quite an association with her, and I need not -recall all of the facts, but is there any reason now that you do not -wish to see her?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. One of the reasons is that she belongs to the Civil -Liberties Union and I don't want to get mixed up in anything. I already -have plenty of grief. - -Senator COOPER. Just one other question--is there any other fact about -this subject, which you have been asked by the Commission or by anyone -else that you have knowledge of that you have not told us about it? Any -fact that would bear on this inquiry?* ** - -*Mrs. OSWALD. I would be glad to, but I don't know of any. - -Representative BOGGS. May I just ask one or two questions? - -Have you seen Mrs. Marguerite Oswald at any time since you first -appeared before the Commission? - -Mrs. OSWALD. No. - -Representative BOGGS. Have you heard from her? - -Mrs. OSWALD. No. - -Representative BOGGS. You've had no communication from her either -directly or indirectly?* ** - -Mrs. OSWALD. No. - -*She tried to get in touch with me. - -**Through Attorney McKenzie. - -Representative BOGGS. And you refused to see her? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. - -*I think that she may have been bad influence with the -children--improper influence with the children. - -**I feel that--I hardly believe--that Lee Oswald really tried to kill -President Kennedy. - -Mrs. OSWALD. I feel in my own mind that Lee did not have President -Kennedy as a prime target when he assassinated him. - -Representative BOGGS. Well, who was it? - -*Mrs. OSWALD. I think it was Connally. That's my personal opinion that -he perhaps was shooting at Governor Connally, the Governor of Texas. - -Senator RUSSELL. You've testified before us before that Lee told you he -was coming back to Texas--if he was back in Texas, he would vote for -Connally for Governor. Why do you think he would shoot him? - -Mrs. OSWALD. **I feel that the reason that he had Connally in his mind -was on account of his discharge from the Marines and various letters -they exchanged between the Marine Corps and the Governor's office, but -actually, I didn't think that he had any idea concerning President -Kennedy. - -Representative BOGGS. Well, now, my next question is--did he ever -express any hostility to Governor Connally?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. He never expressed that to me--his displeasure or hatred -of Connally, but I feel that there could have been some connection, due -to the fact that Lee was dishonorably discharged from the Corps, and -there was an exchange of letters between the Governor's Office and Lee. -That's my personal opinion. - -Representative BOGGS. Just a minute. Excuse me, Senator. - -I asked you in February, Mrs. Oswald, I said, "What motive would -you ascribe to your husband in killing President Kennedy?" And, you -said, "As I saw the documents that were being read to me, I came to -the conclusion that he wanted by any means, good or bad to get into -history, and now that I've read a part of the translation of some of -the documents, I think that there was some political foundation to it, -a foundation of which I am not aware." - -And then you go on and you express no doubt in your mind that he -intended to kill President Kennedy. - -Mrs. OSWALD. **Did I say that, this last time in Dallas? The last time -in Dallas, apparently there was some misunderstanding on the part of my -answers to the Commission, because I was told by Mr. McKenzie that it -wasn't reported accurately. - -*The record should read that on the basis of the documents that I have -read, I have no doubt--that I had available to me to read--I had no -doubt that he did---- - -Mr. GOPADZE. That he could kill him---- - -Mr. GREGORY. Could or have wanted to--could have wanted to---- - -Mr. GOPADZE. He could kill--she doesn't say "want"--he could have -killed him. - -Representative BOGGS. Let's straighten this out because this is very -important. - -Mrs. OSWALD. Okay. - -Representative BOGGS. I'll read it to you, "I gather that you have -reached the conclusion in your own mind that your husband killed -President Kennedy?" You replied, "Regretfully--yes." - -Now, do you have any reason to change that?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. That's correct. I have no doubt that he did kill the -President. - -Representative BOGGS. Now, the other answer as I read it was: "On -the basis of documents that you had seen presented at the Commission -hearing"--isn't that right? - -Mrs. OSWALD. **The word "documents" is wrong--the facts -presented--that's what I mean. - -Representative BOGGS. Again we get back to the question of motive. -You said again today that you are convinced that Lee Oswald killed -President Kennedy. - -You said something additionally today, though, and that is that you -feel that it was his intention not to kill President Kennedy, but to -kill Governor Connally. - -Now, am I correct in saying that she had not said this previously? - -Mr. RANKIN. Ask her that.* ** - -Representative BOGGS. Let's get an answer. I think this answer is quite -important. - -*Mrs. OSWALD. On the basis of all the available facts, I have no doubt -in my mind that Lee Oswald killed President Kennedy. - -*At the same time, I feel in my own mind as far as I am concerned, -I feel that Lee--that my husband perhaps intended to kill Governor -Connally instead of President Kennedy. - -Representative BOGGS. Now, let me ask you one other question: Assuming -that this is correct, would you feel that there would be any less guilt -in killing Governor Connally than in killing the President?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. I am not trying to vindicate or justify or excuse Lee as -my husband. Even if he killed one of his neighbors, still it wouldn't -make much difference--it wouldn't make any difference--a killing is a -killing. I am sorry. - -Representative BOGGS. There are one or two other questions I want to -ask her. - -I know you've been asked a lot of questions about this thing. How old -were you when you left Russia?* - -Mrs. OSWALD. Twenty years. My birthday--I was 21 when I came here. In -July--my birthday was in July. - -Representative BOGGS. Were you a member of the Communist Party in -Russia?* - -Mrs. OSWALD. No. - -*I was a member of a Komsomol organization. - -Representative BOGGS. What is that?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. It is an association of young Communist youth. It is not -party, sir. In order to become a member of the Communist Party, one -has to be first a member of the Komsomol, but I didn't even have the -membership card in Komsomol Association. - -Representative BOGGS. Would it be normal for one to graduate, so to -speak, from the Komsomol to the membership in the Communist Party?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. It is a prerequisite for a prospective member of the -Communist Party to be first a member of the Komsomol organization, but -not every member of Komsomol becomes a Communist Party member. - -Mr. RANKIN. What percentage? - -Senator COOPER. She was expelled? - -Senator RUSSELL. No; she testified she quit the Youth Movement.* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. I was dismissed. - -**I was expelled from Komsomol. - -Senator RUSSELL. Why--for what reason?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. The reason given to me for being expelled from Komsomol -was because I did not get my card, because I did not take out my -Komsomol card for 1 year. That was the reason given to me, but I -believe the true reason why they expelled me from Komsomol was because -I married an American. - -It also happened about the time when I visited the American Embassy. I -was expelled the following week after I visited the American Embassy in -Moscow. - -Senator RUSSELL. Did you pay any dues to the Komsomol? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes; 30c - -*Yes; 30c every month. - -Senator RUSSELL. I thought that practically all young people belonged -to the Komsomol?* ** - -Mrs. OSWALD. No. - -Senator RUSSELL. There are many more of them than there are members of -the Communist Party, aren't there?* - -Mrs. OSWALD. Oh, yes. - -Senator RUSSELL. Nearly every city in Russia has a big building, there -is a Youth Komsomol Building?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. Yes; I was persuaded or talked into joining the Komsomol -organization. - -Senator RUSSELL. I thought that was automatic?** - -Mrs. OSWALD. No. - -*No--one has to be accepted into Komsomol. It is not automatic. - -Representative BOGGS. One further question, and this is off the record. - -(Interrogatories and answers off the record at this point.) - -Representative BOGGS. In response to Senator Russell, I gathered that -you plan to stay in the United States?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. Yes; if possible. - -Representative BOGGS. Do you aspire to become a citizen of the United -States, or are you a citizen?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. I am not a citizen. I wish to become an American citizen. - -Senator RUSSELL. Mrs. Oswald, when you were before us before, you -testified that you were not a member of any church, but you had your -own religion in your own heart, as I recall?* ** - -*Mrs. OSWALD. In Russia I did not belong to any church. No one belongs -to any church in Russia. - -Senator RUSSELL. Except old women? - -*Mrs. OSWALD. I'll say this--that I believe it's unhealthy in the -Soviet Union to openly belong to any church. While there is no -persecution of religious belief in Russia, the officials look at it -with much disfavor. - -Senator RUSSELL. But you are not actually a member of the church, are -you?* ** - -**Mrs. OSWALD. In Russian churches, they don't have a fee or they don't -have any membership, they have dues in Russian churches. - -Senator RUSSELL. But you've not been baptized in any church?* - -Mrs. OSWALD. Oh, yes; I have been baptized. - -Senator RUSSELL. When were you baptized? - -Mrs. OSWALD. I don't remember. - -Senator RUSSELL. Are you actually a member of the church?* ** - -**Mrs. OSWALD. Actually, I am not a member as you know in the United -States. However, I belong to the church, the Russian church here in -Dallas, and I don't pay dues. - -Senator RUSSELL. You are more of a communicant now than you are a -member of the church? - -Mrs. OSWALD. I think the understanding of church membership is -different in the Soviet Union or in the understanding of a person that -was brought up in the Soviet Union. - -Senator RUSSELL. I am concerned about this testimony, Mrs. Oswald, -about your believing now that Lee was shooting at Connally and not at -the President, because you did not tell us that before.* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. At that time I didn't think so, but the more I mull over -it in my own mind trying to get it in my own mind what made him do what -he did, the more I think that he was shooting at Connally rather than -President Kennedy. - -Senator RUSSELL. Now, did you not testify before that Lee wrote a -letter to Connally when he was Secretary of the Navy about the nature -of his Marine discharge? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. - -Senator RUSSELL. And that when he got a letter back, that you asked him -what it was? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. - -Senator RUSSELL. And he said, "Well, it's just some Bureaucrat's -statement"?* - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. - -*Yes. - -Senator RUSSELL. Did you not further testify that Lee said in -discussing the gubernatorial election in Texas that if he were here and -voting, that he would vote for Mr. Connally?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. - -Senator RUSSELL. Now, do you think he would shoot and kill a man that -he would vote for, for the Governor of his state?* ** - -**Mrs. OSWALD. The only reason is--I am trying to analyze, myself, -there was a reason--more reason to dislike Connally as a man than he -had for Kennedy. - -Senator RUSSELL. Well, she testified before that he had spoken, as far -as Lee spoke favorably of anyone, that he had spoken favorably of both -Kennedy and of Governor Connally.** - -**Mrs. OSWALD. He also told me that he was also favorable toward -Connally, while they were in Russia. There is a possibility that he -changed his mind, but he never told her that. - -Senator RUSSELL. Well, I think that's about as speculative as the -answers I've read here. He might have changed his mind, but he didn't -tell her anything about it, as she testified--that discussing politics -in Texas, that he said that if he were here when they had the election, -that he would vote for John Connally for Governor, and that was after -he got the letter about the Marine corps.* ** - -**Mrs. OSWALD. That happened in Russia when he received some kind of -pamphlet with a picture of Connally, a separate time, at which time he -remarked that when he returned, if and when he returned to Texas he -would vote for Connally. - -Senator RUSSELL. That's right--that's exactly right, but yet now you -say that he was his prime target. - -I want to know what Connally had done to Lee since he got back from -Russia that would cause him to change his mind, to shoot him?* ** - -*Mrs. OSWALD. I do not know, but there is a possibility that Lee became -hateful of Connally because the matter of this dishonorable discharge -was dragging so long. - -Senator RUSSELL. Yes; but Connally had left the Navy, where he had -anything to do with the discharge, before he got the pamphlet about his -being a candidate for Governor?** * - -**Mrs. OSWALD. I am not sure when that particular thing happened, -whether Mr. Connally was the Secretary of the Navy or what he was doing. - -Senator RUSSELL. Well, it's a matter of common knowledge that he ran -for Governor after he resigned as Secretary of the Navy. - -Mrs. OSWALD. I don't know. - -Senator RUSSELL. Did you not know that when Mr. Connally was running -for Governor of Texas, he was no longer Secretary of the Navy and had -nothing to do with the Marine Corps?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. Yes, I knew--I knew that he was not the Secretary of the -Navy any more because Lee told me that Connally stated in the letter to -Lee that he was no longer Secretary of Navy and hence he couldn't do -anything for him, and that Connally referred the petition to the proper -authorities. - -Senator RUSSELL. Mrs. Oswald, didn't Lee read about government a great -deal? Didn't Lee read about civic affairs and about government a great -deal?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. He read books about Kennedy, about Hitler, about others. - -Senator RUSSELL. Haven't you been in this country long enough to know -that the President is Commander and Chief of the Army and Navy and he's -even head of the Secretary of the Navy. He can order him to do anything -he wants to?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. I didn't pay any attention to it or I didn't know it or -wasn't told. - -Senator RUSSELL. Do you have any facts on which you base your opinion -now that Lee Oswald was shooting and was intending to kill Connally -rather than President Kennedy?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. I have no facts whatsoever. I simply express an opinion -which perhaps is not logical at all, but I am sorry if I mixed -everybody up. - -Senator RUSSELL. You haven't mixed anybody up, except I think that you -have your evidence terribly confused.* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. No; I have no facts whatsover. I'm sorry I told them that. - -Senator RUSSELL. Do you know whether or not Lee knew Connally -personally or did he know that he was going to be in this motorcade at -all?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. No; I did not know whether Lee knew or ever contacted -the Governor personally, and I don't know whether Lee knew that the -Governor would be in the motorcade. - -Senator RUSSELL. But Lee did take his gun into town that day, and so -far as you know, I believe you said that was the first day he had -carried it into town? - -*Mrs. OSWALD. I do not personally know that Lee took the rifle that -morning or the night before. Apparently the Commission has witnesses or -information to that effect, but of my own knowledge, I don't know. - -Senator RUSSELL. Did you not testify that you thought this was Lee's -rifle that was shown you as the one that shot Connally and the -President?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. Yes; I testified that that was the rifle. - -Mr. GOPADZE. No--I'm sorry. As far as she knows about the arms, the -rifle which was shown to her looked like the one he had. - -Mr. GREGORY. Yes; that's right. - -Senator RUSSELL. That's all I asked her. That's just exactly what I -asked her. - -Mr. GREGORY. Yes; that's correct. - -Senator RUSSELL. In discussing the motorcade, did he say anything about -Connally would be riding with the President?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. No; he did not. - -Senator RUSSELL. I believe you testified, did you not, Mrs. Oswald, -that the day before Lee told you that he fired at General Walker, that -he seemed to be under great emotional stress, strain, very tense?* ** - -*Mrs. OSWALD. He was angry and excited. He was angry and excited. - -Senator RUSSELL. Did he show any of that on the morning that he left -home when the President was assassinated?* ** - -*Mrs. OSWALD. Well, I did not notice any difference in Lee's attitude -during that morning from any other day. But sometimes, quite often, he -was impulsive and nervous and excited. I got tired from watching him in -those particular moods, in his moods, and I didn't pay any attention. - -Senator RUSSELL. Why did you happen to watch him then on the morning -that he shot at General Walker?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. I simply--his mood left no impression on me that -particular morning. There was nothing extraordinary about it. - -Senator RUSSELL. On the Walker morning? - -Mrs. OSWALD. No, no--on the morning of the President's assassination. - -Senator RUSSELL. Yes, but you said you noticed it on the morning before -he shot Walker? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Are you talking about Walker? - -Senator RUSSELL. If you didn't notice his moods, how did you happen to -notice it on the day before he shot at General Walker?* ** - -Mrs. OSWALD. The reason I didn't notice that particular morning about -his mood was because the night before we had a little quarrel and I -didn't pay any attention to that, particularly, and I was thinking that -it was due to that quarrel we had the night before. - -Senator RUSSELL. Well, of course, that was the quarrel you had about -him registering under an assumed name or giving an assumed name at his -room.** - -Was that not the time, did you not try to telephone him and they told -you that no such person stayed there at all? - -*Mrs. OSWALD. That was the cause of the quarrel. You see, at this -particular morning of the assassination, I was very tired because the -baby woke up several times during the night and I was very tired, and -in the morning I did not register or I did not even attempt to register -his moods. - -Senator RUSSELL. I think you testified before that you only saw him -when he got up, that you stayed in bed and that he got up and fixed his -own coffee and got out.* ** - -*Mrs. OSWALD. The only extraordinary thing that I noticed about him the -morning of the assassination was that when Lee was leaving the house, -he asked me if I purchased a pair of shoes. - -Senator RUSSELL. For June? - -Mrs. OSWALD. For me. - -Senator RUSSELL. And for June?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. And for the baby. - -Senator RUSSELL. And for June? - -*Mrs. OSWALD. And that was the only thing that was extraordinary, and I -wondered what was happening that he became, that he was so kind all of -a sudden. - -Senator RUSSELL. That was out of the money in the black wallet, too? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. - -*Yes--that was a fleeting thought in my mind of why the change in him. - -Senator RUSSELL. But apparently he was not as excited and as upset as -he was the morning before the Walker shooting?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. He was just as usual--sort of sleepy that particular -morning. He was not excited. Then, I was so sleepy myself that I didn't -pay any attention. - -Senator RUSSELL. But you did testify that he was unusually excited the -night before he shot at General walker, did you not? - -*Mrs. OSWALD. The more time is passing, the more I am mixed up as -to the exact occurrence. I'm forgetting these fine details with the -passing of time. - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Chairman, I wonder if we could take a 5-minute recess? -The reporter has been at it a long time? - -Senator RUSSELL. Oh, yes; I don't know how she's stood it. I've never -seen one in the Congress that took it anything like that long. - -The REPORTER. Thank you. - -Mr. RANKIN. And we will let you have a 5 minute recess, Mrs. Oswald. - -(At this point the proceedings were recessed and resumed as stated, at -6:40 p.m., Sunday, September 6, 1964.) - -Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Chairman. - -Mrs. Oswald, you have not appeared here today with a lawyer, have you?* - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. - -Mr. RANKIN. You have not, is that right? You have no lawyer with you? - -Mrs. OSWALD. No. - -Senator RUSSELL. No. - -Mr. RANKIN. When you appeared before the Commission the other two -times, you did have a lawyer with you, did you not? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes--the other two times. - -Mr. RANKIN. Is there some reason why you do not have a lawyer at this -time?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. That attorney cost me too much. - -Mr. RANKIN. And--before this hearing, Mrs. Oswald, we offered to, that -is the Commission offered to furnish you an attorney if you wanted one -to be supplied to you for this hearing, did it not?* ** - -**Mrs. OSWALD. You did so? - -Mr. RANKIN. I understood that that message was given to you by the -Secret Service that we would ask for the appointment of counsel to -attend the meeting with you, if you wished it, and you said you didn't -need it, you would just tell the truth? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Mr. Sorrels called me on telephone and he asked me if I -have a lawyer, an attorney, and I said, "No," and he told me, "Do I -want to have one?" and I said, "No." - -Mr. RANKIN. And you understood that you would be supplied a lawyer if -you wanted one and you said you didn't, is that right? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. - -Mr. RANKIN. You referred to the fact, when you were asked, that your -husband had a rifle in the Soviet Union while he was there. In your -prior testimony, you referred to either a rifle or a shotgun, do you -know which it was?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. I do not know the difference between the shotgun and the -rifle. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you know that he had one or the other?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. I know that there is a difference between this particular -rifle and another rifle, but I don't know what the difference is. It -was perhaps a different color. - -Mr. RANKIN. You know that in the Soviet Union he did have either a -rifle or a shotgun, do you?* - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. - -Mr. RANKIN. Turning to the period when you were in New Orleans, just -before you went back to Dallas with Ruth Paine, do you recall that -time?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. Yes--faintly. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you remember that was the latter part of September?* - -Mrs. OSWALD. **Possibly. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you remember what date you went back to Dallas from New -Orleans?* ** - -*Mrs. OSWALD. It wasn't the 26th of September? - -Mr. RANKIN. Wasn't it about the 23d of September that you went back?* ** - -Mrs. OSWALD. The 23d? - -*I do not know. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you remember that you had a discussion with your husband -about the unemployment check that he was to receive about that time?* ** - -*Mrs. OSWALD. I remember Lee told me that he was expecting an -unemployment check just before he left for Mexico. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did he tell you that he had changed the postal address and -that that check would probably come to Ruth Paine's?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. He told me that he was going to change his address and -that the letters would come to that new address of Ruth Paine. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did the unemployment check ever come to Ruth Paine's?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. When he returned from Mexico, he asked me if the -unemployment check arrived, and I replied that I did not know. No; -there was no check. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did he say anything about getting the check at New Orleans -and cashing it himself?* ** - -*Mrs. OSWALD. I do not remember it right now, but if I mentioned that -to the Commission before, then it was so. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you have any recollection about it now?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. I do not recall distinctly now, but I think there was -some conversation about the check being long in transit, that the check -was sent from Dallas to New Orleans and from New Orleans to Irving. - -Mr. RANKIN. Well apparently, Mrs. Oswald, the facts show that the check -was cashed by your husband with a stamped mark of the bank, dated the -26th of September, in New Orleans. Does that refresh your memory at -all?* ** - -*Mrs. OSWALD. I was not with Lee at that time. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did he ever tell you anything about it?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. I do not remember at this moment. - -Mr. RANKIN. Apparently he cashed the check at the little store, or the -supermarket, near where you lived there in New Orleans. Did he every -tell you that?* ** - -*Mrs. OSWALD. No; he did not tell me. I do not remember that he told me. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did Lee ever tell you where he stayed the night after you -left, that is, the night of the 23d of September?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. He told me that he stayed in that same house. - -Mr. RANKIN. At the house where you had lived?** - -**Mrs. OSWALD. He stayed with his aunt. I remember something that he -stayed a couple days with his aunt in New Orleans. - -*Did I leave on the 23d? - -Mr. RANKIN. Yes. - -*Mrs. OSWALD. I do not recall distinctly at this moment, but I believe -he said he spent the first night at the house where we lived, and -perhaps one or two nights at Aunt Lillian's. - -Mr. RANKIN. Is there something else? - -Mrs. OSWALD. It is so difficult for me to remember now. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did your husband have any Cuban friends at New Orleans?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. I do not know about this. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you remember the time a man by the name of Bringuier -came to the house there? Bringuier [spelling] B-r-i-n-g-u-i-e-r. - -*Mrs. OSWALD. Someone came, but I don't know from which organization or -who he was. - -Mr. RANKIN. Was there more than one person who came asking about that -or only one?* - -Mrs. OSWALD. Just one. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you recall that your husband hired someone to help hand -out leaflets about fair play for Cuba on the streets of New Orleans?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. He mentioned that he hired a boy to help him, by giving -him some money to buy ice cream or something--I don't know. - -Mr. RANKIN. I'll hand you what is marked as Frank Pizzo Exhibit No. -453-A, which is a photograph, and ask you if you recognize your husband -there, and also, any of the other men there in the picture?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD (examining instrument mentioned). I recognize only my -husband. - -Mr. RANKIN. Is your husband the man with the marks that sort of look -like a "T" in light green?* - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. - -Mr. RANKIN. I ask you if you recognize anyone besides your husband in -Frank Pizzo Exhibit No. 453-B?* - -Mrs. OSWALD. No. *No. [Examining instrument mentioned.] No. - -Mr. RANKIN. But you do recognize your husband there? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes--yes. - -Mr. RANKIN. He has a green mark over his photograph, does he not? - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you know whether or not your husband consulted any -attorneys in New Orleans while he was there?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. I do not know about this. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you know of a Clay Bertrand, [spelling] B-e-r-t-r-a-n-d?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. No. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did your husband ever say anything about consulting an -attorney about his discharge from the Marines or about his American -citizenship?* ** - -*Mrs. OSWALD. He did not. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you know whether or not your husband was in Dallas in -September between the 23d, the date that you left with Mrs. Paine, and -the 26th of September--at any time?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. I do not know. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did he ever say anything about anything like that?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. No. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you ever know a Sylvia Odio, [spelling] O-d-i-o?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. No. - -Mr. RANKIN. You never heard of her?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. No. - -Mr. RANKIN. Sylvia Odio is a woman in Dallas who said that your -husband, along with two Cubans, came to see her under the name "Leon -Oswald," on the evening of the 25th or the 26th of September 1963. Do -you know anything about that?* - -**Mrs. OSWALD. No; I do not know about this. - -Mr. RANKIN. Have you ever heard of her?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. No. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you ever hear of a person by the name of Rodriguez -[Spelling] R-o-d-r-i-g-u-e-z, that your husband was said to have known -in New Orleans, while you were there? Do you know whether your husband -ever knew a Rodriguez [spelling] R-o-d-r-i-g-u-e-z in New Orleans?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. He may have known him, but I don't know anything about it. - -Mr. RANKIN. He never told you that he knew anyone like that?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. No; he did not tell me. - -Mr. RANKIN. When you lived in New Orleans and after your husband lost -his job, did he stay away from home in the evenings much?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. He was not at home during the day time, but he was at -home most of the time in the evenings. - -Mr. RANKIN. And by being at home in the evenings, what time do you -mean--from 6 o'clock on, or 7 o'clock, or what time?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. After 7. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did he ever show signs of having been drinking or being -drunk when he came home?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. Never. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did he ever talk about having seen some friends or some -Cubans or Mexicans in the bar or some bar in New Orleans?* ** - -*Mrs. OSWALD. No; it's strange for me to hear that Lee visited bars or -that he drank. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you know of his drinking at all in New Orleans?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. I never did. - -Mr. RANKIN. He was arrested in connection with the Fair Play for Cuba -matter around August 9, if you will recall. You may not remember the -exact date, but I refresh your memory and call your attention to the -fact that it was that date--August 9?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. I know about this. - -Mr. RANKIN. How did that come to your attention, how did you learn -about it?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. That night I waited for him until 3 o'clock in the -morning. Then, I went to bed. When he came in the morning, I asked him -where he had been and he told me he was arrested by the police. - -Mr. RANKIN. Had he stayed out all night that way before?* ** - -Mrs. OSWALD. No. - -Mr. RANKIN. It hadn't ever happened before?** - -Mrs. OSWALD. No. - -Mr. RANKIN. You say it never happened that he would even stay out late -in the evening?* - -Mrs. OSWALD. No; sometimes he was delayed, but he would be home by 9 -o'clock. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you ever hear your husband say anything about being -associated with any pro-Castro or anti-Castro groups in Dallas?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. I didn't know that he belonged to any organization in -Dallas. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you know of any such associations or any associations -with Cubans after he returned from Mexico City?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. I do not know about this. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did he ever mention Sylvia Odio to you or any name like -that, that you recall?* ** - -*Mrs. OSWALD. No. - -Mr. RANKIN. Now, when you testified before the Commission before, you -were asked what kind of a job your husband had at the Minsk factory, do -you recall that?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. - -Mr. RANKIN. You said he read blueprints and translated them into the -finished product. Do you remember your husband saying anything like -that to you?* ** - -*Mrs. OSWALD. I don't think I testified to that. - -Mr. RANKIN. You don't recall testifying to that?* - -Mrs. OSWALD. I testified that he was a--slesar. - -Mr. GREGORY. Off the record, please? - -She names a trade and that Russian word stands for locksmith, but I -know that he was not a locksmith, I mean, from the description of work -that he was doing. He was working at a factory where he was assembling -details for--metallic details. He was a machinist apprentice working on -parts for radio receivers. - -Mr. RANKIN. He told the FBI at one time in one of the interviews that -he was busy reading blueprints and translating them. - -Mr. Gregory, are you telling me what she says his job was or are you -telling me what you know? - -Mr. GREGORY. No; she's telling me, but Mrs. Oswald tells me that the -technical name of his job was the Russian word (spelling) s-l-e-s-a-r'. - -Mr. RANKIN. Now, will you describe, Mrs. Oswald, what he did in that -job so it will be clearer than just that word. Tell us what he did?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. I have never been at the plant where Lee worked or in any -factory, but from the description that Lee gave me---- - -Mr. RANKIN. Tell us that?* ** - -*Mrs. OSWALD. He was grinding details--detailed parts for small parts, -small metallic parts for radio receivers, on a lathe. - -Perhaps he was boasting about the importance of his work when he told -you about reading the blueprints and translating them into the finished -product. He may have actually done that kind of work, but I know -nothing about that. - -Mr. RANKIN. Was the only work that he told you he was doing during the -period that you were there in Minsk, this job of grinding these parts -on the lathe?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. While he and I lived together--yes. That was the kind of -work that he was doing in Minsk. - -Mr. RANKIN. And that's all that you know of?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. That's all I know about his work. - -Mr. RANKIN. Now, turning to the period that your husband was in Moscow -in 1959 when he first came there, and, of course, you were married -later than that, did he tell you about his experiences when he first -came to Moscow?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. He told me that for the most part he visited museums and -studied the Russian language. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did he say anything about the intourist guides, the women -studied the Russian language. - -Mrs. OSWALD. The Russian guides? - -Mr. RANKIN. Did he tell you about any of the others that he knew there?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. He did, but I don't remember their names, except Rimma. -The only reason I remember Rimma Sherikova is because she visited us -in Minsk. She did not come especially to see us, but she was passing -through Minsk and stopped to see us. - -Mr. RANKIN. What did your husband tell you about Rimma?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. That she was a very fine, pretty, smart young girl, and -unfortunately, older than he is, and that she helped him a great deal. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did he tell you how she helped him?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. First of all, as an interpreter. - -Mr. RANKIN. What else? - -*Mrs. OSWALD. And that he spent time with her and did not feel lonesome. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did he say anything about Rimma or the other intourist -guides helping him with learning Russian?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. Yes; he did. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did he say how much they did that?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. No; he did not. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did he say anything about the guides helping him in dealing -with the Embassy about his citizenship or giving up his citizenship?* ** - -*Mrs. OSWALD. No; he did not tell me about that. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did he say anything about the guides giving him any -financial help?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. No; he did not tell me. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did your husband say anything about when he learned that he -might be able to stay in Russia, how he learned it? - -*Mrs. OSWALD. No; he did not. He, Lee, took part in radio broadcasts, -propaganda in favor of the Soviet Union, which he felt helped him to -get permission to stay in the Soviet Union. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did he say when he did that?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. That was before my time. - -Mr. RANKIN. How did you learn about it?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. He told me about it. Lee told me that the Soviet Union -offered him Soviet citizenship, but he turned it down. He told me -that he turned it down. At the same time, other developments as I -recall, left the impression with me that he actually wanted to become -a Soviet citizen, but I didn't connect the two. There is a discrepancy -between the two, but at the time, I couldn't reconcile these apparent -differences in what he said. - -Mr. RANKIN. You know he told the reporters that he talked to in -Moscow in November, that the Government was going to let him stay, -but his diary says he didn't get that word until January the 4th of -the following year. Now, do you know anything about that, how that -happened?* - -Mrs. OSWALD. 1960? - -Mr. RANKIN. 1959 in November is when he told the reporters, and it was -January 4, 1960, that he actually put it in his diary that he had the -first learning of it?* - -Mrs. OSWALD. That they would let him stay in the Soviet Union? - -Mr. RANKIN. Yes. - -Mrs. OSWALD. Newspaper reporters? - -Mr. RANKIN. Yes; newspaper reporters--Miss Johnson and Miss Mosby.* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. He made the entry into his diary, I think, at a later -date, and they may not be correct or precise--just one. - -Mr. GREGORY. I think she's a little tired. She's saying many words, but -I can't connect them. She says, "To be brief, I don't believe I know." - -Mr. RANKIN. We will soon be through, Mrs. Oswald. There are just a few -more questions.* - -When your husband said that he had spoken over the radio and he thought -that helped him, did he tell you what he said over the radio?* ** - -*Mrs. OSWALD. He spoke over the radio of how everything--how wonderful -everything was in the Soviet Union, or what he thought they liked to -hear. - -Mr. RANKIN. And did you understand that he spoke that in Moscow while -he was there?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. Yes; while he was in Moscow. - -Mr. RANKIN. That was during the period after he had first come to the -country and before he came to Minsk, is that right?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. - -Mr. RANKIN. Now, do you recall any more than you have told us about the -time you had the interview with the MVD about your visa--what they said -to you and what you said to them?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. First of all, Colonel Aksenov asked me why I wanted to go -to America, "Is it so bad here that you want to leave?" And I replied -that I wanted to go to America with my husband and that I believe that -I have that right. - -Mr. RANKIN. What did they say to that?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. Then he said, "You will simply have to wait because you -are not the only one who wants to leave. You will have to wait your -turn." - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you recall anything else that was said at that time?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. At that time I was pregnant and Colonel Aksenov suggested -that may be it would be better for me to wait until the baby came. - -Mr. RANKIN. What did you say to that?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. I told him that I would prefer to leave as soon as -possible. - -Mr. RANKIN. Is that all you remember of the conversation?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. Nothing of importance. - -Mr. RANKIN. Where did this conversation occur?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. In the MVD building in Minsk. - -Mr. RANKIN. And who was present besides you and Colonel Aksenov?* - -Mrs. OSWALD. At first there were two military men who later left, and -they accompanied me or rather they showed me to the room where Colonel -Aksenov was. We were the only two in the room. - -Mr. RANKIN. Now, your husband said that before you both left for the -United States, he had an interview with the MVD. Do you recall that?* - -Mrs. OSWALD. Before we left where? - -Mr. RANKIN. Before you left the Soviet Union?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. I do not know about this. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you recall anything like that while you were in Moscow -before you left for the United States?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. No. - -Mr. RANKIN. You were never told about anything like that by your -husband?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. No. - -Mr. RANKIN. By anyone else?* - -Mrs. OSWALD. Nobody. - -Mr. RANKIN. You were not present at any such meeting?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. No. - -Mr. RANKIN. Do you know of any meeting of that kind in Minsk?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. He never told me that he had interviews. - -Mr. RANKIN. He said he quarreled with them trying to expedite the -visas, the exit permits, and where was that?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. In Minsk. - -Mr. RANKIN. And did he tell you whom he talked to when he quarreled -with them about the exit visas?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. I do not know their names, but all the people that were -empowered with issuance of the exit permits. - -Mr. RANKIN. Was that the time that you said he tried to get to see -Colonel Aksenov and they wouldn't let him?* ** - -Mrs. OSWALD. It could have happened before we moved because he -apparently had a conversation with the Colonel.** - -**I remember it was cold. - -Mr. GREGORY. May I ask Marina--will you mind to read the question? - -The REPORTER. "Was that the time that you said he tried to get to see -Colonel Aksenov and they wouldn't let him?" - -Mr. RANKIN. I was asking about the meeting with the MVD. - -Mr. GREGORY. Lee meeting with the MVD in Minsk? - -Mr. RANKIN. Yes--about the exit visas. - -Mr. GREGORY. And you wanted to know the year and the month of the year? - -Mr. RANKIN. No; I was first trying to find out what meeting she was -talking about and whether it was the one she referred to later. - -Mr. GREGORY. When she could not get the audience with the man? - -Mr. RANKIN. That's right.* ** - -*Mrs. OSWALD. It was approximately in January 1962. - -Mr. RANKIN. And did he tell you what happened at that meeting?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. He did not meet with--he did not get to see Colonel -Aksenov. - -Mr. RANKIN. But he did see someone else in there? - -*Mrs. OSWALD. Apparently he talked to someone who substituted or was -inferior to Colonel Aksenov. - -Mr. RANKIN. And what did he tell you happened at that time?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. Lee told me that when he came to MVD he asked to see -Colonel Aksenov, and the people in the office asked him the nature of -the business he wanted to discuss with him, and he told them that it -was about exit visas, and they told him that he could not see Aksenov, -but that they, whoever "they" were, were empowered to act on that -question, but he insisted on seeing the colonel, and he did not get to -see him. - -Mr. RANKIN. Then what happened?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. Then he came home--then I went to MVD, then he sent me to -MVD. I said, "I don't want to go there and he said, "I insist." Then, I -was afraid to go there, but I did go, and the Colonel did not eat me up. - -Mr. RANKIN. Did you talk to the colonel about both your visa and your -husband's at that time?* - -Mrs. OSWALD. The conversation with Colonel Aksenov was to find out why -the delay in the issuance of the exit permits. - -Mr. RANKIN. That's all I have. - -Senator COOPER. There has been a good deal of testimony that you and -your husband were good friends with the De Mohrenschildt family?* - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. - -Senator COOPER. Is it correct that when he came to your house on one -occasion that he saw the rifle, your husband's rifle?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. I do not know about this. It is possible that I have -shown the rifle to them. - -Senator COOPER. Do you remember when Mr. De Mohrenschildt said -something like this after the Walker incident: "How could you miss it?" -or something like that.* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. De Mohrenschildt--as soon as he opened the door, he said -to Lee, "How could you have missed, how could you have missed him?" - -Senator COOPER. Do you have any explanation for that?* ** - -*Mrs. OSWALD. I do not know whether Lee told De Mohrenschildt about -shooting at Walker, and then Lee looked at me thinking--whether I told -De Mohrenschildt about it--I don't know. He even couldn't speak that -evening. Lee could not speak that evening. We were on the porch. - -Senator COOPER. Did he later ask you if you had told De Mohrenschildt?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. He asked me if I told De Mohrenschildt about it and when -I said I didn't, he said, "How did he guess it?" - -Mr. GOPADZE. No; she said, "Maybe you have told him." - -*Mrs. OSWALD. Then he said, "Maybe you've told him about it", and then -he added--he said, "How did he guess it?" - -Senator COOPER. De Mohrenschildt said he had lived in Minsk, did he -ever talk to you about Minsk?* ** - -*Mrs. OSWALD. Yes; he did say he lived in Minsk when he was a small -child. - -Senator COOPER. You said also you heard them talking on occasions, that -is, you heard Lee Oswald and De Mohrenschildt talking about Russia, did -you hear them talking about political problems, political affiliations?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. Yes; they discussed politics. - -Senator COOPER. Was De Mohrenschildt living in Dallas at the time of -the assassination of President Kennedy?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. He lived in Haiti. - -Mr. GOPADZE. Do you know if he was in Haiti? - -*Mrs. OSWALD. I do not know whether he lived in Dallas at the time of -the assassination or whether he lived in Haiti. - -Senator COOPER. Could you think back, Mrs. Oswald, is there any fact -which comes to your mind which would lead you to believe that any -person or persons were associated with your husband in any plan to -assassinate President Kennedy, or you thought, Governor Connally?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. Of course, I don't know anything about it. - -Senator COOPER. But my question was--not whether you knew. I asked you -whether you had any facts which would lead you to believe that there -was anyone?* ** - -*Mrs. OSWALD. I do not know about this. - -Senator COOPER. One other question. Did Lee Oswald ever say to you that -he had any kind of connection with the Cuban Government or any of its -agents?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. He did not tell me. - -Senator COOPER. I said one more, and this is the last one, I promise -you. - -Once you said that when you went to New Orleans together, he said -something like this: "I'm lost." If that's correct, what was he talking -about? Do you remember that?* ** - -*Mrs. OSWALD. On that particular occasion he sat by the icebox or -the frigidaire and he sat there and he had his head in his hands and -he said, "I am lost." I believe that that was the result of all the -failures of his. - -Senator COOPER. Did you feel sympathy for him and love for him in those -days?* - -Mrs. OSWALD. Yes; I felt sorry for him. I knew it was difficult for him -with his family. I felt sorry for him. - -Senator COOPER. All right. - -Senator RUSSELL. When you testified the second time in Washington, Mrs. -Oswald, that you didn't think Mr. De Mohrenschildt was as dangerous as -he sounds--that was your personal opinion--what did you mean by that?* - -Here it is: "Mr. Mohrenschildt once took us out to the Fords' house. It -was at New Year's, I think--Katya Ford's house. It was either Christmas -or New Year's. I don't think Mr. De Mohrenschildt is as dangerous as he -sounds. That's my personal opinion." - -No one had said anything about him being dangerous, so why was that -your opinion?** * - -Mr. GREGORY. Off the record. - -Senator RUSSELL. She understood that. - -Mr. GREGORY. This goes into the record, of course? - -Senator RUSSELL. Yes, sir. - -Mr. GREGORY. I think she's hesitated---- - -Senator RUSSELL. I think she should explain it. - -*Mrs. OSWALD. George is such a big mouth. - -Senator RUSSELL. Let's let her testify, if you don't mind? - -Mr. GREGORY. I'm translating what she said. - -Senator RUSSELL. Oh, is that what she said? I see. I'm sorry. I'm -sorry--I didn't hear it. - -*Mrs. OSWALD. George is such a loud mouth or big talker---- - -Senator RUSSELL. Big talker--that would be the equivalent, I'm sure. - -*Mrs. OSWALD. I simply do not believe that--it is my intuition---- - -Mr. GOPADZE. No; that point? - -*Mrs. OSWALD. It is my opinion that people that talk too much do little. - -Senator RUSSELL. And did he talk too much or talk very loud? I don't -know Mr. De Mohrenschildt.** * - -Mrs. OSWALD. Very loud. - -*He jokes all the time and people don't know when he talks sense and -when he jokes. - -**Sometimes he would say something jokingly and people would think that -he's telling the truth. - -Senator RUSSELL. Was that boasting about some imaginary achievement of -his?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. It's simply his manner of speaking--of talking. It's his -character. - -Senator RUSSELL. He didn't talk then about his feats of any kind, about -performing any great feats?* - -*Mrs. OSWALD. No; he never did. - -Senator RUSSELL. It was merely his tone of voice and his manner of -expression that made him sound dangerous?** - -**Mrs. OSWALD. He was boasting about it, but he never would follow -through. - -Mr. RANKIN. You might tell the full story. - -Mrs. OSWALD. Quite often he would be boasting about something big but -he never did follow through. - -Senator RUSSELL. So he did talk about great achievements most of the -time?* - -**Mrs. OSWALD. Just like a fellow who is just a happy go-around man, a -happy go-lucky man. - -Senator RUSSELL. If there is nothing further, the Commission thanks you -very much for your assistance, and you, Mr. Gregory, and above all, the -very remarkable reporter who has been able to stay with us from the -beginning. - -The Commission will now recess subject to the call of the Chairman or -Chief Justice Warren. - -Mrs. OSWALD. Thank you very much. - -Senator RUSSELL. Thank you. - -(Whereupon, at 8 p.m., the President's Commission adjourned.) - - - - -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. - -Asterisks in the Marina Oswald testimony have been reproduced as -originally printed. - -Page vii: No Table of Contents entry for "Testimony of Mrs. Lee Harvey -Oswald (resumed)" beginning on page 588. - -Page 47: "is a photostat is a photostat" was printed that way. - -Page 51: "Will you tell us on what date you wrote or dictated Exhibit -711?" occurs twice. The second occurrence either was spoken by Mr. -Rankin or is a typesetting error. - -Page 88 and elsewhere: "Mr. Specter" misprinted five times as "Mr. -Spector"; corrected here. - -Page 107: "these tall building on either side" should be "buildings". - -Page 138: "contains angels of sight" is a misprint for "angles". - -Page 139: One occurrence of "Main Street" was misprinted as "Maine -Street"; corrected here. - -Page 142: "Dr. Hume" is a misprint for "Dr. Humes". - -Page 152: "The other hand, his left hand is on his lapel" was -misprinted as "left had"; corrected here. - -Page 163: "Did the surveyor make that placement" misprinted as -"surveyer"; corrected here. - -Page 177: "Those are 88 mm., too" is a misprint for "8 mm." - -Page 186: "implusive" probably is a misprint for "impulsive". - -Pages 273 and elsewhere: "Mr. Snyder" misprinted six times as "Mr. -Synder"; corrected here. - -Page 298: "exist visa" probably is a misprint for "exit visa". - -Page 306: "would't" was printed that way. - -Page 335: "name." is repeated, originally on the next line; looks like -a misprint. - -Page 365: "How could you tell us" possibly should be "Now could". - -Page 482: "Do you thing that is a handicap" should be "think". - -Page 528: "handwriting. It that yours?" should be "Is". - -Page 529: "handwriting it that?" should be "is". - -Page 530: "I do not know which exhibit is." should be "it is". - -Page 562: "miles and hour." should be "an". - -Page 563: "take as much as minute" probably should be "as a minute". - -Page 611: "whatsover" was printed that way. - -Page 613: "Did he every tell you that" should be "ever". - -Page 618: 'I said, "I don't want to go there and he said, "I insist."' -either is missing a closing quotation mark or has a spurious opening -one. - - - - - - - - -End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of Warren Commission (5 of 26): Hearings -Vol. V (of 15), by The President's Commission on the Assassination of President Kennedy - -*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK WARREN COMMISSION - HEARINGS V5 *** - -***** This file should be named 44005.txt or 44005.zip ***** -This and all associated files of various formats will be found in: - http://www.gutenberg.org/4/4/0/0/44005/ - -Produced by Curtis Weyant, Charlene Taylor, Charlie Howard, -and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at -http://www.pgdp.net. Images generously provided by -www.history-matters.com. - - -Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions -will be renamed. - -Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no -one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation -(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without -permission and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules, -set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to -copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to -protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark. Project -Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you -charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission. If you -do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the -rules is very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose -such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and -research. They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do -practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks. Redistribution is -subject to the trademark license, especially commercial -redistribution. - - - -*** START: FULL LICENSE *** - -THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE -PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK - -To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free -distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work -(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project -Gutenberg-tm License available with this file or online at - www.gutenberg.org/license. - - -Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works - -1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to -and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property -(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all -the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy -all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession. -If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the -terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or -entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8. - -1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be -used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who -agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few -things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See -paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement -and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic -works. See paragraph 1.E below. - -1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation" -or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the -collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an -individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are -located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from -copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative -works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg -are removed. Of course, we hope that you will support the Project -Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by -freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of -this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with -the work. You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by -keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project -Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others. - -1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern -what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in -a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, check -the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement -before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or -creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project -Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no representations concerning -the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United -States. - -1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: - -1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate -access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently -whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the -phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project -Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, -copied or distributed: - -This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with -almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or -re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included -with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org - -1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived -from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is -posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied -and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees -or charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a work -with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the -work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 -through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the -Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or -1.E.9. - -1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted -with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution -must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional -terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked -to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the -permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work. - -1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm -License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this -work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm. - -1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this -electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without -prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with -active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project -Gutenberg-tm License. - -1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, -compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any -word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or -distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than -"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version -posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org), -you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a -copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon -request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other -form. Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm -License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. - -1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, -performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works -unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing -access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided -that - -- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from - the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method - you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is - owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he - has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the - Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments - must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you - prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax - returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and - sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the - address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to - the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation." - -- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies - you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he - does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm - License. You must require such a user to return or - destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium - and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of - Project Gutenberg-tm works. - -- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any - money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the - electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days - of receipt of the work. - -- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free - distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works. - -1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set -forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from -both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael -Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark. Contact the -Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below. - -1.F. - -1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable -effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread -public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm -collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic -works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain -"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or -corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual -property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a -computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by -your equipment. - -1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right -of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project -Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all -liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal -fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT -LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE -PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE -TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE -LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR -INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH -DAMAGE. - -1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a -defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can -receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a -written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you -received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with -your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with -the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a -refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or entity -providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to -receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy -is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further -opportunities to fix the problem. - -1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth -in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS', WITH NO OTHER -WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO -WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. - -1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied -warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages. -If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the -law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be -interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by -the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any -provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions. - -1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the -trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone -providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance -with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production, -promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works, -harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, -that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do -or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm -work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any -Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause. - - -Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm - -Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of -electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers -including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists -because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from -people in all walks of life. - -Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the -assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's -goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will -remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure -and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations. -To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation -and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4 -and the Foundation information page at www.gutenberg.org - - -Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive -Foundation - -The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit -501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the -state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal -Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification -number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg -Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent -permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws. - -The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S. -Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered -throughout numerous locations. Its business office is located at 809 -North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email -contact links and up to date contact information can be found at the -Foundation's web site and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact - -For additional contact information: - Dr. Gregory B. Newby - Chief Executive and Director - gbnewby@pglaf.org - -Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg -Literary Archive Foundation - -Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide -spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of -increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be -freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest -array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations -($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt -status with the IRS. - -The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating -charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United -States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a -considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up -with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations -where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To -SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any -particular state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate - -While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we -have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition -against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who -approach us with offers to donate. - -International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make -any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from -outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. - -Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation -methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other -ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. -To donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate - - -Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic -works. - -Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm -concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared -with anyone. For forty years, he produced and distributed Project -Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support. - -Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed -editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S. -unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily -keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition. - -Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility: - - www.gutenberg.org - -This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, -including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to -subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. |